Stevens County Petitions Wildlife Commision for 4 pt. minimum restriction

[bobcat]

I was looking at the agenda for the meeting this week, Friday and Saturday, and they have added a topic in there for Saturday morning. They will be discussing a petition by the Stevens County Commissioners. This should be interesting. I hope I can make it to the meeting Saturday morning. I need to find a babysitter.  

*ADDED 3/10/2010
PETITION FOR RULE CHANGE – DECISION:
Pursuant to Pursuant to RCW 34.05.330, the Commission will discuss and consider a petition for rule change submitted by Stevens County Commissioners and related to the next agenda item (#15). The Commission may either (a) deny the petition in writing, stating (i) its reasons for the denial, specifically addressing the concerns raised by the petitioner, and, where appropriate, (ii) the alternative means by which it will address the concerns raised by the petitioner, or (b) initiate rule-making proceedings

Here is the letter from Stevens County:

[bowhunterforever]

Where did you find this info at? For some reason the pdf wont load.

[bobcat]

It's on the WDFW website. Try this:

[bobcat]

If that doesn't work for you, go here:  http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2010/03/agenda_mar1310.html


Scroll down to item #15 and click on "Stevens County Petition."

[WAcoyotehunter]

the pend oreille county sportsmans club voted to support this petition as well (part of unit 117 is in this county) and I think the commissioners will support it.  I think it's for a 3 pt though?

[bearpaw]

Not sure how I feel about this, Zender (biologist, now retired) was not a big fan of this idea. But the local group has mustered support and there's a good chance we will get to see how it will work.

It might really make for some great hunting to let the yearlings survive their stupid year....

[bowhunterforever]

I think it might make the numbers of deer increase and the quality of big bucks decrease.

[bobcat]

the pend oreille county sportsmans club voted to support this petition as well (part of unit 117 is in this county) and I think the commissioners will support it.  I think it's for a 3 pt though?

The letter says 4 point. Did you read it?

[bearpaw]

4 pt is what they were wanting at the meeting I attended.....

We do have a lot of cover, get them past the stupid year and they know how to stay out of sight.

[Wacenturion]

I think 3 pt or better is a winner for whitetails............so I guess 4 pt or better will do the same.  It will take a couple years and you'll see a different age structure and a larger number of bigger whitetails available for harvest.

Biologists all have varying opinions.......where Zender wasn't fond of it, the Biologist in the SE thought it was a good idea many years ago.  It has worked well in the Blues, with excellent buck/doe ratios and lots of bruisers as well as plenty of legal smaller bucks taken every year.

A whitetail is a whitetail......you may see some differences based on habitat type and densities tied to that habitat, but in principal you will see a increase in mature bucks as well as smaller legal bucks available for harvest. 

[bearpaw]

wacenturian that's the way it seems to me, I would at least like to see how it would work out in a few years.

[bobcat]

With a 4 point minimum I'd bet half of the hunters that normally hunt there would find somewhere else to go. And that's a good thing, if the deer numbers are really down that much (at least for the deer, not so much for the businesses that depend on hunters' money in the fall. I think a temporary 4 point minimum wouldn't be a bad idea for a lot of GMU's on the eastside, even for muleys.

[bearpaw]

The Whitetail is a pretty smart critter, get him past that 1 or 2 year old stage and he learns to be a survivor. One bad thing, I can see how it could tend to cause genetics to change over time to favor bucks without eyegaurds or only having 3 points on a side. There's a few places where point restrictions have resulted in big old inferior bucks doing the breeding. It seems that was one of Zenders arguments against point restrictions. He favored limiting hunter numbers to increase escapement and I have to agree that his rational makes sense. However, there's a lot of brush in the units suggested so once bucks get little age, they may all be much better survivors.

There's only one way to know for sure.....a trial

[bobcat]

I'd say to only have the restriction for one year. Point restrictions have been proven to not be a good long term solution. The 3 point minimum we now have for mule deer was originally intended to only be temporary after deer numbers plummeted after a bad winter. And the WDFW wanted to drop the restriction but too many hunters wanted to keep it so they listened to the public   Not sure what the state is paying the biologists for when all they do is whatever the public wants.

[WAcoyotehunter]

having a three year trial period is a great idea.  I suspect it will take AT LEAST three years to start to see the results, but when we do I think they will be significant.  This is a good thing for the deer herd.

[Wacenturion]

An interesting read.  Not so sure I would choose the Biologist's (S. Fitkin) logic for no antler restriction over the improved buck/doe/fawn ratios data shown after restrictions, not to mention general concensus of the local folks.  Also compare the results as to meeting Washington's management objectives (buck/doe ratios etc.) to what is said regarding Oregon's success with a different approach. 

http://www.wogameandfish.com/hunting/mule-deer-blacktail-deer-hunting/wo_aa075504a/

[Wacenturion]

Another article........strictly whitetail.

http://www.whitetailjournal.com/ArticleContent.aspx?id=2095

[mulehunter]

I promise they are trying to fool all of us trying to save as many deer to feed enough to Diamond pack and some new packs coming in. So it will balance out ok for 3 years at least then worst after that will happen for sure.

Mulehunter 

[Ray]

I think it will be a dud.

[bearpaw]

In this case, I know the people involved, they are all truly wanting to improve the hunting.

[WAcoyotehunter]

I promise they are trying to fool all of us trying to save as many deer to feed enough to Diamond pack and some new packs coming in. So it will balance out ok for 3 years at least then worst after that will happen for sure.

Mulehunter 

that's untrue.  The people pushing this are the sportsmen. 

[bearpaw]

I promise they are trying to fool all of us trying to save as many deer to feed enough to Diamond pack and some new packs coming in. So it will balance out ok for 3 years at least then worst after that will happen for sure.

Mulehunter 

that's untrue.  The people pushing this are the sportsmen. 

That is correct on this issue, it is local hunters pushing for this.

[Cleve]

I am undecided on the issue also.  On one hand you have people that are meat hunters that are forced to kill a immature buck just for the meat.  In that case give people the option to shoot a doe.  Coming from Montana where your A tag was good for either sex, many people would hunt all season for a big buck and on the last day shoot a doe to have meat in the freezer.  What would this do to numbers here in Stevens County if everyone hunted all season for a bruiser and if they chose to harvest a doe instead of a spike or fork horn just to fill the freezer.  Can the herd numbers support this option?  I love the option of letting the as Bearpaw stated "Stupid Bucks" live to grow another year, but at the same time I love deer meat and would be just as happy with doe meat if needed.

[Viszla]

I have not seen where antler restrictions have worked on the muleys so I don't really see why it would work with the whitetail.  Like everywhere else in the state, if they want larger deer herds maybe they should just cut down the archery and muzzle season.

[Ray]

Like everywhere else in the state, if they want larger deer herds maybe they should just cut down the archery and muzzle season.

I don't see how that works out. You should explain how the math works on that or the philosophy. The way I view such an idea is that many current muzzleloaders and archers will pick up a rifle and harvest the same numbers during the modern season. Probably same number of deer killed. People would just migrate to different tags (or even different states) if the respective primitive seasons are diminished enough. The only solutions I see are going to be shortening seasons which nobody wants to give on and/or creating permit only hunting where it's needed (seems more viable).

[NWBREW]

This is interesting. I have hunted stevens county for the past 20 years but I hunt in the "any whitetail buck" area. I cannot remember the last time I killed a buck with less then 4 pts on one side. I would support it but would like to see all the units go 3 pt or 4 pt or better. With a whitetail most have eyeguards....not all but most. So by making it 4 pt. or better all they are doing is leaving the spikes and forked horns alone to grow but that doesn't mean you can't shoot a young buck. I have seen young 1 1/2 year old bucks that would be legal under the three pt. rule and 2 1/2 year old bucks that would be legal in the 4 pt. rule. So this 4 pt. or better rule for whitetails would just add one or two years to a buck. Most ....if not all 1 1/2 year olds would walk. But a lot of 2 1/2 year olds would be legal. Not huge...but legal.

If anything it would let deer live past their first year with antlers on their heads.

[Viszla]

Don't get me wrong, I love to hunt as much as everyone else on here but at the same time I would love to see the muley season cut down to one week for each user group untill the herds are built up.  At least cut out the late seasons.  It kills me to to see these bowhunters coming down the mountain with a deer strapped to their snowmobile and laughing at how "you just run 'em until there tongues are hanging out."  The late seasons are having an imense impact on our migratory deer herds especially in the areas where you can shoot antlerless.  As long as the deer are being hunted 4 months out of the year their numbers will not increase.

[Ray]

Viszla that sounds illegal. Chasing the deer with snowmobiles. I don't support that with bows or rifles (or anything else). I'd ask the game warden and turn that sort of information over to them. Sorry to hear that but I don't believe most hunters I know are like that.

[sako223]

Antler restrictions are not synonymous with Quality Deer
Management. Rather, antler restrictions are a strategy to protect a specific age class (generally
1½ -year-old bucks, also called yearlings) or classes of bucks.

Many antler restrictions have been
used, including point, spread and beam length requirements as well as Boone & Crockett score. All
restrictions have advantages and disadvantages. The key to implementing an effective strategy is to
devise it from local data and then educate local sportsmen and women on the benefits.

Antler spread is a better predictor of whether a buck is 1½ or 2½ years or
older, and is therefore a more biologically sound approach to protecting yearlings.

The QDMA is encouraged by the increasing number of
states implementing strategies to protect yearling bucks. In general, the QDMA prefers the voluntary
passing of yearling bucks to mandatory antler regulations. However, we recognize that antler
restrictions may be justified in some situations to achieve specific deer management objectives. In
the long term, QDMA is optimistic that enough hunters will voluntarily pass young bucks that antler
restrictions will become unnecessary and even cumbersome to more sophisticated management.

The percentage of bucks in the harvest has declined in most states during the past decade. This is
a positive trend for the health of deer herds and habitat and for the future of hunting. The QDMA
recommends deer herds are maintained in balance with their habitat, with balanced adult sex ratios
and age structures. This situation is obtained by harvesting the biologically appropriate number of
antlerless deer and by protecting young bucks. For most states, adult bucks (1½ years and older)
should constitute less than half of the total deer harvest, and yearlings should constitute less
than half of the adult buck harvest.

These are quotes from the following Long Download link.
http://www.qdma.com/media/WhitetailReport09.pdf

Unlike most biologists WDFW related articles I find some palatable info here put together from across the US.
I also don't agree with more attempts at creating Trophy units as all that I can remember have failed and it is a lot of time wasted because the recovery time makes it even more miserable. Trophy units have failed for many reasons including that the goal is not exactly herd balanced. Next obviously is shoot-n-run and poaching. Then tribal hunting. Increased predators. Then the unthinkable disease and winters can bring it to zero again instantly.

Point restriction have become a requirement but dreams of creating trophy units will fail with point restriction being the only restriction. Even permit only trophy units have failed. Herd management should be the goal with limiting hunters. This will yield trophy animals.

[Skycruiser]

I've hunted Stevens County for over 30 years and have never shot a buck with less than five points on at least one side. I'm sure even some of the 4 x 5's I've taken weren't more than 2 1/2 years old. I think it's a good idea to let 'em grow up a bit.

[Skyvalhunter]

Yea I know how it is I don't shoot anything less than 8 point mule deer myself!!

[yelp]

If I recall last year, The Stevens County Fish and Wildlife Advisory Committee made a big stink about too many deer..They met with the WDFW to see if they could increase deer permits along the highway 395 between Loon Lake to Colville.  Why? because they felt that too many deer were being hit by vehicles..too many deer.  Not sure how.. 4 pt or better fits here.. Hard to follow their logic.

So the WDFW now has this in the regulations..The Colville River permit 2nd deer tag..25 antlerless whitetail permits (wow) (won't solve any vehicle collision problems)

Here is the deer area description..

Deer Area No. 1035 Highway 395 Corridor (Stevens County): That
portion of GMU 121 beginning at the intersection of US Highway
(Hwy) 395 (State Route 20) and State Route (SR) 25: S on SR 25 to
Old Kettle Rd; E on Old Kettle Rd to Mingo Mountain Rd; S on Mingo
Mountain Rd to Greenwood Loop Rd; E on Greenwood Loop Rd to the
bridge over the Colville River; S on the Colville River to the
bridge over Gold Creek Loop/Valley Westside Rd; W and S on Valley
Westside Rd to the Orin-Rice Rd; E on Orin-Rice Rd to Haller Creek
Rd; S on Haller Creek Rd to Skidmore Rd; E and S on Skidmore Rd to
Arden Hill Rd; E on Arden Hill Rd to Townsend-Sackman Rd; S on
Townsend-Sackman Rd to Twelve Mile Rd; S on Twelve Mile Rd to
Marble Valley Basin Rd; S on Marble Valley Basin Rd to Zimmer Rd;
S on Zimmer Rd to Blue Creek West Rd; E on Blue Creek West Rd to
Dry Creek Rd; S on Dry Creek Rd to Duncan Rd; E on Duncan Rd to
Tetro Rd; S on Tetro Rd to Heine Rd; E and S on Heine Rd to Farmto-
Market Rd; S on Farm-to-Market Rd to Newton Rd (also known as
Rickers Lane); E on Newton Rd to US Hwy 395; N on US Hwy 395 to
McLean Rd and Twelve Mile Rd (also known as Old Arden Hwy); N on
McLean Rd and Twelve Mile Rd to US Hwy 395; N on US Hwy 395 to Old
Arden Hwy (again); N on Old Arden Hwy to US Hwy 395; N on US Hwy
395, through the town of Colville, then W on US Hwy 395 (SR 20) to
SR 25 and the point of beginning.

[NWBREW]

I've hunted Stevens County for over 30 years and have never shot a buck with less than five points on at least one side. I'm sure even some of the 4 x 5's I've taken weren't more than 2 1/2 years old. I think it's a good idea to let 'em grow up a bit.

Yea I know how it is I don't shoot anything less than 8 point mule deer myself!!

I may be wrong but are these quotes a response to my post? If so all I am saying is there are a lot of whitetails that put points on there heads at a young age. Last year I killed a 3x4 that was 2 1/2 years of age. No he was not big but would have been legal in the 4 pt. rule. I am not claiming to be the almighty trophy hunter. In 97' I killed a 1 1/2 year old buck that would have been legal for the 3 pt. rule....again, not big but legal. I believe whitetails to be different then mule deer in the reasoning that they put points on earlier. So I am not sure what your trying to get at. I'm just saying that a whitetail doesn't have to be old to meet the 3 pt. or 4 pt. criteria. It would be nice to see them get past the first year....that's all I was trying to say. No B.S.   just my opinion and  .

I think if you want to shoot a buck with a nice BIG rack you need age. not so for points....at least not for whitetails.

[Skycruiser]

I've hunted Stevens County for over 30 years and have never shot a buck with less than five points on at least one side.

I wasn't being a wise guy, what I posted was true. I hunt on private property, a timbered ridge about a mile long above wheat and alfalfa fields. I routinely pass up smaller deer and regularly go home empty handed. Personally, I don't mind waiting for a good buck.

The last couple of years though have been particularly slim though, because of the string of bad winters and the high coyote population. The farmer who owns the property tells me he hasn't seen a fawn in the past two years. He's lived there his entire life (he's 70 now) and he says he's never seen a deer drought like this, even though the habitat hasn't changed.

[boonerboy]

I think it would be a good idea. I hunt the neighboring Ferry county and have noticed a significant drop in the whitetail population over the last few years. I don't know how much impact it would have but these deer need all the help they can get. I would like to see them shorten the late archery season for GMU 101. It is an area that I archery hunt but would gladly give up a couple weeks of the late season. November 10th thru december 15th seems pretty generous and didn't make any sense to me when the whitetail #'s have been falling the last few years.

[bearpaw]

Suggest giving up season with the caveat that when numbers recover, the season length should be re-instated.

[Skycruiser]

Considering this further, I'd like to see the late season hunt extended from the present November 19 to November 23rd. If we're going to let the little guys live longer so they get wiser, at least give the hunters a chance to hunt them during the rut, even if only for a few days. We haven't seen any good bucks the last few years until the 18th or 19th. Even then, they're pretty rare.

[bobcat]

The petition was denied at the Commissioner's meeting.

One thing they are doing to help whitetail deer recover in the NE region is the youth/senior/disabled hunter general season in which they are allowed to harvest antlerless deer has been reduced from 14 days to 4 days. The 4 days will fall on the second weekend of the general season. This is a step in the right direction. They have also reduced antlerless special permit opportunity accordingly. The one thing they are doing that I'm confused on, is to address the antlerless deer archers take, they have taken away the antlerless opportunity in the early season and moved it to the late season. I don't understand what this is meant to do. Will it actually reduce the number of does killed by archers, or will it just move the harvest back to a later season?