Free: Contests & Raffles.
I hope you're right. I just see a whole bunch of hunters migrating to an any buck unit late in the season to fill their tag, especially in the first few years. The problem they are pitching is throughout the NE, not just confined to the proposed APR units, so increasing pressure on the deer in the adjoining units could be devastating. I think this whole proposal is poorly thought out and being pushed for the wrong reasons. Now that we have had a few mild years and the population is on the rise they are pushing even harder to get it done immediately. I think a little more time to study this and see what happens is a much better idea.
Similar inbred and misinformed logic is driving the Stevens County Fish and Wildlife Advisory Committee's antler restriction proposal.The Washington Association of Fish and Wildlife Professionals has submitted a clear rebuttal to the proposal. The two-page letter cites points that have been documented in detail by state biologists and supported by the majority of sportsmen commenting on the proposal in meetings and surveys: * Biological considerations do not support an antler-point restriction. * Surveyed hunters prefer no antler restrictions. * The restrictions would reduce hunter opportunity. * Economic impacts are possible as general hunters head elsewhere.Enforcement agents are concerned about the number of three-point whitetails that might end up dead in the brush after a season with four-point antler restrictions. Sure there's a restriction in Whitman County, but counting antler points is a lot easier in wheat fields than in Stevens County thickets.Wildlife managers agree northeast deer numbers are down, but studies have shown better methods for improving the populations. Little research indicates that a four-point restriction would result in more does bred.Northeastern Washington offers escape cover for a good percentage of bucks to avoid hunters and grow to larger sizes without antler restrictions.Here's what's funny: After a Fish and Wildlife official made a presentation on hunting-season proposals at the Spokane meeting, it was Douvia who took the floor to remind him that the public doesn't want unnecessary regulations.To that, most sportsmen can heartily agree, and so should the commission.Unfortunately, George Orr, former Fish and Wildlife commissioner from Spokane, won't be at the April 8 meeting to reiterate the crux of the issue:"Without a good reason," he said, "I'd rather not add the possibility of putting a kid in a situation where he knocks down a buck that's one-point shy of legal."Get more news and information at Spokesman.com
How hard is it really to find a dink three point with an eyegaurd?
Take a drive through colville nov 15th and look at forty dead two and a half year old bucks in the back of pickups and just think how many more mature bucks there would be if it was mature buck or go home empty handed.
http://m.spokesman.com/stories/2011/mar/30/landers-deer-recommendation-based-misinformation/[/url]QuoteOn April 8, Washington sportsmen will finally learn if Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Gary Douvia of Kettle Falls has compromising photos of other commission members.C'mon Landers is this a fact or just a poor atempt at humor. This is the best lead you could come up with?? Where is the Journalism?? The proof will be in the commission’s vote on a Stevens County proposal to establish a minimum four-point antler restriction for whitetail bucks in Game Management Units 117 and 121 – the state’s two most popular whitetail deer hunting units.The record provides a clear answer on how the vote should go.But vice-chair Douvia seems to have a spell over the current seven-member panel.Considering the statewide realm of fish and wildlife issues, Douvia has helped orchestrate a disproportional amount of commission and agency time to Stevens County rants on everything from wolves to wilderness. Much of it has been of pitiful quality.For example, at the commission’s meeting in Spokane this month, the only county commissioner from the region to bend the panel’s ear was Don Dashiell of – surprise – Stevens County. After summarizing his desires for fish and wildlife management, Dashiell was asked by Douvia to comment on northeastern Washington wilderness proposals.What that has to do with the Fish and Wildlife Commission went over the head of just about everyone there, but on they went for 15 minutes of uncontested misinformation. They trashed conservationists, trounced wilderness as an elitist job-killing concept and pooh-poohed their neighbors on the Northeast Washington Forestry Coalition.“I think if we go to a wilderness area, 90 percent of the people who use those forests now would not be able to use them,” Douvia said.“If we did a wilderness in the Sherman Range, the only way you could hunt and recreate there would be to have your own horses or have guides to take you in to get your animals out. If they close those roads, you can’t get back into that Sherman Range. There’s no way you can do it.” Coincidentally, Derrick Knowles, was there to point out that no roads would be closed in the areas proposed for wilderness by the Forestry Coalition.Minor detail.This isn’t meant to be an argument for or against wilderness. It’s a question about what testimony should sway the Fish and Wildlife Commission.Knowles is a Spokane hunter who shot a six-point bull elk in a walk-in area in northeast Washington two years ago and packed it out 3 miles on his mountain bike. He’s also a board member of the Forest Coalition that’s been negotiating the proposals. After requesting time to comment to the panel, he shot the Stevens County rant so full of holes it looked like one of the county’s road signs.He pointed out that the coalition’s board is comprised of some of Steven’s County’s major employers as well as conservation groups, a partnership that would not have endured since 2003 if it meant the loss of jobs.Not sure what any of the above has to do with APR reccomendations being based on misinformation.Similar inbred and misinformed logic is driving the Stevens County Fish and Wildlife Advisory Committee’s antler restriction proposal.The Washington Association of Fish and Wildlife Professionals has submitted a clear rebuttal to the proposal. The two-page letter cites points that have been documented in detail by state biologists and supported by the majority of sportsmen commenting on the proposal in meetings and surveys:Biological considerations do not support an antler-point restriction.This would be a show stopper I am definitley intersted in what these biological considerations are.Surveyed hunters prefer no antler restrictions.What percentage of surveyed hunters? Of course some hunters aren't going to prefer AR's. It appears to me that it is closer to 50/50.The restrictions would reduce hunter opportunity.Really?? By what standard are they measuring? Maybe for a year or two while the herd recovers there will be less bucks killed. After that hunter opportunity will increase. I am no wildlife professional but I would venture to say that none of these professionals specialize in whitetail deer management (I could be wrong but I doubt it). If we want facts on this matter we should probably consult real professionals.Economic impacts are possible as general hunters head elsewhere.Again is this a known fact? For reasons already stated by myself, bearpaw and grundy I don't think this will be so dramatic as people are proposing. Wildlife professionals or not this is not science. As they say...it's possible...it is also just as possible that more hunter will hunt there and increase economic opportunities.Enforcement agents are concerned about the number of three-point whitetails that might end up dead in the brush after a season with four-point antler restrictions. Sure there’s a restriction in Whitman County, but counting antler points is a lot easier in wheat fields than in Stevens County thickets.What enforcement agents? I am not going to say that no three-points will be shot inadvertantly (poor excuse for a hunter not knowing his target..and thus poor excuse) but the whole deal about not being able to count the points because of thick cover??? are they kidding....don't shoot if you can't count points. I like to think that most hunter are law abiding citizens and safe hunters and will confirm their target before shooting. I see that Landers obviously doesn't hold this position on his fellow hunters.Wildlife managers agree northeast deer numbers are down, but studies have shown better methods for improving the populations. Little research indicates that a four-point restriction would result in more does bred.Northeastern Washington offers escape cover for a good percentage of bucks to avoid hunters and grow to larger sizes without antler restrictions.Finally a real and relevant fact. I don't think more drastic measures are required to increase the deer numbers and if we want to talk about truly losing opportunity that is what those measures would require. Here’s what’s funny: After a Fish and Wildlife official made a presentation on hunting-season proposals at the Spokane meeting, it was Douvia who took the floor to remind him that the public doesn’t want unnecessary regulations.To that, most sportsmen can heartily agree, and so should the commission.Unfortunately, George Orr, former Fish and Wildlife commissioner from Spokane, won’t be at the April 8 meeting to reiterate the crux of the issue:“Without a good reason,” he said, “I’d rather not add the possibility of putting a kid in a situation where he knocks down a buck that’s one-point shy of legal.” Really...this is the crux... This is a non-issue. If the kid is responsible enough to be hunting on his own he won't be killing illegal deer.
On April 8, Washington sportsmen will finally learn if Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Gary Douvia of Kettle Falls has compromising photos of other commission members.C'mon Landers is this a fact or just a poor atempt at humor. This is the best lead you could come up with?? Where is the Journalism?? The proof will be in the commission’s vote on a Stevens County proposal to establish a minimum four-point antler restriction for whitetail bucks in Game Management Units 117 and 121 – the state’s two most popular whitetail deer hunting units.The record provides a clear answer on how the vote should go.But vice-chair Douvia seems to have a spell over the current seven-member panel.Considering the statewide realm of fish and wildlife issues, Douvia has helped orchestrate a disproportional amount of commission and agency time to Stevens County rants on everything from wolves to wilderness. Much of it has been of pitiful quality.For example, at the commission’s meeting in Spokane this month, the only county commissioner from the region to bend the panel’s ear was Don Dashiell of – surprise – Stevens County. After summarizing his desires for fish and wildlife management, Dashiell was asked by Douvia to comment on northeastern Washington wilderness proposals.What that has to do with the Fish and Wildlife Commission went over the head of just about everyone there, but on they went for 15 minutes of uncontested misinformation. They trashed conservationists, trounced wilderness as an elitist job-killing concept and pooh-poohed their neighbors on the Northeast Washington Forestry Coalition.“I think if we go to a wilderness area, 90 percent of the people who use those forests now would not be able to use them,” Douvia said.“If we did a wilderness in the Sherman Range, the only way you could hunt and recreate there would be to have your own horses or have guides to take you in to get your animals out. If they close those roads, you can’t get back into that Sherman Range. There’s no way you can do it.” Coincidentally, Derrick Knowles, was there to point out that no roads would be closed in the areas proposed for wilderness by the Forestry Coalition.Minor detail.This isn’t meant to be an argument for or against wilderness. It’s a question about what testimony should sway the Fish and Wildlife Commission.Knowles is a Spokane hunter who shot a six-point bull elk in a walk-in area in northeast Washington two years ago and packed it out 3 miles on his mountain bike. He’s also a board member of the Forest Coalition that’s been negotiating the proposals. After requesting time to comment to the panel, he shot the Stevens County rant so full of holes it looked like one of the county’s road signs.He pointed out that the coalition’s board is comprised of some of Steven’s County’s major employers as well as conservation groups, a partnership that would not have endured since 2003 if it meant the loss of jobs.Not sure what any of the above has to do with APR reccomendations being based on misinformation.Similar inbred and misinformed logic is driving the Stevens County Fish and Wildlife Advisory Committee’s antler restriction proposal.The Washington Association of Fish and Wildlife Professionals has submitted a clear rebuttal to the proposal. The two-page letter cites points that have been documented in detail by state biologists and supported by the majority of sportsmen commenting on the proposal in meetings and surveys:Biological considerations do not support an antler-point restriction.This would be a show stopper I am definitley intersted in what these biological considerations are.Surveyed hunters prefer no antler restrictions.What percentage of surveyed hunters? Of course some hunters aren't going to prefer AR's. It appears to me that it is closer to 50/50.The restrictions would reduce hunter opportunity.Really?? By what standard are they measuring? Maybe for a year or two while the herd recovers there will be less bucks killed. After that hunter opportunity will increase. I am no wildlife professional but I would venture to say that none of these professionals specialize in whitetail deer management (I could be wrong but I doubt it). If we want facts on this matter we should probably consult real professionals.Economic impacts are possible as general hunters head elsewhere.Again is this a known fact? For reasons already stated by myself, bearpaw and grundy I don't think this will be so dramatic as people are proposing. Wildlife professionals or not this is not science. As they say...it's possible...it is also just as possible that more hunter will hunt there and increase economic opportunities.Enforcement agents are concerned about the number of three-point whitetails that might end up dead in the brush after a season with four-point antler restrictions. Sure there’s a restriction in Whitman County, but counting antler points is a lot easier in wheat fields than in Stevens County thickets.What enforcement agents? I am not going to say that no three-points will be shot inadvertantly (poor excuse for a hunter not knowing his target..and thus poor excuse) but the whole deal about not being able to count the points because of thick cover??? are they kidding....don't shoot if you can't count points. I like to think that most hunter are law abiding citizens and safe hunters and will confirm their target before shooting. I see that Landers obviously doesn't hold this position on his fellow hunters.Wildlife managers agree northeast deer numbers are down, but studies have shown better methods for improving the populations. Little research indicates that a four-point restriction would result in more does bred.Northeastern Washington offers escape cover for a good percentage of bucks to avoid hunters and grow to larger sizes without antler restrictions.Finally a real and relevant fact. I don't think more drastic measures are required to increase the deer numbers and if we want to talk about truly losing opportunity that is what those measures would require. Here’s what’s funny: After a Fish and Wildlife official made a presentation on hunting-season proposals at the Spokane meeting, it was Douvia who took the floor to remind him that the public doesn’t want unnecessary regulations.To that, most sportsmen can heartily agree, and so should the commission.Unfortunately, George Orr, former Fish and Wildlife commissioner from Spokane, won’t be at the April 8 meeting to reiterate the crux of the issue:“Without a good reason,” he said, “I’d rather not add the possibility of putting a kid in a situation where he knocks down a buck that’s one-point shy of legal.” Really...this is the crux... This is a non-issue. If the kid is responsible enough to be hunting on his own he won't be killing illegal deer.
Quote How hard is it really to find a dink three point with an eyegaurd? Not hard at all, that's my point. There are lots of bucks in all age classes if you get off the valley floor.QuoteTake a drive through colville nov 15th and look at forty dead two and a half year old bucks in the back of pickups and just think how many more mature bucks there would be if it was mature buck or go home empty handed.I see at least twice and maybe 3x the number of 4 pt or better bucks killed up there than dinks, every year, and have for as long as I can remember. The majority being 3 1/2 year old 4 points.
Quote from: walt on March 31, 2011, 07:32:28 AMQuote How hard is it really to find a dink three point with an eyegaurd? Not hard at all, that's my point. There are lots of bucks in all age classes if you get off the valley floor.QuoteTake a drive through colville nov 15th and look at forty dead two and a half year old bucks in the back of pickups and just think how many more mature bucks there would be if it was mature buck or go home empty handed.I see at least twice and maybe 3x the number of 4 pt or better bucks killed up there than dinks, every year, and have for as long as I can remember. The majority being 3 1/2 year old 4 points.They Don't Have to, But They Will.so then why would hunters leave to flood other unit?
7. There is no scientific basis to cull 1 1/2 year old bucks. The age structure argument is not against APR scientifically but for APR scientifically. There is new recruitment of yearlings every year...but your recruitment of older age classes largely depend on the survival of those yearlings...thus the basis of an APR to balance the herd.. (along with strategic doe management)..In addition we will be helping our herd recover faster...particuarly the older age class bucks which are often hardest hit by bad winters.
i dont consider a three and a half year old a mature buck and i hope you dont either....
