3 Point Restriction

[whacker1]

All opinions should be treated like a buffet - well stated, as I think many folks take the comments on hear far too personally

I just think that the WDFW methodology needs to change for Deer in general, but I don't know the right answer.  I spend a lot of time out, not as much as Phool based on what I see him post in the way of photography all year round, but I do spend about 15-30 actual days hunting from season to season.  Every year I try and spend more time in the off season scouting and hiking, but find it hard to balance with family. (Definition of Balance is somehow different in my wife's opinion)   I grew up on the west side, and I remember 15 years ago, when we would see 10-20 blacktail on opening day of deer season.  You could see hundreds of blacktail in the summer in a single day, now it seems like the black tail have turned into ghosts.  I don't know why - over harvest, disease, poaching, predators, added pressure, etc, but something needs to change.  The whitetail population seems to be fairly strong, but the Mule Deer population is questionable from area to area.  I also think there has been a building interest in Mule Deer over the last 5 - 10 years.  Or maybe I have just been exposed to the added interest in the last few y ears.
I have been spending more time in Idaho & Montana over the last 5 years, and I can see that trend continuing for me, but I find myself running into Wolf predation issues in the area of Idaho I enjoyed hunting.  Trying new areas in Idaho to try and get away from Wolves next year.  

[Pathfinder101]

most of the Mulies that are harvested in this state (not necessarily by this site) are 2 1/2 year old small 3's and fours?

No argument here Goldtip. Its a fact that since the point restriction was implemented there are a lot of those mature 2 points running around, that is more than likely the reason F&W are going to have a permit to target them the next few seasons. My point was that the buck/doe ratio is higher with the restriction and just because they lift the restriction doesn't mean that only two points with inferior genes are going to be the two points harvested, two points with the 4 point genome will be harvested as well but in the long run MORE bucks overall will be harvested overall, leaving the buck/doe ratio lower than optimum.

Great point Phool.  I for one would like to see the buck/doe ratios change...

[Curly]

If they went to permit only in some of the more open country units and dropped the 3-point restriction, you would have a healthier deer herd.  Point restriction is necessary when it is general OTC tags.  If WDFW went with 2-point max then the deer herds would be healthier, but how many tags would they sell?  At least with elk you get a lot of meat w/ a spike.

[GoldTip]

look what the Blues have turned into.

That is a direct result of limiting the number of mature bulls that can be harvested, not because of a spike restriction. If you limited the Entiat, Swakane etc to only a few permits and eliminated branch antler bucks from being harvested during general or late you would have the same results in a few years. How many branched tags are given out in those Blues units each year? try giving the exact same amount for bucks in the "Dream Units" and see what happens in 10 years.

I agree completely to a certain degree.  My feeling would be to limit completely the number of branch bucks taken in certain area's, such as the Roosevelt, no bucks taken at all with greater than 2 points on on side, as in none. Do that for 3 years to weed out the BIG forky's and then lower it for 3-5 years to bucks with no more than one point on one side.  Only young and inferior (antlered) bucks to be harvested.  Yes, for a time there would be a great number of bucks harvested, without doubt, but I believe it would turn around within 6-8 years to where the genetics would be so good, many bucks are never spikes, their first year they are 2 and 3 points as 1 1/2 year old deer.  Then start to give out some branch antlered permits.  

Much like what they see with the elk in the blues.  Believe me, the years I've hunted the blues you see way too many elk with very few spikes to believe that all spikes are already dead, they simply never grew spike horns.  I think we would see the same thing with the Mule deer.  Also, for the first 2 years, actually increase the number of doe permits for that area, this would help keep the buck doe ratio in check.  Hell, we gotta try something, because what I am seeing is not working.

[Ricochet]

Oregon tried that "three point or better' rule many years ago in  specific units.  This led to most bucks being killed as soon as they reached that barely legal size and a lot of big 2X2's either being shot and left, or surviving to breed.  It eventually caused a drop in trophy quality, not exactly the goal!  The failure of the three point rule to produce the trophy hunting desired brought us to where we are now, all mule deer hunting except archery by permit only.   That management method has also failed due to the ban on hunting cougars with hounds that has resulted in a large increase in cougar numbers and the inability of the Game Commission to realise that managing mule deer for a buck to doe ratio of 10/100 is never going to provide decent hunting.  Wyoming manages its mule deer for a ratio of 35/100 with 45/100 being the target in trophy areas.  Oregon "trophy" areas are targeted at 25/100.  So I guess you can see why Wyoming has so much better hunting and trophy quality than we do.    

[Red Dawg]

It does seem like there were more deer around when you could shoot 2 points in our areas. However it wasnt that great when you could shoot spikes also. I feel that these units should be 2 point or better and also draw only for the mule deer units.

[Pathfinder101]

look what the Blues have turned into.

That is a direct result of limiting the number of mature bulls that can be harvested, not because of a spike restriction. If you limited the Entiat, Swakane etc to only a few permits and eliminated branch antler bucks from being harvested during general or late you would have the same results in a few years. How many branched tags are given out in those Blues units each year? try giving the exact same amount for bucks in the "Dream Units" and see what happens in 10 years.

I agree completely to a certain degree.  My feeling would be to limit completely the number of branch bucks taken in certain area's, such as the Roosevelt, no bucks taken at all with greater than 2 points on on side, as in none. Do that for 3 years to weed out the BIG forky's and then lower it for 3-5 years to bucks with no more than one point on one side.  Only young and inferior (antlered) bucks to be harvested.  Yes, for a time there would be a great number of bucks harvested, without doubt, but I believe it would turn around within 6-8 years to where the genetics would be so good, many bucks are never spikes, their first year they are 2 and 3 points as 1 1/2 year old deer.  Then start to give out some branch antlered permits.  

Much like what they see with the elk in the blues.  Believe me, the years I've hunted the blues you see way too many elk with very few spikes to believe that all spikes are already dead, they simply never grew spike horns.  I think we would see the same thing with the Mule deer.  Also, for the first 2 years, actually increase the number of doe permits for that area, this would help keep the buck doe ratio in check.  Hell, we gotta try something, because what I am seeing is not working.

This is news to me Goldtip.  I had always been told 2 things that I guess I took as gospel, but maybe they're wives' tales...;

1.  A 1 1/2 year old bull elk is ALWAYS a spike (unless he's got a sticker or some other wierd occurance).

2.  Spike deer are genetically inferior animals that will never reach good trophy potential (I have heard this about whitetails, but always assumed it applied to muleys also).

I never checked any of this with game biologists, and I heard this so early in my hunting career, that I don't even remember who told me.

[huntnphool]

a buck to doe ratio of 10/100 is never going to provide decent hunting.  Wyoming manages its mule deer for a ratio of 35/100 with 45/100 being the target in trophy areas.  Oregon "trophy" areas are targeted at 25/100.

 okay so doesn't it stand to reason that if you have a 20/100 buck/doe ratio, and you remove all antler restrictions, allowing the harvest of ANY buck, that the buck/doe ratio will drop below 20/100? This thead clearly shows that without the restriction a lot more would have hit the ground.

If they went to permit only in some of the more open country units and dropped the 3-point restriction, you would have a healthier deer herd.

 This would only work if the amount of permits were limited to about 10 per unit for the whole season, not per method.

 You know one other very important factor that gets overlooked by most is that the general season used to be several weeks long, limiting it to 8-10 days plays a huge role in the harvest as well. To make it easy lets just use 1000 as the number. When 1000 hunters go hunting over a 21 day season they are spread out in lower numbers per weekend allowing for more escapement. When you cut the season down to two weekends you are forcing the hunters to all hit the woods at the same time, leaving little room for escapement. Of course I'm talking about the general hunt here.

[GoldTip]

look what the Blues have turned into.

That is a direct result of limiting the number of mature bulls that can be harvested, not because of a spike restriction. If you limited the Entiat, Swakane etc to only a few permits and eliminated branch antler bucks from being harvested during general or late you would have the same results in a few years. How many branched tags are given out in those Blues units each year? try giving the exact same amount for bucks in the "Dream Units" and see what happens in 10 years.

I agree completely to a certain degree.  My feeling would be to limit completely the number of branch bucks taken in certain area's, such as the Roosevelt, no bucks taken at all with greater than 2 points on on side, as in none. Do that for 3 years to weed out the BIG forky's and then lower it for 3-5 years to bucks with no more than one point on one side.  Only young and inferior (antlered) bucks to be harvested.  Yes, for a time there would be a great number of bucks harvested, without doubt, but I believe it would turn around within 6-8 years to where the genetics would be so good, many bucks are never spikes, their first year they are 2 and 3 points as 1 1/2 year old deer.  Then start to give out some branch antlered permits.  

Much like what they see with the elk in the blues.  Believe me, the years I've hunted the blues you see way too many elk with very few spikes to believe that all spikes are already dead, they simply never grew spike horns.  I think we would see the same thing with the Mule deer.  Also, for the first 2 years, actually increase the number of doe permits for that area, this would help keep the buck doe ratio in check.  Hell, we gotta try something, because what I am seeing is not working.

This is news to me Goldtip.  I had always been told 2 things that I guess I took as gospel, but maybe they're wives' tales...;

1.  A 1 1/2 year old bull elk is ALWAYS a spike (unless he's got a sticker or some other wierd occurance).

2.  Spike deer are genetically inferior animals that will never reach good trophy potential (I have heard this about whitetails, but always assumed it applied to muleys also).

I never checked any of this with game biologists, and I heard this so early in my hunting career, that I don't even remember who told me.

Sorry, but yeah, both of those are wives tales.  I can't quote references specifically, but I have read multiple articles and studies which prove spike bucks are not always inferior bucks.  As well as several articles where biologists have been quoted showing that when managed the way the blues are being managed, many 1 1/2 year old elk are 2 and 3 points.  There was an article in Outdoor life probably 10-15 years ago regarding a bull here in Washington that biologists stated started his horn growth as a 2x3 and at 2 1/2 years old was was a 5x5 that would score in the 280 range.  At 3 1/2 he was a 340" bull!  It could work, whether it will or not is hard to say.

[gasman]

If you all remember, most of the state was any buck at one time. Then we had a devistating winter kill and that is when the antler restriction came in to play for both deer and elk.

The point restriction was originaly a 5 year plan to rebuild the herds. After the 5 years were up the WDFW came to the conclusion that if they kift the restictions they will lose revenue. They then decited to keep the restrictions in place, going against the recomondations of the states own wildlife biologists. I had a conversation on wit this with one of the state biologist when the 5 year plan was coming to an end. He informed me the state was going to keep the restriction and use the excuse of all the hunters in the state would flock to the Yakima area if and kill all the big bulls if restrictios were lifted.

The deer and elk numbers were at one time equal to and in some places greater than they were before the winter kill (i can not rember the year), but i do not know if that is the current case.