The analysis of the original databases created according to the catalogs of hunting trophies showed that the most popular trophies in Russia were roe and moose antlers and wild boar tusks. The adequacy of the measurements in the assessment of hunting trophies was considered. The methods for assessing trophies of wild boar and roe deer describe the trophy well, but do not have measurements to assess the age of the harvested animals. In contrast, the method of assessing the trophy merits of a moose makes it possible to determine the age of the stag, but it does not describe the appearance of the trophy well. It was proposed to introduce into the trophy boar rating a measurement of the width of the lower tusk in its upper part at the base of the cut. For roe deer, it is necessary to measure the greatest thickness of the pedicle for each antler. This will make it possible to determine the age of the animals by trophy. To improve the assessment of moose antlers, it is desirable to describe the architectural structure of the antlers: the direction of growth, the shape of the costal edge (inner edge of the palm), the shape of the palm and pre-palm, the curvature of the beam. The age determining of the harvested animals makes it possible to do producer bonitation with the help of trophy evaluation. A hypothesis is that the bonitation criterion should be considered as a comparison of the remoteness of the ratio of the score to age from the function of the normal development of trophies of the form y=a/x, where a is the average value of the trophy score (in points) for the sample, x is the age of the harvested animal.

Kolesnikov Vyacheslav V., Sergeev Alexey A., Economov Alexander V., Mashkin Victor I., Solovyov Vyacheslav A.

1. Bowyer R. T., Stewart K. M., Kie J. G, Gasaway W. C. Fluctuating asymmetry in antlers of Alaskan moose: size matters. Journal of Mammalogy, 2001; 82 (3): 814–824.
2. Schmidt J. I., Ver Hoef J. M., Bowyer R. T. Antler size of Alaskan moose Alces Alces Gigas: effects of population density, hunter harvest and use of guides. Wildlife Biology, 2007; 13:53–65.
3. Kozlovsky I. S., Kolesnikov V. V., Shevnina M. S., Economov A.V., Makarova D. S., Strelnikov D. P. Trofejnaya ocenka rogov ohotnich'ih zhivotnyh, obitayushchih v Rossii [Trophy evaluation of the horns of hunting animals living in Russia]. Baza dannyh RF, no. 2015621173 (in Russ.).
4. Voznesensky V. L. Pervichnaya obrabotka eksperimental'nyh dannyh: prakticheskie primery [Primary processing of experimental data: practical examples], Leningrad, Nauka, 1969, 84 p. (in Russ.).
5. Ivanter E. V., Korosov A.V. Elementarnaya biometriya: uchebnoe posobie [Elementary Biometrics: a textbook], Petrozavodsk, Petrozavodskij gosudarstvennyj universitet, 2013, 110 p. (in Russ.).
6. Makarova D. S., Kolesnikov V. V., Strelnikov D. P., Nemchinov Yu. E. Sootnoshenie trofejnoj ocenki evropejskih i sibirskih losej i kosul' [The ratio of trophy evaluation of European and Siberian moose and roe deer]. Proceedings from Biological resources: state, use and protection: Mezhdunarodnaya nauchno-prakticheskaya konferenciya – International Scientific and Practical Conference. (PP. 103–106), Kirov, Vyatskaya gosudarstvennaya sel'skohozyajstvennaya akademiya, 2015 (in Russ.).
7. Kolesnikov V. V., Kozlovskii I. S. Geographical variation of antler morphology of moose (Alces alces) in Russia. Acta Theriologica, 2014; 59; 3: 443–448.
8. Sukhanova M. S., Kolesnikov V. V., Kozlovsky I. S. Trofejnaya harakteristika volka, medvedya burogo, rysi, rosomahi, kabana i surka [Trophy characteristics of wolf, brown bear, lynx, wolverine, wild boar and groundhog]. Vestnik ohotovedeniya. – Bulletin of Hunting Studies, 2011; 8; 2: 204–218 (in Russ.).
9. LaSharr T. N., Long R. A., Heffelfinger J. R., Bleich V. C., Krausman P. R., Bowyer R. T. Biological relevance of antler, horn, and pronghorn size in records programs. Journal of Mammalogy, 2019; 100; 5: 1447–1458.
10. Boeskorov G. G., Puzachenko A. Yu. Geograficheskaya izmenchivost' cherepa i rogov losej (Alces, Artiodactyla) Golarktiki [Geographical variability of the skull and horns of moose (Alces, Artiodactyla) of the Holarctic]. Zoologicheskij zhurnal. – Zoological Journal, 2001; 80; 1:97–110 (in Russ.).
11. Economov A. V. Ekologiya kabana evropejskogo severo-vostoka Rossii (Sus scrofa L., 1758) [Ecology of the wild boar of the European Northeast of Russia (Sus scrofa L., 1758)]. Extended abstract of candidate’s thesis. Petrozavodsk, 2015 (in Russ.).
12. Kolesnikov V. V. Razvitie trofejnogo dela vo VNIIOZ im. prof. B. M. Zhitkova [Development of trophy business in All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Game Management and Fur Farming named after Professor B. M. Zhitkov]. Proceedings from Hunting business in Russia. History and modernity: Vserossijskaya konferenciya (4–5 aprelya 2018 g.) – All-Russian Conference. (PP. 48–52), Sankt-Peterburg, Sankt-Peterburgskij gosudarstvennyj lesotekhnicheskij universitet, 2018 (in Russ.).
13. Kolesnikov V. V., Makarova D. S. Opredelenie vozrasta samcov sibirskoj kosuli (Capreolus pygargus pygargus Pallas, 1771) po kostnym pen'kam ih rogov [Determination of the age of male Siberian roe deer (Capreolus pygargus pygargus Pallas, 1771) by the bone stumps of their horns]. Vestnik ohotovedeniya. – Bulletin of Hunting Studies, 2016; 13; 2: 123–127 (in Russ.).
14. Habermehl K. H. Alterbestimmung bei Wild- und Pelztieren, Berlin, 1985, 223 p.
15. Kolesnikov V. V., Makarova D. S. Opredelenie vozrasta samcov evropejskogo losya (Alces alces L., 1758) po ih rogam [Determination of the age of male European elk (Alces alces L., 1758) by their horns]. Vestnik ohotovedeniya. – Bulletin of Hunting Studies, 2014; 11; 2:317–322 (in Russ.).
16. Harke W. Ein neuer weg zur altersbestimmung des rothirsches. Wild und Hund, 1952;55; 12.
17. Mashkin V. I. Metody izucheniya ohotnich'ih i ohranyaemyh zhivotnyh v polevyh usloviyah: uchebnoe posobie [Methods of studying hunting and protected animals in the field: study guide], Sankt-Peterburg, Lan', 2013, 432 p. (in Russ.).
18. Rukovodstvo po ocenke i izmereniyu trofeev po sisteme CIC [Guide to the evaluation and measurement of trophies according to the CIC system], Budapesht, 2014, 140 p. (in Russ.).
19. Smirnov M. N. K metodike opredeleniya vozrasta kosul' po kompleksu morfologicheskih priznakov [To the method of determining the age of roe deer by a complex of morphological features]. Sbornik nauchno-tekhnicheskoj informacii (ohota, pushnina i dich'). – Collection of scientific and technical information (hunting, furs and game), 1977; 58: 34–39 (in Russ.).
20. Kolesnikov V. V., Makarova D. S. The method of determining the age of a male European (Alces а. alces L., 1758) and Siberian (A. a. pfizenmayeri Zukowsky, 1910) moose on the beam circumference antlers and the largest diameter of the bone stump antlers. Reštitúcia losa európskeho, 2015: 41–44.