Deer Antler Point Regs

[Bango skank]

Im with you completely on that, but i think even if we opened up lion hunting like coyote hunting it wouldnt be enough at this point.  Not to say it wouldnt help some, and not to say i dont want that, i do, but we will never get a handle on them without hounds.  In the mean time, i think the best thing we can push for is a management plan thats being proposed by NWWG based off of the idaho panhandles cougar management.  Instead of a maximum harvest, switching to a minimum harvest.  Season open aug 1st through april 30th, 2 cougar bag limit, and if harvest in a region drops below a predetermined level for 2 consecutive years it can be taken as a sign that populations are decreasing and seasons can be adjusted accordingly.  Seems very rational to me, but the odds of getting that are slim.  We need as many people as possible to support that plan.  Emails are good, going to the march commission meeting in tri cities and testifying is better.  We need a huge crowd from all over showing up to testify and have a unified voice supporting this.  Short of changing the law on hound hunting i think its the best we could possibly hope for.

[buckfvr]

Mule Deer Antler Point Regs (APRs) Don’t Work
https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/cont...VIE0006790.pdf

• APRs have been shown to reduce the number and potentially the quality of mature bucks over time.
• Long-term use of APRs may target legal bucks that have not realized their full antler growth potential while protecting bucks with low antler growth potential (i.e., hunters select against legal bucks with smaller antlers). Although not validated by research, this is a concern among wildlife professionals and the public.

One of the truisms of life is that we get more of what we protect.  Do we want more spikes as a percentage of the bucks in a herd?  Sometimes we are protecting something different than what we think we are. 

IME/O protecting spikes results eventually in a herd that has a LOT of big old spikes and mature bucks with small racks and few points.  Simple genetics.  California had a 2 point or better buck season for decades and resulted in a high percentage of spike bucks and huge gnarly old fork horns, though maybe they always had a lot of spikes in California.  I hunted it after 50 years of fork horn or better seasons.

In most areas, a healthy 18 month old buck with good genetics will normally be a fork horn, and some will have 3 or more points per side.  I'd like to protect THOSE bucks with their exceptional genes rather than spikes. 

In Texas behind fences, they kill spikes, protect multi-tined young bucks-- and a high percentage of bucks have BIG antlers. 

I have hunted 4 point or better late mule deer seasons and enjoyed them the most of any deer hunting I've done, even though success was low. 

Protect spikes?  With respect, my opinion differs.

In many, many years in the woods I cant recall any big ol spikes.........Nothing they do in Texas or california  applies to here..  If resourceful, you can find any number of studies to back your thoughts and if you keep digging you can find studies that say those are wrong.  Studies, in general are agenda driven..........to believe them is to believe anything you read.  Learn to compare apples to apples.

[Jingles]

Lets face the fact WDFW does NOT manage for Quality thy manage for Quantity

[Okanagan]

We have different opinions on this topic.  Nothing wrong with that, and there is some evidence to support each side.  Just a lot more evidence on one side IMO.   Facts are facts, deer are deer, the laws of genetics apply whether in California or Timbuktu.

Selective breeding works to increase desired characteristics for cattle, horses, sheep, pigs, dogs... but we are saying that it does not work for deer??!!  That is the core issue of the kill spikes or protect them debate. 

Also, let's not attribute to one another positions we have not claimed.  I do not believe that most spikes remain spikes.  I do believe from my experience that most 18 month old spikes will never grow as big a set of antlers as an 18 month old 2x2 or more.  The majority of research I have read supports that experience, including 2019 deer research.   Culling has not been repudiated for deer.

The idea to shoot spikes to improve genetics of the herd got its serious start not with grandpa but with a few biologists in the 1980's.  I remember when that debate got going in major publications. 

 Some spikes may catch up in antler growth, which research shows, but not the broad majority, year after year,  across a deer population.  Nutrition is a bigger factor than genetics for specific deer and in good or bad years.  From my observations, I think there are some blacktail areas where most bucks are spikes their first year, where a stubby 2x3 with some mass is as big as the area will normally produce.

 Lotta factors, lotta exceptions but spike genetics as a general predictor of mature antler size is a probability with strong evidence from life experience and research on real deer.

That said I have no idea how to protect young bucks with the best genetics on public land in general seasons.  Probably all that can be done is to manage for quantity. 

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Go to a ranch where they specialize in quality deer and you will see they protect the large racked bucks and encourage hunters to cull out the bucks with "inferior" antler genes.   I honestly believe that APRs eventually lead to deer with less points. You are putting all the pressure on the animals with the traits you are trying to encourage. And leaving the bucks with the traits you don't want to do the breeding.  Back Asswards.

On the ranches that specialize in growing huge bucks, they know that the really special bucks start showing it with their first set of antlers and instead of spikes they will be 3x3's and 4x4's. They protect those young bucks and let them grow and get some breeding in before they let a hunter take them, usually at the peak or just after in size and breeding capabilities.

As for states, most would agree that Idaho whitetail hunting is superior to Washington in spite of all the extra wolves Idaho has. And Idaho has a six week long modern season in which yo can take any deer. Killing does and small bucks there doesn't seem to affect the herd.

[Bango skank]

This is not a high fenced deer farm, and comparing mansging wild deer genetics with managing high fenced farm deer is ridiculous.  You dont know why a wild buck here is a spike.  Was it born late?  Bad nutrition year? You dont know.  These are things high fence operations have complete control over, so their ability to impact that stuff is much higher.  You simply cant compare high fence operations to managing wild deer.  Also, im not talking about an apr to make "trophy bucks" im talking about an apr to help promote a naturally functioning, healthy herd structure.
  And lerhaps the fact thst idahos seasons run so long is part of why they dont need aprs.  Here you got a million guys all hitting the woods in the same tiny timeframe, with the "gotta notch my tag now" mentality.  And with all the hunter pressure, everything goes nocturnal but the stupid yearling bucks, so they get wholesale slaughtered, screwing up our herd structure.  Idaho you have z much longer season with more spresd out pressure, maybe huys dont feel desparate to shoot the first peckerhead they see.

[Bango skank]

Selective breeding works to increase desired characteristics for cattle, horses, sheep, pigs, dogs... but we are saying that it does not work for deer??!! 

Youre comparing selectively breeding captive domestic animals with trying to do the same with wild deer herds, its absurd.  For one thing when selectively breeding domestic animals for certain traits, you choose both the male and female which breed.  You cant do that with wild deer.

Just for the sake of argument, lets say i agree that a spike buck is always genetically inferior.  So you see a spike buck.  You think youre going to improve the genetics of the herd by killing it huh?  Okay, what about its mom?  Going to kill its mom too?  Half its genetics come from its mom after all.  What about all the doe fawns that doe has birthed over the years.  Know where they are?  Can you identify them?  Theyre out spreading her genetics around.  But wait, are the spikes "bad antler genetics" from his moms side, or his dads side?  You dont know.  Which buck impregnated that doe?  You dont know.  What time of year is it?
You likely wont even know which doe birthed that buck.  By the time our hunting seasons roll around a year and a half old buck is rarely still around its mom to even be able to identify which doe it is.  And if the rut is going, that buck very likely has already bred a doe or two and passed on its "inferior genes."  Yes spike bucks breed too.  Too many variables in wild animals to believe you can cull undesirable traits out of the gene pool.  The best we can do is to protect the youngest, most vulnerable to hunters bucks, in order to foster a better, more natural herd structure.

I can tell you here where we had the 4pt apr in my home unit, after a few years you were more likely to see a 4pt+ buck than a spike or forkie.  There were just flat out that many more bucks running around with an extra year or two of age on them, because the yearlings had been protected for a few years.  Just giving them that one free year lets them become much smarter, much more able to avoid hunters.  Yearling whitetail bucks, especially during the rut, are like shooting fish in a barrel.  Theyre way too easy to kill.  Allowing people to kill them results in a disproportinate number of them being killed, largely taking out an entire future age class of bucks.  And i never have seen one mature whitetail that wasnt at least a 4x. None of this "big old spike, big mature forkie" thing going on with whitetail.  The apr absolutely worked as intended, and a few years after it was repealed all of the progress made was gone.

[Bango skank]

A good article on trying to impact wild deer genetics via "culling" small bucks.  About a study with multiple phds captured 2500 bucks with helicopters and net guns, microchipping, measuring, culling with state scientific permit, over a decade on over 26k acres and using dna samples from captured bucks to identify lineage.  They were unable to improve trophy quality with all of that available to them.  In fact, the killing of young bucks reduced their buck to doe ratio causing the late births ive talked about, resulting in more small antlered yearlings.

"What had been a 1:1 ratio of bucks to does became 1:6 before the culling was over. Even though bucks that remained in the intensive treatment area had large antlers for their age, there weren’t enough of them to breed all the does on their first estrus cycle during the normal peak of the rut. Average conception dates started falling later and later, which led to more late-born fawns, which had less time in their first year to grow, so they ended up with smaller bodies and antlers for their age.

“We created our own negative feedback loop,” said Donnie. “Even though a fawn might have been genetically superior, their bodies couldn’t express that potential because they were born late, and they ended up getting culled anyway.”

This part in bold is exactly whats happening up here.  Lot of fawns getting born late because the buck to doe ratio is so skewed, which can be, and was fixed by, instituting an apr.  Late born buck fawns tend to have small antlers for a couple years.  Its not because of bad genetics, its cause they were born late.

https://www.qdma.com/qdm-works-culling-doesnt/

Further on it goes on about how some bucks with larger racks regularly produced smaller racked offspring, and vice versa. 

"Over years of data, the research team found cull-worthy bucks with low-quality antlers that produced fawns that went on to have above-average antlers. They also found bucks with large antlers for their age that produced fawns with below-average antlers. Without being able to trust antler quality as a guide to a buck’s breeding value, a hunter has no way to selectively cull.

“Looking at antlers is the only way we know how to cull,” said Donnie. “We don’t know how to cull a doe.”

[hunter399]

I don't eat the horns ,that's not what the 4pt min in NE WASHINGTON is about.We have hade plenty of culling in the past few years.So it has nothing to do with growing trophy deer.It has to do with lower amount of hunters,lower harvest/higher number of bucks.

[Skyvalhunter]

Might want to look at trying it the calcium is good for your teeth, bones, and ligaments.

[buckfvr]

Most of the 4pts killed in n.e. wa. are STILL only 18 months old..........

[buckfvr]

I don't eat the horns ,that's not what the 4pt min in NE WASHINGTON is about.We have hade plenty of culling in the past few years.So it has nothing to do with growing trophy deer.It has to do with lower amount of hunters,lower harvest/higher number of bucks.

It has NOTHING to do with lower number of hunters and lower harvest.  That will be an initial effect but like the last time the 4pt rule was in place, the harvest increased each year and by the last year harvest rate and success rate was astounding.  NWWG has all those figures.

What the 4pt rule is intended to do is allow the less than 4pt 18 month old bucks to escape in order to improve herd age class structure.  18 month old 4pts still get killed.  Its about overall herd health, not trophies.  The way it is now, escapement numbers for 18 month old bucks is terrible.  By 2 1/2 years of age they have moved on and arent hanging with the does.  At each additional year of age they become smarter, more hunter educated, and there for some what harder to hunt.  Still, the majority of the harvest will be young bucks, with 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 years olds making up the majority of the harvest.

4pt minimum had a huge effect on the condition of the herd here last time and it was obvious to those of us who live in 121 and 117.  Now, with the extreme predation problem, we need the 4pt rule more than ever.  I can only hope that some people realize that maybe the input from guys LIVING in 121 and 117 is more significant than input from guys who have never been here or only show up for a week or so each year.

[hunter399]

I don't eat the horns ,that's not what the 4pt min in NE WASHINGTON is about.We have hade plenty of culling in the past few years.So it has nothing to do with growing trophy deer.It has to do with lower amount of hunters,lower harvest/higher number of bucks.

It has NOTHING to do with lower number of hunters and lower harvest.  That will be an initial effect but like the last time the 4pt rule was in place, the harvest increased each year and by the last year harvest rate and success rate was astounding.  NWWG has all those figures.

What the 4pt rule is intended to do is allow the less than 4pt 18 month old bucks to escape in order to improve herd age class structure.  18 month old 4pts still get killed.  Its about overall herd health, not trophies.  The way it is now, escapement numbers for 18 month old bucks is terrible.  By 2 1/2 years of age they have moved on and arent hanging with the does.  At each additional year of age they become smarter, more hunter educated, and there for some what harder to hunt.  Still, the majority of the harvest will be young bucks, with 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 years olds making up the majority of the harvest.

4pt minimum had a huge effect on the condition of the herd here last time and it was obvious to those of us who live in 121 and 117.  Now, with the extreme predation problem, we need the 4pt rule more than ever.  I can only hope that some people realize that maybe the input from guys LIVING in 121 and 117 is more significant than input from guys who have never been here or only show up for a week or so each year.

I can tell ya i have lived in 121/117 my whole life.Hunted the 4pt min,harvested the 4pt min,lived the 4pt .Greatest years for hunting for me anyway.local talking to a local I'm sure you have seen the full scope of the condition deer herds are in right now.I will just agree with ya.There are lots of herd benefits to the 4pt min.

[blackveltbowhunter]

From what I am reading in the comments I think there is at least two different management issues being discussed and not just APR effectivness.

 The reason APR's are mostly  counter productive in hunter restricted environments, is not because they kill or don't kill a spike or young 4 point. Its because the hunters/managers generally have a very good idea on the AGE of the buck when it is taken, thus while a spike may be killed ( although the common theme is to let most spikes walk and give them a year to redeem themselves) , a young 4 point is given the pass. A large 10 point that is 4 years old is also given the same pass in exchange for the 130" 9 point who is 8 years old. This is due to either A) Fence operations, Heavy monitoring of the herd or both. Not a realistic scenario in general season public land.  The reason APRs are not needed in this scenario is mainly due to selective harvest regardless of antler points.

It has been mentioned several time and is very valid, odds are very good you likely don't need an APR ( although they are nice for us horn addicts) in a robust healthy herd with good escapement. If there are surplus deer, you can get away without being to picky on which ones are taken out. Areas with lots of deer and cover for deer to escape into do well with little management. Sure big bucks are not around every corner in this system, but there are plenty of bucks to do breeding, and a variety of age classes. Major environmental impacts are usually the biggest threats. IE..... your mile of big buck ridge gets logged, and death and carnage ensue for 2-3 years until its void of nice bucks. That's usually more local than anything else however.

The other side is APR in the "real" world. Its very hit and miss. I am going to side with the guys who have experience in the WT areas over there being discussed that they work great. But I tend to believe the system was not in play long enough to outlive the glory. I think it would have trended back down or at best stabilized with simply a new level of " dink" buck. This is for mainly BT and WT where habitat offers escape cover.  For muley in open country with a lot less escapement APR is a necessary evil for OTC to even be considered, 3 up should be a minimum. Lots of 1.5 year old muleys are forked so APR dropping to a forked buck while it would eliminate wasted deer, would also be counter productive IMO.

 

[Jingles]

Go to a ranch where they specialize in quality deer and you will see they protect the large racked bucks and encourage hunters to cull out the bucks with "inferior" antler genes.   I honestly believe that APRs eventually lead to deer with less points. You are putting all the pressure on the animals with the traits you are trying to encourage. And leaving the bucks with the traits you don't want to do the breeding.  Back Asswards.

On the ranches that specialize in growing huge bucks, they know that the really special bucks start showing it with their first set of antlers and instead of spikes they will be 3x3's and 4x4's. They protect those young bucks and let them grow and get some breeding in before they let a hunter take them, usually at the peak or just after in size and breeding capabilities.

As for states, most would agree that Idaho whitetail hunting is superior to Washington in spite of all the extra wolves Idaho has. And Idaho has a six week long modern season in which yo can take any deer. Killing does and small bucks there doesn't seem to affect the herd.

Only problem with the above statement is it makes sense and WDFW has proven time and time again that they do not have brains enough to pour Pee out of a boot with instruction written on the heel and an arrow pointing to the heel as thy refuse to even acknowledge time tested surveys by wildlife experts in other areas, thy put a person with a degree in Botany in charge of a program in biology