THE ITALIAN DELEGATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR GAME AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
A PRACTICAL GUIDE to the CIC Handbook for the Evaluation and Measurement of Hunting Trophies
Fritz Heje Hansen Szečko Žerjav
Tony Dalby-WelshNicolò Amosso Enzo Berzieri
A PRACTICAL GUIDE to
CIC Handbook for the Evaluation and Measurement of Hunting Trophies
Fritz Heje Hansen Szečko
Tony Dalby-WelshNicolò Amosso Enzo Berzieri Žerjav
Second edition, February 2023
Layout and graphics: Elisa Bossotto
Printed in Italy at Tipografia Botalla s.r.l. – Gaglianico (BI)
© 2021 The International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation | CIC - Conseil International de la Chasse et de la Conservation du Gibier
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of both the copyright owner and the below publisher of this book. This includes the text, measurement criteria and images set out in this Handbook which may not be reproduced in any form without the prior written consent of the CIC. Permission to use this material may be requested from the Authors.
Unauthorised reproduction and use will result in legal proceedings.
Premise by the Authors
Preface by George Aman ...................................
Preface by Tony Dalby-Welsh ............................
Preface by Bruno Lauro Vigna ...........................
Red Deer .........................................................
Roe Deer .........................................................
Fallow Deer .....................................................
Alpine Ibex .....................................................
European Mouflon ...........................................
Wild Boar ........................................................
Premise by the Authors
This Practical Guide was born thanks to our international experience after the publication of the CIC Handbook for the Evaluation and Measurement of Hunting Trophies, in order to contribute to its important objective of standardizing the measurement and evaluation criteria of the trophies at a national and international level. It is not a text of trophies in its own right, but an integrative manual intended for those who work in the actual field with the trophy “in hand”.
We have dealt with some crucial points and cases of particular interest, motivated by the desire to overcome the critical issues encountered during the many Italian Evaluation Commissions in which we have taken part.
To be consistent with this approach we have only studied some sections of the CIC Manual in depth, deliberately neglecting others, which we believe are already complete.
The CIC Handbook is the official text for Trophy Measurers and is the authority for Trophy Evaluation in the CIC, while this Practical Guide provides a useful collection of examples, photos, processes and hints to help interpret the Handbook correctly.
We are aware that it is not possible to deal with the matter in a comprehensive way given its complexity. Therefore, the content of this booklet, now updated according to the decisions taken during the International Trophy Evaluation Board held on May 19th, 2021 and adopted as official textbook by the CIC on the same date, is subject to revisions, bearing in mind what will be approved in future International Trophy Evaluation Board meetings and the experiences gained in the field during International Commissions of Evaluation.
We are very grateful to our colleagues STJs Fritz Heje Hansen (DK) and Szečko Žerjav (SLO) for their supervision and advice, respectively on the following chapters: Red Deer, Roe Deer, Fallow Deer, Wild Boar and the chapters: Chamois, European Mouflon and Alpine Ibex.
We especially thank Tony Dalby-Welsh, Co-Chairman of the International Trophy Evaluation Board, for his important and useful final revision and for presenting our work to the ITEB; our friend Luna Milatovíc CIC Conservation Officer, for her invaluable encouragement and support; our CCM friends Franco Bagnis and Vittorio Fusinato for the photographic contribution. We extend a sign of special gratitude to the Fabbrica d’Armi Beretta S.p.A. for the generously granted support to our initiative.
Dear CIC Trophy Measurers, it is with great pleasure that I present you with this Practical Guide, which has been prepared to complement the existing CIC Handbook for the Evaluation and Measurement of Hunting Trophies. Put together by Italian Senior Trophy Judges, Nicolò Amosso and Enzo Berzieri, the guide will further assist measurers in the evaluation of trophies, and is a new step for the Trophy Evaluation System and the CIC.
As most of you will know, the Trophy Evaluation System was overhauled in 2013 with the aim to standardise the evaluation criteria and measuring policies, as well as to make the system more transparent, accountable and consistent across countries.
The decision to create a new manual based on the Red Book, today known as the ‘CIC Handbook’, was one of the key outcomes of this overhaul. The fact that the Handbook is referred to as ‘the bible’ for CIC measurers is a testament to its value. Over the last nine years, it has served as an invaluable resource for measuring tens of thousands of trophies by our measurers. There is no doubt, however, that the Handbook has also come with its own challenges. Limited in size and with only so many included examples, the need for additional guidance was recently recognised by Italian measurers.
The Practical Guide in front of you has been made to help you overcome challenges when measuring trophies that might not be covered by examples in the Handbook. Nature is capable of creating infinite variations and no document will ever be able to cover all possible outcomes. Nevertheless, this guide is a good start that will surely help you when you are in doubt over which score to assign to a trophy. I trust you will all make a good use of it!
On behalf of the CIC, I would like express my deep gratitude to Nicolò Amosso and Enzo Berzieri for their commitment and motivation towards creating this document.
Measuring activities have been a core part of the CIC during all its history but particularly in recent years, in part due to the efforts of measurers like Nicolò and Enzo. The creation of the Practical Guide is most certainly an evolution to the Trophy Evaluation System, and I am excited to see where this new resource will take us going forward.George Aman
It was no surprise to me when I heard that Nicolò Amosso and Enzo Berzieri had the foresight to see a need to assist CIC Trophy Measurers in interpreting the CIC Handbook for the Evaluation and Measurement of Hunting Trophies. Neither was it a surprise when they then also produced this Guide, with its examples and careful guidance on how to deal with the many non-typical trophies that our measurers have to deal with.
These two STJs have always been at the forefront of improving the Trophy Evaluation System, to the CIC’s benefit.
There is no doubt that the production of the new CIC Trophy Evaluation System in 2013 and the publication of the Handbook introduced the means to ensure that measurers across the world had the tools that they needed to produce consistent and accurate assessments of trophies. But measuring is not yet a complete science and the craft of assessing trophies is as much in the subjective and objective judgement of features, as it is of accurate measurement. This Guide gives measurers an additional tool in making both those judgements and measurements and I commend it to all of our STJs and CCMs for the benefit that it will provide in fulfilling their obligations as CIC Measurers.Tony Dalby-Welsh
It sometimes happens that, absorbed in reading, before we reach the end a thought arises spontaneously: “Here is a text whose need was not felt at all”.
One certainly cannot think this of the Practical Guide to the CIC Handbook for the Evaluation and Measurement of Hunting Trophies. If anything, the opposite thought arises: “How come no one has ever written this before now and it was necessary to wait for Nicolò Amosso and Enzo Berzieri to fill this gap?”
Now there is finally an integration to the CIC Manual and it is both welcome and commendable. The text not only fills a gap, but also combines legibility and scientificity. With painstaking precision, the two Authors proceeded to give clear, logical, easy explanations without technical abstractions, despite the extreme scientific rigor.
There are many qualities in this book: unparalleled precision, iconographic richness, icasticity of images of each trophy showing merits (and additions), faults (and deductions), doubts concerning the spread, additional information and a list of non evaluable items.
Despite its wealth of examples and details, this Practical Guide is never verbose and/or redundant; when the Handbook for the Evaluation is adequately clear Amosso and Berzieri simply refer to it, or in some rare cases, make very concise clarifications.
As an old hunter and passionate trophy enthusiast, I cannot but hope that this text be appreciated and esteemed, that the Authors enjoy the right satisfaction for their (cherished) literary efforts and that readers find answers to their evaluative doubts and joy for their cultural and hunting successes.
2 Length of brow tine
Let us examine the additional or bifurcated points of the brow tine.
The bifurcated tines can have a horizontal or vertical development as in the example (fig. CE 01).
Horizontal tines: proceed normally by choosing the most appropriate route to reach the tine that gives the maximum score.
Vertical tines: the measurement may present some difficulties. The longest element of the brow tine is measured as far as possible using the underside of the tine.
3 Tray tine lengths
Bifurcated tray tines (fig. CE 02 and CE 02-A) which have a single root for their second tips will not be part of the crowns.
Normally the measurement starts from the bisector of the lower corner up to the apex of the first tip, but in this case it is preferable to start from the bisector of the upper corner to the apex of the second tip most favourable to the trophy score.
Both paths are valid, but the most favourable for the trophy should be chosen.
In fig. CE 03 we have a bifurcated tray tine on the right beam: the second tine on the right beam at the bottom is not considered a bay tine as it has the same root.
5 Lower beam circumference H1
6 Upper beam circumference H2
• If the tray tine is broken, it is still the reference point for the measurements of H1 and H2 (fig. CE 04).
• If the beam is without a tray tine, then the thinnest point between the brow tine and the tray tine will be valid for the measurement of H1 and H2 (fig. CE 05).
• If the beam has no crown or fork, H2 is identified as the mid-way point between the tray tine and the top end of the beam (fig. CE 06).
7 Number of tines
It is useful to clarify more in depth the general concept of the tine and how to proceed, in the light of the statement, in the CIC Handbook.
It should be noted that the measurement for scoring purposes does not always coincide with that used to determine if it is actually a tine.
Faced with a questionable or broken tine (fig. CE 07) you should proceed in the following way:
• Draw the line D1-D2 on the base of the outer edge of the beam following the natural line of the antler, as if the tine did not exist.
• Draw the centre line A-D from the tip of the tine to the line D1-D2 and check whether A-D is equal to or greater than 2 cm. If it is, then measure D1-D2 and compare it with A-D. If it is less than this last, then it is a tine.
• In the case of a tine or a large and tall “stub”, start at the apex A and measure down 2 cms to point B, draw the line B1-B2 at right angles to A-D.
• If B1-B2 is less than A-B it is a tine.
• If it is not less, go down and draw a further line at a point considered promising for the height/ width comparison and take the measurements.
• Proceed with further attempts before rejecting as a tine.
Short or broken tines that do not meet the criteria do not score any points.
9 Inside spread
Measurement of the inside spread can cause some problems due to the great diversity of shape and height of the trophies. The measurement should be taken at right angles to the axis of the skull between the beams as in the following examples.
• Trophy without a fork or crown: the measurement should be taken at the maximum internal distance (fig. CE 11).
• Trophy with two forks:
- symmetrical: the measurement is taken from the starting point of the forks (fig. CE 12);
- asymmetrical: the measurement is taken from the lower fork towards the inside of the other beam (fig. CE 13).
• Trophy with a fork and a crown:
- fork at the same height as the crown: the measurement is taken from the fork to below the crown (fig. CE 14);
- fork is lower than the crown: the measurement is taken from the fork towards the opposite beam (fig. CE 15);
- the trophy represented in fig. CE 16 could be misleading since the fourth point on the right beam is an additional tine belonging to the crown. The inside spread could be erroneously considered to be B. In the measurement of the spread however, an additional tine is not considered part of the crown and therefore the correct measurement is A.
• Trophy with two crowns: - symmetrical: the measurement is the maximum inside spread below the crowns (fig. CE 17); - asymmetrical: the measurement is taken below the lower crown towards the inside of the opposite beam (fig. CE 18).
14 Formation of crowns
To measure the tines correctly it is necessary to start from the graphical description of the CIC Handbook fortheEvaluationandMeasurementofHuntingTrophies which allows for a very favourable measurement of the trophy, but omits to indicate the starting point hidden by the fork in the foreground to be identified, however, at the centre of the crown. Dissect the crown to locate it by calling A the foreground section and B the second section.
The dotted lines that start from the crown cup up to the apexes of the two bifurcated tips A and B are the most favourable measurements for the trophy. In the case of webbed crowns it is necessary to draw a line at the base of each tip to proceed with the measurement.
Since the lengths of the crown tips cannot be inserted into the photographs, the paths have been chosen by exclusively analysing the trophy morphology, knowing that it is possible to identify other paths if these prove to be more favourable. The crown points of the Hromas table assigns the same score to different combinations of both medium and long tines.
Please bear in mind that, in fig. CE 20, CE 21, paths were outlined on the outside of the crown which could not have otherwise been graphically created internally and is only for demonstration purposes.
The red deer, because of the conformation, size and weight of the trophy, rarely presents large anomalies, thus the formula provides only 3 points for deduction, limiting the analysis of the irregular positioning of the beams, of clearly unequal beam lengths, marked asymmetry and irregularities of the brow, bay and tray tines. The crowns, because of their variety cannot be penalised for the number of tines and form. Some examples of deductions:
The following is an anomalous case that is very interesting but perfectly measurable (fig. CE 35). The first tine of the left beam is not the brow tine but a tip that starts directly from the skull. The brow tine is the second tip; then there is a bifurcated bay tine and finally the tray tine which is symmetrical to the other. The tine that comes out of the skull contributes to the weight of the trophy and to the total number of the points, but will be penalised by 0.5 points for asymmetry. The same applies to the bifurcated bay tine and the different shape of the brow tine. We deduct 0.5 points for asymmetry to both of them.
Not connected to the trophy is a further example of a tine that grows directly from the skull outside the trophy, which should be counted as a tine but penalised by 0.5 points in box 15 for asymmetry (fig. CE 36).
NON - MEASURABLE TROPHIES
Mounted trophies cannot be evaluated. This is the same for trophies to which previously broken original tines or artificial tines have been glued. Then there are trophies where it is not possible to identify the parameters that must be examined. In these cases the trophy cannot be evaluated. This can be seen in the extreme cases of the trophies CE 37 and CE 38.
In the cases of figures CE 39 and CE 40 the broken tines have been reconstructed in resin. The different sound obtained by tapping the suspicious points confirms the manipulation. As previously mentioned, in these cases, the trophies must be declared as non-measurable.
Tip-to-tip spread (t)
The tip-to-tip spread is measured between the centre points of each tip at the highest point on the main beam, without the need for that line to beat right angles to the centre line.
Greatest spread (g)
The greatest spread is measured between the external points of the beams at right angles to the vertical line of the skull.
As expressly required in the CIC Handbook, these measurements are mandatory for gold medals and do not contribute to the CIC score, but only to the identification of the trophy. It is not considered necessary to dwell on the other information required (maximum length and width of the skull) as it is sufficiently described in the HB chapter.
Some examples of tip-to-tip spread (t) and greatest spread (g):
1 Main beam length
Main beam length: overspanning
From zero line on the lower edge of the coronet go up for all its thickness. Imagine a line two centimetres higher than the upper edge of the coronet and from that point continue to measure the length of the beam. In the case of an inclined coronet follow the profile of the coronet (fig. CP 02).
Two anomalies (fig. CP 04 - CP 05) that can occur quite frequently are coronets that either extend below or above the general line of that coronet, at the point where the beam measurement should start. The rule remains that the measurement must start at the point of intersection between the centre line of the pedicle and the lowest point of the coronet, whether that point is above or below the general line of the coronet or not.
3 Weight of dry antlers
4 Antler volume
In the case of a trophy with an additional tip that originates from the skull (fig. CP 06) and not from the beams the trophy is evaluated with this tip.
Proceed normally for the dry weight of the trophy and also for the volume even if the tip mentioned will only be partially immersed. The same goes for any tine that starts from the beam and enters into the water.
6 Additions for the pearling
In allocating points for pearling it is useful to divide each beam into 4 sectors, the inside and outside of each beam, and assign the score to each according to the presence of pearling and their importance. A trophy with diffused but small pearling on 4 sectors could have the same score as another with remarkable or exceptional pearling on two or three sectors.
In consideration of the different types of pearling present in the roe deer trophies we wish to dwell on how to distinguish the latter from any additional tip with some examples.
In fig. CP 07 we have an example of a beam, practically without pearling, but with two asymmetric additional points that are not present on the other beam.
In fig. CP 08 (detail) and CP 09 the pearling, of exceptional quality, cannot be considered points.
In the example shown in fig. CP 10 we have, on the right beam, two well highlighted pearlings whilst on the left beam there is an additional tine.
Evident asymmetric additional tine (fig. CP 11).
This is an interesting case (fig. CP 12) in which, on the left beam, we find an asymmetric additional tine and a pearling because the base is too wide compared to the height.
The Measurer will have no difficulty in considering the following trophy (fig. CP 13) as an asymmetric additional tine.
9 Additions Regularity, symmetry and form
Some examples of classic forms of roe deer trophies
These trophies, viewed from the front, all deserve 1.5 points for regularity and symmetry without any deduction.
In the case of asymmetry and irregularity of beams, front tines and rear tines can be highlighted in both the frontal and lateral views. It will be necessary, starting from the three assignable theoretical points, to deduct the relative penalties attributable to the previously mentioned defects. Beams having dissimilar shapes and inclinations, different heights and being atypical are considered anomalies, being asymmetric, dissimilar to each other, and not having a uniform position of the tines when comparing both beams.
The following box 12 lists the possible detectable deductions that will reduce the three assignable theoretical points mentioned above. Box 12 is used to penalise, with a maximum of 1 point, trophies with undesirable conformations.
Irregularity and asymmetry
Before addressing this point it is necessary to make a premise. The fundamental principle is that a trophy can never be penalised twice, so any penalties already applied to box 9 , Regularity, symmetry and form, cannot be repeated in box 12 .
Frontal -1.0 point
Lateral -1.0 point
List of possible deductions for irregularities and asymmetries found in the frontal and lateral views of the trophy:
• different length of beams
• different form of beams
• different front tine form
• different front tine inclination
• different front tine positions
• different form rear tine
• different rear tine inclination
• different rear tine position
• different position of beam
• different side shape of the beams
• asymmetries of front and rear tine
We have indicated generically the penalty of 0.5 points for the various forms of irregularity and asymmetry not because we want to give a standard value but because it is the penalty that is generally used more. In cases of greater severity it is possible to foresee a greater penalisation. Any penalties found will reduce the three theoretical points that can be assigned in box 9 up to a maximum of two points.
B) Undesirable forms - 1 point
The task of the Measurer is to identify the essential form, isolating the excess elements to assign or not the deductions: in the following drawing (fig. CP 16), starting from a standard form, some tips have been added to provide some examples and declare the relative scores for numerical asymmetry.
symmetrical asymmetrical symmetrical asymmetrical asymmetrical
Deduction 0 0.5 0 1.0 max 1.0
In the evaluation of the additional tines, the typical six tines of the species are excluded, so that if a front tine, a tip of the beam or a rear tine is missing or broken, the homologous tine present will not be considered an additional tine.
Some examples of irregular, asymmetric and undesirable forms:
Fig. CP 17: a very complex trophy at the limit of measurability. The left beam is attributable to one of the classic forms, with a very marked pearling but not considered a tine, and the rear tine just visible. On the right, the beam (B) has been judged with the rear tine (C) and at the base a tine is considered a rotated front tine (A). The coronet ends with a series of 4 additional tines (D-E-F-G).
Deductions in box 9 :
• different position of beams -0.5 points
• difference in beam length -0.5 points
• asymmetric beams -0.5 points
• asymmetrical front tines -0.5 points meaning that (3-2) = 1
Deductions in box 12 :
• supernumerary tines (D-E-F-G) -1 point
The four oversized and asymmetrical tines would impose the trophy to be penalised by 2 points, but the maximum allowable deduction is 1 point.
Fig. CP 19. An example of a symmetrical trophy: two front tines, two rear tines, two tips of the beam, two symmetrical additional tines but in a slightly unequal position. Limiting analysis only to the tines, in box 9 we assign a reduction of 0.5 points for the right front tine lower than the left and in box 12 we do not assign any deduction.
In the case of the fig. CP 18 the rear tine A is awarded 0.5 points for its length in box 10 .
The right beam with tine B has 4 tines, while the left has only 3.
The numerical asymmetry will be penalised by 0,5 point only in box 12 .
The trophy represented by fig. CP 20 has a lower left beam (-0.5 points), with a different shape on the right (-0.5 points) and a lower left front tine (-0.5 points).
1.5 points will therefore be deducted in box 9 .
The left beam is missing the rear tine which will not generate penalties in box 12 but will have a deduction of 0.5 points to box 11 .
Fig. CP 21. Considering the tine A as an additional tine we will have in box 9 a penalty of 0.5 points for the shape of the beams, in box 11 a penalty of 0.5 points for the missing right rear tine and in box 12 a penalty of 0.5 points for additional tine.
interesting trophy (fig.
We will have in box 9 the following deductions: -0.5 points for the different shape of the left beam; -0.5 points for asymmetric rear tines in length; -0.5 points for different length of the beams.
In box 12 : -0.5 points for asymmetric additional tine (A).
In the photograph fig. CP 23 we have: A-D front tine; B-E tip of the beam; C-F rear tines; G additional tine.
In box 9 we will have:
-0.5 points (the left beam asymmetric to the right); -0.5 points (shorter left hand beam); -0.5 points (asymmetrical left-hand rear tine).
In box 12 : -0.5 points asymmetric additional tine.
The trophy (fig. CP 25) presents asymmetrical front tines, rear tines and an additional tine (B). The others (A-C) are not considered tines.
The measurements have been highlighted inside and not outside the beam only for demonstration purposes.
We will therefore have the following deductions:
in box 9 : -1 point (0.5+0.5 front and rear tines asymmetries).
In box 12 : -0.5 points (additional tine).
The trophy shown in fig. CP 24 is regular with an asymmetrical additional tine between the main beam and the right rear tine.
In box 9 : +3 points.
In box 12 : -0,5 points.
The trophy (fig. CP 27) presents asymmetrical front tines and two asymmetric additional tines for which:
in box 9 : -0.5 points for front tines.
In box 12 : -1 point for the two asymmetric additional tines.
Here we can see a trophy brought as an example of a tine that starts from the skull and not from the beams (fig. CP 26).
In box 12 we will have a deduction of 0.5 points.
NON - MEASURABLE TROPHIES
Mounted trophies cannot be evaluated. This is the same for the trophies to which previously broken original tines or artificial tines have been glued. Trophies where it is not possible to identify the parameters that must be examined, cannot be evaluated. Some examples of trophies that cannot be evaluated for this reason:
CP 31 CP 32
In the case of fig. CP 33 the broken tine has been rebuilt in resin. The different sound obtained by tapping the suspicious tine confirms the manipulation. The trophies in these cases must be declared non-measurable.
Tip-to-tip spread (t)
The measurement is taken from the centre of the tips of the beam, without the need for that line to beat right angles to the centre line. Even in the case of broken or damaged tips, the measurement is always taken from the middle points of the tine end.
Greatest spread (g)
The maximum spread is measured perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the skull between the outside points of the beams or the tip of the tines.
As expressly required in the CICHandbookfortheEvaluationandMeasurementofHuntingTrophies these measures are mandatory for gold medals and do not contribute to the CIC score but only as a description of the trophy.
It is not necessary to dwell on the other information required (maximum length and width of the skull) as it is sufficiently described in the HB chapter.
Some examples of tip-to tip spread (t) and greatest spread (g):