northeast antler restrictions

[caseyv21]

just wondering if anybody else was in favor of a 3 or 4 point antler restriction for northeastern whitetails. The population has exploded and the potential for big bucks is out there but there's just too many guys shooting little spikes that have no chance to grow up.  I think if the wdfw makes new antler restrictions that washington could produce some of the biggest bucks in the country. Right now in the late season its any buck for rifle hunters north of spokane. This in particular needs to change.

[Jason]

Never hunted the East side but I know years ago it was hard to find big bucks in the Grayback unit,evryone was shooting small forked horns,since they went to three point or better the Deer being harvested are bigger in body and horn size.

[SHANE(WA)]

Oh Iam, there is no comparison to hunting the Mica unit compared to units north of the river, lots of branch antlered deer running around and big bucks.Rather have the antler restrictions north of the river, mica is all private and deer are pretty protected compared to the deer north of the river so they have a good chance to surrvive. I am pretty sure a area or unit will change to a 4 pt min this next season.

[Schmalzfam]

I'm just wondering....is the any whitetail buck in effect because of the way they multiply and how much they have taken over or pushed the Muley's out?

I'm not against antler restriction, I am just asking.

[Palmer]

I've heard of an area really improving with antler restrictions of 4 pt or better and its a good idea.  However, there is such a huge exploding population of deer in the Northeast that the wdfw should issue more anterless permits for whitetails.  Or make it anterless and 4 or 5 pt + only for modern firearm. 

The ratio of 1:3, bucks:doe is very good already and the bucks respond well to grunts and rattling.  So I'm more in favor of more anterless permits over opening up anterless altother.

[Gobble]

just wondering if anybody else was in favor of a 3 or 4 point antler restriction for northeastern whitetails. The population has exploded and the potential for big bucks is out there but there's just too many guys shooting little spikes that have no chance to grow up.  I think if the wdfw makes new antler restrictions that washington could produce some of the biggest bucks in the country. Right now in the late season its any buck for rifle hunters north of spokane. This in particular needs to change.

Nope, I think there is far too many WT already. They are pushing out the Mule deer that are much more desirable IMHO. I think they should leave it the way it is.

[DeKuma]

More antlerless gets my vote!

[Sagedawg]

 More doe tags and a longer and any weapon season for WT only. My


  Sage

[MHWASH]

No need for antler restictions in the NE. There are allready enough mature bucks to spread their genes and keep the population healthy.

 You need to keep in mind most hunters are looking for any deer to shoot. If a person is looking for a quality deer there are plenty up there. You just need to change your hunting style.

The down side to antler restrictiond in the N.E. would be lots of small bucks shot and left to rot. Much of the N.E. is so thick the only shot is a running one.

[croix]

I recently read a study based on a 20 year research project that I found very enlightening. For 20 years researchers tracked every buck and doe breeding and their offspring (obviously a fenced research area). They discovered that antler growth was more dependent on genetics than available food. Don't get me wrong - available food still plays a large part in producing larger antlers but even the best food sources cannot overcome poor genetics.

With regard to spike antlers, they found that bucks with spike antlers their first year rarely grew more than 7 points even after 5.5 years with exceptional food. Truly trophy racks were only grown by bucks with forked antlers their first year. Additionally, bucks that were spikes their first year almost never produced offspring that were bigger than spikes on year one. The only exception was when spikes were bred with one particular doe, that doe's dna was such that forked bucks were still produced.

The bottom line was:
If you want more bucks with average racks, then let the spikes walk.
If you want bucks with larger (trophy) racks, pull the trigger on those spikes.

This study completely changed my views on antler restrictions. Not being able to cull the genetically inferior spikes would be detrimental to the development of big racks. It seems that a restriction of spike OR greater than four point would be the best way to get some trophies out there.

More food for thought.

[caseyv21]

i agree instead of having it any buck it should be either spike only or 4 point or better. we do need to give out more antlerless permits. that study is very interesting. whatever the wdfw does it needs to do it quick the deer are getting out of control, and i would like to see more mulies up north, if there had to i wouldn't be against closing down the mule deer season for a year north of the spokane river

[CP]

I’ll never understand hunting for racks.  To me the only measures for deer are dressed weight and how they taste.  The whole “my deer’s antlers are bigger than your deer’s antlers” game is pointless (no pun intended).  But it’s spreading, now there’s “trophy turkeys” determined by the size of their beards.  What’s next, trophy grouse, quail, dove?  We just need something to measure on those.

I’d rather see deer managed for healthy sustainable numbers rather than rack size.  Then maybe we could have larger limits.  I’d much rather have 2, 3 or 4 average deer over 1 big buck. 

But if we really want big racks, why do we shoot a large racked mature buck at the prime of his life?  He has the right genetics and is the most capable of passing those genetics on.  Shoot him and pencil rack takes his place and starts passing on the pencil rack genes.  Antler restrictions go the wrong way; it should 4 point or less. 

Maybe we need a new “big buck” ( 6x6 or better) tag for those who want trophy racks.  When you buy your license you can choose the “multiple average deer” tags, or opt for a big buck tag, but not both.  We would probable need to go to a draw on the big buck tag.

[shanevg]

I hate antler restrictions.  I would much rather be able to shoot any deer and have more consistent hunting than have to sit and stare at the buck forever just to figure out if it is a 3 point or not.  In my experience, the deer populations have only gotten worse since the antler restrictions have taken effect and we have seen no increase in buck to doe ratios.  Just let us shoot any buck, it makes for a much more enjoyable hunt.

I also think there should be more second deer doe tags to get some of the does out of there.  And second deer tags should not use points.

[Colville]

NO.

There are miles and miles of roadless areas guys can chase low pressure deer to their hearts content. Tons of NF/State/BLM/Wilderness/Wildlife Refuge. There are big bucks there even in the high pressure areas they are just harder to hunt. Also, there are  muzz and archery seasons that are true rut hunts that improve the odds of seeing mature deer.

Invariably it's not just about the numbers of big bucks, but guys want them to be easy to find and kill. Problem is you have to steal the hunting opportunity from everyone to provide it to the minority that think the most important thing about their hunt is the rack.

The NE is that last place a family camp can go with decent odds of harvest where the old and young can participate with ease. Tons of these family camps are there that could give a fig about racks. That  herd is already offering both quantity and quality for those willing to pursue it. I just don't understand why some folks feel they are entitled to antler restrictions when it's not required to ensure the herd and it costs so many others their hunting tradition. The big bucks are there, go get em and let everyone else keep their hunts as they've been doing em now for years and years.

[MHWASH]

Colville,

 I could not have said it better. Good point.