The Debate about if APR's Work!!

[colockumelk]

There has been alot of debate on here lately about whether or not the APR's (Antler Point Restrictions) work. I personally believe that they work.  But I'm not the type of guy to spout off about something without at least researching it and looking into it myself.  I think that this particular debate is EXTREMELY important for our deer herd.  Because whether it works or not is going to have a huge impact on the future of our deer hunting.  So I am not going to preach my opinions on why APR works because since I didn't do any of my own research it would be just that.  An opinion not fact.  Instead I used google and googled a bunch of APR studies, cull studies, doe harvest studies and adult sex ratio's. 

To sum it up.  Culling "managment bucks" only has an effect on small herds that are enclosed (Texas high fence) in larger areas they have 0 effect.  So cull away if it makes you feel better but it doesn't do anything.  APR's are meant to do 3 things.  1 They are not meant to make "Trohpy" units they are meant to make "Quality" units.  By increasing the age class of the bucks.  2. Increase doe harvest and 3. Overall increase the pre-hunting season buck:doe ratio as close to 1:1 as possible.  APR's reduce the amount of buck harvest and increase the amount of doe harvest. 

So go ahead and flame on and please before you flame about how they are stupid and don't work. Or how you can't compare WA to PA, or ND or to Eastern ID.  Please take the time and read the articles.  You'll at least learn some stuff.  Look at the attachements as well.  Because there is a really good article about Antler Point Restrictions. 

CULLING "Managment Bucks"
http://www.americanhunter.org/blogs/culling-bucks/ 

Antler Point Restrictions: Purpose
http://www.qdma.com/what-we-do/articles/deer-biologymanagement/protecting-yearling/

http://www.whitetailinstitute.com/info/news/aug03/6.html

Adult Sex Ratio
http://www.qdma.com/what-we-do/articles/deer-biologymanagement/adult-sex-ratios/

[DBHAWTHORNE]

 Pennsylvania actually ran off the Whitetail Biologist that instituted the antler restrictions...basically forced him into retirement. Years later they are being rewarded with the fruits of the restrictions and the complaining is a minutiae of what it used to be. The herd is now healthy and as an added bonus they have had a signficant increase in the number of bucks that qualify for Boone and Crockett unlike anything they have ever experienced in the past.

[Buckmark]

Are you only talking whitetails?
Here is what the WAFWA (Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies) has to say about antler point restrictions when talking Mule deer.
*
Antler point restrictions

Creating mule deer harvest seasons with antler point restrictions is popular amongst hunters who think it will help increase the number of mature bucks and buck:doe ratios in mule deer populations. But research in many western states shows that antler point restrictions do not produce more deer or larger-antlered deer.

Colorado implemented antler point restrictions statewide for six years, and in a number of game units for seven years. The result was a shift of hunting from pressure on all age classes of bucks (primarily yearlings) to bucks two years and older, and an increase in illegal or accidental harvest of yearling bucks. The number of mature bucks did not increase over time.

Idaho and Montana implemented two points or less seasons to reduce hunting pressure on older bucks and improve buck:doe ratios at the end of hunting seasons. Over the long term, two point seasons did not improve buck:doe ratios at the end of the hunting seasons.

Wyoming’s experience with four point or better seasons resulted in fewer hunters and a reduction in total harvest, fewer mature bucks, and a significant number of deer harvested with fewer than four points.

Utah abandoned efforts to implement antler point restrictions after five years when officials documented illegal harvest, reductions in overall harvest and fewer mature bucks.

Attempts to increase the number of mature bucks and buck:doe ratios using four-point seasons in Montana reduced buck harvest by 28 percent, increased illegal harvest of bucks with 3x3 points or less by about 40 percent, and increased harvest of bucks having more than 3x4 points.

Washington tried antler point restrictions in a few of their hunting units and experienced a smaller harvest of mule deer bucks, a switch in harvest from mule deer to white-tailed deer, and no increase in the number of mature bucks. They did experience an increase in buck:doe ratios because of the lower buck harvest and improved recruitment of fawns.

Oregon abandoned antler point restrictions in a few popular hunting areas when the number of older bucks and buck:doe ratios decreased after 12 years.

Most western states have concluded that changes in buck:doe ratios and increases in the number of mature bucks can only be accomplished through reductions in harvest of bucks.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Interesting read:

http://www.gameandfishmag.com/2010/09/29/hunting_mule-deer-blacktail-deer-hunting_wo_aa075504a/

[JimmyHoffa]

The areas where I saw antler management produce bigger bucks did so by culling based off presumed age.  Ex. A 1.5 year old 3 point would get a pass, but if it was 4.5 years old or if the 4.5 year old's spread still inside the ears it was killed.  They couldn't predict what a young deer would look like, but once there were older deer with less desirable antler characteristics they could shape the herd 'look'.  The nutrition seemed to impact mass more than points or spread.  So, I guess, yes--the APRs work to a degree.  On the flip though, a very young deer with highly desirable antlers could be killed before it gets a chance to spread its genes.  From what I've read the doe is actually just as important for getting big antler bucks--the doe needs to be offspring of a large buck (to predict that it's fawns will be like the buck it is bred to).

[mdbuck5x5]

  personally it makes it that much sweeter when I see a big buck only every once in a while!

[buckfvr]

WDFW has no controll over the deer in our state, but consequently have total control of the hunters...........

As unpopular as it is here in N.E. Wa., I blame first, the liberal modern late season....I think it should be by permit, and no longer than 10 days........and second...all the state rags like Fishing and Hunting Lies that encourage many folks to seek out ther hunting fantasies here.  Over the many years Ive hunted, I have witnessed it happen to many one time excellent hunts.  All areas I hunted at one time or another and saw the decline first hand.   Methow,  Colockum,  Blues,  Lt. Murray,  YFC,  we had some great deer hunting in the past for sure, and it was accessable to all.......not private lands like some of our best hunts today. 

I also blame the Internet for the current spike in hunter numbers in areas that not long ago held few hunters.....if you want company, just post pics and be forthcoming with info anywhere on the net, and low and behold, company.

All said and done....I support APR's here, and am in a position to see for myself if it works.  Time will tell.........

[colockumelk]

Most biologists agree that using APR's is not the most effective way to control and steer harvest from  yearling bucks.  But it is the easiest and most logical way.  Let me explain.  The best method are rules is to use body composition as a way to determine legal bucks or not.  However this would be impossible to enforce on public land.  It takes a highly trained eye to determine that a buck is of a certain age class based on their body.  And it would be unreasonable to expect your average person to train themselves to this level and standard.  Using this to enforce game laws would be unreasonable.  Many game farms and hunting properties use these because the deer are not pressured and many times a guide is with them. 

The other method is using antler width.  Sure a yearling buck may have 3 points on one side but he's not going to be more than 16" wide.  Many outfits use this.  But again in a public land scenario this is unreasonable.  I know I can't tell the difference at 50yds between 14 or 16".  Again unreasonable. 

The method most often used is APR.  Because everyone that hunts should be expected to be able to count to 3 or 4.  Its a pretty easy standard to use and thus is used most often. 

[colockumelk]

The main Anti-APR argument is that APR's focus the harvest of bucks on the Mature bucks.  Where areas that are "Any Buck" evenly (Key word evenly) spread out the harvest amongst the age groups.  From the research I have read this argument is false and misleading.  In "Any Buck" units the harvest is not even close to being "evenly" distributed across the age groups.  70-80% of harvest in "Any Buck" units are 1.5 year old bucks.  Basically the opposite of evenly distributed. 

The other Anti-APR argument is they say that since the harvest is focused more on mature bucks that the number of mature bucks decreases and that the 1.5 year old bucks do all the breeding.  This is also not true from what I have read.  The number of mature bucks increases over time due to the fact that most of the 1.5 year old bucks survive to become mature bucks and more of the harvest also is focused on does. Typically APR units see a reduction of 20-30% in buck harvests over its previous "Any Buck" harvests. 

The other Anti-APR argument says with a 3pt or 4pt minimum this kills off all your stud 1.5 year old bucks and leaves all the geneticaly inferior 1.5 year olds to live and later on breed and pass on their inferior genes.  ALL the studies that biologists have done shows that this is 100% false.  In free ranging wild deer herds, hunting can not control the genetic strength or inferiority of a herd.  This includes culling inferior bucks etc.  There are just too many variables that will determine if a buck will be a stud.  Length of life and nutrition are the two biggest factors.  Culling an unfavorable buck doesnt' mean you took that gene out of the herd.  Since 50% of a bucks genetic makeup comes from his mother.  And how do you tell if a doe is gonna pass on big buck genes.     You can't.  The ONLY place that culling inferior bucks from a gene pool are on properties that have high fences in controlled environements.  Wild bucks range from 5 to 30 miles and like many things in mother nature we just can't control herd genetics. 

The reason I believe in APR's is because there is literally a TON of research and science that supports APR's.  I have seen little if any that says otherwise.  I have also seen APR's work first hand in WA.  Both in Central WA Mule Deer and in Whitetail deer south of I90 in WA.  Especially with Whitetails in Eastern WA.  Wow it worked well. 

[Special T]

I think the debates about APR on White tail has alot of research, however i do not thing it translates as closely to BT and Mulies. I think it does reduce harvest of younger bucks giving them more time to grow to thier full potential, but that is it as far as any benifit for BT or mulies. 

[colockumelk]

Interesting read:

http://www.gameandfishmag.com/2010/09/29/hunting_mule-deer-blacktail-deer-hunting_wo_aa075504a/

That was a really good and informative article.  Thanks for posting
 
Special T.  Yeah I tried finding research that would apply to BT and Mule Deer and I didn't really find anything other than some blog type stuff.  But nothing really research related.  Now of course I didn't much passed page 2 or 3 on google so who knows maybe on page 18 there's some Mule Deer or BT stuff.   

You said "I think it does reduce harvest of younger bucks giving them more time to grow to their full potential, but that is it as far as any benefit for BT or Mulies".  I agree this is the purpose of APR and QDM.  So many people (myself included until recently) think that QDM or APR is all about creating "Trophy" animals and "Trophy" hunts.  This is not true.  Its simply to create more "Mature" type bucks, (2.5years old or older) and create a higher buck:doe ratio.  It does this by allowing the 1.5year olds to grow up a bit and get a little bit smarter and creates escapement because you can't just go "I see antlers BOOM"  you have to take time to look at the rack.  I think that APR's and QDM is successfull at its two main goals. 

As far as Mule Deer goes in Central WA I was starting to see an improvement until the hair loss disease hit.  I have no clue about BT.  I have never hunted them so I will not speculate or make an opinion. 

[bearpaw]

Its simply to create more "Mature" type bucks, (2.5years old or older) and create a higher buck:doe ratio.  It does this by allowing the 1.5year olds to grow up a bit and get a little bit smarter and creates escapement because you can't just go "I see antlers BOOM"  you have to take time to look at the rack.  I think that APR's and QDM is successfull at its two main goals. 

Very well put and why I supported APR in NE WA on whitetails. Right now we need buck escapement, from what I saw this season I think we had fewer bucks taken in those units than would have been taken without APR...

[Special T]

I personally feel that age and feed make the 2 most important factors in "Controllable" factors by humans.  Most of the WT research done in closed environments provide some insight to WT. I think it is like compareing Red delicious apples to Granny smiths, and Gongolas... Same "Kind" but don't react the same... 
Always cool to read the research tho.

I had a buddy who's wife worked at a research facility near Olympia. They studied and compared BT to pigmy goats. Looking for spays that would deter deer from eating the fresh buds off of trees.  Think about what goats eat... BT eat that and more! Cedar boughs, Brachen fern, Sword fern ect... Breacken fern causes Tricinosus (sp) in goats but not BT. 

Because WT hunting is such big business there has been alot of $$$ tossed at studying them...

[coachcw]

I'd like to see no doe hunts to build the herd numbers up , then go to a 4 point or spike only season . I just dont see over population here in wa.

[Special T]

I think tweeking deer regs is only part of the issue and you cannot make significant chang without predator management.  I think this is why APR's may have more effect on WT than  others because they breed like rabbits. Part of thier genitic protection is the ability to Breed well. The can bounce back from problems quicker than Mulies Or BT can. APR might work for them dispite the predators, but likely would not for others.