4 pt. minimum whitetail units

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Don't hunt there.   

The problem is, now everybody and his brother is going to hunt there because they all think there is going to be a bonanza of big bucks there. So there will be even more pressure on the bigger bucks. Conventional wisdom being what it is.

I agree that more hunters will come (though this past season a lot of people seemed to boycott those units ....which was perfectly fine by me). That being said I think an increase in hunters will grow with the increase in opportunities (as well it should because it is good for the local communities).

[DBHAWTHORNE]

have to keep hammering this point home because nobody ever seems to want to talk about it..............QDMA and EVERY eastern US whitetail antler restriction rules are part of a two tier system;

they are predicated on a large antlerless harvest because whitetail herds back East are probably 5 times as productive as our herds here;  when you couple an APR, with an "option" for the hunter to take an antlerless animal, they have found that in many cases hunters will simply shoot an antlerless deer instead of waiting around for a 4 pt animal;  ALL the data (and I have posted it on here numerous times) shows that with these large antlerless quota's, combined with APR's there is a very, very, very tiny increase in the recruitment of animals into the 4.5 yr old class;  what they have found is that the APR just "shifts" the harvest up one age class;  if everybody used to be shooting 1.5 yr old deer, they are now shooting 2.5 yr old deer;  AND, very few bucks are making it past their second year;

Very sound points above. However, the bottom line is that one age class of animals is being protected. The harvest will certainly shift too the 2 1/2 year old bucks but this isn't a bad thing. The bottom line is that the population will increase and along with it opportunity will increase. A couple hundred extra deer surviving a season/winter/predators in a particular GMU can make a big difference in just a few years

now, contrast this with what WA state has going on;  we have un-productive herds, so we cannot offer any meaningful antlerless component;  so ALL the harvest is focused on bucks and none on does;
This would be happening with or without an APR so it is a moot point unless you are suggesting the need for a restricted harvest by some other measure

Another HUGE difference is that in many Eastern states, the whitetail hunt occur AFTER the rut;  so, at least you have some of the mature bucks still in the population at that point;  AND the bucks are in a post rut situation where they are not running around looking for a piece of a$$ all day long;
This is key.. Honestly I think removing the Rifle Hunt from the Rut would be the best thing for the herd...even better than the 4pt minimum.....but try selling that too the Rifle guys....

  our whitetail harvest is before, and in the middle of rut, in these units;

So, as huntnw likes to point out, comparing our whitetail herds to those in Eastern US is comparing apples to oranges...........what works back there (APR's) will not work here because of the different type of whitetail population we have, no antlerless opportunities to "pull" harvest away from bucks, and hunts that occur in the middle of the rut.


the numbers I ran are pretty simple:

I use "hunter days" because this is a much  better reflection of what is going on;

Bottom line is that in 2011 there were 30% FEWER hunter days, but, the harvest of 4pt+ animals went UP 10%;
Of course there is going to be an increased 4pt harvest when there is a 4 pt minimum...this is to be expected 

So, sitting here right now, you have decreased the number of mature bucks Just because they have 4pts doesn't mean their mature....most 4pt bucks killed are 2 1/2 year old bucks.... If you look you will see that the 5pt (a better measure of maturity but still not valid measure) harvest remained relatively even from 2010 to 2011......and I would wager that the guys that killed the 5pt bucks in 2010 made up a large percentage of the guys that killed 5pt plus bucks in 2011 in the population by more then you would have with a normal season;  and, you increased the number of immature bucks in the population because you protected them;This isn't exactly accurate but even if it was it would be a wash in a few years with a slight increase in the number of mature bucks.

so, during the breeding season this year in these units, you most likely had a lower age class buck doing the breeding (on average) then you have in the past;  statistically this has to be the outcome because you protected ALL of the 1.5 yr old bucks and increased the harvest of the mature bucks.Which means that there were possibly many 1 1/2 year old with great genetics that got to pass on their genes...when they wouldn't have been able too otherwise

  there is LOTS of data that shows that lowering the age class of the bucks that are doing the breeding results in lower fawn recruitment.  and, this makes intuitive sense........how productive would the US be if 13 yr old boys were making all the babies???These statistics are from overpopulated or very unbalanced herds...(which are generally the herds where the yearlings to the largest majority of the breeding).. the lower recruitment isn't simply because a 1 1/2 year old bucks offspring is weaker. I might add that recent research has shown that contrary to popular belief 1 1/2 year old bucks actually do a lot of breeding in very healthy herds.

I counted 92 extra 4pt+ bucks harvested in those units, so, right off the bat, after year #1, that herd has 92 fewer mature bucks in it;  Most of those bucks were almost certainly two year olds and that hardly meets the definition of mature... however, if you consider a 4pt mature then I might add that there was a significant number of additional bucks that survived the season (since the overall buck harvest was lower) and by using your definition there will be several hundred more "mature" (by your definition) bucks available this season.

next year, when all the hunters return, and "hunter days" return to normal (probably goes higher actually) then you are going to see a huge increase in the level of harvest of the 5pt+ category; Eventually you should see a significant increase in the 5pt harvest because there will be more opportunity.

you obviously will see a big increase in the 4pt class;  but, if you look at the "data"  what it shows is that in other APR whitetail areas, where there is a huge antlerless component, and the hunt does not occur during the rut, and the herd is much more productive, they see very tiny improvements of recruitment into the 4.5 yr age class; I agree...it is never easy for any buck to make it too 4.5 years

now, contrast that with what we have here;  low productivity herds, no antlerless component, hunting allowed during the rut;  it isn't hard to see how  this is going to end...........Worst case scenario it will be a wash

bottom line is we have year #1 down and there are fewer mature bucks in the population and more immature bucks;  the rule has successfully, after year 1, reduced the average age of the buck in these units; Or increased it because there will be a lot more 2 1/2 year old bucks this year and only a few less 3 1/2 year old bucks

for all the proponents, you had better hope hunter days stays 30% lower permanently..........because that is the only thing that will prevent this rule from permenantly reducing the average age class in these units; I don't disagree that other measures should be taken (particularly moving the rifle out of the rut... I don't even believe it needs to be shortened.....just adjusted.

[muleyguy]

DB,

couple of points;  I don't consider a 4 pt whitetail "mature" but, it is certainly at least 1 yr and possibly 2 yr's older then the yearling bucks that this rule protected;

bottom line is this:  the average age structure of that buck population is younger then it would have been without this rule after year 1.  Like I said in the earlier post, all of the eastern US areas where APR's have been implemented show little, if any increased recruitment into the 4.5 yr old class, and this is with the large antlerless tags "pulling" hunting pressure from the buck population.

without that "pull" from the antlerless tags, there would be no bucks recruited in the older age classes and most likely a reduction;   mother nature set it up so mature bucks would do the bulk of the breeding;  there is a reason for this;  you are correct that there are recent studies that say a lot of the breeding is being done by 1.5 yr old animals;  but, that is because in our modern day of big game populations that is dominant age class!! 

In 20 yrs I suspect( just a personal opinion......) that biologists will come to believe that 60 years of poor age structure bucks doing the breeding has contributed to the chronically low fawn recruitment levels in our big game herds.

the legacy of APR's in this state, a state that cannot support large antlerless tags, is a slow erosion of season length, with seasons backed up further into October;  and massive hunter pressure packed into a 9 day season, and you NEVER get rid of it.........

The pattern is so clear:  1.  initiate an APR    2. shorten the season   3.  all the hunting pressure is focused into 9 day seasons  4.  very poor hunter experience   5.  no help to the herd because the increased hunting pressure in such a short window puts further strains on the herd.  6.  Department of game under all kinds of pressure, cannot get rid of the APR, but cannot shorten seasons any more because of hunter disastifaction;   7.  the management of our herds get stuck with an APR and shortened seasons;

anybody who thinks that this APR will EVER be gotten rid of does not understand how they work......make no mistake, this isn't some  5 yr experiment.....the reason you can't get rid of it is because the first year you get rid of it, the buck population gets absoulutely hammered because you open it back up to all the age classes;  it is just the reverse of what you have the first year of an APR when you protect the 1.5 yr old age class;  the only realistic way to unwind an APR would be to have restricted tag sales the first year you get rid of it;  how likely is that???

the first causality of this APR will be the elimination of the modern rut hunt........this will happen in 2 to 3yrs when the it becomes clear that you cannot sustain this hunt when all the pressure is focused on the older age classes of bucks;  and, we will be well on our way to the legacy of shorter seasons........

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Another HUGE difference is that in many Eastern states, the whitetail hunt occur AFTER the rut;  so, at least you have some of the mature bucks still in the population at that point;  AND the bucks are in a post rut situation where they are not running around looking for a piece of a$$ all day long; 

  our whitetail harvest is before, and in the middle of rut, in these units;

Bottom line is that in 2011 there were 30% FEWER hunter days, but, the harvest of 4pt+ animals went UP 10%;

So, sitting here right now, you have decreased the number of mature bucks in the population by more then you would have with a normal season;  and, you increased the number of immature bucks in the population because you protected them;
so, during the breeding season this year in these units, you most likely had a lower age class buck doing the breeding (on average) then you have in the past;  statistically this has to be the outcome because you protected ALL of the 1.5 yr old bucks and increased the harvest of the mature bucks.

Amen brother. You hit the nail on the head. Instead of more mature bucks around at breeding time, you have less. This system was advertized to increase the population of older more mature bucks, but instead it puts more pressure on them before they can do any good.

I would be more confident in an APR system if the taking of bigger bucks was allowed only after the rut. Even better would be to divide up the hunters similar to making people choose weapons. Those who choose to hunt 3pt or smaller animals or does get to hunt pre rut. When you buy your license, you choose, early 3 pt or less buck season or post rut 4 pt or better buck season. Then the early hunters have the choice of putting in for any available doe tags. If drawn, you are strictly limited to an antlerless deer, no buck. If you don't draw, you get your preference point and go back into the early 3 pt or less buck hunt. Those with the post rut 4 pt or better tags have less opportunity, but a chance at a nice buck.

The beauty of a system like this would be that harvest and hunting effort would be spread somewhat equally through all age classes and both sexes and there's something there for all hunters whether you're a meat hunter or a trophy hunter and you're not whacking the big boys before they get a chance to breed which is better for the overall health of the herd.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

DB,

couple of points;  I don't consider a 4 pt whitetail "mature" but, it is certainly at least 1 yr and possibly 2 yr's older then the yearling bucks that this rule protected; I understand. It would be accurate to call a 2 year old an adult though.

bottom line is this:  the average age structure of that buck population is younger then it would have been without this rule after year 1.  Like I said in the earlier post, all of the eastern US areas where APR's have been implemented show little, if any increased recruitment into the 4.5 yr old class, and this is with the large antlerless tags "pulling" hunting pressure from the buck population. Yes...there is generally only a small recruitement into the 4.5 year old class but this is not the primary goal of APRs and in reality it is only an added benefit.

without that "pull" from the antlerless tags, there would be no bucks recruited in the older age classes and most likely a reduction;    mother nature set it up so mature bucks would do the bulk of the breeding;  there is a reason for this;  you are correct that there are recent studies that say a lot of the breeding is being done by 1.5 yr old animals;  but, that is because in our modern day of big game populations that is dominant age class!!  You failed to read my last post clearly...the newest research shows that a lot of breeding is done by 1.5 year old bucks in "healthy" herds....by healthy I also mean age structure "balanced".

And why do you think there would be a reduction. Hunters will not be more effective at killing 2.5 year old bucks than 1.5 year old bucks.

In 20 yrs I suspect( just a personal opinion......) that biologists will come to believe that 60 years of poor age structure bucks doing the breeding has contributed to the chronically low fawn recruitment levels in our big game herds. Here is the deal... a 2.5 year old buck is an "adult".... so.......this year and onward there will be more adult (2.5 and older) bucks to do the breeding than there were in years past....and thus increasing the fawn recruitment.

the legacy of APR's in this state, a state that cannot support large antlerless tags, is a slow erosion of season length, with seasons backed up further into October;  and massive hunter pressure packed into a 9 day season, and you NEVER get rid of it.........The season (particularly rifle) being shortened and moved to before or after the rut has nothing to do with the APRs (at least when it comes to whitetails). It simply makes zero sense to have a long drawn out rifle season (particularly one that hits the rut). The best managed deer herds generally have short rifle seasons that aren't during the rut...... However, if they do this they need to open up all of the units and get rid of the choose your weapon.

The pattern is so clear:  1.  initiate an APR    2. shorten the season   3.  all the hunting pressure is focused into 9 day seasons  4.  very poor hunter experience   5.  no help to the herd because the increased hunting pressure in such a short window puts further strains on the herd.  6.  Department of game under all kinds of pressure, cannot get rid of the APR, but cannot shorten seasons any more because of hunter disastifaction;   7.  the management of our herds get stuck with an APR and shortened seasons; There are other options like shortening the rifle and moving it out of the rut... and then getting rid of the choose your weapon

anybody who thinks that this APR will EVER be gotten rid of does not understand how they work......make no mistake, this isn't some  5 yr experiment.....the reason you can't get rid of it is because the first year you get rid of it, the buck population gets absoulutely hammered because you open it back up to all the age classes;  it is just the reverse of what you have the first year of an APR when you protect the 1.5 yr old age class;  the only realistic way to unwind an APR would be to have restricted tag sales the first year you get rid of it;  how likely is that???

the first causality of this APR will be the elimination of the modern rut hunt..Which again is the absolute worst thing for herd health and age structure and if that is truly your biggest complaint with the APRs then you would definitely support the elimination of the General season rut hunt (because it is far worse than an APR could ever be).......this will happen in 2 to 3yrs when the it becomes clear that you cannot sustain this hunt when all the pressure is focused on the older age classes of bucks; Unfortunately the majority of scientific studies are contrary to your conclusion    and, we will be well on our way to the legacy of shorter seasons........If we lose the rifle rut hunt it won't be because of the APRs it will be because that is undeniably the best thing for the herd.

[muleyguy]

You failed to read my last post clearly...the newest research shows that a lot of breeding is done by 1.5 year old bucks in "healthy" herds....by healthy I also mean age structure "balanced".

I have read this research;  the problem with this research though is it was conducted on Eastern/Southern US whitetail populations;  these populations do not have the same predation and winter issues that our herd has;  there is good research that shows that when you have mature bucks (4.5 yr old or older) do the breeding, the fawns survive predation and winter issues much better.   You can have later born fawns in Missouri because the winters and predation are nowhere near as bad as here;  the primary benefit derived from mature bucks doing the breeding is earlier mating which results in fawns being born earlier and being able to withstand predation and their fist winter better.  Those studies you are referring to are from states that do not have our issues.

Once again, you guys are using flawed Eastern US whitetail and QDMA strategies to manage our herds;

here are a couple of links:

http://www.muleymadness.com/articles/fawns-bucks-start/

http://www.muleymadness.com/articles/it-all-starts-with-the-fawns/

Here is the deal... a 2.5 year old buck is an "adult".... so.......this year and onward there will be more adult (2.5 and older) bucks to do the breeding than there were in years past....and thus increasing the fawn recruitment.

a 2.5 yr old buck is not a "mature" buck and is not the age class that nature set up to do the breeding in ungulates; 


you have to ask yourself what was the problem with these two units??  why were the populations hurting??  it was simply because there were two bad winters back to back;  that was the problem;

putting an APR in place to protect 1.5 yr old bucks for one year until they get shot at 2.5 yrs old, is not going to "restore" the population;  you need babies.......and you need mama's..........and after winter kills, that takes time, and elimination of doe tags;  one of the problems here was that they didn't eliminate the antlerless tags 100%;  they are still giving them out.

the season structure in these units was fine;  there was good mature buck escapement, even with the rut hunt, because the rules were structured so you could shoot any buck, so, most people choose to shoot yearling bucks instead of mature bucks;  that fact, coupled with good habitat escapement resulted in good numbers of quality mature bucks in these units.   The buck age structure in 117 and 121 has always been excellent even with the rut hunt.

these units were arguably two of the better units in this state to actually find a 160 class or better whitetail hunt on with a general tag and with good amounts of public land;  an average joe could put in his time, hunt hard, and find mature (4.5 yr old or older) bucks;   

these units were actually one of the rare units were you could support a general season rut hunt, and still have good mature buck escapement;

instead of going to this drastic step of APR's, a simple elimination of all antlerless tags and maybe putting in a two year, automatic sunset clause, restriction the rut hunt, would have most likely did the job;

it just needed time in these units, thats all............I can guarantee you that if the APR's are left in place, the rut hunt will be eliminated because of the pressure it will put on mature bucks, which will be unfortunate because these units could actually support longer seasons, a limited  general season rut hunt, and still have good numbers of mature bucks;  this is a rarity in todays world;

these units are headed to ever shorter seasons, over crowding, permanent APR's,  and less chance at finding that 160 class  or better whitetail.   But, you will have a stockpile of basket racked 2.5 yr old bucks to shoot every year......

[bearpaw]

The way I see it, the numbers do not lie, we accomplished what was desired, fewer bucks were killed and we built the herd numbers. I am also seeing more deer in 121 this spring, likely because fewer are in the freezer. 

[DBHAWTHORNE]

You failed to read my last post clearly...the newest research shows that a lot of breeding is done by 1.5 year old bucks in "healthy" herds....by healthy I also mean age structure "balanced".

I have read this research;  the problem with this research though is it was conducted on Eastern/Southern US whitetail populations;  these populations do not have the same predation and winter issues that our herd has;  there is good research that shows that when you have mature bucks (4.5 yr old or older) do the breeding, the fawns survive predation and winter issues much better.   You can have later born fawns in Missouri because the winters and predation are nowhere near as bad as here;  the primary benefit derived from mature bucks doing the breeding is earlier mating which results in fawns being born earlier and being able to withstand predation and their fist winter better.  Those studies you are referring to are from states that do not have our issues.

Once again, you guys are using flawed Eastern US whitetail and QDMA strategies to manage our herds;

here are a couple of links:

http://www.muleymadness.com/articles/fawns-bucks-start/

http://www.muleymadness.com/articles/it-all-starts-with-the-fawns/

Here is the deal... a 2.5 year old buck is an "adult".... so.......this year and onward there will be more adult (2.5 and older) bucks to do the breeding than there were in years past....and thus increasing the fawn recruitment.

a 2.5 yr old buck is not a "mature" buck and is not the age class that nature set up to do the breeding in ungulates; 


you have to ask yourself what was the problem with these two units??  why were the populations hurting??  it was simply because there were two bad winters back to back;  that was the problem;

putting an APR in place to protect 1.5 yr old bucks for one year until they get shot at 2.5 yrs old, is not going to "restore" the population;  you need babies.......and you need mama's..........and after winter kills, that takes time, and elimination of doe tags;  one of the problems here was that they didn't eliminate the antlerless tags 100%;  they are still giving them out.

the season structure in these units was fine;  there was good mature buck escapement, even with the rut hunt, because the rules were structured so you could shoot any buck, so, most people choose to shoot yearling bucks instead of mature bucks;  that fact, coupled with good habitat escapement resulted in good numbers of quality mature bucks in these units.   The buck age structure in 117 and 121 has always been excellent even with the rut hunt.

these units were arguably two of the better units in this state to actually find a 160 class or better whitetail hunt on with a general tag and with good amounts of public land;  an average joe could put in his time, hunt hard, and find mature (4.5 yr old or older) bucks;   

these units were actually one of the rare units were you could support a general season rut hunt, and still have good mature buck escapement;

instead of going to this drastic step of APR's, a simple elimination of all antlerless tags and maybe putting in a two year, automatic sunset clause, restriction the rut hunt, would have most likely did the job;

it just needed time in these units, thats all............I can guarantee you that if the APR's are left in place, the rut hunt will be eliminated because of the pressure it will put on mature bucks, which will be unfortunate because these units could actually support longer seasons, a limited  general season rut hunt, and still have good numbers of mature bucks;  this is a rarity in todays world;

these units are headed to ever shorter seasons, over crowding, permanent APR's,  and less chance at finding that 160 class  or better whitetail.   But, you will have a stockpile of basket racked 2.5 yr old bucks to shoot every year......

I agree with you on some point and disagree with you on others. I do think there are better options than APRs but they would be harder to manage on a GMU wide level.

If the escapement is as good as you say it is in these units (which I don't
completely disagree) then we should still see plenty of older bucks even if everything else you predicted is accurate.. 

I agree these two units are great for 160+ bucks. I find several each year. I am interested to see what the next several years hold.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

there is good research that shows that when you have mature bucks (4.5 yr old or older) do the breeding, the fawns survive predation and winter issues much better.   You can have later born fawns in Missouri because the winters and predation are nowhere near as bad as here;  the primary benefit derived from mature bucks doing the breeding is earlier mating which results in fawns being born earlier and being able to withstand predation and their fist winter better.  Those studies you are referring to are from states that do not have our issues.

Again, right on. Instead of having fawns born spread out over a long period, it's biologically important for them to all be born in a short time span and early enough that they get big enough to make it through their first winter. The reason it's important they are born in a short time span is it protects the bulk of them from predation at the time in their lives they are most vulnerable.  Predators are only going to kill so many per day, so nature overwhelms them with numbers. The older the prey animals get, the less likely they will be killed by a predator. If they are all born close together, they get hit to a degree, but the bulk make it to a safer age. But if the rut drags on because a lot of does don't get bred the first time around, then the births are spread apart and predators can take advantage of the young for a longer period, thereby taking a larger amount out of that year's fawns. 

The other reason any buck seasons are better than APR seasons, especially in areas with good cover is that any buck season put a lot more of the harvest pressure on younger animals instead of putting all the pressure on the older breeders. In nature, it's the young and the very old that die first in hard times. But as long as the breeders survive, recoveries are quicker.  If all this year's fawns survived winter and something killed all the breeding aged animals, all you'd have this spring is a bunch of yearlings. There would be no recruitment this year. Then when breeding came around in the fall, it would be a bunch of 1 1/2 year olds making next spring's crop of fawns. The young bucks wouldn't be as efficient, prolonging the rut and the birthing season, and the young does might have less twins and more birthing problems than older does would so you start with less babies that were more prone to be taken out by predators, and more fawns being born later in the year so they'd be less likely to make it through the first winter. The young does would also have less experience keeping their babies safe from harm, say from predators, dogs, and cars for starters. But nature keeps those older breeders alive, with the younger deer dying first. The first advantage is you get a new crop of fawns this spring, so you are already ahead. Then with the mature deer doing the breeding next fall, you have a better chance at twins and a successful birthing season next year. You're probably already twice as far ahead as you would be if only the fawns survived this winter. 

Management is more successful where it mimics nature and uses natural advantages built into nature for maintaining herd health. Unfortunately, a lot of  modern management runs counter to nature. Especially when it comes to taking out the breeders before they get a chance to breed.  In nature there will usually be a stable herd of older mature animals that crank out a lot of babies, of which many will die before the survivors eventually replace the the older generations as they get past their prime years. Much of modern management puts the emphasis on protecting the young, and taking out the prime aged animals and replacing them with the young animals before they are fully ready for the job. It's no wonder there are problems. The largest being perennially low fawn/doe or cow/calf numbers.

[bearpaw]

I completely agree that older bucks are better breeders and we need to manage to have a good ratio of older bucks in the herd. 

I am not sold on the eternal use of the 4pt rule and in fact I used to oppose it. But something needed done to reduce the harvest of bucks now, not in 5 years, this was by far the most popular option to reduce harvest and it worked, we already have herd numbers bouncing back nicely. If it appears that the rule doesn't work over the long term at allowing old bucks to survive or that we simply don't need the rule in 4 years then I would gladly support removing it. 

Something that many of you have overlooked is that many of the big old bucks perish during the hard winters, so you have been talking about the 4pt rule putting pressure on many bucks that died in the hard winters and don't exist. Now this should change, as we pull away from those hard winters we should see more older age bucks again and if we don't, then we may need to recinsider the 4pt rule in 4 years at the end of the trial period. But at this point who knows, we need to see what happens before we will know. 

I agree that we cannot guess at how the APR will work in 117/121 based on how it has worked in other areas, the dynamics of this area are different than elsewhere. The only way to know is to try the rule. As I stated before, it appears the herd has benefitted in the short term, the real question is how long will the rule benefit the herd. Some of you guys need to realize we are already 1 year into this program and it's time to look at the results instead of arguing the same argument that you argued before the rule started. 

Experimenting is how scientists who are not hung up on preconcieved ideas find better scientific methods of doing things. Like it or not, you have to conduct experiments to learn. What I can see from the first year data is that the 4pt rule and elimination of doe hunts will recover whitetail herds in NE WA faster when implemented immediately after a heavy winter loss. It is not proven, but I would think this would have worked even better if implemented immediately after a bad winter. 

Problem I see with too many biologists and I will openly fault some of them for it, too many simply want to follow the status quo. I think a biologist should be willing to learn what works best by conducting experiments and then put what is learned to work to improve the status quo. Some game managers in Washington have had the blinders on for too long. We need to look outside of the box and find ways to make our herds more productive instead of going back to the same playbook year after year in every GMU regardles of what condition the herds are in. 

[bearpaw]

Another thing that I will mention is winter feeding. When we have hard winters that push deer from the mid elevation winter ranges, we need to feed them to help them because humans are occupying far too much of the low elevation winter range. When Washington had larger deer numbers we had a strong feeding effort going on. Now there is less winter range and our managers don't want to feed. No wonder we lose so many deer in a hard winter.   

There used to be hundreds of mule deer herded in the winter in Ferry County near the feeding areas. Winter ranges were covered in deer. Today most of the winter ranges that are still there are basically empty. You will have a hard time finding 50 deer in a whole day. This is obviously more management that is not good and not working. 

[Moose22]

Another thing that I will mention is winter feeding. When we have hard winters that push deer from the mid elevation winter ranges, we need to feed them to help them because humans are occupying far too much of the low elevation winter range. When Washington had larger deer numbers we had a strong feeding effort going on. Now there is less winter range and our managers don't want to feed. No wonder we lose so many deer in a hard winter.   

There used to be hundreds of mule deer herded in the winter in Ferry County near the feeding areas. Winter ranges were covered in deer. Today most of the winter ranges that are still there are basically empty. You will have a hard time finding 50 deer in a whole day. This is obviously more management that is not good and not working. 

Well said, we have been evading their space with expanding occupation in the lower elevations.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Another thing that I will mention is winter feeding. When we have hard winters that push deer from the mid elevation winter ranges, we need to feed them to help them because humans are occupying far too much of the low elevation winter range. When Washington had larger deer numbers we had a strong feeding effort going on. Now there is less winter range and our managers don't want to feed.

The managers don't want to rely on feeding programs because it concentrates too many animals in too small of areas. The result can be catastrophic if disease gets started. It can also cause problems with animal/auto collisions and concentrates animals for predators, both 4 & 2 legged. It also gets animals used to handouts instead of learning to forage on their own. Good habitat and spread out herds is good, feeding programs are a sign of problems in the surrounding habitat. They can actually exacerbate the problem at hand. A good example is the St Helens elk herd. Remember a few years back when whole herds of animals were tipping over and dying?  They had a winter feeding program there, but the problem actually started in the summer range. The animals were getting to their winter range in near starving condition. So it really didn't make sense to feed them in the winter to keep more of them alive to further overcrowd and degrade the summer range even more. I'll see if I can find the link to that study again.

[npaull]

Although it's hardly scientific, I think as a general rule, if an outfitter (in this case bearpaw) supports a *more* restrictive rule for hunting in their own territory, it is almost certainly a good idea...

[buckfvr]

How in the hell did we all over look the correlation between the St
Helens mud flow ELK heard, and the whitetail of GMU 121 and 117?