Results of 3 point or better rule

[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.

[Kingofthemountain83]

Eastern WA has so many different types of areas and is so diverse I don't know the answer to APR... I think they need to get more area and species specific... But how exactly?
 Cowichie for instance, my favorite GMU has MD, benchlegs, and BT, no WT... I use to nail a deer here almost every year here... Rimrock is so thick they don't do deer surveys and I think 4 bucks were reported 2024 modern mainly BT... Most of Little Naches you're not seeing a deer in unless it's crossing a road mainly BT... Same with Bumping... I see no reason for APR in 300 GMU bordering the Cascades where they base populations off harvest statistics... Units so thick it's like the west side... But missing the cuts... At that in between ages...

 I also hunted Chiwawa hard a couple seasons... Saw not many deer actually... Did see one masher that probably would've been one regardless of APR considering how he was running from me and where he was at... Don't know much about this area...

 And then Chewuch and the Pasayten... For the amount of time I've spent in these areas started in 2020 one high buck hunt 2025... I've consistently come across more legal deer in such a shorter time period... It's obvious this place has a higher deer population than areas I have been hunting but think that has always been the case and as I understand it use to be way better...   

And we need another thread for the amount of quality bull tags given out... Quality muzzy in Cowichie was given 2 last year... What a joke... The size and quality of that herd is unreal... Some world class animals in there or so if someone wants to put it on a rag 4 point after chasing spikes for 20 years... I saw 14 bulls on one hill side before the opener... When I had the tag there were 8 given out in 2008... They could give out 50... Maybe 25 bulls would get shot... But anyways... 

[Loup Loup]

Huntingphool: to answer your question, I maintain that a good genetics buck fawn will throw two point with eye guards its first set of antlers. A spike or smooth beam two point are genetically inferior.
There are plenty of antler point/ageclass mule deer studies out there.
Again that is why I say a spike or smooth beam two point should be culled its first set of antlers. You are doing the population as a whole a favor. Less juveniles harassing does during breeding, less inferior studs out there period, less pressure on the winter range, less roadkills from dimwits that drive 60mph plus up and down the highways through winter and spring range after dark, when a hunter takes a spike or two point they go home and don’t keep hunting til they crop a mature buck.
To paraphrase Dr V. Geist (I apologize for the misspell on name) A poor genetics fawn’s main purpose in the system is to be killed and eatin by something else in the system.
Of course some live, that coupled with your strong two points with eye guards (if they aren’t shot as “three points”),baring a devastating winter, and your population has a chance to grow and become strong.
Of course if they are helped by improved winter range number one, and more consistent predator control.

[EnglishSetter]

Furbearer365: Why would you protect a spike? Could even be a lifelong spike. Which would get him a lifelong pass from hunters.
One of the biggest bodied bucks we ever got was back when you could shoot any buck. I got Dad on a spike opening morning. He made a great shot with my rifle.
It had a big mature size body and a white face Roman nose old buck. It had 12” long spikes.
Later I asked dad where those horns were as I wanted them as a curiosity. He had buried the head in the garden already.

When did I say "protect a spike?"  Im agreeing that 3 point or better is stupid, and doesn't work. That was my point with the elk also, why are we allowing a herd to have 5 spikes, but only shooting the only dinky 3x3 in the herd. All im saying is 2 point makes more sense then 3 point. Trying to see a 3rd point at 500 yards is damn near impossible sometimes. But seeing that its branched usually isn't. And, for the record, I think anyone under 16 and over 65 should be any deer. Get rid of "draw doe tags," cuz thats the dumbest thing ever. Allow our youth and elderly to use those to fill tags

I'm a fan of youth and over 65.  Not sure any deer vs any buck, but unlikely "mistakes" won't get tagged and accounted for.

[Humptulips]

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.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. The problem is not too many hunters, it is not enough deer and elk. How many threads have been posted on here about how many deer or elk there were in the old days? I know many are not old enough to remember anything but emptiness in the woods. I've always hunted the westside and am old enough to remember a lot more hunters out but also a lot more deer and elk. I won't go into my predator rant but this State seems to manage for minimum ungulates and maximum predators. We need to turn that around. So westside, that's not mule deer and three-point restrictions but it is. If there were a ton of BTs that would reduce pressure on Mule deer. 

[Loup Loup]

Yes, Humptulips. And:
I think on the Eastside quality winter range is the foundation. Can’t grow deer without feed.
The state, county’s, BLM, Forest service, need to take the next step beyond spraying their road edges for noxious weeds, and be good neighbors and work with the goal of noxious weed eradication, not just “control” what you can see from the road.
Maybe the state could spare some funds from stocking Narcan dispensers to burnin down some weed.?
The Forest service needs to quite bringing in overhead teams from California on fires that make a habit of NEEDLESSLY back burning critical winter range. Range that in my lifetime has yet to come back…other than knapweed. I’ve had county fireteams back burning critical winter winter range for no reason other than they think it will help them out years down the road by already be burned up.
A value needs to be accessed on range land!
If the deer have winter range they can withstand predation. They been doing it for 40,000 years.
But! When our deer population is down to a skeleton level, and predator management is tounge in cheek by managers they can….never… come back to sustainable numbers.