The Debate about if APR's Work!!

[JimmyHoffa]

Most of the research I was referring to was done with WT, because of the huge amounts of money and the ease of working with game depts in other states.  Muleys don't seem to have as much issue with size and BT are such a small market that they get overlooked.  I would agree that where APRs are in place that the bucks taken do get larger because of the animals that are allowed another year.  Also agree that the only feasible way to conduct herd shaping on public land is probably APRs.  Take a look at the WT buck breeders websites, some go into detail for over 30 years of trying to grow monster WT, it wasn't until they started tracking the doe's genetic history that they could start going to the next level.  The only other way I've seen to really raise the desirable antler characteristics over time is by increasing buck to doe ratio.  I've heard 2:3 or higher is good for WT.  Basically it keeps it where the number of larger bucks that are going to breed (anyways?) are breeding a higher percentage of the does.

[Dave Workman]

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

Buckmark:

Please provide a link to this.

[Glockster]

Managing hunt opportunity is critical to maintaining hunters and social support for wildlife
management. Hunters are essential to the North American Model of Wildlife Management.
Hunter numbers are declining nationwide. Vocal minorities tend to prefer more elite hunting
opportunities, whereas silent majorities seem to want the opportunity to go while unwilling to
speak out. Educating hunters and managing hunting opportunity in the next decades may be
the most critical and delicate elements to the continuation of the North American Model of
Wildlife Management. Recognizing that hunting customers comprise at least 2 distinct public
segments is critical to providing suitable products.
WESTERN STATES AND PROVINCES DEER AND ELK WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS 7:11-21.

[Glockster]

more:

Essentially, surveys reflect that wildlife management agencies have a minimum of 2
publics when providing hunting opportunity: hunters that simply want the opportunity to hunt and
hunters that desire a high quality hunt and are willing to wait to receive it. Those that simply
want the opportunity to hunt are important customers because they are the ranks from which
recruitment and retention is most important; they vote and interact socially with others that may
not hunt. The vocal minority that seeks quality hunting opportunities is the segment that
routinely attends Commission meetings, legislative hearings, and most often vocally supports
initiatives that benefit wildlife conservation. Wildlife agencies are challenged to provide suitable
products for both customer segments.
Literature Cited

[Glockster]

For those who haven't seen any scientific evidence of the failure of APR in western deer management:

Ballard, J.  2008.  Making a point.  Wyoming Wildlife LXXI(3):34-39.  [“…the Mule Deer Working Group of the Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies has little positive data to report from its analysis of antler point restrictions.”  “Antler point restrictions do not produce more deer or larger-antlered deer.”]

Barsness, J.  1997.  Twilight for the gray deer?  Field & Stream Dec:53-58.  [Trophy management has several costs: (1) lost hunter opportunity, (2) wasted dead deer, and (3) cheapened live deer.  Idaho biologist Lon Kuck says “I’d rather puke in my hand than use point restrictions.”]

Bitler, Craig.  2006.  Antler restrictions: the science behind the idea.  Deer & Deer Hunting 29(9):44-46,50,52.  Aug.  [Mortality became focused on mature bucks and illegal kills increased.  “It is evident that APRs have a long, but not particularly distinguished history in the western United States.”]

Carpenter, L.H. and R.B. Gill.  1987.  Antler point regulations: the good, the bad, and the ugly.  Proc. Western Assoc. Fish & Wildl. Agencies 67:94-107.  [“An interesting irony of APRs is that hunting pressure is greatest on the segment of the herd that the regulation was designed to ‘produce’… The ugly of APRs for deer is that they are likely to be quite costly in wasted animals and discouraged hunters.”]

[Special T]

That is why APR info does not directly translate from WT to mulies or BT!  Nice info Glockster 

[Glockster]

And for those who have bought into the as 'seen on TV' whitetail deer farming QDM koolaid:

Collier, B.A.  2004.  Evaluating impact of selective harvest management on age structure and sex ratio of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in Arkansas.  PhD Dissert. University of Arkansas.  189pp.  [The use of antler restrictions (3-points on a side) were expected to shift male survivorship into older age classes.  "My results indicated that those shifts were canceled out by increased selectivity of sub-adults under current regulations (and possibly high quality yearlings), allowing no more males to reach mature (>3.5 year old) age classes than under historical regulations."

Crawford, Andy.  2005.  6-point experiment set to expire, less than booming success.  Louisiana Sportsman 25(2):12-14 (Feb).  [The 3-year experiment did not result in significantly larger deer or antlers, but did result in fewer bucks being harvested.  Biologist Dave Moreland said, "he believes the results of the 6-point experiment highlighted problems with antler restrictions…his preference would be to implement other management practices" (habitat management, herd control).]

DeYoung, C.A.  1989.  Mortality of adult male white-tailed deer in south Texas.  J. Wildl. Manage. 53(3):513-523.  [“These data show that managing for mature males can be inefficient because 25-29% of males/year will die before reaching mature age.”  That is, only 36-42% of yearlings will survive to age 4 if not harvested sooner.]

[DBHAWTHORNE]

And for those who have bought into the as 'seen on TV' whitetail deer farming QDM koolaid:

Collier, B.A.  2004.  Evaluating impact of selective harvest management on age structure and sex ratio of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in Arkansas.  PhD Dissert. University of Arkansas.  189pp.  [The use of antler restrictions (3-points on a side) were expected to shift male survivorship into older age classes.  "My results indicated that those shifts were canceled out by increased selectivity of sub-adults under current regulations (and possibly high quality yearlings), allowing no more males to reach mature (>3.5 year old) age classes than under historical regulations."

Crawford, Andy.  2005.  6-point experiment set to expire, less than booming success.  Louisiana Sportsman 25(2):12-14 (Feb).  [The 3-year experiment did not result in significantly larger deer or antlers, but did result in fewer bucks being harvested.  Biologist Dave Moreland said, "he believes the results of the 6-point experiment highlighted problems with antler restrictions…his preference would be to implement other management practices" (habitat management, herd control).]

DeYoung, C.A.  1989.  Mortality of adult male white-tailed deer in south Texas.  J. Wildl. Manage. 53(3):513-523.  [“These data show that managing for mature males can be inefficient because 25-29% of males/year will die before reaching mature age.”  That is, only 36-42% of yearlings will survive to age 4 if not harvested sooner.]

As a guy who grew up hunting both with and without Antler Restrictions in Arkansas I can call BS too the first guys comments. Without a doubt there are a higher percentage of older age class bucks than there were before the AR's. That is a from a guy who probably spent as much or more time in the field than Mr. Collier.

[Dave Workman]

As a guy who grew up hunting both with and without Antler Restrictions in Arkansas I can call BS too the first guys comments. Without a doubt there are a higher percentage of older age class bucks than there were before the AR's. That is a from a guy who probably spent as much or more time in the field than Mr. Collier.

You ain't from around here, then.

 I grew up HERE hunting without Antler Restrictions and it worked fine. There are lots more people who are looking to notch a tag and put some meat in the freezer than stroke their own egos with a big wallhanger rack. I've shot big and small deer.  They all pretty much tasted the same, and the feeling of accomplishment was no more or less. 

And as I have said before...to a KID...even a spike is a trophy. If you want to kill a big mature deer, fine...just don't shoot a smaller one. But don't stand in the way of someone else shooting a smaller one just to fulfill your agenda.

[high country]

I know this, there were far fewer hunters in 117 than typical in my past expierience, but 124 was flat POUNDED. combine higher fuel prices and APR's and you just put the whammy on neighboring units. APR's are fine for mule deer as their typical habits lead them to be easier to kill at younger ages....whitetails in the wild, not you private farm with zero pressure (excluding when you go load your feeder) are very smart begining at a very young age. I understand the management plan, but if it was to truly bring the buck to doe ratio around, why not offer increased doe hunts? the carrying capacity of the land can only support so many deer, why not make that number include more bucks in general.

[mdbuck5x5]

Well said Workman 

[DBHAWTHORNE]

As a guy who grew up hunting both with and without Antler Restrictions in Arkansas I can call BS too the first guys comments. Without a doubt there are a higher percentage of older age class bucks than there were before the AR's. That is a from a guy who probably spent as much or more time in the field than Mr. Collier.

You ain't from around here, then.

 I grew up HERE hunting without Antler Restrictions and it worked fine. There are lots more people who are looking to notch a tag and put some meat in the freezer than stroke their own egos with a big wallhanger rack. I've shot big and small deer.  They all pretty much tasted the same, and the feeling of accomplishment was no more or less. 

And as I have said before...to a KID...even a spike is a trophy. If you want to kill a big mature deer, fine...just don't shoot a smaller one. But don't stand in the way of someone else shooting a smaller one just to fulfill your agenda.

Not "orginally" from around here but I have lived here for a total of 10 years and hunted here for 15 years straight so I would consider that a fair amount of Washington hunting experience (all of it strictly for whitetail and all of it without APRs). Certainly not as much as you or many of the natives here but definitely a reasonable amount to make a reasonable assessment of my own.

Despite your massive amounts of Washington hunting experience it appears you don't remember what Washington whitetail herds were like 10-15 years ago vs today.

 "There are lots more people who are looking to notch a tag and put some meat in the freezer than stroke their own egos with a big wallhanger rack."  I have no idea where you all keep getting that this is about a big wallhanger rack. It almost contradicts what most of the anti-APR guys say because one hand you talk about how it wont' create bigger bucks and then you say that this all about creating bigger bucks.... makes zero sense...and is completely contradictory.

If the majority of people would prefer to just notch their tag and put a deer in the freezer then it would seem that higher deer populations (which the restricted buck and doe harvest will create) will work to their benefit in a few years.

Your last paragraph hits to the heart and I do agree with you. I am certainly not for placing unnecessary restrictions of any kind. However, at this point I do believe restrictions of some kind are in order to help the herd. Are there other ways to do achieve the desired result of healthier herds? Sure. Is there better ways to achieve the desired result of healthier herds? Sure. Is there better ways to do achieve desired results when managing at a state level??? I'm not so sure.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

I know this, there were far fewer hunters in 117 than typical in my past expierience, but 124 was flat POUNDED. combine higher fuel prices and APR's and you just put the whammy on neighboring units. APR's are fine for mule deer as their typical habits lead them to be easier to kill at younger ages....whitetails in the wild, not you private farm with zero pressure (excluding when you go load your feeder) are very smart begining at a very young age. I understand the management plan, but if it was to truly bring the buck to doe ratio around, why not offer increased doe hunts? the carrying capacity of the land can only support so many deer, why not make that number include more bucks in general.

Odd... I saw more hunters in 117 than I did any year previous...perhaps it was just the area I was hunting.

[Dave Workman]

Not "orginally" from around here but I have lived here for a total of 10 years and hunted here for 15 years straight so I would consider that a fair amount of Washington hunting experience (all of it strictly for whitetail and all of it without APRs). Certainly not as much as you or many of the natives here but definitely a reasonable amount to make a reasonable assessment of my own.

This isn't about whitetails per se, it's about the positively stupid perpetuation of APR regulations on mule deer. I don't think BA restrictions work for whitetail, either, and while some folks say "give it time," there is ample experience in other regions with whitetails that pretty much refutes the predictions.

Despite your massive amounts of Washington hunting experience it appears you don't remember what Washington whitetail herds were like 10-15 years ago vs today.

Yes, I do remember whitetail herds 10-15 years ago.  In the seasons when I hunted Northeast counties, I saw plenty of whitetails at times, and at other times I didn't. That's why they call it hunting and not shooting...except in the fairytale television shows where a hunt wraps up in 30 minutes and the people sit in blinds, dressed in camo as if deer could see them. 



 

"There are lots more people who are looking to notch a tag and put some meat in the freezer than stroke their own egos with a big wallhanger rack."  I have no idea where you all keep getting that this is about a big wallhanger rack. It almost contradicts what most of the anti-APR guys say because one hand you talk about how it wont' create bigger bucks and then you say that this all about creating bigger bucks.... makes zero sense...and is completely contradictory.

You're not getting it at all.  The anti-APR guys are right, it will not create more big bucks. However, that doesn't stop the APR advocates from believing it will create more big bucks.  THAT's where the delusional thinking comes into play. Lecture them, not me. The available evidence appears to suggest that the APR guys are wrong in believing they'll wake up one day and find B&C bucks around every television set.  And, yes, I blame television for a lot of this bull$#!t.

If the majority of people would prefer to just notch their tag and put a deer in the freezer then it would seem that higher deer populations (which the restricted buck and doe harvest will create) will work to their benefit in a few years.

The problem with this is what we in these parts known is a pattern that is probably going to get worse if this climate change thing has any veracity.  Place restrictions on deer and the populations will increase for a few years, and then just when it might make sense to drop the restrictions, WHAM! we get hit with a hard winter, there are too many deer, too many bucks competing with pregnant does for available feed, and we have a big winter kill that allows the desk jockeys in Oly and their butt smoochers to wring their hands and recommend continued antler restrictions "to bring back the herd numbers."

They might also believe they hav to remain conservative in the harvest to provide more munchies for the wolves and cougars, the populations of which are both very likely grossly underestimated. 

Your last paragraph hits to the heart and I do agree with you. I am certainly not for placing unnecessary restrictions of any kind. However, at this point I do believe restrictions of some kind are in order to help the herd. Are there other ways to do achieve the desired result of healthier herds? Sure. Is there better ways to achieve the desired result of healthier herds? Sure. Is there better ways to do achieve desired results when managing at a state level??? I'm not so sure.

Managing the deer herd requires more than just sitting behind a desk crunching numbers from the regions.

if I were suddenly GAME director, I'd hold a fire sale on office furniture and give a lot of people an option: Get out there, come back with five ideas apiece on how to improve the available habitat to support 50,000 more deer and 10,000 more elk within five years, or find a job somewhere else.  We have all of this public land out there that should be good habitat and COULD be good habitat, but it's not. It is just kind of "doing its own thing." What the hell did we buy it for?

As for coyotes, I'd remove the requirement to have a hunting license to kill them, and I would then encourage everybody with a gun to kill every one coyote they see.

I'd go to the Legislature, have them repeal the hound hunting restrictions, put aggressive hound hunting seasons on mountain lions and black bears, and take down the populations fast.

I'd find the money somewhere — probably instead of spending it on wolf studies and management — and put that into habitat improvement; planting good browse brush, clover plots, wild wheat, alfalfa, whatever the game animals eat and has the best nutrients, and plant that stuff wherever it will best benefit the herds.

And I'd lobby our congressional delegation to spend every waking hour to delist wolves in all of Washington state, and call on the Legislature to remove state protections, and then deal with that issue.


But I'll never be GAME director.   

[Special T]

Dave i think you prove that a 1 prong approach will only has a small short gain. That said, attacking this issue on many levels  predators, more boots on the ground etc.
will likely have a more meaningful effect. What we lack is LEADERSHIP not studies.