Free: Contests & Raffles.
I'd vote for it. I get sick of people shooting these dinky 80lb spikes left and right, usually right off the road. What a waste, let them grow a little! I'm not sure how much it would help as far as number of nice bucks, but I guess it would help slightly, there are a lot more deer and mature bucks around than most people realize. The areas I hunt truly have no shortage of deer, besides my favorite deer spot has now been taken over by two young lions on a killing spree. I've grown tired of even killing 2 points, 1st year or 2nd year two points doesn't matter I'm tired of adding them to the pile, but there are so many it's hard to not pull the trigger.
NOT NO BUT HELL NO.. THIS DAMN STATE HAS TOO MANY RESTRICTIONS AS IT IS..SET YOUR OWN RESTRICTIONS NOT MINE!!!Hunterman(Tony)
Quote from: DoubleJ on September 02, 2012, 05:20:58 PMQuote from: FLIZZ on September 02, 2012, 05:10:20 PMQuote from: DoubleJ on September 02, 2012, 04:56:38 PMThere are plenty of "tanks" running around. By instituting a 2pt minimum, you're ensuring those "tanks" get shot while the immature bucks and bucks with bad genetics get to breedIf they're tanks they're going to be smart enough to stay alive unless they are earned by people who get out of their trucks and actually hunt. Road hunters would probably give up all together. And even if a 2pt bangs a doe, in 5 or 6 years that baby will be a tank regardless of genetics.I can tell you've put a lot of thought, research, and science into this "2pt minimum everywhere" line of thought hahahah YES. countless hours and research have gone into this. no but Seriously though its just a thought fellas. The 636 unit in Mason county is 2pt minimum and there's a lot of hogs taken out of there. Therefor my thinking can't be that wild.
Quote from: FLIZZ on September 02, 2012, 05:10:20 PMQuote from: DoubleJ on September 02, 2012, 04:56:38 PMThere are plenty of "tanks" running around. By instituting a 2pt minimum, you're ensuring those "tanks" get shot while the immature bucks and bucks with bad genetics get to breedIf they're tanks they're going to be smart enough to stay alive unless they are earned by people who get out of their trucks and actually hunt. Road hunters would probably give up all together. And even if a 2pt bangs a doe, in 5 or 6 years that baby will be a tank regardless of genetics.I can tell you've put a lot of thought, research, and science into this "2pt minimum everywhere" line of thought
Quote from: DoubleJ on September 02, 2012, 04:56:38 PMThere are plenty of "tanks" running around. By instituting a 2pt minimum, you're ensuring those "tanks" get shot while the immature bucks and bucks with bad genetics get to breedIf they're tanks they're going to be smart enough to stay alive unless they are earned by people who get out of their trucks and actually hunt. Road hunters would probably give up all together. And even if a 2pt bangs a doe, in 5 or 6 years that baby will be a tank regardless of genetics.
There are plenty of "tanks" running around. By instituting a 2pt minimum, you're ensuring those "tanks" get shot while the immature bucks and bucks with bad genetics get to breed
I personally like the idea about the youth being able to shoot spikes, but I don't think there are a shortage of big bucks so why over regulate a season that isn't bad now. I don't shoot spikes but I like having a choice rather than adding more regulations.
I think 2 pt. minimum would be a great thing, especially if youth hunters were allowed to shoot spikes with a general tag still. People probably thought the world was going to come to an end when they made it 3 pt. minimum for elk, and what do you know, most of those spikes it saves get shot as 3 or 4 points now. Bigger bodies, bigger racks, same success rate more less. It has been a great success in my opinion, and I don't see how the 2 pt. minimum for deer would be any different.
It would be even sweeter if they eliminated doe tags and made it 3 point or better for all of Western WA!