Boundary Line for Columbian Blacktail deer in WA

[Gringo31]

Sundance,
I realize it is a touchy issue.  It makes the guys who hunt in the ferns mad at bigger buck with a pine tree in the background. 

I get that.  I also see it as another wedge between hunters....we just can't seem to help ourselves.


That being said, I respect you for setting this thread off to the side as you could see a storm coming.  Personally, I don't care as I sit in E. Wa and IMO the bucks just east of the PWT aren't hardly worth harvesting   

[shanevg]

If CA bucks are considered blacktails, then anything west of PCT should be considered a blacktail. 

Here is the B&C boundary - it's clear as mud.  Seriously though a Mt. Baker Wilderness buck being the same category as a north CA buck seems ridiculous.

Washington — Beginning at the Washington-British Columbia border, the boundary line runs south along the west boundary of North Cascades National Park to the range line between R10E and R11E, Willamette Meridian, which is then followed directly south to its intersection with the township line between T18N and T17N, which is then followed westward until it connects with the north border of Mt. Rainier National Park, then along the north, west and south park boundaries until it intersects with the range line between R9E and R10E, Willamette Meridian, which is then followed directly south to the Columbia River near Cook.

[Okanagan]

If CA bucks are considered blacktails... 

California blacktails are slightly smaller class of mule deer.  They don't look like blacktails, don't act like blacktails and are not rain deer blacktails.  I have lived in California and hunted them.  To class them with I.e. Olympic Peninsula blacktails is ridiculous.  That's always been a peeve of mine. 

The problem is that the deer walk back and forth across any line we draw to separate mule deer and blacktails, especially bucks in the rut looking for does.  Crossbreeds/hybrids are the rule for miles on both sides of the line.  I think the rule makers have tried to err to the west and keep mule deer genes out of the blacktail record book more than the other way.  That makes for many fine bucks with big racks in the North Cascades that are excluded from the blacktail records and yet have no chance whatsoever at the mule deer book.  We enjoy hunting them anyway, and know that a big old mature buck is a trophy, especially if he is about as big as deer get in his area, whether that is book size or not.  Island blacktails come to mind-- not a ghost of a chance at record book size but fine bucks -- on a smaller scale.   

I know of two areas, one in WA and one in BC where I have seen what looks like pure blacktails and pure mule deer a few minutes and a few yards apart.  Both of them may have been purebreds and both may have been hybrids.  No way to tell short of DNA maybe and somehow that feels like overkill science rather than hunting.  In those areas over the years we've seen every kind of blended physical features, especially noticeable on the rump and tail.  I wish I'd taken a  photo of four deer together miles west of the Crest Trail.  Each of them had distinctly different rump and tail markings, from close to pure blacktail to pure mule deer with two in the middle part way between. 

The problem is clear but not a solution.  I kind of like the benchleg or Cascade class of bucks for hybrids, at least to recognize outstanding examples. 

[fishnfur]

Nicely said, and I concur completely.  Having a standard for benchleg bucks makes total sense to those of you who hunt the areas where that strain of animal exists.   

[grundy53]

The fact that people feel the need to argue about this is retarded   

I see it as more of a discussion then an argument. There will not be a consensus, nor will the issue probably ever be resolved. I don't see the harm in some civil debate. No one is trying to ban anything.

[grundy53]

Sundance,
I realize it is a touchy issue.  It makes the guys who hunt in the ferns mad at bigger buck with a pine tree in the background. 

I get that.  I also see it as another wedge between hunters....we just can't seem to help ourselves.


That being said, I respect you for setting this thread off to the side as you could see a storm coming. Personally, I don't care as I sit in E. Wa and IMO the bucks just east of the PWT aren't hardly worth harvesting   

This is what we are talking about and it goes both ways. Those "mulies" are smaller and "hardly worth harvesting"  just east of the PCT yet that same buck walks a few yards over the PCT to the west side and all of the sudden he is a masher Blacktail. No matter what side he is standing on he is the same deer. But he could be passed off as 2 different sub-species I find that kind of ridiculous. There are Blacktails there are Mulies and there are Bench leg/hybrids. I don't know why people get offended when their buck is called a bench leg. Bench leg is not a derogatory name. It takes nothing away from the beauty nor the size of the animal. It's simply calling it what it actually is. I wouldn't go over to Republic and shoot a big ole mulie and try to pass it off as a Blacktail. That would be ridiculous and inaccurate. I wouldn't go to Forks and shoot a masher blacktail and call it a mule deer. That would be ridiculous and inaccurate. So why not call a bench leg/hybrid what it actually is? Why do people get offended when you call a deer that is from an area of heavy hybridization a hybrid? I don't get it.

[grundy53]

Here is a picture of a mule deer doe 34 miles (as a crow flies) west of the PCT.

[erk444]

Is that in Hancock

[grundy53]

Is that in Hancock

Yes

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[fishnfur]

Good points and pic Grundy. 

It's interesting that WDFW has no separation between species when reporting a successful hunt, as they do for salmon.   If it is west of the PCT - it's a blacktail.  East, it's a muley.

[kodiak 907]

Nice capture! Thanks for posting