4-point rule 117/121

[buglebrush]

I totally love the 4-point restriction.   The only thing to make it better would be to open up some antlerless harvest too.  Such a waste to kill a young buck when in a year or two he could be a wall hanger.  Doe or Giant only for me.  ( Bow hunter )

[Whitetail freak]

I think 121 124 117 all need 4 point rules. Keeps a lot of does, fawns, and up and comer bucks from being shot from the road by The bubba hunters. And lowers the hunting pressure for the guys that actually scout hike and hunt. Makes our experience that much better

[CedarPants]

That'd be an interesting thread probably all of it's own.  124.

What's everyone's experience like there?  The areas I spend a lot of time in (all public land) in 124 don't have nearly the number of deer they did 5 - 10 years ago

[Whitetail freak]

In 124 is where I spend most of my time and more and more people are coming in and deer numbers go down and down each year I to see 100-120 deer In the big alfalfa field I hunt around now I'm lucky to see 40 with 5 bucks. But that's also due to the # of coyotes and the wolfs that where there a while ago...

[huntnnw]

Perfect example what's wrong with the herd..40 does and 5 bucks.. Lotta area like that around here..I counted 112 does one day in a field ..not 1 antler!

[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.

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.

Thank you snowpack, that is what I was looking for.

2009 117 modern firearm - 4000 hunters and 21000 hunter days
2012 117 modern firearm - 2882 hunters and 14000 hunter days.

Those numbers by percentage are similar in 121.

I compared 113 to see if more hunters gravitated to 113.  The hunters actually went down by 10 bodies, and a few hundred hunter days.

 

[buglebrush]

Perfect example what's wrong with the herd..40 does and 5 bucks.. Lotta area like that around here..I counted 112 does one day in a field ..not 1 antler!

Couldn't agree more.   

[huntnnw]

Where I use to live in Clayton..the farmer had one of the best areas I had seen for deer numbers and quality in that area ever. He was issued depredation doe tags every summer and was allowed to let people hunt come Aug 15th..All it took was the first doe to hit the dirt and I wouldnt see another buck in that field till next spring in the daylight!! Those deer smartned up fast. There was on avg 75 deer in that field on a nightly basis and 30 of them were bucks with varying age class of bucks with a few in the 6.5yr and older

[bearpaw]

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.

Thank you snowpack, that is what I was looking for.

2009 117 modern firearm - 4000 hunters and 21000 hunter days
2012 117 modern firearm - 2882 hunters and 14000 hunter days.

Those numbers by percentage are similar in 121.

I compared 113 to see if more hunters gravitated to 113.  The hunters actually went down by 10 bodies, and a few hundred hunter days.

whacker1 that is an interesting statistic because one of the complaints about the 4pt rule was that hunter numbers would go up in surrounding units, glad to know that excessive pressure did not occur in 113. I think some hunters have quit coming to NE WA from across the state after they have heard that deer numbers are down. The economy no doubt may have some affect on hunter numbers too.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

This is about deer population not hunter success.

It's not about hunter success? Then why bother jacking up the herd? If it doesn't equate to hunter success, it's a wasted effort. The deer were no where near disappearing. This rule was driven by low hunter success and sold as a cure.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

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.

But it's been said, on this thread I believe, this rule wasn't made to create more trophy bucks, it was put in to create more deer.

[bearpaw]

This is about deer population not hunter success.

It's not about hunter success? Then why bother jacking up the herd? If it doesn't equate to hunter success, it's a wasted effort. The deer were no where near disappearing. This rule was driven by low hunter success and sold as a cure.

If you have 1000 deer and kill 500 that leaves 500 deer to breed.
If you have 1000 deer and only kill 400 that leaves 600 deer to breed.
If you leave 600 deer this year instead of only 500 deer to breed, then there will likely be more fawns and a larger overall herd next year.
Do this same thing for a few years then it seems to me that the much higher deer numbers will provide much more opportunity in the future?
It also seems that this should be a clear path to recovering deer numbers and maintaining a better buck to doe ratio.

Please correct me if my math is wrong.

[huntnnw]

no brainer

[Bigshooter]

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20130713/COLUMNISTS01/307130009/Antler-rule-points-buck-survival-issue

Good read about about APR.

[dscubame]

This is about deer population not hunter success.

It's not about hunter success? Then why bother jacking up the herd? If it doesn't equate to hunter success, it's a wasted effort. The deer were no where near disappearing. This rule was driven by low hunter success and sold as a cure.

It is obvious you are not familiar with the unit when you make a statement like you did about the deer no where near disappearing.  The very fact that the deer numbers have been on a drastic decline in these units were at the fore front of the wdfw research and commissioners meetings. 

And the cure is working.  Deer numbers are on the rise.