N/E washington?

[DBHAWTHORNE]

THere are whitetails out there that I bet have never been seen by man.  Now with the invention of the trail cam that has tipped the scales.  I bet there are STILL ones out there that are eluding you/us.   They are not like Muledeer whatsoever.  I still think the ground swallows them up and they only come out a week or two a year to play.

I think that's a fact.

[Hornseeker]

I agree, look at that 187 buck from this year...they had trail cams up and never saw him!

Over the line in Idaho there was a 212ish nontyp killed with triple droppers last  year, poached at night... BEAST... He made it a LONG time before anyone saw him... and they only saw him when they were being illegal.... trespassing.... and at night...

[boneaddict]

Have you heard anything on that 200 buck yet Ernie?  Whether it was typical or not?

[TeacherMan]

Have you heard anything on that 200 buck yet Ernie?  Whether it was typical or not?

a 212 from 3 years ago in the NE, I got a 189. I love that deep timber...

[DBHAWTHORNE]

I agree, look at that 187 buck from this year...they had trail cams up and never saw him!

Over the line in Idaho there was a 212ish nontyp killed with triple droppers last  year, poached at night... BEAST... He made it a LONG time before anyone saw him... and they only saw him when they were being illegal.... trespassing.... and at night...

Is there a thread/photo on the 212ish buck?

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Have you heard anything on that 200 buck yet Ernie?  Whether it was typical or not?

 I love that deep timber...

I will second that. Our deep timber whitetail hunting is awesome!

[high country]

THere are whitetails out there that I bet have never been seen by man.  Now with the invention of the trail cam that has tipped the scales.  I bet there are STILL ones out there that are eluding you/us.   They are not like Muledeer whatsoever.  I still think the ground swallows them up and they only come out a week or two a year to play.

one of my good friends lives in a whitetail heave and he has killed plenty of good bucks in his backyard. I was up a couple weeks ago watching moose and a whitey jumped up fro the draw not 200yds from his house. it was a 170ish buck that was way wide and massy. I described it to him and he said he has never seen it. he spends his whole life hiding.....it must suck.

[huntnnw]

well I will gurantee somebody has seen that buck (187") in the area that buck was killed, not a chance. There was somebody hunting him I bet, he got lucky and the buck wandered out of his normal core and stumbled upon his bait, he so happened to be there that day. The only bucks that dont see people are big woods bucks,access and cover or huge chunks of private that nobody hunts. I dont beleive in the nobody sees theory if they are in area that gets hunted someone will see them. There isnt a deer out there that wont come into a massive bait pile in the middle of winter, when he comes is the key, might be dark. Deer are lazy, just like fence crossings, benches and saddles, they will do whatever is easier.

[gjbruny]

Bruny you make some valid points but you have to remember that Washington for one has one of the highest hunter to game ratios in the nation. That doesnt exactly help herd numbers increase.

so that i can take many of the more staunch supporters and/or managers of our "status quo" out to Iowa or Wisconsin to see what a healthy buck to do ratio is, and just how many BIG mature deer are seen on a regular basis

Now as far as this goes you also need to take into consideration that while Wisconsin and Iowa have big mature deer regularly, they also dont have as many predators working against them ie. wolves, bears, cougars, coyotes. Then couple that with harsh winters where the mountains can get completely hammered and also the tough rugged thick terrain that our state has. You put  all that together and it doesnt bode well for the game. I agree Washington could be doing a better management job, but the fact is we don't have flatter terrain where its virtually wide open rolling hills. With corn and alfalfa fields at practically every corner that help the deer easily fatten up and provide good genetics for antler growth. All I'm saying is you cant really compare what theyre doing in the midwest with what we do here.

I agree we should completely do away with baiting. In my opinion theres no place for that in hunting. Also I saw it mentioned on here somewhere before but I think they should ban using cams during hunting season. I mean whatever happened to the thrill of going hunting and not knowing what you might see and where you might see it. I know using them doesnt guarantee success but I'm a little old school in the fact I like having a little bit of mystery in the hunt. I think these days too many people rely on baiting and electronics and have forgotten about the very basics of hunting.

no question about our hunter to deer ratio and that is a great point. having said that, wisconsin is a great example of predators... i'd say their coyote population is as "healthy" as aours or more so.... the do have bears and enough of them that residents can hunt them...... and they have MORE wolves than we do..... that is, if you believe the WDFW's claimed wolf numbers. . the only thing they don't have is the cats (which definately is a factor).

as far as terrain goes, you are right, most is flat but "buffalo Co." is known as "bluff country".... the hills aren't nearly as tall as ours (maybe 500 feet max) but it is as steep as anything in north idaho and then some. the timber is THICK and brush is equally comparable to N. idaho and NE WA (but has some of the nastiest thornes you have ever been through). the wide open terrain and relatively flat comment is a little closer to true of IA..... but not WI. infact, i'd put the terrain in buff county much closer to what we have here than what most people think of when they invision what the midwest is like.

durring the winter months, the corn has been cut months prior so it is no longer a food source.... they certainly do have alfalfa but i don't often see deer hitting alfalfa fields once the snow is over 8-10" deep. i have asked the guys out there several times about winter kills and they definately do get it.... no question about it...... and the bad thing is, they don't have the 1500-2500ft elevation changes that we have that allows our deer to head to low ground to get out of the deeper snow..... it is deep everywhere. having said that, the deer still do funnel down into the lower ground and in harsh winters, it is a virtual buffet for the yotes and wolves there just like it can be here. wisconsin winters are much longer and much harder than ours even in hard winters like '08. 2ft of consistent snow on the ground is the norm there.... not the 6" for 2 weeks then melt, 10" for a week then melt, 10" stays for a month then melts ect. ect. when winter hits back there, it stays till spring.

also, when i talk to the guys back in the midwest about how they went about introducing and getting the general public on board with killing does and making them understand that herds thrive with a good buck to doe ratio (even in times of BAD winter kills), they say that they were met with the same resistance that i see even on this thread..... people see it as a big risk instead of good science and wildlife management. they dealt with that resistance for years before a single county gave it a try. when they saw the results.... well.... you know where i am going with this.

 trust me, i was on the same side of the fence before i saw what multiple states have done and all have had success.

the thing is, we can't expect different results if we aren't willing to try different tactics.

[gjbruny]

like was said before... let's dump a ton of cougars, bears, coyotes, and wolves in there and take away most of the agricultural fields and see how your herd does.  That's like comparing the westsides winter kill to the eastsides. it's apples to oranges. they are 2 completely different places. .

see my post above on this one...... it is more like what we have here than you think.... and the winters are worse.

you ever been there?

That's the answer... lets ban some more *censored* and take away more hunting practices. That should help our cause. i don't bait (except for my game cams which i pull before season), but i have absolutely no problem with people that do. look what happened to the bear population when they banned bear baiting. i wish people would actually consider other people before they start spouting *censored* about banning other peoples hunting methods.

holy smokes, Turbo..... take a breath. taking away baiting has nothing to do with "our cause." if you go back and reread my post, i said we should use it as a tool to get our herds back up to snuff. if you took it out of context, i apologize. but i do stand behind my comment that a lot of newer hunters that i see these days truly wouldn't know how to HUNT whitetails if baiting was removed (which could help the herds recover) and a lot of seasoned hunters wouldn't be as consistently successful (which would help the herds recover)..... you can say what you want, but if you are being honest, you know that statement is true.


 i have hunted over baits before and have killed 3 deer in 3 different seasons over them. it isn't my cup of tea but i won't bash somebody for doing it..... that would make me a hypocrite. i still use big piles of corn and/or alfalfa for my "buck inventory cams."

i also said that i would support removing baits during hunting season (even in front of cameras) as well as even taking trail cams out of the equation DURING the season..... and i am a trail camera junkie and enjoy them a close second to actually patterning and killing big deer.

what i am getting at is.... i am willing to sacrifice some things that I enjoy for the sake of the herd.... not trying to "take away anything" from hunters (because i am one).... remember, i am on your side..... not PETA's. and if giving up something for a short time means we get more days in the field, i am all over it..... if we stay on the same track that we are now, we'll lose days in the field.... you can bet your arse on that one.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Bruny you make some valid points but you have to remember that Washington for one has one of the highest hunter to game ratios in the nation. That doesnt exactly help herd numbers increase.

so that i can take many of the more staunch supporters and/or managers of our "status quo" out to Iowa or Wisconsin to see what a healthy buck to do ratio is, and just how many BIG mature deer are seen on a regular basis

Now as far as this goes you also need to take into consideration that while Wisconsin and Iowa have big mature deer regularly, they also dont have as many predators working against them ie. wolves, bears, cougars, coyotes. Then couple that with harsh winters where the mountains can get completely hammered and also the tough rugged thick terrain that our state has. You put  all that together and it doesnt bode well for the game. I agree Washington could be doing a better management job, but the fact is we don't have flatter terrain where its virtually wide open rolling hills. With corn and alfalfa fields at practically every corner that help the deer easily fatten up and provide good genetics for antler growth. All I'm saying is you cant really compare what theyre doing in the midwest with what we do here.

I agree we should completely do away with baiting. In my opinion theres no place for that in hunting. Also I saw it mentioned on here somewhere before but I think they should ban using cams during hunting season. I mean whatever happened to the thrill of going hunting and not knowing what you might see and where you might see it. I know using them doesnt guarantee success but I'm a little old school in the fact I like having a little bit of mystery in the hunt. I think these days too many people rely on baiting and electronics and have forgotten about the very basics of hunting.

no question about our hunter to deer ratio and that is a great point. having said that, wisconsin is a great example of predators... i'd say their coyote population is as "healthy" as aours or more so.... the do have bears and enough of them that residents can hunt them...... and they have MORE wolves than we do..... that is, if you believe the WDFW's claimed wolf numbers. . the only thing they don't have is the cats (which definately is a factor).

as far as terrain goes, you are right, most is flat but "buffalo Co." is known as "bluff country".... the hills aren't nearly as tall as ours (maybe 500 feet max) but it is as steep as anything in north idaho and then some. the timber is THICK and brush is equally comparable to N. idaho and NE WA (but has some of the nastiest thornes you have ever been through). the wide open terrain and relatively flat comment is a little closer to true of IA..... but not WI. infact, i'd put the terrain in buff county much closer to what we have here than what most people think of when they invision what the midwest is like.

durring the winter months, the corn has been cut months prior so it is no longer a food source.... they certainly do have alfalfa but i don't often see deer hitting alfalfa fields once the snow is over 8-10" deep. i have asked the guys out there several times about winter kills and they definately do get it.... no question about it...... and the bad thing is, they don't have the 1500-2500ft elevation changes that we have that allows our deer to head to low ground to get out of the deeper snow..... it is deep everywhere. having said that, the deer still do funnel down into the lower ground and in harsh winters, it is a virtual buffet for the yotes and wolves there just like it can be here. wisconsin winters are much longer and much harder than ours even in hard winters like '08. 2ft of consistent snow on the ground is the norm there.... not the 6" for 2 weeks then melt, 10" for a week then melt, 10" stays for a month then melts ect. ect. when winter hits back there, it stays till spring.

also, when i talk to the guys back in the midwest about how they went about introducing and getting the general public on board with killing does and making them understand that herds thrive with a good buck to doe ratio (even in times of BAD winter kills), they say that they were met with the same resistance that i see even on this thread..... people see it as a big risk instead of good science and wildlife management. they dealt with that resistance for years before a single county gave it a try. when they saw the results.... well.... you know where i am going with this.

 trust me, i was on the same side of the fence before i saw what multiple states have done and all have had success.

the thing is, we can't expect different results if we aren't willing to try different tactics.

GJ...good info... Aside from balancing buck to doe ratios (which is one of the reasons for increased doe harvest)  one of the primary reason WI and many other midwest states are increasing doe harvest is because they are trying to lower the population of their herds. When WI instituted earn-a-buck and extended season their reason to the hunters were the fact that deer numbers were too high. Increased doe harvest = lower deer populations...not our goal. I do agree our herd numbers will continually bounce up and down but killing more does will not speed up the herds recovery.

What GMU's are you seeing a huge buck/doe ratio imbalance in our herds? Don't get me wrong I notice it on a select properties in various GMU's but overall I see a buck to doe ratio of 1:1 or 1:2...both of which are very desirable. I do have some properties where it seems to be closer to 1:5/6. Those are the properties I hunt on the last day of the season if I haven't filled my tag with a mature buck. I have hunted heavily managed properties across the nation with worse buck/doe ratios than I see here in WA (generally speaking).

Kentucky has a law where they allow private landowners to take as many does as they deem necessary and it has had great results.

I will agree that perhaps more control could be given to landowners and perhaps if the public lands were imbalanced they could assess that and hand out a determined amount of doe tags for those areas.

[gjbruny]

This is an excerpt from a 2005 article about a study of the NW Montana deer herd:

"In this case, it turns out that northwestern Montana deer hunters were right all along.
For years, these whitetail hunters resisted attempts by wildlife managers to liberalize doe hunting opportunities. In 1999, fearing that northwestern deer populations had been severely damaged by a brutal winter a few years earlier, hunters went so far as to demand a closure to the region’s doe harvest.
“No doubt about it. Hunters up here are very conservative when it comes to deer regulations,” says Dr. Alan Wood, a white-tailed deer expert in Kalispell who works as the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife mitigation coordinator.
Results from a monumental FWP study on white-tailed deer in the state’s northwestern region indicate hunters had it right. “The study suggests regulations designed to encourage doe harvest might go too far and reduce population size in years when adult doe survival is notably impacted by other types of mortality,” says Gary Dusek, another FWP whitetail expert. Wood and lead author Dusek wrote the study report, “Population Ecology of White-tailed Deer in Northwestern Montana.”

Like I said..don't get me wrong... I do take does on the last day if I don't connect on a buck I want. But I do it in areas that I believe need it. From what I have seen I don't think our herds in the mountains of Colville/Kanisku national forest need me to remove a doe.

i used to hunt MT quite often and if i had to make a choice to hunt trophy bucks here (in N.E. WA) or over in montana (you could pick the spot for me).... i'd choose here any day of the week..... even though what we have, and what they have is very very similar in relationship  to trophy potential and buck to doe ratios....... and "popular oppinion" on sound herd management.

the biggest issue is.... to do it right, things would truly have to be micro managed. our state is a perfect example as to the "why" of it.... we have everything from sub-tropical rainforests, to alpine forrests, to high desert..... no one set of rules would or could apply to the state, half the state...... or in some cases, even a single GMU..... but managing on that scale requires some dough that i don't think the "powers that be" would allocate to wildlife during these times.... even though the wildlife is a source of revenue.... both for  state and privately owned intities... again.... mismangement... but i guess thats a topic for a different thread.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

 

I 100% agree with everything you just posted.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

The link below is to an article from Jan 10 on just how happy hunters are with the management of the herd in WI

http://www.nbc15.com/state/headlines/78093777.html


On another note I do think one of the worse mistakes a game department can make is to listen primarily to public opinion on "how" to manage the herd. Like you said before.. the state should be micromanaged.

They figured this out in Germany long ago. They have managers for various regions and those managers had better meet their conservation goals or repercussions will follow.

[SirSpencer]

This thread went in a direction i never imagined. Got a little heated for a bit there.

They figured this out in Germany long ago. They have managers for various regions and those managers had better meet their conservation goals or repercussions will follow.

That would be a very desirable system for us because of our diverse terrain.