The Debate about if APR's Work!!

[JimmyHoffa]

The doe thing should have a few exceptions.  When you go to the Islands there are deer everywhere.  It has a very similar set up that Eastern states have with their white tails.  I don't know of any hard hitting predators, and tons of food.  They have a deer a day lost to vehicles.  But they also have many private areas that refuse hunting.  If WDFW wanted to 'realistically' try APR in a controlled environment, that is the only place I can think of where it might work out.  Of course many people would just like to get that herd cut back by a good percentage.   

[Houndhunter]

bobcat, I too am totally against doe harvest especially on the west side. I have a hard time understanding why they allow this here in the west side, back years ago it may not of been a issue but now all I see it doing hurting are deer numbers even if it is only a few tags per unit.

[Curly]

MuleyGuy nailed it, as usual when it comes to this topic.

[Dave Workman]

For the benefit of those who just can't stand a post from me without some cite, here you go, courtesy of the Mule Deer Working Group of the Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies and their book "Mule Deer Conservation: Issues and Challenges" pages 130-132:

http://muledeerworkinggroup.com/index_files/Page771.htm

In the 1990s, APRs were implemented in a few units in Washington.  Less mule deer bucks were being harvested because of a shortened season, restricted access, and hunters switching effort from mule deer to white-tailed deer.  Buck:doe ratios increased due to this lower buck harvest and simultaneous improvement in fawn recruitment, but the proportion of mature bucks in the population did not increase noticeably.
         After 12 years of trial in Oregon, the 4-point antler restriction on South Steens Mountain was rescinded in 1987.  Biologists reported buck:doe ratios, particularly older bucks, had actually decreased.
            APRs have been tried in most western states, but have failed to produce the desired results despite their popularity with the public.  APRs have increased post-hunt buck:doe ratios in some areas due to a reduction in hunters in those areas, but have almost universally failed to increase the number or proportion of mature bucks (which is why most hunters support APRs).  A significant illegal harvest of bucks not meeting the antler criteria was reported in all APR trials, which defeats the purpose of the restrictions.  Antler point restrictions do not produce more deer or larger-antlered deer, only reducing legal harvest through changes in hunt structure will accomplish that goal.

And there you have it.

[muleyguy]

Besides,,what good is a high buck-doe ratio if those bucks can't be tagged?

it makes for a healthier herd that throws fitter fawns;  with hunting we artificially lower the buck to doe ratio and can cause age structure problems;

herds with better buck to doe ratio's and good quantities of mature animals doing the bulk of the breeding are healthier.

I have read yours and Glocksters opinions and you seem to be of the opinion that a buck left standing after the season is a "wasted" opportunity.  This just harkens back to old line thinking that these deer populations are like factories;  they aren't factories and are dynamic and changing; 

a couple of quick analogies come to mind:  would you run your bank account down to $0 every month and not have a rainy day fund??   A good buck to doe ratio and good age structure going into the breeding season and the winter ensures that we have good healthy adult males doing the breeding and gives us a buffer going into the winter.  Sure, if over the years we have excess amounts of bucks over a healthy ratio certainly provide hunting opportunities for those;

BUT, we are nowhere near that right now.

Our deer herds, both muley and whitetail, are not as productive as other states;  we need to have a buffer in place;  we can't rebound like pennsylvania.

The reason our predator problems have risen is not because we are leaving excess deer in the forest;  its because we have changed the laws on how they can be managed AND we have completely introduced a new one into the equation (wolves)

With increased predators we simply cannot continue to harvest bucks and does to the extent we used to.

while it is true that tag sales have decreased over the years, the fact is hunter days have increased which more then offsets the decrease in tag sales;  so this idea that we are putting less pressure on the resource today is not correct;  the modern deer hunter is highly mobile, has better equipment, and puts more days in the field and works harder;

your solution seems to be that we need MORE opportunities not less on bucks;  there need to be restrictions in this State;  the problem is that we are choosing to use APR's as the restriction of choice when it is the poorest option.

Some very small sacrifices would go a long ways to making the herd healthier and exponentially increasing the hunter experience in the field;  if we reduced the amount of hunters in the field by 1/3 each year and lengthened out the season substaintially, we could grow the herd and keep the hunter experience first class;  all this for just giving up 1 year out of 3

[Glockster]

Predators are not daisy's.  They don't just happen.  More food + protection = more predators.  Especially when a dept manages with a pro predator agenda. 

Still APR guys cannot cite a single western biologist study pointing to APR as a beneficial management tool.  Dave and I have cited studies by the professional game managers from MT, UT, ID, CO, & WY and their experiences with APR.  It's been tried guys and it doesn't work.  Well it only works if your goals are fewer hunters and lots of illegal kills.

You guys who believe in the let's loose so we can gain math really need to think that math through carefully.  What you're advocating is a severe reduction in stakeholders (to use the PC-ish term for HUNTERS)...guys who will simply go to other states.  I know i am.  I'm not going to waste my breath at WDFW meetings or fill out their silly surveys because I'm not a stakeholder anymore.

I say we leave management of game to the professionals and not the court of public opinion.  If you like management by survey and armchair biology....WA is your state 

[muleyguy]

Still APR guys cannot cite a single western biologist study pointing to APR as a beneficial management tool

I'm with you 100% on this!

Predators are not daisy's.  They don't just happen.  More food + protection = more predators.  Especially when a dept manages with a pro predator agenda.

Once again I agree completely!  But, the way you solve the problem is NOT by decreasing the food supply (shoot more bucks);  you solve the problem by more aggressive predator management;  I agree that WDFW has completely dropped the ball on this;

What you're advocating is a severe reduction in stakeholders (to use the PC-ish term for HUNTERS)...guys who will simply go to other states.

Are you saying that they are going to go to other states for easier and more opportunities???  What State is that??   ALL Oregon mule deer are draw only;  the WHOLE state of Nevada is draw only;  Wyoming you have to select a region or unit and then DRAW it.  Idaho is pretty open, but, they have seen the quality of their mule deer drop drastically.  Colorado has one of the most sophisticated draw mechanisms in the country;  Arizona and NM are draw based.

The only state that is really open for the most part is Montana, BUT Montana is a special case because it has wonderful deer habitat and has very productive herds, so its deer herds can withstand a much higher threshold of harvest and pressure then a state like WA.

There is a pattern here outside of Montana;  ALL the states I mentioned have better hunting and healthier herds then WA;  there are few to none APR's in these states, AND they more strictly control the hunter numbers and opportunities then WA.

[Glockster]

Geist, V.  1997.  On mule deer management.  Mule Deer.  Spring:11-14.  [“keep the process of mule deer management public, transparent, and open…protect mule deer from private whims and management for marketable values.”]


You guys who think you have good ideas on deer management should read Dr. Valerius Geist's works....specifically Deer of the World: Their Evolution.

And all those states you mention Muleyguy have tried APR and found it to be a miserable failure to accomplish their herd health goals.  Why does WA think it's special?   Three are plenty of non res OTC left over tag opps for antlerless, etc in most of those states.  I may or may not draw, but if i do i'll be hunting where I have an infinitely better chance of notching a tag.

I'll be hunting in a place where they appreciate hunters and their dollars.  As I was getting into the airport in Albuquerque last week...even the curb guy congratulated me on getting my deer.  So did the counter gal who helped me check my meat and gun in.  I'm gonna go where I'm appreciated and that ain't Washington anymore.

[muleyguy]

five minutes of data lookup confirms the problem:

2009 Washington state deer tag sales:  167,000
2009 Wyoming Deer tag Sales:               90,000


Wyoming is a bigger state with more productive deer habitat then WA will ever have;  and here we are in WA trying to jam 167,000 hunters into a smaller land base, all on a general season 9 day hunt???

its insane!

you HAVE to have restrictions in this State;  States with much smaller tag sales, and larger deer habitat, are regulating their deer hunters MORE then we are!

That is why the experience is so much better.  Those states certainly aren't perfect and have their issues also, but, we have a very serious problem in this state in that we are issuing WAY too many tags relative to what our deer herd can sustain

[muleyguy]

And all those states you mention Muleyguy have tried APR and found it to be a miserable failure to accomplish their herd health goals.  Why does WA think it's special?

I AGREE;  READ MY POSTS!!  I AM THE MOST ANTI-APR GUY ON THIS SITE!!!!

but your and dave's solution of just opening it up is not going to solve it!!  You need regulation;  APR's though are the poorest form of it!!

The reason our state chooses to use them is because all of us hunters do not want to give up our god given right to hunt every year for as long as we want!!

[FLIZZ]

All I know is, they need to make the 633 unit 3 point or better

[bobcat]

five minutes of data lookup confirms the problem:

2009 Washington state deer tag sales:  167,000
2009 Wyoming Deer tag Sales:               90,000


Wyoming is a bigger state with more productive deer habitat then WA will ever have;  and here we are in WA trying to jam 167,000 hunters into a smaller land base, all on a general season 9 day hunt???

its insane!

you HAVE to have restrictions in this State;  States with much smaller tag sales, and larger deer habitat, are regulating their deer hunters MORE then we are!

That is why the experience is so much better.  Those states certainly aren't perfect and have their issues also, but, we have a very serious problem in this state in that we are issuing WAY too many tags relative to what our deer herd can sustain

Yep and that's why we need to do away with general seasons and go to permit only deer hunting (and elk). Like most other states have done.

[Glockster]

Thanks Muley Guy...i should have read more carefully.  In the heat of battle i forgot if i fired all 16 shots or only 15.   LOL

I do not agree that the answer is more regulation.  I do not agree that there is a 'problem" with our deer herds in WA (with the very notable exceptions of the western Yakima county units and a few North Sound, Randall area & Penninsula units where clearcutting has stopped in the name of owls.). 

I see no scarcity of the annual wonderful big bucks on winter range pics on this site and lots of the "look at me I shot my permit only buck" on winter range pics.  ~I don't see this statewide scarcity of deer problem.   I don't see the problems you do..but neither of us are going off of science based deer population surveys are we?.  We're citing our own experiences/perceptions; mine of which runs my lifetime in WA.   I'm sure you hunt alot too.  I'm just saying I remember the "uncontrolled" days and there wasn't a problem...had 40% more deer and elk hunters and we had longer seasons, all units open, could hunt any weapon type if we bought the tags and hunted much better times of year.  Heck ya more guys went home with venison.  That was the point.  More guys took kids out of school for the elk season.  I don't see much of that these days.  I saw lots of grumpy looking elk guys, no kids and one single cow hanging in one camp on a 50mi drive thru Bethel, Nile, Wenas and Umptanum.   I can remember seeing elk hanging in every other camp on that route during the 80's. 

So maybe we do ad another 30 pages to the WA reg book.  3pt on sundays for permit holders with ss#'s ending in odd numbers and all hunters can apply for an 'every year permit' for $45 ea entry.  But you can apply as many times as you want. 

[Dave Workman]

Yep and that's why we need to do away with general seasons and go to permit only deer hunting (and elk). Like most other states have done.

You have just solved your own dilemma. Go hunt in one of those other states. Stop hunting here, period. Put in for those permits in Wyoming or Idaho, Montana or Utah...or Colorado. Don't forget New Mexico.

Eliminating general seasons is not going to help perpetuate hunting and grow a new generation of hunters. Nor does it solve the problem we have here, which is not too many hunters but poor management of the resource.

Who is going to be able to convince a kid to become a hunter by telling that kid..."hey, junior, it'll take you 5-8 years to draw a permit, and then you'll have to wait another few years before you can hunt again..."

Not exactly the way to sell an idea.

[bearpaw]

five minutes of data lookup confirms the problem:

2009 Washington state deer tag sales:  167,000
2009 Wyoming Deer tag Sales:               90,000


Wyoming is a bigger state with more productive deer habitat then WA will ever have;  and here we are in WA trying to jam 167,000 hunters into a smaller land base, all on a general season 9 day hunt???

its insane!

you HAVE to have restrictions in this State;  States with much smaller tag sales, and larger deer habitat, are regulating their deer hunters MORE then we are!

That is why the experience is so much better.  Those states certainly aren't perfect and have their issues also, but, we have a very serious problem in this state in that we are issuing WAY too many tags relative to what our deer herd can sustain

 

No doubt we have a dillema, I guess it just depends if people want limited opportunity during an open season or if people want limited opportunity to hunt, period.

I maintain that if we go to a draw that you will cause hunters to leave the sport in this state and fewer young hunters will be recruited, that is already a problem. Even though it would mean bigger deer, I would hate to see limited entry only and fewer hunters in the sport.