Four point minimum 117&121

[muleyguy]

And its only 2 damn units in the whole state!

the entire state is APR for muleys;  significant numbers of whitetail units have been APR's for 10 yrs now;  and, now you have taken 2 of the biggest and most important whitetail units in the state and making them APR's;

Right now, the MAJORITY of the state is under APR regulation; 

Within 10 yrs, the entire State will be under APR's for whitetails also;  the reason is that when you have APR's in one unit, but not in neighboring units, all the pressure get pushed to the non APR units; so its just a domino effect;

You act like this is some little experiment in a couple of insignificant units;  nothing could be farther from the truth!

and for whiteys that most on here dont wanna hunt

These are the two most hunted units in the state!!;  no other units receive even close to the amount of Hunter Days that these two units receive;   

what do you mean whiteys that most on here don't wanna hunt?  these are the most popular hunting units the state!

who cares...see if it works

sorry, but, there has to be scientific data to back up these decisions;  you just simply cannot play fast and loose, and have local stakeholder groups using their influence to change rules in certain units as they please with no data to back it up!   

The problem you are not understanding is that these stakeholder groups did in fact use QDM and Eastern US whitetail APR's when coming up with this proposal, do not kid yourself;  the problem is they lacked the sophistication to understand that our herds are completely different, and APR's, in the absence of significant antlerless opportunities, cause major problems.

When pressed for data and facts, the supporters of this continue to go back to the same line:  "we have no data to support this, we are just going to experiment"

We do in fact have good data in this state concerning how APR's work with our herds, as we have had so many units under the APR rule for so long:

Here is the legacy of those regulations in every case in the State of WA, regardless of unit and deer type:

1.  Permanently shortened seasons in mid october:  9 day seasons
2.  No better long term herd health;  continued stagnation at best 
3.  No better long term buck to doe ratio's and poorer age structures doing the breeding
4.  No better numbers (and most likely worse) of 4.5 yr old animals
5.  We NEVER have gotten rid of an APR;  they were ALL supposed to be "temporary"
6.  Ever expanding APR's into neighboring units


Unlike supporters of this regulation who all they say is:  "well, we don't know if it is going to work, so we might as well experiment", I am putting forth exactly what will happen with these APR's in 117 and 121.  The above 6 outcomes are exactly what will happen.  All of these problems and issues so hunters like maverick can shoot 1 yr older bucks.

Bottom line is that local groups conducting their own personal experiments without logical data to back up those experiments, is a very disturbing trend that does not bode well for long term game management in this state; 

[Maverick]

Well muley guy, I'm quite happy with APRs and will stick to them. You act like aprs kill off all the big bucks in the state. They dont.  Just ask any of the guys with big bucks on their trail cams. You just said muleys have been apr for years. So how is it guys are still killing dandy muley bucks in this state? Hell my dad has done pretty good. All on public land and one of them even scoring 202 in the book. If you don't like it then I guess youre screwed cause this state is most likely gonna keep them       

[bearpaw]

muleyguy
Essentually you are saying because of APR we will be forced to reduce season length because herds will not recover or improve. Your predictions were some of the options discussed if APR wasn't tried. I still say it appears to me you are afraid that APR will work. But regardless of what you may think or say in 4 years when we review the results of APR in 117/121 compared to the surrounding GMU's, the results will determine my position on APR in those units. I'm not going to be talked into or out of APR by your predictions. APR can stand on it's own merits or lack of merits in 4 years.

FYI - In the most recent year "2010" for which there is data available, GMU 124 shows more hunters than GMU 121. 
GMU 124 had 6491 hunters:  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/deer_gmu.php?District=2
GMU 121 had 5539 hunters:  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/deer_gmu.php?District=1



Sitka_Blacktail
I find it interesting that you left GMU 101 and 124 off your comparison of District 1 and PMU 13 GMU's, there were fewer bucks harvested in 2010 in both of those GMU's.

Please let me remind you of what I have pointed out many times in these APR discussions. In 2009 there were more hunters hunting antlerless deer. In 2010 much of the antlerless hunting was eliminated to help rebuild the herd which caused a higher percentage of the hunters to hunt bucks in 2010 than in 2009. Therefore, it's very likely the reason the buck harvest went up slightly is because there was a higher percentage of buck hunters than in 2009, the regs show reduced antlerless seasons and data shows that fewer antlerless deer were taken which proves there was a higher percentage of the hunters hunting bucks which is likely why a few more bucks were killed. I doubt there are more deer, there was simply a higher percentage of the hunters who were hunting bucks.

The following data also supports my theory that the APR initiated in 2011 will likely help maintain the buck/doe ratio which would suffer with increased buck harvest and decreased doe harvest:

2009
PMU 13 is GMU's 105-124
Antlerless 1,483
Antlered 5,083
TOTAL Harvest 6,566

2010
PMU 13 is GMU's 105-124
Antlerless 826
Antlered 5,250
TOTAL Harvest 6,076
_____________________

2009
District 1 is GMU's 101-121
Antlerless 1,321
Antlered 4,158
TOTAL Harvest 5,479

2010
District 1 is GMU's 101-121
Antlerless 666
Antlered 4,281
TOTAL Harvest 4,947
_____________________

2009
GMU 117
Antlerless 260
Antlered 857
TOTAL Harvest 1,117

2010
GMU 117
Antlerless 124
Antlered 912
TOTAL Harvest 1,036
_____________________

2009
GMU 121
Antlerless 349
Antlered 1,242
TOTAL Harvest 1,591

2010
GMU 121
Antlerless 182
Antlered 1,254
TOTAL Harvest 1,436

[BOWHUNTER45]

You guys need to realize that in P.a the number of bucks taken are now less than say in the early 90s ...P.a hunters are not selective when it comes to shooting whitetail ... lot of smaller bucks were killed back then ,,,spikes - 2pts ect ... Now they have the 4 pt. min. and it has produced some damn nice bucks in the last 5 years .... I will find some examples for ya !!!!

[BOWHUNTER45]

Here is my 1st whitetail with a bow in 1984 ...this was the average whitetail shot in P.a up until they went 4 pt min. the other was my 1st rifle buck in 1982 ..

[BOWHUNTER45]

O.K Had my bro send me a couple of his in the last couple years .... seriously a big difference and our average buck in Washington is a little bigger than it was in P.a So I can not wait to see what happens in the next 5 years 

[BOWHUNTER45]

Dang I am missing P.a.......

[Maverick]

Awesome bucks bowhunter! Tell your bro Congrats! Muley guy I think those pics say enough for Apr to be a good thing.

[summit creek]

y not its a great idea and if your a meat hunter and dont like it hunt elswere

[BOWHUNTER45]

I think once everyone sees alot more bigger bucks they will change their minds.... We already have some dang nice whitetail So it will be interresting in what pops up in the next couple years ....

[BOWHUNTER45]

muleyguy
Essentually you are saying because of APR we will be forced to reduce season length because herds will not recover or improve. Your predictions were some of the options discussed if APR wasn't tried. I still say it appears to me you are afraid that APR will work. But regardless of what you may think or say in 4 years when we review the results of APR in 117/121 compared to the surrounding GMU's, the results will determine my position on APR in those units. I'm not going to be talked into or out of APR by your predictions. APR can stand on it's own merits or lack of merits in 4 years.

FYI - In the most recent year "2010" for which there is data available, GMU 124 shows more hunters than GMU 121. 
GMU 124 had 6491 hunters:  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/deer_gmu.php?District=2
GMU 121 had 5539 hunters:  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/deer_gmu.php?District=1



Sitka_Blacktail
I find it interesting that you left GMU 101 and 124 off your comparison of District 1 and PMU 13 GMU's, there were fewer bucks harvested in 2010 in both of those GMU's.

Please let me remind you of what I have pointed out many times in these APR discussions. In 2009 there were more hunters hunting antlerless deer. In 2010 much of the antlerless hunting was eliminated to help rebuild the herd which caused a higher percentage of the hunters to hunt bucks in 2010 than in 2009. Therefore, it's very likely the reason the buck harvest went up slightly is because there was a higher percentage of buck hunters than in 2009, the regs show reduced antlerless seasons and data shows that fewer antlerless deer were taken which proves there was a higher percentage of the hunters hunting bucks which is likely why a few more bucks were killed. I doubt there are more deer, there was simply a higher percentage of the hunters who were hunting bucks.

The following data also supports my theory that the APR initiated in 2011 will likely help maintain the buck/doe ratio which would suffer with increased buck harvest and decreased doe harvest:

2009
PMU 13 is GMU's 105-124
Antlerless 1,483
Antlered 5,083
TOTAL Harvest 6,566

2010
PMU 13 is GMU's 105-124
Antlerless 826
Antlered 5,250
TOTAL Harvest 6,076
_____________________

2009
District 1 is GMU's 101-121
Antlerless 1,321
Antlered 4,158
TOTAL Harvest 5,479

2010
District 1 is GMU's 101-121
Antlerless 666
Antlered 4,281
TOTAL Harvest 4,947
_____________________

2009
GMU 117
Antlerless 260
Antlered 857
TOTAL Harvest 1,117

2010
GMU 117
Antlerless 124
Antlered 912
TOTAL Harvest 1,036
_____________________

2009
GMU 121
Antlerless 349
Antlered 1,242
TOTAL Harvest 1,591

2010
GMU 121
Antlerless 182
Antlered 1,254
TOTAL Harvest 1,436

Bearpaw...you worded that nicely !!!

[huntnnw]

 

[Archeryoutfitters]

muleyguy
Essentually you are saying because of APR we will be forced to reduce season length because herds will not recover or improve. Your predictions were some of the options discussed if APR wasn't tried. I still say it appears to me you are afraid that APR will work. But regardless of what you may think or say in 4 years when we review the results of APR in 117/121 compared to the surrounding GMU's, the results will determine my position on APR in those units. I'm not going to be talked into or out of APR by your predictions. APR can stand on it's own merits or lack of merits in 4 years.

FYI - In the most recent year "2010" for which there is data available, GMU 124 shows more hunters than GMU 121. 
GMU 124 had 6491 hunters:  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/deer_gmu.php?District=2
GMU 121 had 5539 hunters:  http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2010/reports/deer_gmu.php?District=1



Sitka_Blacktail
I find it interesting that you left GMU 101 and 124 off your comparison of District 1 and PMU 13 GMU's, there were fewer bucks harvested in 2010 in both of those GMU's.

Please let me remind you of what I have pointed out many times in these APR discussions. In 2009 there were more hunters hunting antlerless deer. In 2010 much of the antlerless hunting was eliminated to help rebuild the herd which caused a higher percentage of the hunters to hunt bucks in 2010 than in 2009. Therefore, it's very likely the reason the buck harvest went up slightly is because there was a higher percentage of buck hunters than in 2009, the regs show reduced antlerless seasons and data shows that fewer antlerless deer were taken which proves there was a higher percentage of the hunters hunting bucks which is likely why a few more bucks were killed. I doubt there are more deer, there was simply a higher percentage of the hunters who were hunting bucks.

The following data also supports my theory that the APR initiated in 2011 will likely help maintain the buck/doe ratio which would suffer with increased buck harvest and decreased doe harvest:

2009
PMU 13 is GMU's 105-124
Antlerless 1,483
Antlered 5,083
TOTAL Harvest 6,566

2010
PMU 13 is GMU's 105-124
Antlerless 826
Antlered 5,250
TOTAL Harvest 6,076
_____________________

2009
District 1 is GMU's 101-121
Antlerless 1,321
Antlered 4,158
TOTAL Harvest 5,479

2010
District 1 is GMU's 101-121
Antlerless 666
Antlered 4,281
TOTAL Harvest 4,947
_____________________

2009
GMU 117
Antlerless 260
Antlered 857
TOTAL Harvest 1,117

2010
GMU 117
Antlerless 124
Antlered 912
TOTAL Harvest 1,036
_____________________

2009
GMU 121
Antlerless 349
Antlered 1,242
TOTAL Harvest 1,591

2010
GMU 121
Antlerless 182
Antlered 1,254
TOTAL Harvest 1,436

The difference is that you live here Dale, you see it, feel it, and care about what is happening to the herd, not only is it a big part of your life and who you are, you want to see what is best for them as we all should as hunters and outdoors-men, (It is good to see the whole picture) 
Trying to keep the same great hunting so we can pass down to our kids and grand-kids,that we have been blessed to have. 

[C-Money]

I think once everyone sees alot more bigger bucks they will change their minds.... We already have some dang nice whitetail So it will be interresting in what pops up in the next couple years ....

Yes it will! Should be some monsters! Maybe this will get NE WA over the hump and finally kick out the next World record whitetail!

[huntnnw]

I already think theres been a few world records that havent been killed or killed after their prime