4-point rule 117/121

[boneaddict]

certainly might

[boneaddict]

Do these statistics take in account hunter days, amount of hunters, just deer harvested?

[dscubame]

Simple.  Way less hunters hitting the unit with the 4 point restriction.  Way less hunters equal way less harvest.

This is about deer population not hunter success. 

[snowpack]

Do these statistics take in account hunter days, amount of hunters, just deer harvested?

The harvest reports have that in them.  They also include the number of deer killed that have 'x' number of points.  So you can look at how many 5+ pts were killed before and how many now.

[Jonathan_S]

Simple.  Way less hunters hitting the unit with the 4 point restriction.  Way less hunters equal way less harvest.

This is about deer population not hunter success.

     Sitka_Blacktail is acting as though the harvest numbers are directly tied to the population. 

Less deer were killed because dumb little spikes and forks can't be killed and escaped, it doesn't mean there were less deer in the unit.  Less people hunted the units.  Where's the SPIN emoticon?

How could anyone argue that the APR decreases the deer numbers, especially after two years?

[whacker1]

Do these statistics take in account hunter days, amount of hunters, just deer harvested?

The harvest reports have that in them.  They also include the number of deer killed that have 'x' number of points.  So you can look at how many 5+ pts were killed before and how many now.

I did not see hunter days included in the harvest reports.  I would like to know how many people hunted those units as compared to prior years.

[bearpaw]

I don't wantto sound like a dick, and especially since I rarely if ever post here, but you have to be one dense know it all idiot to think this wouldn't work.

Ok let's take a little look at the results of this little experiment so far. The winters of 07 and 08 knocked the herd down so we want to see how hunting has recovered since, and we'll want something to compare the two 4 pt units to, so I'll include the 4 units that surround 117 and 121 since they will have the closest similarities of conditions as for knocking the herd down and recovery ie weather, food, and predators. I'm gonna use harvest stats, cuz that's the bottom line for most hunters.

In the 2008 season, the first after the first bad recent winter, hunters took 1,346 deer in unit 117 and 2,232 deer in unit 121. In surrounding units 108, 111, 113, and 124 hunters took 418 in 108, 441 in 111, 444 in 113, and 2,984 in 124.

Things bottomed out about 2010.

Unit 108, 389 deer
Unit 111, 391 deer
Unit 113, 389 deer
Unit 124, 2,354 deer

Unit 117, 1,053 deer
Unit 121, 1,455 deer

Then things turned around........except in 117 and 121

2012,
In unit 108 the harvest was 425 deer or up 1.6 % from 2008.
In unit 111 the harvest was 441 deer or up 10% from 2008.
In unit 113 the harvest was 444 deer or up .5% from 2008.
In unit 124 the harvest was 2952 deer or down 1% from 2008.

Basically all back to 2008 levels or slightly up, just by keeping things the same and letting nature take it's course.

But in the 4pt or better units........

Unit 117, 884 deer, DOWN 34% from 2008
Unit 121, 1,238 deer, DOWN 44.5% from 2008

Now you might argue that was because the 4 pt restriction  reduced the harvest, but that should have been a one year glitch in 2011. In 2011 younger bucks were stockpiled so if the restriction worked 2012 should have eclipsed the harvest gains in the surrounding non restricted units. So far, that hasn't happened. We will see. So far it hasn't translated into hunter success.

You may also try to argue that the reduction is from reduced doe harvest. So lets compare buck harvest.

Unit 117
2008 had 998 bucks harvested, 2012 had 681 bucks or a loss of 31.7%

Unit 121
2008 had 1499 bucks harvested, 2012 had 930 bucks or a loss of 40%.

Now convince me these restrictions are working.

The intended purpose of the rule was to reduce harvest and leave more deer on the ground alive, looks like it's working perfectly so far to me, the harvest has been reduced. The real test is to see how many deer we have alive in the unit at the end of the 5 year trial. 

[vandeman17]

I don't wantto sound like a dick, and especially since I rarely if ever post here, but you have to be one dense know it all idiot to think this wouldn't work.

Ok let's take a little look at the results of this little experiment so far. The winters of 07 and 08 knocked the herd down so we want to see how hunting has recovered since, and we'll want something to compare the two 4 pt units to, so I'll include the 4 units that surround 117 and 121 since they will have the closest similarities of conditions as for knocking the herd down and recovery ie weather, food, and predators. I'm gonna use harvest stats, cuz that's the bottom line for most hunters.

In the 2008 season, the first after the first bad recent winter, hunters took 1,346 deer in unit 117 and 2,232 deer in unit 121. In surrounding units 108, 111, 113, and 124 hunters took 418 in 108, 441 in 111, 444 in 113, and 2,984 in 124.

Things bottomed out about 2010.

Unit 108, 389 deer
Unit 111, 391 deer
Unit 113, 389 deer
Unit 124, 2,354 deer

Unit 117, 1,053 deer
Unit 121, 1,455 deer

Then things turned around........except in 117 and 121

2012,
In unit 108 the harvest was 425 deer or up 1.6 % from 2008.
In unit 111 the harvest was 441 deer or up 10% from 2008.
In unit 113 the harvest was 444 deer or up .5% from 2008.
In unit 124 the harvest was 2952 deer or down 1% from 2008.

Basically all back to 2008 levels or slightly up, just by keeping things the same and letting nature take it's course.

But in the 4pt or better units........

Unit 117, 884 deer, DOWN 34% from 2008
Unit 121, 1,238 deer, DOWN 44.5% from 2008

Now you might argue that was because the 4 pt restriction  reduced the harvest, but that should have been a one year glitch in 2011. In 2011 younger bucks were stockpiled so if the restriction worked 2012 should have eclipsed the harvest gains in the surrounding non restricted units. So far, that hasn't happened. We will see. So far it hasn't translated into hunter success.

You may also try to argue that the reduction is from reduced doe harvest. So lets compare buck harvest.

Unit 117
2008 had 998 bucks harvested, 2012 had 681 bucks or a loss of 31.7%

Unit 121
2008 had 1499 bucks harvested, 2012 had 930 bucks or a loss of 40%.

Now convince me these restrictions are working.

The intended purpose of the rule was to reduce harvest and leave more deer on the ground alive, looks like it's working perfectly so far to me, the harvest has been reduced. The real test is to see how many deer we have alive in the unit at the end of the 5 year trial. 

 

[Orion]

 Just an observation but I just spent 3 days scouting moose there and saw more moose than deer. Also noticed a huge lack of Wildlife Feeding Areas (Clear Cuts). Deer were plentiful around all the houses, just not in open hunting areas.
 I don't think the unit will ever support a large deer population until some timber is cut and new browse is grown. No food-No deer. Same situation exists in almost all
GMUs with a majority of National Forest land. It was my first trip to 117 and I don't have any historical knowledge, just my initial opinion.

[snowpack]

Do these statistics take in account hunter days, amount of hunters, just deer harvested?

The harvest reports have that in them.  They also include the number of deer killed that have 'x' number of points.  So you can look at how many 5+ pts were killed before and how many now.

I did not see hunter days included in the harvest reports.  I would like to know how many people hunted those units as compared to prior years.

Yeah, looks like they only have that info easily accessible from 2009 on. 

[whacker1]

Do these statistics take in account hunter days, amount of hunters, just deer harvested?

The harvest reports have that in them.  They also include the number of deer killed that have 'x' number of points.  So you can look at how many 5+ pts were killed before and how many now.

I did not see hunter days included in the harvest reports.  I would like to know how many people hunted those units as compared to prior years.

Yeah, looks like they only have that info easily accessible from 2009 on. 

can you provide a link, because the harvest reports I was looking at did not show that info.  I am sure that I am looking in the wrong spot, as I think I have seen it before.

[huntnnw]

Some people's attempt to brain wash us with there anti 4pt rule is ridiculous .. You just take a step back and really read what some write and think where is the common sense? It's laughable to read the crap some have wrote on here, from completely wrong and untrue to just lack of info or maybe intentionally left out to prove their point? Or maybe just that ignorant 

[snowpack]

Do these statistics take in account hunter days, amount of hunters, just deer harvested?

The harvest reports have that in them.  They also include the number of deer killed that have 'x' number of points.  So you can look at how many 5+ pts were killed before and how many now.

I did not see hunter days included in the harvest reports.  I would like to know how many people hunted those units as compared to prior years.

Yeah, looks like they only have that info easily accessible from 2009 on. 

can you provide a link, because the harvest reports I was looking at did not show that info.  I am sure that I am looking in the wrong spot, as I think I have seen it before.

For 2009  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2009/reports/deer_gmu_all.php
2012  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2012/reports/deer_gmu_all.php

I only linked 2009 and 2012, you can get to 10 and 11 from either.  I wonder if they just didn't ask for the hunter days before 09.  They changed the format or something.

[buckfvr]

Just an observation but I just spent 3 days scouting moose there and saw more moose than deer. Also noticed a huge lack of Wildlife Feeding Areas (Clear Cuts). Deer were plentiful around all the houses, just not in open hunting areas.
 I don't think the unit will ever support a large deer population until some timber is cut and new browse is grown. No food-No deer. Same situation exists in almost all
GMUs with a majority of National Forest land. It was my first trip to 117 and I don't have any historical knowledge, just my initial opinion.

Better go have a few more look sees...................

[huntnnw]

I've spent considerable time in 117.. It needs help .