Is a 3x restriction good?

[LOVEMYLABXS]

Just kind of wondering do or have you seen that this is a good thing. I'm a bit confused  we have a spike only or true spike on elk to keep breeding bulls around but it's 3 point or better on deer?

Is this working? I see a lot of nice 2x2 bucks??

[LOVEMYLABXS]

By the way these are all different deer I got the change to shoot with my camera just drtivin along.

[deerhuntr4885]

Those are all young deer. Expected to be two points.   Those pics just show good fawn survival last year. Is the restriction a good thing?  Now that is still a good question though.     I think that allowing them to mature an extra year or so gives them a little bit more life experience and instincts to avoid hunters better, hence living longer and larger. 

You will here guys saying that we are allowing giant two points to breed the does because of this.  That is somewhat true but this has always happened.  Even back before the three point restriction I saw big two's rutting some times.  Guys fear that they are passing that genetic gene down. But just being a two does not mean they always were.  It is not as much about genetics as it is about age and summer forage. Most times giant two' are just regressed, older bucks and still carry great genetics (but not always).

[vandeman17]

I see tons of mature two point bucks every season and it is getting a bit old. I have said all along that in some units they should issue two point only permits and make it a long season to try and cull some from the herd. 

[SkookumHntr]

It's the reason you got to see those young bucks! 

[GameHunter1959]

I think it depends on where your hunting. I have hunted in a pumpkin patch for 30 years. IMO the 3 point or better restriction did NOT improve the area. Idiots are still shooting spikes, all bigger 2 points definitely get shot at (most killed), and any deer with a 3 point or better gets slaughtered.

Last year I switched to private land and started archery hunting. I won't shoot anything smaller than a large 4 point, because I now am in a advantageous position.

[James]

Spike only or 3 point min restrictions do the exact same thing but in a different way.  They reduce the hunter success rate.  This combined with season lengths are all part of the game plan that allows for everyone to have an over the counter tag every year.

I do worry sometimes that we are selectively breeding animals based on these restrictions.  Deer that take more years (or never do) develop 3 points have lower hunter exposure. Elk that stay spikes longer in spike areas have a higher exposure to human hunting. 

I have wondered if we should cycle between 3 point min deer areas go to 2 point only, then back again.

[bobdog86]

Catch 22 for sure, almost to the point of frustration. I truly believe in the restriction and the number of mature bucks seen (where I hunt), but having said that, the number of freak 2 points, sometimes to the point of lunacy is also increasing at an alarming rate.  I have said all along, why not have a drawing for youth or seniors for an any buck tag in some of these areas, (SE WA for me). State doesn't seem to have a problem trying to suck more money out of us, may as well add another draw. Biggest buck I saw in lick Creek last year during the late hunt; was a fairly young Muley, slick 2 with not an eye guard, that was well over mid 20's wide and tall. Came by me at 30  yards. 

[coachcw]

I'd say its better than just shooting any buck . I'd like to see three point main frame how ever . or a spike and four point or better . in most place that are looking to improve the herd they cull spikes .

[bobcat]

I don't see the problem with having big two point bucks that can't be shot.

Having said that, I really don't care for the 3 pt minimum rule, because I'd prefer an "any buck" season, but by draw only, so that the number of hunters can be regulated by GMU.

[Bullkllr]

In my opinion, the 3x is probably not a good idea in the perfect world. The wdfw uses it for harvest control, and it probably works for that.

[bobcat]

The WDFW actually wanted to do away with the 3 point minimum, but they went with popular opinion and kept it.

[Bullkllr]

The WDFW actually wanted to do away with the 3 point minimum, but they went with popular opinion and kept it.

What I probably should have said was that the 3x restriction lowers harvest, probably resulting in better buck numbers.

Was the other side of the coin permit only? I know there is support for the 3x rule, but a lot of mixed feelings if permits are the other option for controlling harvest. Doing away with the rule while maintaining OTC tags I would not support; permit only is probably the best idea.

[swashington2128]

Personally I really like the restriction. Yes, it greatly reduces the number of bucks out there that are eligible to get harvested and thus reducing the hunter success rate but.... is it more fun to hunt and see lots of animals and not shoot, looking for the right one or just blast any deer out there. I love being out there and seeing the animals. Plus the advantage of seeing a large framed set of antlers just adds to the excitement of it.

So the question is would you like to harvest more deer or better deer? Some of the comments about mature 2x2s being more common is most likely true (Whitetail hunter here). Unfortunately WDFW cannot manage the states different deer populations like a ranch in Texas growing monster whitetails. Yes, some deer with inferior antler genetics will survive and reproduce, but they are survivors and that in and of itself is good for the herd.

I also like the antler restriction because it keeps most of the hunters in other areas. I hunted over in Huckleberry the last few years and saw very few hunters because of the 4x4 restriction for whitetails. This year the restriction is gone and the area will most likely be a warzone again.

 

[Bean Counter]

The 4 point minimum seems to have done well in the Northeast corner of WA, why not implement it for the muleys?