WA management critics can crank up the volume

[jackelope]

"However, one might ask, what’s the sense of killing off all those older mule deer bucks – which would ideally be supplying the best genetics to the herd"

Older does not necessarily = best genetics

+1

Right on. A yearling buck has the same genetics as it will when it is a 5+ year old. Genetics don't grow or get better as time goes by.

[Ridgerunner]

The reality is the economy sucks and people are definately thinking 2x or 3x before they head across the state, with the new minimum requirement some probably said screw it I'm staying close to home.  I know the last few years I've started making more of these decisions, i've also decided to go out of state where the hunting is way better than here, so I get more bang for my buck that way. 

[boneaddict]

I see lots of 4 point whitetails.   Even young ones, so not sure.   

[DBHAWTHORNE]

How hard is it to find a 4 point whitetail in those units? Legit question, not trying to be a wise guy or anything. I've not deer hunted there before.

It's hard "not" to find a 4 point or better. I see far more legal bucks than non-legal bucks on camera and while hunting.

[BOWHUNTER45]

yep sounds like we all need to move to the Dakotas .....Sounds better every day I hear about it... but I would miss elk & bear hunting but I would be killin many pheasant which I have not done much of lately  In all reality I have a pretty complete trophy room......I still need that 30 in . Muley 

[longknife]

I wonder if us reporting our trophy bucks are a contributing factor?? Every trophy entered in the northwest big game records?? I have noticed (for whitetail, rifle)its a landslide in certan areas, but why kill the genetics of the trophys? Let the big ones stay big, and pass it on.                   
where as a 3 point might get 2 does in a year vs. 15-20 for a big buck, that can fight off the 3 points.
Am i in left field on this??

[bigtex]

"WDFW is on track to break or tie their all time record for license (hunting and fishing combined) revenue."

Tex, is that statement really true in terms of 1970's dollars vs 2000's dollars??  Not calling you out, just wondering if inflation has taken into account. 

Also, there were over 40% more deer tags sold back in the 70's-80's than the 90's-2000's, so while revenue is at all time high for WDFW, it comes at the expense of the far fewer numbers of hunters left paying the freight.  And that's not necessarily what I'd consider a badge of honor for them.

I honestly don't know if inflation is taken into account. If I were a betting man I would say no.

[boneaddict]

does it also take into effect all the new categories for permit apps as well, I guess thats a year old now but......

[Special T]

A slight increase in cost will make up for numbers... The WDFW has definitely looked at where they can get away with raising rates.. take all the OIL tags for example....

[longknife]

what is the OIL tag?

[boneaddict]

moose sheep goat once in a lifetime

[bearpaw]

I believe that revenue is probably up, look at all the application fees they are raking in. 
But honestly, I think it's a good thing for hunters to be the primary supporters of the WDFW, part of the problem is that WDFW is getting lots of dollars from other sources so hunting has become less important in Washington. 

I remember a thread a couple years ago where we all were discussing antler restrictions and how it never worked in other states and was removed everywhere except here. It was also suggested that we have a 4 point restriction in some units, also suggested to WDFW in their survey. Their reply was 4 point restrictions wouldn't work because it would mean that only the most mature deer would be harvested/targetted.

 My question to Dale is how is this any different, why is it acceptable now?

Contrary to what some say, APR has worked in some areas to accomplish desired goals. FYI - Pennsylvania is a perfect example, it was rare to kill a buck older than 1 1/2 or 2 1/2, now they are killing much better bucks.

APR can have a different effect depending on specie and cover. Mule deer in open country can be taken at will by expereinced hunters with good glassing abilities. I beleive it will be a much different story on whiteys in NE where we have heavy cover. Once those yearling bucks get past the stupid stage and old whitetail is pretty tough to get in heavy cover like we have there. The first year will be tough under APR, because harvest is bound to drop, but barring a hard winter nearly all 2 1/2 yr whities will become legal bucks and harvest should level off to be nearly as good as before except that the harvest will be made up of almost no yearling bucks. I honestly do not think that people can kill all the 2 1/2 year whiteys like some of you guys claim. There have been tests done where whitetails were released in 10 acre pens with heavy cover and hunters could not get them.

Again I can't say for sure it will work, just as people cannot say for sure it will not work, but we will all know more in a few years.

I stand by my statement about our commission being good, everyone should be glad our commission is willing to do something other than rubberstamp every WDFW proposal.

I listened to the bios at our working group meetings and while they didn't agree with APR, they admitted they didn't know how it would work out in NE WA due to the heavier cover than south of Spokane. I think some of these people making posts about what the WDFW says are changing the wording a little bit on what is actually being said, or else the WDFW is changing their remarks. Truth be known the WDFW has never done an extensive whitetail study in WA and there is a lot they do not know, including what effects an APR will have in NE WA.

I'm sure I will be called a greedy outfitter or something of the sort by someone, but I say lets give this a chance and then let's look at it in 5 years as is planned. (many of us had suggested 3 years, but the WDFW said if we do APR we need to do APR for 5 years to compare data)

Another thing there seems to be this mentality that this is a permanent thing, from what was discussed in the meetings, the data will be compared to determine future management. I will question whether or not our goal has been met of increasing the herd size with buck and doe escapement for a few years. I wonder if once the herd grows, will APR be a good thing to continue, it may only be a good temporary measure to grow the herd and then go back to any buck once the herd recovers.

[sebek556]

your a greedy greddy outfitter just had to do it

[huntnphool]

Another thing there seems to be this mentality that this is a permanent thing

 Can you really blame someone if they feel that way though Dale, how long has the east side 3 point rule been in effect, and I'm not talking about the few units that were 3 point before the entire east side went that way.

[500 long]

Well if 'bearpaw' is correct we'll have five years of "we'll see what happens" insted of a solution of the issue.  Deal with the major factors. Hunters one per year times known success figure, tribal volume unknown (not  ) , predators are several per month, natural causes pretty much fit with predators.  If you want more immediate results then an introduction of more deer would be in order. Check out some other threads on the subject like WA deer population decline or what would you do if in charge (couldn't back up to it to get the name correct). Relocation has been more successful than not so it should be considered. The tribes have had good success with game population manipulation so i would like to think we could all work together to git'er done.