Free: Contests & Raffles.
We have gone over this before. I am not gonna go into detail on why my opinions are what they are, but I think most units on the east side should be 4 point or better, especially those in the Methow/Okanagon County.
Another harvest strategy sometimes employed to improve depressed buck:doe ratios is a “four-point or better” hunting season. It may seem counterintuitive, but antler pointrestrictions do not necessarily produce more large bucks. In a 4-point or better season, the hunter is restricted to harvesting bucks with 4 points or more on either antler. Consequently, all harvest pressure is redirected to the largest deer in the population, which reduces their number. Since most yearlings and some 2-year old bucks are protected until they become small 4-point deer, the overall ratio of bucks to does will increase somewhat as a result of having more young bucks in the population. However, harvest is merely delayed until a buck grows its first set of 4-point antlers. The maximum benefit of a 4-point season is typically realized after the season has been in place 2 or 3 years, at which time most 4-point bucks are being harvested. Thereafter, the buck:doe ratio does not continue to increase and fewer bucks actually survive to grow truly large antlers. Over the long-term, persistently targeting large bucks may also eliminate desirable genetics (the ability to grow large antlers) from the population. If the objective is to produce more large deer, the 4-point restriction must be lifted after 2 years so harvest is once again spread over more age classes. This allows more of the incoming cohort of 4-point bucks to survive to an older age and potentially grow much larger antlers. Should the overall buck:doe ratio again decline to an unacceptably low level, the 4-point or better season can be reinstated for another 2-3 years to augment the number of bucks in the population, and the process is repeated. Permanent 4-point or better seasons do not produce more large bucks and actually reduce the harvestable surplus because some of the younger bucks that could have been harvested will die from other causes before they grow 4-point antlers. In addition, some small bucks are mistaken for legal bucks and are illegally killed and abandoned.
Antler Rules Do They Work?A few years ago,I heard that the Southern Guides were recomending a four -point restriction on mule deer. It sounds good to the average hunter, but after much reading, and research I found that point-restrictions in fact have never worked.One would figure a professional guide, would know that placing all hunting pressure on the older age class bucks has significantly eroded that portion of the buck herd.The truth of the matter is antler point restrictions do not produce the result for which they were intended.Article done by,Albert Yendes,Antler Rules:Do They Work?The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife admitted futility of antler rules in the state's 1987 big game regulations.A breif anouncement stated that after 12 years of a four-point-and -larger regulation in South Steens Mountains, the legal harvest had plummeted 50 percent and buck ratios had declined 30 percent."Point restrictions have always been a disaster," said Len Carpenter, wildlife research leader for Colarado Division of Wildlife.Regulating harvest with 4 point restrictions is a fallacy; it has never worked anywhere in the West.''Rudy Drobnick recently retired as wildlife program coordinator for Utah Division of Wildlife Resourses said 3 point or better rules cause a gradual increase of small-antlered deer due to selective removal of large-antlered deer.Antler shape, size, number of the points and total configuration is genetically controlled, and only secondarily influenced by age, nutrition, weather and disease. "In Utah, if we had continued to harvest the largest-antlered bucks because of three-point-or-better requirement, the smaller-antlered bucks would have been protected and would increase in population. "Only one in 50,000 to 100,000 bucks will ever become a candidate for Boone &Crockett. Normally, the B&C buck would have been a yearling with two or three points. By yearling, I mean a buck that is 16-18 months old are mature. A yearling has the potential to carry four points with the proper genetic predisposition.He said that professional and personal attitudes must change for Western states to maintain large-antlered mule deer.The first change may be the elimination of hunting during the rut Large bucks are reclusive and elusive except during the rut, when they become susceptible to hunters.The second change , which could improve the genetic pool of a deer herd, would be culling process during the rut. Have your standard deer season on October where the skills of a hunter, and a little luck, will determine his success.. Then in November, at the peak of the rut, hold a season for two-point or fewer bucks that would help remove geneticallly inferior deer.Wyoming has had it's share of Point Restrictionsby Albert YendesWyoming has had it share of point restriction, and have not pleased Harry Harju, the supervisor of biological services with the Wyoming Game and Fish Department."Greys River was one of your so called trophy deer areas until we placed a four-point-or-better deer season on it for eight years. "During that eight-year period, hunter success dropped from 60 percent to 18 percent. The outfitters in that area wanted to hunt the big bucks up high, so an earlier season with point restrictions was implemented. During the later season, the number of does and small bucks harvested remained virtually the same for the entire eight years."Not only did the number of trophy animals decline, but the average size of their racks did as well. If your goal is to discourage hunters, we have found that a four-point-or better restriction will cut the numbers in half. Fish and Game departments cannot afford to lose any more political support from hunters; we need them. But as far as point restrictions with the end being quality hunting, the public has been sold a bill of goods."In short, point restrictions do not promote better fawn production, nor do they produce a surplus of larger animals. Instead, they increase hunting pressure on the older age class of animals and quite possible ruin the gene pool in the process. With such weighty evidence that point restrictons are useless, why do they persist?
Quote from: alecvg on March 07, 2010, 05:38:05 PMWe have gone over this before. I am not gonna go into detail on why my opinions are what they are, but I think most units on the east side should be 4 point or better, especially those in the Methow/Okanagon County.well you can't throw that out and not explain why. I'm not against the idea but I really don't think it would help.
People complain about all the giant 2-points right now. They would be complaining about giant 3-points if it were a 4-point min.
