Results of 3 point or better rule

[WAcoueshunter]

All these point restriction plans do is try and make up for a lack of game. That is the problem that needs to be attacked.

Yes, not enough animals for the number of hunters.  The main issue is that we have general OTC seasons and a million hunters.  Take off the APR and every buck with nubs would get shot.  APR slows down the harvest.  Only real solution is to limit the number of tags.  Rip the band aid off already and get it over with. 

[HunterStrait]

All these point restriction plans do is try and make up for a lack of game. That is the problem that needs to be attacked.

Yes, not enough animals for the number of hunters.  The main issue is that we have general OTC seasons and a million hunters.  Take off the APR and every buck with nubs would get shot.  APR slows down the harvest.  Only real solution is to limit the number of tags.  Rip the band aid off already and get it over with.

Actually dealing with the opposite in my "neck of the woods" for farmland deer. I will see plenty of deer a year, but not enough hunters because the surrounding local landowners no longer allow hunters. Don't know how much my point matters because i hunt private, but it has been that way for the past few years and hasn't really improved the quality of bucks. The loss of access into private, as well as shrinking public lands, in my opinion is really just pushing everyone who doesn't have the same privilege into limited space and putting a lot of pressure and stress onto those herds.

[Bullkllr]

All these point restriction plans do is try and make up for a lack of game. That is the problem that needs to be attacked.

Yes, not enough animals for the number of hunters.  The main issue is that we have general OTC seasons and a million hunters.  Take off the APR and every buck with nubs would get shot.  APR slows down the harvest.  Only real solution is to limit the number of tags.  Rip the band aid off already and get it over with.

They would also need to foresee how that would affect whitetail and blacktail situations and adjust accordingly there also.

[WAcoueshunter]

All these point restriction plans do is try and make up for a lack of game. That is the problem that needs to be attacked.

Yes, not enough animals for the number of hunters.  The main issue is that we have general OTC seasons and a million hunters.  Take off the APR and every buck with nubs would get shot.  APR slows down the harvest.  Only real solution is to limit the number of tags.  Rip the band aid off already and get it over with.

They would also need to foresee how that would affect whitetail and blacktail situations and adjust accordingly there also.

Totally, good point.  Lots of moving parts, and no perfect 'one size fits all' scenario.

[boneaddict]

Such as the tribes.   Try to regulate harvest like in the Clock and see what happens, or in Alkali.  It becomes a private hunting ground. Here in the Wenas and in Yakima on the winter range.  I’m sure the Swakane and that country got hit hard with the roads open this year.

[RC]

All these point restriction plans do is try and make up for a lack of game. That is the problem that needs to be attacked.

Yes, not enough animals for the number of hunters.  The main issue is that we have general OTC seasons and a million hunters.  Take off the APR and every buck with nubs would get shot.  APR slows down the harvest.  Only real solution is to limit the number of tags.  Rip the band aid off already and get it over with.

So, the solution is to go to a 100% draw then?  I know a lot of people on here are concerned about a draw tanking hunter participation and giving the antis a win, which sounds valid, but I also look at Oregon and how they are 100% draw for the east side of the state.  Looking at their draw odds, most archery units have 100% draws, and even some of the rifle units are 100% with many decent units having odds of drawing every 2-3 years.  I have a lot of friends and family over there on the east side, and while it's not a perfect system (what one is?), there's usually enough opportunity for them.  Seems like it should at least be a consideration, so I'm curious to hear thoughts from other people that hunt Oregon and what they think of this system?  Has it resulted in an overall dropoff in hunter participation?

[Mtnwalker]

All these point restriction plans do is try and make up for a lack of game. That is the problem that needs to be attacked.

Yes, not enough animals for the number of hunters.  The main issue is that we have general OTC seasons and a million hunters.  Take off the APR and every buck with nubs would get shot.  APR slows down the harvest.  Only real solution is to limit the number of tags.  Rip the band aid off already and get it over with.

100% agree. The problem (one of many) is our game and tag allocations being managed by a department that puts non-tribal hunters at the very bottom of the priority list. If quality elk tags are any indicator, I don't think draw-only would work out in our collective favor for very long. My opinion on WA is be very careful what you wish for, it sucks now but I think chances of making things even worse by trying to make it better are high. 

[HillHound]

Impossible to manage it when you have a special user group that gets to do basically whatever they want as long as there’s a holiday or a birthday or an anniversary, etc. it’s stupid to save all the big bulls for the natives to kill. I’m sure they don’t like the three-point antler restriction. Less big bucks running around when they go to shoot them in November and December.