Post by: SirSpencer on December 21, 2010, 11:56:48 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 22, 2010, 12:08:16 AM
Okay, so im seeing these big bucks come out of north east washington. I'm wondering what gmu's cities or general areas they are referring to? It's not mt. spokane or the okanogan areas is it?I honestly have yet to find a GMU that doesn't have a lot of big whitetail. It just takes a little time and effort finding them.
Post by: SirSpencer on December 22, 2010, 12:19:55 AM
Post by: Button Nubbs on December 22, 2010, 12:31:27 AM
I understand that i run into some pretty decent whitetails in the palouse and okanogan, im just wanting some clarification as to what these guys refer to as NE Washington.
want gps coordintaes where they found the bucks too?
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 22, 2010, 12:34:01 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 22, 2010, 12:34:58 AM
I understand that i run into some pretty decent whitetails in the palouse and okanogan, im just wanting some clarification as to what these guys refer to as NE Washington.
want gps coordintaes where they found the bucks too?
yes please :chuckle:
Post by: Button Nubbs on December 22, 2010, 12:41:11 AM
I understand that i run into some pretty decent whitetails in the palouse and okanogan, im just wanting some clarification as to what these guys refer to as NE Washington.
want gps coordintaes where they found the bucks too?
yes please :chuckle:
well when i find out i will let you know, then you can let a buddy know, who can let his buddys buddy know, then that guy can post it on the internet!!!!!! we could have a hunting washington take over in the "northeast!!!!!" :rockin: :cue: :brew:
Post by: SirSpencer on December 22, 2010, 01:20:55 AM
Post by: NWBREW on December 22, 2010, 02:17:11 AM
Scouting is the key.
Post by: huntnnw on December 22, 2010, 04:25:29 AM
Post by: gjbruny on December 22, 2010, 09:05:00 AM
Scouting is the key.
AMEN!!!!!!!
Thanks DB, that was what i was looking for. I'm getting tired of working the wide open palouse and was thinking about going to some different terrain. Saw these NE deer photos and it looked like a little more fun area to hunt.
there are a number of us that kill very good to great deer every year and the quote about scouting is the key. some of us live this stuff all year long, not just before and during season. now part of the reason you are seeing so many big bucks hitting the dirt.....er, snow, is because we had the conditions this late season that we as bowhunters pray for every year, but only see about every 7-10 years. the conditions i am talking about was the weather and particularly the heavy snowfall EARLY in the year.
what i am saying is, don't think that big bucks are hiding behind every tree. they are definately here.... no quesion...... just don't think they are here in the numbers that i see in the midwest....... we as a state shoot too many of our deer before the have a chance to mature to see those numbers of big deer.
don't kid yourself, i have hunted coyotes a ton down in your neck of the woods and have seen bucks down there that would knock your socks off........ i have a 170" shed to prove it. start working the draws and coulees down there that have pockets of timber.... trust me, the big boys are there............. and may not be as overwhelming as coming up and hunting big timber that goes all the way to canada.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 22, 2010, 09:57:53 AM
:yeah:Scouting is the key.
AMEN!!!!!!!Thanks DB, that was what i was looking for. I'm getting tired of working the wide open palouse and was thinking about going to some different terrain. Saw these NE deer photos and it looked like a little more fun area to hunt.
there are a number of us that kill very good to great deer every year and the quote about scouting is the key. some of us live this stuff all year long, not just before and during season. now part of the reason you are seeing so many big bucks hitting the dirt.....er, snow, is because we had the conditions this late season that we as bowhunters pray for every year, but only see about every 7-10 years. the conditions i am talking about was the weather and particularly the heavy snowfall EARLY in the year.
what i am saying is, don't think that big bucks are hiding behind every tree. they are definately here.... no quesion...... just don't think they are here in the numbers that i see in the midwest....... we as a state shoot too many of our deer before the have a chance to mature to see those numbers of big deer.
don't kid yourself, i have hunted coyotes a ton down in your neck of the woods and have seen bucks down there that would knock your socks off........ i have a 170" shed to prove it. start working the draws and coulees down there that have pockets of timber.... trust me, the big boys are there............. and may not be as overwhelming as coming up and hunting big timber that goes all the way to canada.
That's some great advice. I have also seen a number of big deer in the Palouse and they would definitely be easier to pattern than the bucks we hunt in the big timber....of course they are still mature bucks and as such will present a great challenge...easier to pattern doesn't always equate to easier to kill...especially when they are only moving at night. The advantage to hunting the deep woods is that I am rarely limited by where I can go like I am on private land. There are times I have come across bucks on private land that I want to hunt but I only see them at night on my trail camears...meanwhile the guy on the property next to me is closer to his core area and has him in during daylight reguarly because he is closer to his core area.
Post by: 400out on December 22, 2010, 10:07:55 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 22, 2010, 10:23:01 AM
This is a really hard question, The guys that are finding these bucks have been doing this hunt for years and played in the areas year round! Any of the areas that are open for late buck will hold deer it's just the chalange of finding the big deer! I have made this hunt and it is tough! Thick and cold! Do the home work in the off season and you will increase your odds but don't expect to find the caliber these guys have right away, Read some of their post and they will say "biggest I saw all year" Go shedding now and start getting trail cams, Your homework started yesterday :twocents: Hope this helps:yeah:
"biggest I saw all year"...that's real key. While I had few 160-180 inch bucks on camera. The biggest bucks I had in bow range during season were Gross 140's and the biggest during daylight on camera were a couple 150 class bucks....I put a lot of hard miles on the rig (which came to a head with a blown rear diff during primetime) and I practically lived in the mountains since spring.
Post by: high country on December 22, 2010, 10:32:56 AM
keep doing what you are doing and you will keep getting what you got. there are big whiteys all over this side, but they don't like people to see them....yet often are very close to people.......work with that.
Post by: SirSpencer on December 23, 2010, 01:10:16 AM
The advantage to hunting the deep woods is that I am rarely limited by where I can go like I am on private land. There are times I have come across bucks on private land that I want to hunt but I only see them at night on my trail camears...meanwhile the guy on the property next to me is closer to his core area and has him in during daylight reguarly because he is closer to his core area.
This is what i'm kind of tired of in the Palouse. To find good places to hunt in the region is getting hard, public land is few and far between and over hunted. Free private land is getting sparse or if it is it's just open field. The rest is anywhere from 50$ a day to 1000$ per person a season. Which for a broke college kid those prices aren't happening.
I know there are big bucks in the Palouse as well, ive seen them I missed an opportunity on a 150 this year. I'm starting to work on the trail cam thing as well, but like i said broke college kid. I'm just gathering general information for 2 seasons out when i have more income and more weekends available.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 23, 2010, 07:09:56 AM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 23, 2010, 07:21:09 AM
Unit 204 & 113 too..............
That's campmeat telling you nicely to stay out of unit 101. :chuckle:
You guys won't believe this, but I don't like deer meat at all. I had a very nice 6x8 whitetail in the yard this year, he's still here. Predators are my thing.
Post by: whacker1 on December 23, 2010, 08:52:12 AM
Unit 204 & 113 too..............
That's campmeat telling you nicely to stay out of unit 101. :chuckle:
You guys won't believe this, but I don't like deer meat at all. I had a very nice 6x8 whitetail in the yard this year, he's still here. Predators are my thing.
I would be happy to help you remove your flower eaters.... :chuckle: We all know that a 6 x 8 will eat more landscape than a doe.... :chuckle:
Post by: huntnnw on December 24, 2010, 01:01:00 AM
Post by: high country on December 24, 2010, 06:17:32 AM
Post by: huntnnw on December 24, 2010, 06:30:48 AM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 24, 2010, 07:20:19 AM
Unit 204 & 113 too..............
That's campmeat telling you nicely to stay out of unit 101. :chuckle:
You guys won't believe this, but I don't like deer meat at all. I had a very nice 6x8 whitetail in the yard this year, he's still here. Predators are my thing.
I would be happy to help you remove your flower eaters.... :chuckle: We all know that a 6 x 8 will eat more landscape than a doe.... :chuckle:
[/quote
Sorry, I'm fattening him up for next year. I had never seen him until this year. My wife likes deer meat. I would of killed him , but I had an archery tag and couldn't quite make it happen.
Post by: dscubame on December 24, 2010, 07:41:04 AM
Post by: huntnnw on December 24, 2010, 09:47:54 PM
Post by: bigelk1030 on December 24, 2010, 10:52:35 PM
In away I wish I had never bought a trail camera, addicted to them. In the begining it was, I can scout lots of places at once, save me on time and travel..WRONG :chuckle: I spend more time in the woods WAY more on fuel and the frusturation of malfunctioned cameras, bears!! and people stealing. Then to not get anything good on camera is always a downer.. almost sounds like a drinking problem :chuckle:
or a country western song..... :brew:
Post by: gjbruny on December 25, 2010, 01:24:27 AM
In away I wish I had never bought a trail camera, addicted to them. In the begining it was, I can scout lots of places at once, save me on time and travel..WRONG :chuckle: I spend more time in the woods WAY more on fuel and the frusturation of malfunctioned cameras, bears!! and people stealing. Then to not get anything good on camera is always a downer.. almost sounds like a drinking problem :chuckle:
i couldn't agree more..... it is like christmas morning everytime i go to check them. this year i had 13 cameras out between our place and the two other farms i hunt..... i was running around like a chicken with my head cut off...... and loving every second of it. :chuckle:
in some respects (especially in the off season) these things are a blessing..... at other times i have to ask myself where do we draw the line on technology? i mean for pete sakes....... i hunt with a stickbow but i had 26 gigs of memory out in the woods at one time this year LOL!!!! honestly though, i sat a stand and killed my '08 buck strictly due to my cameras..... i had planned on hunting a different trail that night but checked my cards before heading into the timber. the camera changed my mind and i shot my buck that night because i knew he would head down that particular trail. if i had no cameras, the outcome may have been different.
Post by: huntnnw on December 25, 2010, 06:38:17 AM
Post by: elkaholic on December 25, 2010, 08:17:34 AM
Post by: NWBREW on December 25, 2010, 01:00:55 PM
I love the NE, Once many see the thickness and work involved they turn around.
That's the best part about hunting up there. Once you learn how to hunt it it's not too bad.
Post by: elkaholic on December 25, 2010, 01:15:11 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 25, 2010, 05:56:45 PM
In away I wish I had never bought a trail camera, addicted to them. In the begining it was, I can scout lots of places at once, save me on time and travel..WRONG :chuckle: I spend more time in the woods WAY more on fuel and the frusturation of malfunctioned cameras, bears!! and people stealing. Then to not get anything good on camera is always a downer.. almost sounds like a drinking problem :chuckle:
I definitely spend way more money than I used to..I am addicted to it. Like gjbruny said..it's like Christmas every time I check my cameras. Aside from covering more territory the biggest advantage the cameras give me is being able to limit my presence (pressure) in any given area.
Post by: huntnnw on December 25, 2010, 08:01:10 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 25, 2010, 11:06:21 PM
Post by: gjbruny on December 25, 2010, 11:12:37 PM
I feel my presence is even greater with the trail cams, before I ever owned one I watched from a far, I glassed alot and watched particular bucks to hunt then made a plan to hunt the buck. Now I am in and out of areas alot, I need to get away from this way of scouting and get back to the way I use to do it
i feel the exact same way. used to be the only way to pattern a buck was to sit back at 500-1000 yards and glass with binos and a spotting scope. pick out your buck, keep a journal or talley as to which trail he took most often then play the numbers by setting stands over the most frequently used trails. start on the field fringes and then work your way further into the timber as the season progressed.
i still glass daily, but now i can set cams well in past the timber edge and figure out which spur trails he might be using. i need to get away from that and get back to basics. i think they are great as "buck inventory cams" where you put big piles of corn out in the fringe areas and/or in alfalfa fields..... within 2 weeks, you should know of just about every buck that is on the place which is great for figuring out which bucks made it throught the winter and which ones didn't.
in all honestly, i think montana has their shnat together with the cam laws...... you can use them right up until season, then after that, your cams had better be out of the woods. kind of keeps some the "mystery" in hunting.
Post by: huntnnw on December 26, 2010, 09:48:49 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 26, 2010, 10:07:25 PM
I prefer it the way it is currently. WA: Baiting/Trail Cams ID: No Baiting/Trail Cams MT: No Baiting/No Trail Cams in Season. It allows a different experience in each state. If all the laws were the same I would use the exact same strategy in each state. It keeps things interesting. Maybe I haven't refined my trail camera strategies but I still find plenty of mystery in using trail cameras. There are constantly bucks showing up on and off camera that I have never seen and I have found it to be far from a guarantee of even seeing the bucks I have on cam. This year I saw well less than 50% of the bucks I had on camera while hunting.I feel my presence is even greater with the trail cams, before I ever owned one I watched from a far, I glassed alot and watched particular bucks to hunt then made a plan to hunt the buck. Now I am in and out of areas alot, I need to get away from this way of scouting and get back to the way I use to do it
i feel the exact same way. used to be the only way to pattern a buck was to sit back at 500-1000 yards and glass with binos and a spotting scope. pick out your buck, keep a journal or talley as to which trail he took most often then play the numbers by setting stands over the most frequently used trails. start on the field fringes and then work your way further into the timber as the season progressed.
i still glass daily, but now i can set cams well in past the timber edge and figure out which spur trails he might be using. i need to get away from that and get back to basics. i think they are great as "buck inventory cams" where you put big piles of corn out in the fringe areas and/or in alfalfa fields..... within 2 weeks, you should know of just about every buck that is on the place which is great for figuring out which bucks made it throught the winter and which ones didn't.
in all honestly, i think montana has their shnat together with the cam laws...... you can use them right up until season, then after that, your cams had better be out of the woods. kind of keeps some the "mystery" in hunting.
Like you I still haven't given up the regular glassing. It is one of my favorite parts of the experience. There is nothing like watching those big boys in the summer when they are extremely visible during daylight hours....and cameras or not I still find post-season scouting to be critical for my future late season hunts.
By the way gj... Congrats on that great buck you shot this year.
Post by: Decker on December 26, 2010, 10:32:11 PM
By the way gj... Congrats on that great buck you shot this year.:yeah:
Personally speaking, I think the Palouse has a MUCH better buck to doe ratio. I have seen monsters in the most wide open country you can imagine. Before this year, I spent three years chasing mule deer in the open sage country and kept coming across HUGE whitetail where I never would have thought to go look for them.
As for the access thing, it's a numbers game. The more people you ask permission, the better odds you have to get it. I would consider spot lighting wheat and alfalfa fields at night in the summer (if this has not become illegal yet). When you find the bucks you want to hunt start asking permission on those places. You would be surprised how many farmers WANT the deer to be taken.
Good luck.
Post by: huntnnw on December 27, 2010, 05:19:00 AM
Post by: Decker on December 27, 2010, 05:44:10 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 27, 2010, 10:44:39 AM
Without exaggerating it really does work, I've counted up to 20 bucks in a single field, 3-4 that would probably Pope. If you can't get permission to hunt a great spot you find in the summer, get out your topo/google earth and consider where those bucks may peel off to during the rut and then late season.I miss the days where I would see 40+ bucks in a field during daylight (late summer) and 10-15 would be Pope.
Post by: bearpaw on December 27, 2010, 10:51:48 AM
Without exaggerating it really does work, I've counted up to 20 bucks in a single field, 3-4 that would probably Pope. If you can't get permission to hunt a great spot you find in the summer, get out your topo/google earth and consider where those bucks may peel off to during the rut and then late season.I miss the days were I would see 40+ bucks in a field during daylight (late summer) and 10-15 would be Pope.
This is one of the reasons the NE Management Group is recommending a 5 year trial in two units for 4 pt or better. We want to bring the herds back.
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 27, 2010, 10:52:51 AM
Post by: gjbruny on December 27, 2010, 12:33:13 PM
This is one of the reasons the NE Management Group is recommending a 5 year trial in two units for 4 pt or better. We want to bring the herds back.
i would give anything for that and have been begging for it for years. only issue is, you can have a 1.5 year old that is a 4pt....... many many 2 year olds are 4pts. i wish more people were "up to snuff" about aging deer on the hoof so that we could have a 4pt minimum with a 3 year old minimum. i would be absolutely for a 5pt minimum, but 4pts as wide or wider than their ears were legal..... that wouldn't be too difficult for most people.
it was hard for me to get on the bandwagon on killing does to help the herd until i really started hunting the midwest. we DEFINATELY need to kill more does. wisconsin's "earn a buck" program is proof in the pudding on how well that works.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 27, 2010, 01:06:19 PM
This is one of the reasons the NE Management Group is recommending a 5 year trial in two units for 4 pt or better. We want to bring the herds back.
i would give anything for that and have been begging for it for years. only issue is, you can have a 1.5 year old that is a 4pt....... many many 2 year olds are 4pts. i wish more people were "up to snuff" about aging deer on the hoof so that we could have a 4pt minimum with a 3 year old minimum. i would be absolutely for a 5pt minimum, but 4pts as wide or wider than their ears were legal..... that wouldn't be too difficult for most people.
it was hard for me to get on the bandwagon on killing does to help the herd until i really started hunting the midwest. we DEFINATELY need to kill more does. wisconsin's "earn a buck" program is proof in the pudding on how well that works.
I agree on wishing people could age deer better. I have seen a lot of 1.5/2.5 year old bucks killed in my life that people claim are old bucks and on the downhill slide. I don't care that they killed them if they are legal and that is what makes them happy... I just wish they realized the buck was not mature. An age minimum is something that could never happen on a statewide scale.
I think the 4pt minimum is the best antler restriction for whitetail that can be enforced on a large scale. The killing of our stronger 1.5 bucks is the downfall of such an antler restriction. However, I think most people that would kill those 1.5 year old 4x4 bucks would shoot the same buck regardless of the antler restriction so it is probably a wash. The good thing is the number of bucks making it to 2 1/2 years old would increase and thus each age group after that should increase.
You then run into the same problem putting a point and spread restriction. You run the risk of killing off only your best 2 1/2 year olds but many more 2 1/2 year olds would make it to an older age class. I think this would be even more likely effect the deer herd because many people would pass on a 1 1/2 year old 4x4 but have a hard time passing or knowing the age of a solid 2 1/2 year old 4x4 that is wider than the ears.
On another note spread restrictions have been done with success in the past. From Dr. Dave Samuel: "In 1993 Georgia became the first state to impose Quality Deer Management (QDM) antler restrictions throughout a whole county. Subsequently, three other counties adopted antler restrictions. But research was needed to determine if the approach was working, so in 1998 the Georgia Department of Natural Resources radio-collared 135 bucks in parts of four counties to assess mortality. In two counties the antler restriction was 15 inches outside spread (ear tip-to-ear tip), and in the other two counties the antler restriction requirement was 4 points on one side.
In the areas with 15-inch spread minimums, 57 percent of all yearlings survived to 2 ½ years of age, and 25 percent survived to 3 ½ years of age. In the 4-point-or-better areas, 47 percent of all yearlings survived to age 2 ½, and 29 percent survived to age 3 ½. Also, twice as many yearling bucks were killed illegally in the 4-point areas than in the spread-restrictions areas."
Below is a link to another article that has other great info from Dr. Dave Samuel on the great success of spread restrictions as opposed to point restrictions (apparently they are doing this on a county wide basis in several states): http://www.knowhunting.com/article.html?id=93 (http://www.knowhunting.com/article.html?id=93)
Post by: bearpaw on December 27, 2010, 05:15:21 PM
If this occurs, there will be a greatly reduced buck harvest the first year in those two units, but in subsequent years the harvest should catch back up. In 4 or 5 years the restriction may not even be needed as buck/doe ratios may be inline.
Currently we do not have a large enough deer herd to support much doe harvest, and I totally agree with WDFW cutting back doe permits in 2010 and hope they continue with fewer permits for a couple more years. When our herd hopefully grows in 3 to 5 years, then I would fully support a much increased doe harvest.
Plenty of folks have said they don't want an antler restriction, but if we get it and in a couple years when buck numbers and quality improves, watch how popular those units will be for hunters. :twocents:
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 27, 2010, 05:24:06 PM
Whatever is done if anything must be very simple for all hunters to easily understand and comply. The more complicated the less chance of it working. Thus I think the simple 4 pt restriction is the best option.I definitely think this will help get the herd back to where it needs to be and helps buffer any hard winters we may have in the future.
If this occurs, there will be a greatly reduced buck harvest the first year in those two units, but in subsequent years the harvest should catch back up. In 4 or 5 years the restriction may not even be needed as buck/doe ratios may be inline.
Currently we do not have a large enough deer herd to support much doe harvest, and I totally agree with WDFW cutting back doe permits in 2010 and hope they continue with fewer permits for a couple more years. When our herd hopefully grows in 3 to 5 years, then I would fully support a much increased doe harvest.
Plenty of folks have said they don't want an antler restriction, but if we get it and in a couple years when buck numbers and quality improves, watch how popular those units will be for hunters. :twocents:
Post by: ribka on December 27, 2010, 05:39:18 PM
Whatever is done if anything must be very simple for all hunters to easily understand and comply. The more complicated the less chance of it working. Thus I think the simple 4 pt restriction is the best option.
If this occurs, there will be a greatly reduced buck harvest the first year in those two units, but in subsequent years the harvest should catch back up. In 4 or 5 years the restriction may not even be needed as buck/doe ratios may be inline.
Currently we do not have a large enough deer herd to support much doe harvest, and I totally agree with WDFW cutting back doe permits in 2010 and hope they continue with fewer permits for a couple more years. When our herd hopefully grows in 3 to 5 years, then I would fully support a much increased doe harvest.
Plenty of folks have said they don't want an antler restriction, but if we get it and in a couple years when buck numbers and quality improves, watch how popular those units will be for hunters. :twocents:
Great idea. Agree with the 4 pt restriction in some units. Great trophy potential up there
Post by: walt on December 27, 2010, 06:51:48 PM
Post by: gjbruny on December 27, 2010, 10:57:44 PM
I am far from convinced it is a good idea. Every 5 years or so we have a harsher than usual winter, sometimes two in a row and the herd declines, a year or three later it has rebounded and the complaints about too many deer start. Then ma nature hits them again. It has been going on for decades. We had two hard winters in a row before this last mild one and there was no shortage of mature bucks this year, or any past year. If you want to help the herd adjust the season dates, most of the mature bucks get killed in the last few days of the late season when the rut is in full swing. Many hunters are looking for meat not antlers. Also what effect would this restriction have on the surrounding units? It seems that the ones pushing the hardest for this are the ones that will benefit from it. Not talking about you specifically bearpaw but from talking to many friends and family up there that seems to be the concensus. Adjust the season not the size if there is really an issue with too few deer and the herd not recovering. I'm a little skeptical that is the motivation though.
yes there was a shortage of mature bucks this year. in '07, there was no shortage.... but this year?.... the problem is, most people can't tell a 3 year old (not mature) from a 6 year old. i have seen plenty of 3 year olds in the130-140" range..... to most people, that is a monster and they will assume it is fully mature (and probably be convinced they saw a booner ;)). how many times have you talked with people that have a decently sized bodied deer on the ground and they are swearing that it s a old buck that is in the decline when infact it is just a healthy 3-4 year old? i have seen that plenty of times. conversely, i have over 40 sets of sheds that are from 5 and 6 year olds that are in the 130-140" range. people far too often judge an animal's age by the size of his rack.... and most people aren't all that good at judging horns..... let alone an animals age through skeletal and facial features. lets not forget.... the hansen buck was a 3 year old.
what i don't understand is people saying there are too many deer even in a "banner" year. for instance, last year WI killed over 400,000 deer..... that is not estimated 400,000 animals in the state..... that is deer harvested!!! that is roughly 4 times the total whitetails estimated to be living in WA.
if there are too many, Ma Nature will take care of it, be it weather, predation, or disease. the key is how fast the herd bounces back and a poor buck to doe ratio is the worst answer for it.
i know some people don't think that regularly killing does is a good idea...... i was on that bandwagon until i started hunting the midwest and don't kid yourself, WI,IA, and ND winters are consistently brutal..... not an every 5 year thing. but they have it completely figured out but trying to convince guys out here that have never been to the midwest to kill does when total herd numbers are down is next to impossible..... i think you truly have to see it and how it has worked to believe it.
bottom line is that the land will always have a "carrying capacity" and it doesn't care if the number is a buck to doe ratio 1:30 or 1:1. so lets say that we have 10,000 deer each in two units that is hit with a massive winter and a 50% kill rates. one unit was managed for 5-8 years under an "earn a buck" program and has a 1:3 buck to doe ratio (3333 bucks 6667 does) the other has a 1:10 ratio (1000 bucks to 9000 does). after a 50% kill off, unit 1 has 1666 bucks and 3333 does while unit two has 500 bucks to 4500 does.
it has been shown that most whitetails have the capacity to breed on average 5-7 does/ season.
in unit 1 that means all the does were bred and more than 3333 fawns should be born (assuming 100% survival rate)
in unit 2 only 50-70% of the does would be bred. lets call it 60% or 2700 fawns with a 100% survival.
*****year two shows that unit 1 now has 8333 deer with a healthy buck to doe ratio while unit two has 7700 deer and the buck to doe ratio is still out of whack.
lets say you have a second back to back winter with another 50% kill.... assuming that the buck to doe ratio quatas were kept in check after that year's hunting season and we went off the year prior's breeding buck and does.
unit 1 would have another 100% or 3333 does bred while unit two had another 60% or 2700 bred does.
now winter hits and half the deer die. 4167 in unit one survive and 3850 survive in unit 2. now take half of the bred does made it and add their fawns to the population.
unit one how has 5833 total deer (4167 with 1666 fawns)
unit two now has 5200 total deer (3850 with 1350 fawns)
now obviously this is an example and would only happen in a perfect world but it is dang close to what actually happens in the midwest. throw in some QDM and now you have more bucks making it through the hunting season since they get wiser with age.
not only that, but where there is a healthy buck to doe ratio, only the strongest bucks breed since competition is SO high to breed.
i am not sure how many of you get to hunt the midwest on a regular basis, but the ones that do can attest to just how aggressive the older bucks are during the rut. the strongest bucks get the does and they pass on those strong genes to the fawns.
not only that, but the overall health of the herd is better, the number of buck (and big buck) sightings is WAY up during the season and both deer and hunters are happy.
there is no secret.... or atleast the secret is getting out that eastern WA has some big deer.... we have the potential to have A LOT of great deer but the management is just not here.... partly because most believe that killing does (even when total deer numbers are down) will further hurt the herd.... that just isn't the case and the number of deer will actually grow as the buck to doe ratio is brought back into line. in times of crisis (more fawns will result the following year than a unit with a poor buck to doe ratio and the number of bucks seen during hunting season won't seem so bleak.....this grows exponentially with each passing year if those ratios are kept inline.
again, there is a carrying capacity for all tracts of land and it doesn't discriminate between the sex of the animal. but when there are so many does, that only 50-70% are reproducing each year, that means another 30-50% of those animals could have been bucks if the ratios were kept in check meaning more fawns born the following year. as mentioned before, our brutal weather patterns are indeed cyclical..... so when do we as a state finally decide to get the buck to doe ratio in line?..... i doubt Ma Nature is going to open up a window especially for us to do it.... we just have to suck it up and do it.
how many times have you heard the same phrase "i sure didn't see many does with fawns this year?" now ask yourself why? the yotes and the cats aren't totally responsible for it...... we are partly to blame...... besides, the number of yotes and cats come and go with the number of deer..... again, "carrying capacity." ;)
Post by: Decker on December 27, 2010, 11:32:39 PM
We had two hard winters in a row before this last mild one and there was no shortage of mature bucks this year
Of course there wasn't. Two hard winters in a row like that will take out a great of deer. The ones that survived had to be the toughest of the tough. One of the reasons we're seeing so many big bucks taken this year is because they had the genetics to survive those harsh winters. I'm just hoping that we'll see an uptrend in the genetics of our area as a whole due to this, i.e. a lot of the lesser genetics didn't make it and now all of these great bucks we're seeing are doing the breeding. :twocents:
Post by: gjbruny on December 27, 2010, 11:44:19 PM
One of the reasons we're seeing so many big bucks taken this year is because they had the genetics to survive those harsh winters.
more than genes, we have to be honest with ourselves....... the two BIGGEST reasons a number of good deer were taken are (most importantly) we had a record snowfall in the month of November which concentrated the deer around food sources..... and the other is more and more hunters each year set their stands right over bait...... this year, the two went hand in hand.
the midwest has their baiting laws dialed as well. example...... WI= 2gallons or less of bait on a pile at any given time. IA= no bait.
WI + IA + QDM + sound buck to doe ratios=..... WORLD CLASS HUNTING. ;)
Post by: bearpaw on December 28, 2010, 12:36:31 AM
This is a compound problem becuase when antlerless harvest is reduced it forces a greater percentage of hunters to hunt bucks. This has a negative effect on ratios. By reducing buck harvest, whether by reduced season or by antler restriction, buck/doe ratios will benefit.
I have attended numerous meetings in NE WA over many years on this antler restriction and to be honest, I used to oppose it. I felt it would have a negative impact. However given the current herd numbers something must be done. When asked if people would prefer shorter seasons or an antler restriction, more people were in favor of an antler restriction than limiting season lenght, but in all honesty either option can have the same positive effect on buck/doe ratios.
FYI - I really don't care which happens, but something really needs to happen and the antler restrictions seems to be the more popular option with the people I know. One thing I have noticed is that some people from out of the area really don't care what happens to the deer in NE WA, they are only concerned with being able to come hunting here when they fail to kill a deer somewhere else. While I don't blame anyone for having that attitude and I do understand everyone is entitled to hunt here, I want to remind those people that they will kill more deer if we all try to properly manage the herd in the best way possible.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 28, 2010, 01:08:40 AM
Post by: gjbruny on December 28, 2010, 06:45:10 AM
i know that here in my home state, talking about killing does even when total deer herds are down is about as effective as beating my head against a wall when trying to convince people that we DO have too many does compared to bucks. i sometimes wish i had an unlimited amount of financial resources so that i can take many of the more staunch supporters and/or managers of our "status quo" out to Iowa or Wisconsin to see what a healthy buck to do ratio is, and just how many BIG mature deer are seen on a regular basis. so for now, i just agree to disagree and if we as a state run our animals into the ground...... then so be it. maybe then people will realize that you can't expect different results when you keep using the same tactics.
if guys want to keep their season lengths, i think that a great way to get harvest numbers down yet keep the same # of days in the field would be to eliminate baiting...... make guys actually learn how to hunt again and let the newer hunters learn to hunt for the first time. if baiting were outlawed for a period of time, we would come away with more animals, better hunters that have more of an understanding of the animal they hunt, and more time to hunt. couple no baiting with antler restrictions and it would be a win-win.
Post by: whacker1 on December 28, 2010, 08:52:23 AM
For purposes of seeing what the majority thinks, I started a poll on the subject.
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on December 28, 2010, 09:12:22 AM
Quote
so that i can take many of the more staunch supporters and/or managers of our "status quo" out to Iowa or Wisconsin to see what a healthy buck to do ratio is, and just how many BIG mature deer are seen on a regular basis
Now as far as this goes you also need to take into consideration that while Wisconsin and Iowa have big mature deer regularly, they also dont have as many predators working against them ie. wolves, bears, cougars, coyotes. Then couple that with harsh winters where the mountains can get completely hammered and also the tough rugged thick terrain that our state has. You put all that together and it doesnt bode well for the game. I agree Washington could be doing a better management job, but the fact is we don't have flatter terrain where its virtually wide open rolling hills. With corn and alfalfa fields at practically every corner that help the deer easily fatten up and provide good genetics for antler growth. All I'm saying is you cant really compare what theyre doing in the midwest with what we do here.
I agree we should completely do away with baiting. In my opinion theres no place for that in hunting. Also I saw it mentioned on here somewhere before but I think they should ban using cams during hunting season. I mean whatever happened to the thrill of going hunting and not knowing what you might see and where you might see it. I know using them doesnt guarantee success but I'm a little old school in the fact I like having a little bit of mystery in the hunt. I think these days too many people rely on baiting and electronics and have forgotten about the very basics of hunting.
Post by: grundy53 on December 28, 2010, 09:44:09 AM
we fly quite a bit...... i can tell you that our buck to doe ratios ARE out of whack as a whole...... WAY more so than most think. sure some fields will have a ton of bucks in it during the summer while others primarily hold does. that is typical of summer time and how bachelor groups work. we as hunters as well as outfitters primarily focus on the bucks bulls ect and avoid the areas that hold the females (partly because we are only allowed kill bucks and bulls) so it is easy to see how sometimes perceptions can get skewed. cover hundreds of square miles in a few hours from a plane, record actual sightings and perceptions change in a real hurry......... then hunt states where there an actual healthy buck to doe ratio and it becomes REALLY clear that our state needs to get it's shnat together.
i know that here in my home state, talking about killing does even when total deer herds are down is about as effective as beating my head against a wall when trying to convince people that we DO have too many does compared to bucks. i sometimes wish i had an unlimited amount of financial resources so that i can take many of the more staunch supporters and/or managers of our "status quo" out to Iowa or Wisconsin to see what a healthy buck to do ratio is, and just how many BIG mature deer are seen on a regular basis. so for now, i just agree to disagree and if we as a state run our animals into the ground...... then so be it. maybe then people will realize that you can't expect different results when you keep using the same tactics.
if guys want to keep their season lengths, i think that a great way to get harvest numbers down yet keep the same # of days in the field would be to eliminate baiting...... make guys actually learn how to hunt again and let the newer hunters learn to hunt for the first time. if baiting were outlawed for a period of time, we would come away with more animals, better hunters that have more of an understanding of the animal they hunt, and more time to hunt. couple no baiting with antler restrictions and it would be a win-win.
like was said before... let's dump a ton of cougars, bears, coyotes, and wolves in there and take away most of the agricultural feilds and see how your herd does. That's like comparing the westsides winter kill to the eastsides. it's apples to oranges. they are 2 completley different places. :bash:. That's the answer... lets ban some more *censored* and take away more hunting practices. That should help our cause. i don't bait (except for my game cams which i pull before season), but i have absoslutely no problem with people that do. look what happened to the bear population when they banned bear baiting. i wish people would actually consider other people before they start spouting *censored* about banning other peoples hunting methods. >:( >:( :bash: :bash:
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 28, 2010, 10:04:24 AM
I know in Texas they used aircraft a lot but when I talked to the biologist in Arkansas they depended more on cameras and on ground observations because the thickness of the security cover.
My observations purely come from boots on ground (pretty much every free moment) and running cameras in 30-40 locations per year. I do indeed hone in on areas with the biggest bucks but I don't ignore the does because in the rut that is where I want to be. I can tell you have plenty of time with boots on ground yourself so I would love to get together some time and compare notes.
This is an excerpt from a 2005 article about a study of the NW Montana deer herd:
"In this case, it turns out that northwestern Montana deer hunters were right all along.
For years, these whitetail hunters resisted attempts by wildlife managers to liberalize doe hunting opportunities. In 1999, fearing that northwestern deer populations had been severely damaged by a brutal winter a few years earlier, hunters went so far as to demand a closure to the region’s doe harvest.
“No doubt about it. Hunters up here are very conservative when it comes to deer regulations,” says Dr. Alan Wood, a white-tailed deer expert in Kalispell who works as the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife mitigation coordinator.
Results from a monumental FWP study on white-tailed deer in the state’s northwestern region indicate hunters had it right. “The study suggests regulations designed to encourage doe harvest might go too far and reduce population size in years when adult doe survival is notably impacted by other types of mortality,” says Gary Dusek, another FWP whitetail expert. Wood and lead author Dusek wrote the study report, “Population Ecology of White-tailed Deer in Northwestern Montana.”
Like I said..don't get me wrong... I do take does on the last day if I don't connect on a buck I want. But I do it in areas that I believe need it. From what I have seen I don't think our herds in the mountains of Colville/Kanisku national forest need me to remove a doe.
mdbuck:
I have to disagree that baiting and more specifically trail cameras have no place in hunting. I hunted without them for years and my success rates have not improved since using them (probably gone down because I am even more selective...hard to shoot a 3 1/2 or 4 1/2 year old 140 when you know a 180 and a couple 150-160 bucks are roaming the area). To me there is still plenty of mystery... possibly even more mystery. There is nothing like having a giant on camera and never being able to cross his path during daylight to throw a little mystery into the mix. When I put up cameras or bait it's not like I can ignore the basic hunting principles/strategies that I used for the largest majority of my life.. these two things go hand in hand. If anything I have learned more about deer behavior since I started baiting and using trial cameras. I believe it has made me a better hunter than before. My biggest increase in success came 14 years ago when I moved to an area that actually had mature bucks in any real numbers.
I have no issue with people not wanting to use modern technology..I just wish people wouldn't try to force everyone else to conform to their idea of what constitutes a hunting experience. The largest majority of people using bait are whitetail bowhunters so it won't surprise me to see it go away some time in the future. I will say I can understand that argument a bit because I do believe there are times where the bucks become more nocturnal due to presence of bait and that would impact another persons hunt...in addition to it changing the deers pattern to some extent. That being said I can understand why some want it gone. I personally like that I can use it here but if I want a different experience I can go to Idaho where baiting isn't allowed. In addition to that I believe there is plenty of space left in the mountains without bait. I have some areas on public land where I don't see hunters for several miles in any direction. The real problem I have is that the majority of whitetail bowhunter use it but it will likely get banned in the future because of people who are not whitetail bowhunters...basically.. it doesn't effect them and it doesn't appeal to their idea of hunting so let's get rid of it. I wish I had the power to return the favor and ban their choice of modern gadgets/hunting methods for a couple years. Perhaps they would change their views.
Post by: grundy53 on December 28, 2010, 10:14:54 AM
GJ, I certainly don't have the aircraft census's to my advantage. I am surprised they are effective (for whitetail more so than other game animals) because of how thick the cover is. Though I am sure since our deer winter that it may make it easier to spot them.
I know in Texas they used aircraft a lot but when I talked to the biologist in Arkansas they depended more on cameras and on ground observations because the thickness of the security cover.
My observations purely come from boots on ground (pretty much every free moment) and running cameras in 30-40 locations per year. I do indeed hone in on areas with the biggest bucks but I don't ignore the does because in the rut that is where I want to be. I can tell you have plenty of time with boots on ground yourself so I would love to get together some time and compare notes.
This is an excerpt from a 2005 article about a study of the NW Montana deer herd:
"In this case, it turns out that northwestern Montana deer hunters were right all along.
For years, these whitetail hunters resisted attempts by wildlife managers to liberalize doe hunting opportunities. In 1999, fearing that northwestern deer populations had been severely damaged by a brutal winter a few years earlier, hunters went so far as to demand a closure to the region’s doe harvest.
“No doubt about it. Hunters up here are very conservative when it comes to deer regulations,” says Dr. Alan Wood, a white-tailed deer expert in Kalispell who works as the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife mitigation coordinator.
Results from a monumental FWP study on white-tailed deer in the state’s northwestern region indicate hunters had it right. “The study suggests regulations designed to encourage doe harvest might go too far and reduce population size in years when adult doe survival is notably impacted by other types of mortality,” says Gary Dusek, another FWP whitetail expert. Wood and lead author Dusek wrote the study report, “Population Ecology of White-tailed Deer in Northwestern Montana.”
Like I said..don't get me wrong... I do take does on the last day if I don't connect on a buck I want. But I do it in areas that I believe need it. From what I have seen I don't think our herds in the mountains of Colville/Kanisku national forest need me to remove a doe.
mdbuck:
I have to disagree that baiting and more specifically trail cameras have no place in hunting. I hunted without them for years and my success rates have not improved since using them (probably gone down because I am even more selective...hard to shoot a 3 1/2 or 4 1/2 year old 140 when you know a 180 and a couple 150-160 bucks are roaming the area). To me there is still plenty of mystery... possibly even more mystery. There is nothing like having a giant on camera and never being able to cross his path during daylight to throw a little mystery into the mix. When I put up cameras or bait it's not like I can ignore the basic hunting principles/strategies that I used for the largest majority of my life.. these two things go hand in hand. If anything I have learned more about deer behavior since I started baiting and using trial cameras. I believe it has made me a better hunter than before. My biggest increase in success came 14 years ago when I moved to an area that actually had mature bucks in any real numbers.
I have no issue with people not wanting to use modern technology..I just wish people wouldn't try to force everyone else to conform to their idea of what constitutes a hunting experience. The largest majority of people using bait are whitetail bowhunters so it won't surprise me to see it go away some time in the future. I will say I can understand that argument a bit because I do believe there are times where the bucks become more nocturnal due to presence of bait and that would impact another persons hunt...in addition to it changing the deers pattern to some extent. That being said I can understand why some want it gone. I personally like that I can use it here but if I want a different experience I can go to Idaho where baiting isn't allowed. In addition to that I believe there is plenty of space left in the mountains without bait. I have some areas on public land where I don't see hunters for several miles in any direction. The real problem I have is that the majority of whitetail bowhunter use it but it will likely get banned in the future because of people who are not whitetail bowhunters...basically.. it doesn't effect them and it doesn't appeal to their idea of hunting so let's get rid of it. I wish I had the power to return the favor and ban their choice of modern gadgets/hunting methods for a couple years. Perhaps they would change their views.
couldn't have said it any better. :tup:
Post by: BeeMan on December 28, 2010, 10:41:07 AM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on December 28, 2010, 10:54:06 AM
I understand what you are saying and honestly I don't have any problems with what you do and don't do. Everything that I said about bait and cams is MY opinion. I'm not telling anybody what to do. I choose not to use bait and cams because I don't need them. This is america and we have the right to do what we want if we so choose. Sorry if you were misled by my post.
Quote
I hunted without them for years and my success rates have not improved since using them (probably gone down because I am even more selective
So let me ask you a question if you don't mind. If the above statement you made is true then why even spend the time and money if your results are nill or worse? I mean after hunting an area for years wouldnt you have a pretty good understanding of the geography and where the game concentrate. Just curious.
Post by: grundy53 on December 28, 2010, 11:00:41 AM
dbhawthorne:
I understand what you are saying and honestly I don't have any problems with what you do and don't do. Everything that I said about bait and cams is MY opinion. I'm not telling anybody what to do. I choose not to use bait and cams because I don't need them. This is america and we have the right to do what we want if we so choose. Sorry if you were misled by my post.QuoteI hunted without them for years and my success rates have not improved since using them (probably gone down because I am even more selective
So let me ask you a question if you don't mind. If the above statement you made is true then why even spend the time and money if your results are nill or worse? I mean after hunting an area for years wouldnt you have a pretty good understanding of the geography and where the game concentrate. Just curious.
i believe he is stating that since he see's larger deer on his cameras it makes it harder to pull the trigger on a 140 buck that he would have shot with out hesitation pre camera. it's not so much not knowing where bucks are in general, it's just harder to settle for what used to be acceptable. as the saying goes... ignorance is bliss.... :tung:
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on December 28, 2010, 12:02:33 PM
So now we have to result to name calling huh? :dunno: I guess that just goes to show how mature you are. I hunt for meat and not trophies. Hunting has never been about trophies for me.
Post by: quadrafire on December 28, 2010, 12:05:15 PM
Grundy::dunno:
So now we have to result to name calling huh? :dunno: I guess that just goes to show how mature you are. I hunt for meat and not trophies. Hunting has never been about trophies for me.
Post by: grundy53 on December 28, 2010, 12:09:26 PM
Grundy:
So now we have to result to name calling huh? :dunno: I guess that just goes to show how mature you are. I hunt for meat and not trophies. Hunting has never been about trophies for me.
What are you talking about? :dunno: "ingnorance is bliss" wasn't directed at you at all. i was merely pointing out how sometimes it's nice to shoot a smaller deer and not know there is a bigger one out there cause it might drive you nuts and take away from the trophy. Hence the hunter would be ignorent of any larger bucks being around. it wasn't directed at you at all. But thank you for letting me know how mature i am. :rolleyes:
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 28, 2010, 01:12:57 PM
dbhawthorne:
I understand what you are saying and honestly I don't have any problems with what you do and don't do. Everything that I said about bait and cams is MY opinion. I'm not telling anybody what to do. I choose not to use bait and cams because I don't need them. This is america and we have the right to do what we want if we so choose. Sorry if you were misled by my post.QuoteI hunted without them for years and my success rates have not improved since using them (probably gone down because I am even more selective
So let me ask you a question if you don't mind. If the above statement you made is true then why even spend the time and money if your results are nill or worse? I mean after hunting an area for years wouldnt you have a pretty good understanding of the geography and where the game concentrate. Just curious.
I understand and 100% agree on holding an opinion. The issue arises when we go to the voting blocks and our opinion takes away the rights of the minority simply for the reason that it doens't appeal to our idea of what hunting is about (which we both know happens). I know the future of baiting in this state is not good and it's just a matter of time before it is a distant memory. However, if you took just whitetail bowhunters (the primary user group of this hunting method) I believe it would be supported by an overwhelming majority. Before I hunted using this method I shared the same opinions as you have so I completely understand. My view on hunting rights changed as a whole after I started using this method because it was the first time I have ever used a method that was heavily under attack by fellow hunters. Now I have a completely different outlook on hunting methods whether I use/like them or not. The use of dog's in the south is something I used to hate (and it definitely impacted my hunt). I would have happily voted against it in the past...not anymore.
On another note...despite the fact that I now bait...I have my own issues with baiting...primarily the effects it can have on deer making it through the winter. A deer's gastrointestinal tract is very sensitive and an unbaited deer in the big woods will go through changes preparing it for the low quality food that it eats for survival during the winter. Baiting can prohibit a deers system from making these changes and in rare cases it can actually kill a deer. I believe it only happens in rare cases because I think most deer do not gorge themself on that type of food source during the winter. However, it is defintiely something to consider that appeals to my senses much more than losing the right to bait becaue it doesn't appeal to the non-users view of a hunting experience.
My results with baiting/cameras definitely aren't worse when it come to seeing 140 and under bucks. I would say they are slightly better than neal for seeing bucs of that caliber and pretty much neal for seeing bucks (while hunting) that are larger than 140's. I like using them because it does give me an undeniable advantage in finding and hunting "the one". By "the one" I mean a personal best or very unique animal. I can't hunt them unless I find them and there is no doubt it allows me to find them. The second advantage it gives me is it (sometimes) allows me to narrow in on "the one's" core area faster than I ever could before. For instance before cameras I would glass constantly (still do) and I would find a handful of 140 class bucks and perhaps one 150-160 class buck (finding 2 of that caliber was a great year for me personally). I would set stands and I would adjust throughout the season as necessary until I found a bucks core area. Now I can cover way more territory and find more "the one's" than ever before. I have found having a single "the one" greatly reduces the chance of ending the season with a tag filled so it is good to have at least 2-3 options. Finally, a camera during the season let's me know if a buck I have been hunting has dropped off the map. For instance a big buck I was concentrating efforts on late this year dropped off the map several days prior to late bow. I never saw him again. I was able to adjust and hunt other "the one's" accordingly. I was also able to use my cameras to continue scouting the area for him while I was hunting other areas. Perhaps I could have located him a mile or two down the road (didn't happen this year). I am not denying the advantage in locating and learning the habits of a whitetail...the advantage is real and the learning outcome is great. I have lived, eaten and breathed (okay obssessed ) whitetail and only whitetail since I was a kid. In the few years I have used cameras with bait my learning outcome has accelerated at a much faster rate than at any other time in my hunting life.
Thanks for the good discussion
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 28, 2010, 01:25:40 PM
Grundy:
So now we have to result to name calling huh? :dunno: I guess that just goes to show how mature you are. I hunt for meat and not trophies. Hunting has never been about trophies for me.
I dont' think he was name calling when he said "ignorance is bliss". He wasn't talking about you...if anything he was talking about me/himself/others...prior to using cameras. Prior to using cameras many of us would have shot a beautiful 140's buck becasue we may think it is the biggest buck in our area...sometimes cameras reveal giant bucks that you never see while scouting with other methods.
Hunting for me is not about the trophy or the meat (I can buy meat at the grocery store for much cheaper than what 99% of us hunters spend on hunting); it is about the experience. My dad always said "You can't eat the horns"... However, I have often (not always) found a close correlation between the antler size and body size. Bigger antlers often means more venison. I love venison. I have also found that big antlers generally enhances the experience for most (it does for me...though my smallest buck (first buck) is still one of my favorites). I have met very few hunters in my lifetime that wouldn't prefer to kill a big buck if given the option. The difference is that we all have things we want from our experience and we individually tailor our priorities to our desires. I actually think it's one of the great things about hunting.
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on December 28, 2010, 01:26:30 PM
And to Grundy I made a mistake and I'm sorry. I guess I didn't read your post correctly. I'll head to the bathroom and change my pad now. Please accept my apology. Last thing I want to do is get into it with anyone here.
Post by: grundy53 on December 28, 2010, 01:37:23 PM
Well thank you...I believe your answer sums up my question nicely. Not sure what its gonna take but I hope one day hunting in this state can get back to the way it was in the 80's and early 90's. Sorry if I came off with a bad attitude in my posts. I wasn't and never will bash anyone for the methods they use. One thing for sure is I usually never sit on the fence about an issue.
And to Grundy I made a mistake and I'm sorry. I guess I didn't read your post correctly. I'll head to the bathroom and change my pad now. Please accept my apology. Last thing I want to do is get into it with anyone here.
no worries. we've all done it. lol ;)
Post by: grundy53 on December 28, 2010, 01:38:12 PM
Grundy:
So now we have to result to name calling huh? :dunno: I guess that just goes to show how mature you are. I hunt for meat and not trophies. Hunting has never been about trophies for me.
I dont' think he was name calling when he said "ignorance is bliss". He wasn't talking about you...if anything he was talking about me/himself/others...prior to using cameras. Prior to using cameras many of us would have shot a beautiful 140's buck becasue we may think it is the biggest buck in our area...sometimes cameras reveal giant bucks that you never see while scouting with other methods.
Hunting for me is not about the trophy or the meat (I can buy meat at the grocery store for much cheaper than what 99% of what hunters spend on hunting); it is about the experience. My dad always said "You can't eat the horns"... However, I have often (not always) found a close correlation between the antler size and body size. Bigger antlers often means more venison. I love venison. I have also found that big antlers generally enhances the experience for most (it does for me...though my smalles buck (first buck) is still one of my favorites). I have met very few hunters in my lifetime that wouldn't prefer to kill a big buck if given the option. The difference is that we all have things we want from our experience and we individually tailor our priorities to our desires. I actually think it's one of the great things about hunting.
spot on :tup:
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 28, 2010, 01:56:36 PM
Well thank you...I believe your answer sums up my question nicely. Not sure what its gonna take but I hope one day hunting in this state can get back to the way it was in the 80's and early 90's. Sorry if I came off with a bad attitude in my posts. I wasn't and never will bash anyone for the methods they use. One thing for sure is I usually never sit on the fence about an issue.
And to Grundy I made a mistake and I'm sorry. I guess I didn't read your post correctly. I'll head to the bathroom and change my pad now. Please accept my apology. Last thing I want to do is get into it with anyone here.
I really wish I could have had the opportunity to hunt here in those days. I didn't get up here until 97. I love it here. It's where I belong.
I don't think you came off with a bad attitude. I think these topics/differences in opinion are great things to discuss and I think it is hard not to be passionate about something we love.
Post by: boneaddict on December 28, 2010, 02:17:27 PM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on December 28, 2010, 02:33:34 PM
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 28, 2010, 02:55:57 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 28, 2010, 05:42:44 PM
THere are whitetails out there that I bet have never been seen by man. Now with the invention of the trail cam that has tipped the scales. I bet there are STILL ones out there that are eluding you/us. They are not like Muledeer whatsoever. I still think the ground swallows them up and they only come out a week or two a year to play. :)
I think that's a fact.
Post by: Hornseeker on December 29, 2010, 06:04:27 AM
Over the line in Idaho there was a 212ish nontyp killed with triple droppers last year, poached at night... BEAST... He made it a LONG time before anyone saw him... and they only saw him when they were being illegal.... trespassing.... and at night...
Post by: boneaddict on December 29, 2010, 06:16:19 AM
Post by: TeacherMan on December 29, 2010, 06:56:11 AM
Have you heard anything on that 200 buck yet Ernie? Whether it was typical or not?
a 212 from 3 years ago in the NE, I got a 189. I love that deep timber...
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 29, 2010, 08:27:38 AM
I agree, look at that 187 buck from this year...they had trail cams up and never saw him!
Over the line in Idaho there was a 212ish nontyp killed with triple droppers last year, poached at night... BEAST... He made it a LONG time before anyone saw him... and they only saw him when they were being illegal.... trespassing.... and at night...
Is there a thread/photo on the 212ish buck?
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 29, 2010, 08:29:46 AM
Have you heard anything on that 200 buck yet Ernie? Whether it was typical or not?
I love that deep timber...
:yeah:
I will second that. Our deep timber whitetail hunting is awesome!
Post by: high country on December 29, 2010, 09:11:35 AM
THere are whitetails out there that I bet have never been seen by man. Now with the invention of the trail cam that has tipped the scales. I bet there are STILL ones out there that are eluding you/us. They are not like Muledeer whatsoever. I still think the ground swallows them up and they only come out a week or two a year to play. :)
one of my good friends lives in a whitetail heave and he has killed plenty of good bucks in his backyard. I was up a couple weeks ago watching moose and a whitey jumped up fro the draw not 200yds from his house. it was a 170ish buck that was way wide and massy. I described it to him and he said he has never seen it. he spends his whole life hiding.....it must suck.
Post by: huntnnw on December 29, 2010, 12:04:09 PM
Post by: gjbruny on December 29, 2010, 10:26:53 PM
Bruny you make some valid points but you have to remember that Washington for one has one of the highest hunter to game ratios in the nation. That doesnt exactly help herd numbers increase.Quoteso that i can take many of the more staunch supporters and/or managers of our "status quo" out to Iowa or Wisconsin to see what a healthy buck to do ratio is, and just how many BIG mature deer are seen on a regular basis
Now as far as this goes you also need to take into consideration that while Wisconsin and Iowa have big mature deer regularly, they also dont have as many predators working against them ie. wolves, bears, cougars, coyotes. Then couple that with harsh winters where the mountains can get completely hammered and also the tough rugged thick terrain that our state has. You put all that together and it doesnt bode well for the game. I agree Washington could be doing a better management job, but the fact is we don't have flatter terrain where its virtually wide open rolling hills. With corn and alfalfa fields at practically every corner that help the deer easily fatten up and provide good genetics for antler growth. All I'm saying is you cant really compare what theyre doing in the midwest with what we do here.
I agree we should completely do away with baiting. In my opinion theres no place for that in hunting. Also I saw it mentioned on here somewhere before but I think they should ban using cams during hunting season. I mean whatever happened to the thrill of going hunting and not knowing what you might see and where you might see it. I know using them doesnt guarantee success but I'm a little old school in the fact I like having a little bit of mystery in the hunt. I think these days too many people rely on baiting and electronics and have forgotten about the very basics of hunting.
no question about our hunter to deer ratio and that is a great point. having said that, wisconsin is a great example of predators... i'd say their coyote population is as "healthy" as aours or more so.... the do have bears and enough of them that residents can hunt them...... and they have MORE wolves than we do..... that is, if you believe the WDFW's claimed wolf numbers. ;). the only thing they don't have is the cats (which definately is a factor).
as far as terrain goes, you are right, most is flat but "buffalo Co." is known as "bluff country".... the hills aren't nearly as tall as ours (maybe 500 feet max) but it is as steep as anything in north idaho and then some. the timber is THICK and brush is equally comparable to N. idaho and NE WA (but has some of the nastiest thornes you have ever been through). the wide open terrain and relatively flat comment is a little closer to true of IA..... but not WI. infact, i'd put the terrain in buff county much closer to what we have here than what most people think of when they invision what the midwest is like.
durring the winter months, the corn has been cut months prior so it is no longer a food source.... they certainly do have alfalfa but i don't often see deer hitting alfalfa fields once the snow is over 8-10" deep. i have asked the guys out there several times about winter kills and they definately do get it.... no question about it...... and the bad thing is, they don't have the 1500-2500ft elevation changes that we have that allows our deer to head to low ground to get out of the deeper snow..... it is deep everywhere. having said that, the deer still do funnel down into the lower ground and in harsh winters, it is a virtual buffet for the yotes and wolves there just like it can be here. wisconsin winters are much longer and much harder than ours even in hard winters like '08. 2ft of consistent snow on the ground is the norm there.... not the 6" for 2 weeks then melt, 10" for a week then melt, 10" stays for a month then melts ect. ect. when winter hits back there, it stays till spring.
also, when i talk to the guys back in the midwest about how they went about introducing and getting the general public on board with killing does and making them understand that herds thrive with a good buck to doe ratio (even in times of BAD winter kills), they say that they were met with the same resistance that i see even on this thread..... people see it as a big risk instead of good science and wildlife management. they dealt with that resistance for years before a single county gave it a try. when they saw the results.... well.... you know where i am going with this. ;)
trust me, i was on the same side of the fence before i saw what multiple states have done and all have had success.
the thing is, we can't expect different results if we aren't willing to try different tactics.
Post by: gjbruny on December 29, 2010, 10:51:56 PM
like was said before... let's dump a ton of cougars, bears, coyotes, and wolves in there and take away most of the agricultural fields and see how your herd does. That's like comparing the westsides winter kill to the eastsides. it's apples to oranges. they are 2 completely different places. :bash:.
see my post above on this one...... it is more like what we have here than you think.... and the winters are worse.
you ever been there?
That's the answer... lets ban some more *censored* and take away more hunting practices. That should help our cause. i don't bait (except for my game cams which i pull before season), but i have absolutely no problem with people that do. look what happened to the bear population when they banned bear baiting. i wish people would actually consider other people before they start spouting *censored* about banning other peoples hunting methods. >:( >:( :bash: :bash:
holy smokes, Turbo..... take a breath. taking away baiting has nothing to do with "our cause." if you go back and reread my post, i said we should use it as a tool to get our herds back up to snuff. if you took it out of context, i apologize. but i do stand behind my comment that a lot of newer hunters that i see these days truly wouldn't know how to HUNT whitetails if baiting was removed (which could help the herds recover) and a lot of seasoned hunters wouldn't be as consistently successful (which would help the herds recover)..... you can say what you want, but if you are being honest, you know that statement is true.
i have hunted over baits before and have killed 3 deer in 3 different seasons over them. it isn't my cup of tea but i won't bash somebody for doing it..... that would make me a hypocrite. i still use big piles of corn and/or alfalfa for my "buck inventory cams."
i also said that i would support removing baits during hunting season (even in front of cameras) as well as even taking trail cams out of the equation DURING the season..... and i am a trail camera junkie and enjoy them a close second to actually patterning and killing big deer.
what i am getting at is.... i am willing to sacrifice some things that I enjoy for the sake of the herd.... not trying to "take away anything" from hunters (because i am one).... remember, i am on your side..... not PETA's. and if giving up something for a short time means we get more days in the field, i am all over it..... if we stay on the same track that we are now, we'll lose days in the field.... you can bet your arse on that one.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 29, 2010, 11:03:45 PM
Bruny you make some valid points but you have to remember that Washington for one has one of the highest hunter to game ratios in the nation. That doesnt exactly help herd numbers increase.Quoteso that i can take many of the more staunch supporters and/or managers of our "status quo" out to Iowa or Wisconsin to see what a healthy buck to do ratio is, and just how many BIG mature deer are seen on a regular basis
Now as far as this goes you also need to take into consideration that while Wisconsin and Iowa have big mature deer regularly, they also dont have as many predators working against them ie. wolves, bears, cougars, coyotes. Then couple that with harsh winters where the mountains can get completely hammered and also the tough rugged thick terrain that our state has. You put all that together and it doesnt bode well for the game. I agree Washington could be doing a better management job, but the fact is we don't have flatter terrain where its virtually wide open rolling hills. With corn and alfalfa fields at practically every corner that help the deer easily fatten up and provide good genetics for antler growth. All I'm saying is you cant really compare what theyre doing in the midwest with what we do here.
I agree we should completely do away with baiting. In my opinion theres no place for that in hunting. Also I saw it mentioned on here somewhere before but I think they should ban using cams during hunting season. I mean whatever happened to the thrill of going hunting and not knowing what you might see and where you might see it. I know using them doesnt guarantee success but I'm a little old school in the fact I like having a little bit of mystery in the hunt. I think these days too many people rely on baiting and electronics and have forgotten about the very basics of hunting.
no question about our hunter to deer ratio and that is a great point. having said that, wisconsin is a great example of predators... i'd say their coyote population is as "healthy" as aours or more so.... the do have bears and enough of them that residents can hunt them...... and they have MORE wolves than we do..... that is, if you believe the WDFW's claimed wolf numbers. ;). the only thing they don't have is the cats (which definately is a factor).
as far as terrain goes, you are right, most is flat but "buffalo Co." is known as "bluff country".... the hills aren't nearly as tall as ours (maybe 500 feet max) but it is as steep as anything in north idaho and then some. the timber is THICK and brush is equally comparable to N. idaho and NE WA (but has some of the nastiest thornes you have ever been through). the wide open terrain and relatively flat comment is a little closer to true of IA..... but not WI. infact, i'd put the terrain in buff county much closer to what we have here than what most people think of when they invision what the midwest is like.
durring the winter months, the corn has been cut months prior so it is no longer a food source.... they certainly do have alfalfa but i don't often see deer hitting alfalfa fields once the snow is over 8-10" deep. i have asked the guys out there several times about winter kills and they definately do get it.... no question about it...... and the bad thing is, they don't have the 1500-2500ft elevation changes that we have that allows our deer to head to low ground to get out of the deeper snow..... it is deep everywhere. having said that, the deer still do funnel down into the lower ground and in harsh winters, it is a virtual buffet for the yotes and wolves there just like it can be here. wisconsin winters are much longer and much harder than ours even in hard winters like '08. 2ft of consistent snow on the ground is the norm there.... not the 6" for 2 weeks then melt, 10" for a week then melt, 10" stays for a month then melts ect. ect. when winter hits back there, it stays till spring.
also, when i talk to the guys back in the midwest about how they went about introducing and getting the general public on board with killing does and making them understand that herds thrive with a good buck to doe ratio (even in times of BAD winter kills), they say that they were met with the same resistance that i see even on this thread..... people see it as a big risk instead of good science and wildlife management. they dealt with that resistance for years before a single county gave it a try. when they saw the results.... well.... you know where i am going with this. ;)
trust me, i was on the same side of the fence before i saw what multiple states have done and all have had success.
the thing is, we can't expect different results if we aren't willing to try different tactics.
GJ...good info... Aside from balancing buck to doe ratios (which is one of the reasons for increased doe harvest) one of the primary reason WI and many other midwest states are increasing doe harvest is because they are trying to lower the population of their herds. When WI instituted earn-a-buck and extended season their reason to the hunters were the fact that deer numbers were too high. Increased doe harvest = lower deer populations...not our goal. I do agree our herd numbers will continually bounce up and down but killing more does will not speed up the herds recovery.
What GMU's are you seeing a huge buck/doe ratio imbalance in our herds? Don't get me wrong I notice it on a select properties in various GMU's but overall I see a buck to doe ratio of 1:1 or 1:2...both of which are very desirable. I do have some properties where it seems to be closer to 1:5/6. Those are the properties I hunt on the last day of the season if I haven't filled my tag with a mature buck. I have hunted heavily managed properties across the nation with worse buck/doe ratios than I see here in WA (generally speaking).
Kentucky has a law where they allow private landowners to take as many does as they deem necessary and it has had great results.
I will agree that perhaps more control could be given to landowners and perhaps if the public lands were imbalanced they could assess that and hand out a determined amount of doe tags for those areas.
Post by: gjbruny on December 29, 2010, 11:08:24 PM
This is an excerpt from a 2005 article about a study of the NW Montana deer herd:
"In this case, it turns out that northwestern Montana deer hunters were right all along.
For years, these whitetail hunters resisted attempts by wildlife managers to liberalize doe hunting opportunities. In 1999, fearing that northwestern deer populations had been severely damaged by a brutal winter a few years earlier, hunters went so far as to demand a closure to the region’s doe harvest.
“No doubt about it. Hunters up here are very conservative when it comes to deer regulations,” says Dr. Alan Wood, a white-tailed deer expert in Kalispell who works as the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife mitigation coordinator.
Results from a monumental FWP study on white-tailed deer in the state’s northwestern region indicate hunters had it right. “The study suggests regulations designed to encourage doe harvest might go too far and reduce population size in years when adult doe survival is notably impacted by other types of mortality,” says Gary Dusek, another FWP whitetail expert. Wood and lead author Dusek wrote the study report, “Population Ecology of White-tailed Deer in Northwestern Montana.”
Like I said..don't get me wrong... I do take does on the last day if I don't connect on a buck I want. But I do it in areas that I believe need it. From what I have seen I don't think our herds in the mountains of Colville/Kanisku national forest need me to remove a doe.
i used to hunt MT quite often and if i had to make a choice to hunt trophy bucks here (in N.E. WA) or over in montana (you could pick the spot for me).... i'd choose here any day of the week..... even though what we have, and what they have is very very similar in relationship to trophy potential and buck to doe ratios....... and "popular oppinion" on sound herd management.
the biggest issue is.... to do it right, things would truly have to be micro managed. our state is a perfect example as to the "why" of it.... we have everything from sub-tropical rainforests, to alpine forrests, to high desert..... no one set of rules would or could apply to the state, half the state...... or in some cases, even a single GMU..... but managing on that scale requires some dough that i don't think the "powers that be" would allocate to wildlife during these times.... even though the wildlife is a source of revenue.... both for state and privately owned intities... again.... mismangement... but i guess thats a topic for a different thread. ;)
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 29, 2010, 11:11:22 PM
I 100% agree with everything you just posted.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 29, 2010, 11:16:39 PM
The link below is to an article from Jan 10 on just how happy hunters are with the management of the herd in WI
http://www.nbc15.com/state/headlines/78093777.html (http://www.nbc15.com/state/headlines/78093777.html)
On another note I do think one of the worse mistakes a game department can make is to listen primarily to public opinion on "how" to manage the herd. Like you said before.. the state should be micromanaged.
They figured this out in Germany long ago. They have managers for various regions and those managers had better meet their conservation goals or repercussions will follow.
Post by: SirSpencer on December 29, 2010, 11:19:16 PM
They figured this out in Germany long ago. They have managers for various regions and those managers had better meet their conservation goals or repercussions will follow.
That would be a very desirable system for us because of our diverse terrain.
Post by: gjbruny on December 29, 2010, 11:22:11 PM
They have managers for various regions and those managers had better meet their conservation goals or repercussions will follow.
boy i would sure hope so..... considering how much time a single hunter has to wait/put in just to draw for the opportunity to get ground from the nation to hunt...... and then HOW MUCH MONEY that individual has to pay for that "leased" ground if they do draw (makes our non-res fees look very appealing :chuckle:). absolutely crazy!!! and sad at the same time.
Post by: gjbruny on December 29, 2010, 11:23:21 PM
This thread went in a direction i never imagined. Got a little heated for a bit there.
i was just thinking that very same thing.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 29, 2010, 11:29:38 PM
i have hunted over baits before and have killed 3 deer in 3 different seasons over them. it isn't my cup of tea but i won't bash somebody for doing it..... that would make me a hypocrite. i still use big piles of corn and/or alfalfa for my "buck inventory cams."
I thought the deer you shot this year was baited?
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 29, 2010, 11:30:35 PM
They have managers for various regions and those managers had better meet their conservation goals or repercussions will follow.
boy i would sure hope so..... considering how much time a single hunter has to wait/put in just to draw for the opportunity to get ground from the nation to hunt...... and then HOW MUCH MONEY that individual has to pay for that "leased" ground if they do draw (makes our non-res fees look very appealing :chuckle:). absolutely crazy!!! and sad at the same time.
Yeah.. I think that is why they are so hard on them when they don't meet their goals.
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 12:10:23 AM
i have hunted over baits before and have killed 3 deer in 3 different seasons over them. it isn't my cup of tea but i won't bash somebody for doing it..... that would make me a hypocrite. i still use big piles of corn and/or alfalfa for my "buck inventory cams."
If it isn't your cup of tea, then why are you still doing it?
miles- go back and read the thread. the deer i shot this year was baited...... over a trail cam..... i didn't hunt over them. i definately use baits for my trail cams all the time. the deer i killed over baits were over 10 years ago. i just didn't like having 10 sets of eyes on me at all times. it was a stressful way to spend time in a stand...... i couldn't move, make any noise...... and god forbid i farted. :chuckle:
i don't have anything against them whatsoever and if i went out of state and was placed over one...... you can bet i'd hunt it so long as it was legal.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 30, 2010, 12:15:16 AM
i have hunted over baits before and have killed 3 deer in 3 different seasons over them. it isn't my cup of tea but i won't bash somebody for doing it..... that would make me a hypocrite. i still use big piles of corn and/or alfalfa for my "buck inventory cams."
If it isn't your cup of tea, then why are you still doing it?
miles- go back and read the thread. the deer i shot this year was baited...... over a trail cam..... i didn't hunt over them. i definately use baits for my trail cams all the time. the deer i killed over baits were over 10 years ago. i just didn't like having 10 sets of eyes on me at all times. it was a stressful way to spend time in a stand...... i couldn't move, make any noise...... and god forbid i farted. :chuckle:
i don't have anything against them whatsoever and if i went out of state and was placed over one...... you can bet i'd hunt it so long as it was legal.
Would it be safe to assume you are using the bait/trailcam to pattern these bucks. I often will set stands several 100-400 yards away from a bait along a path I know the bucks to be traveling when moving to the bait. I sometimes prefer this for two reason 1. The bucks hang back until dark at times. 2. It alleviates the high alert and a dozen sets of eyes.
Even though I am not hunting directly over the bait I still consider it baiting.
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 12:33:02 AM
typically, i use bait and cams for my "buck inventory".... they are placed well out in the fields so that they attract as many deer as possible so that i know what is out there. you probably noticed in the thread with my buck that i said something to the effect of "this is just part of a thread that i cut and pasted here." i guess you would have to read the whole thing on a different site. i do a hunt/scout along thread every year but to make a long story short, there was a very short window of time for me to hunt this farm and i had a "hunch" that this buck still roamed a specific area (i think i even posted on the other site that i really don't enjoy hunting over baits). the cam just verified it. i could PM the link if you would like.
like i said before..... i'd happily give up the cams/baits during season for the sake of the herds. not being able to check cams would be like not having christmas morning..... but i could deal with it and i'd still fill my tag on mature bucks just like before trail cams were introduced.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 30, 2010, 12:42:07 AM
DB-absolutely...... i had a stand about 150 yards from the bait. killed him from a natural ground blind that i built about 12 years ago that was 600 yards give or take from the nearest bait...... the only issue was..... what bait was he going to? i had 9 cams/baits on this farm when i shot him. the 150 yard stand was the closest to any one camera/bait that i had.... just as much as it would have been to be sitting a trail leading into one of the orchards or one of the winter wheat fields. all of the baits/cams were on either a winter wheat field or in one of the orchards that are adjacent to the wheat. the baits are there so i can see what was on the cameras..... but yeah, it is baiting.
typically, i use bait and cams for my "buck inventory".... they are placed well out in the fields so that they attract as many deer as possible so that i know what is out there. you probably noticed in the thread with my buck that i said something to the effect of "this is just part of a thread that i cut and pasted here." i guess you would have to read the whole thing on a different site. i do a hunt/scout along thread every year but to make a long story short, there was a very short window of time for me to hunt this farm and i had a "hunch" that this buck still roamed a specific area (i think i even posted on the other site that i really don't enjoy hunting over baits). the cam just verified it. i could PM the link if you would like.
like i said before..... i'd happily give up the cams/baits during season for the sake of the herds. not being able to check cams would be like not having christmas morning..... but i could deal with it and i'd still fill my tag on mature bucks just like before trail cams were introduced.
I have no doubt we would do fine without the cams but I would like to keep them...like you said... the Christmas morning thing. It's better than Christmas to me.
Definitely PM me the site.. if it is a good forum.
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 01:28:47 AM
there is a difference on sitting 600 yards from a camera with a pile of hay that IS IN THE MIDDLE of a main food source (to have the best possible chance of seeing every deer on the farm) vs. sitting smack dab over a pile of hay up in the timber....... if it isn't, then when i sit over an alfalfa field, winter wheat field, or apple orchard am i baiting? there was not one single camera that i could have even taken a shot at (no available trees) unless i would have used a pop up blind. every single field that the cams were on are no smaller that 250 acres and 2 are 600+...... these cams are in the middle of the fields with 2 being on the fringes. trust me when i say these deer were already coming here and in no way did i alter their already well established travel routes from the timber...... hell, i had just located this buck a few days prior with binos, not a camera.... but i guess you know how i roll without even knowing the whole story. ;) come hunt with me "over my baits"..... we'll see how well you do and you can tell me if its the same thing as setting up and hunting a bait site..
you know what ASSUME is an achronym for...... right?
do you talk to everyone with that kind of sarcasim? :dunno: sheesh.... some people's kids. :rolleyes:
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 01:41:42 AM
the blind that i shot the buck out of was 600 yards...... 1800 feet...... over a QUARTER MILE from the nearest bait. hell, i was closer to a small orchard than a pile of hay...... IN THE MIDDLE OF A HAY FIELD.
so if the neighbor was baiting, and i was closer to his bait than "my bait", was i hunting over his bait? the neighbor's property line is only 200 yards from where i shot this buck and they feed deer year round in their yard.
i don't know why i bother...... its like talking to a rock.
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 01:44:55 AM
You are baiting when you carry the alfalfa, and grain in to one of your nine piles. You are bringing this in and placing it there, it is not naturally occuring in these nine different spots. You are doing this to draw deer in to one of those locations, to take pictures of them which is in turn helping you decide which pile to hunt beside (not over).
And about the sarcasm....Yes. ;)
i love it!!!!! and i was baiting you on this one. you are easier than whitetails :chuckle:...... SO WHERE DID THE ALFALFA SEED, WHEAT SEED, AND APPLE TREES COME FROM? please don't say they are naturally occuring alfalfa fields. :dunno: the "bait" was in the middle of all those seeds...... the only way i could have hit a deer when on those "baits" is with a rifle..... but please don't accuse me of that one.
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 02:08:13 AM
You know what I love....All the editing your having to go back and do to your previous posts.
FAIL.
i'm not used to having a site with spell check. ;)..... and i suck at spelling but would rather others didn't know...... oops, word is out.
guess i missed your point..... i can't edit your posts.
just relax....... ok ok, ya got me..... i'll admit it...... i baited the buck and shot him off the pile..... the word is out.... arrest me. oh thats right, baiting is legal here.
what do you think i have to hide when i am saying i didn't shoot this deer off a pile? bragging rights? :dunno: if that is the case, i am sure you have a strong argument as to why i don't and never have entered any of my deer, elk, bears, or caribou into pope and young or B&C books right?
my original point pages back was...... i'd be happy to do away with baits if it would help the herds and in the process, some of these newer hunters who have only hunted over baits (especially with a bow) would be forced to actually learn a little more about how to hunt vs. how to shoot.
i never claimed i didn't bait for trail cams, haven't shot deer over piles. i guess i don't know what you are trying to prove? or do ya just like petty internet drama/pissing matches?
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 02:52:09 AM
yes, it is baiting.... for the sole purpose of getting pics of bucks. but if you think my killing a deer at over 1/4 mile from the nearest pile is the same thing as hunting over baits....... on 9,000 acres of private ground..... then you and i will have to agree to disagree.
its guys like you that camp on the computer and go looking for a pissing match that makes me wonder why i ever sit down infront of the computer and log onto these sites. do you actually even hunt?
this was actually turning out to be a good thread.
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 03:47:46 AM
its guys like you that camp on the computer and go looking for a pissing match that makes me wonder why i ever sit down infront of the computer and log onto these sites. do you actually even hunt?
Now your catching on....with this 9 hour time change I make it a little game of mine to see who I can get so worked up that they'll stay online in to the wee hours of the morning trying to "win". Thanks for playing. :chuckle:
Oh, and do I hunt? No, I hike around during hunting season and when I hear a shot I run towards it and beg the person to let me take my picture with it. After I have the picture I proceed to argue with them over how they chose to pursue and hunt the buck, until they catch on to my "game" and then I thank them for playing along...and head for the next victim.
On a serious note....yes I do hunt, and I do so without the use of baits because I can.
yep.... up late tonight. i just had to bury our 10.5 year old dog this evening that my wife and i got about 6 months after we were married. we don't have children yet so our dogs fill that role for now.... so as you can imagine, sleep ain't happening.....
here, maybe this will explain how i hunt better than i can on this thread.... it is the buck i killed last year that was hanging with the 166" buck i killed this year.
if it doesn't do the trick as to explaining how i use "baits".... nothing will (i killed this deer around a1.5 miles from the nearest canera that you consider a bait where i am "set up beside")..... and oh yeah, there are plenty of edits in my posts there. like i said, i'm not used to having spell check like we do on this site and i suck at spelling.
some of the trail cam pics with the corn should give you an idea at just how out in the middle of the fields i am talking. others are strapped to apple trees that you consider baits.
mods- if posting a link to this site isn't within the rules, feel free to pull it.
http://www.piratesofarchery.net/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=7625&sid=6314bd53cef3f19525d69cd91243f3ad (http://www.piratesofarchery.net/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=7625&sid=6314bd53cef3f19525d69cd91243f3ad)
Post by: gjbruny on December 30, 2010, 03:53:34 AM
Post by: Hornseeker on December 30, 2010, 06:17:50 AM
Quote
We will have to agree to disagree.
Oh dear Lord.... Thank You! Because I can see its not going to be resolved otherwise. As a bystander...I can see both sides very clearly...
Post by: Skyvalhunter on December 30, 2010, 06:36:13 AM
Post by: NWBREW on December 30, 2010, 08:53:40 AM
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 30, 2010, 09:13:32 AM
Glad you 2 stopped this pissing match!! :chuckle:
Yeah guyz. When we fight, the terrorists win...
Post by: Decker on December 30, 2010, 08:48:41 PM
Until this year, I had never hunted over bait and never used a trail cam. Was "proud" to say, I do it THIS way, WITHOUT that...Never use tree stands or ground blinds because I enjoy runnin and gunnin hunting. Spot and stalk. SNEAKING UP ON A CRITTER. ...WOW did I ever find out who I was kidding...ME! I had spent the last three seasons chasing eastern WA muleys (and an occasional big whitey) in the flat scab lands west of Spokane. Put on tons of great stalks, helped a buddy kill a 6x6 muley with his bow, and zipped an arrow under a monster. Always have hunted with these same tactics on forest whiteys. Tried it different this year. Bought a nice ground blind I could hunt with my wife from. Borrowed a Cuddeback (SO BAD ASS). Baited at beginning of late season with alfalfa, corn, a mineral block and even some good smellin' stuff. Took my first Poper and it was the greatest feeling ever. After spending many seasons as a guide for elk, bear, turkey, and a few for rifle deer, during which I watched client after client kill amazing animals, I FINALLY GOT MY TROPHY. My wife is hooked on hunting for life because of this season. (She's a Diamond girl, has a sticker on her back window and she HATES stickers!)
I LOVED checking the cam pics! Coolest freaking thing I've ever experienced in my extensive tenure of hunting, which includes my time as a back country elk guide. To see my wife THAT excited to get home from work and see the pics from "our" camera...we baited it together, worked it together, passed on deer over it together in hopes of the nice 5x5 that was only nocturnally coming in. In the end a buck that we had not seen all year came in around midnight of December 9th. The next evening we climbed into the blind (not having known what had shown up the night before; we took the previous nights pics home with us when we left.) In walked my first Poper, I stuck it...and have never felt the kind of excitement we shared together...well except for maybe on our wedding night. ;)
I LOVE BAIT. I LOVE CAMERAS. I will continue to hunt this way every year until they decide to change our rules. It brought me GREAT joy and contentment as a hunter. I am proud to tell people this story. If you think I am not a good hunter because I shot a big buck 15 yards from a legal pile of bait, I could give a $hit. What matters to me is the happiness of my wife.
:rockin: BAITERS FOR LIFE :rockin:
Post by: Decker on December 30, 2010, 08:51:10 PM
:rockin: BAITERS FOR LIFE :rockin:
Maybe someday we'll bemasters like you toad-smiths out there.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 30, 2010, 09:56:19 PM
Um....who gives a $hit how other people hunt? As long as it's legal and it fulfills their enjoyment, just be happy for one another's succes!:yeah:
Until this year, I had never hunted over bait and never used a trail cam. Was "proud" to say, I do it THIS way, WITHOUT that...Never use tree stands or ground blinds because I enjoy runnin and gunnin hunting. Spot and stalk. SNEAKING UP ON A CRITTER. ...WOW did I ever find out who I was kidding...ME! I had spent the last three seasons chasing eastern WA muleys (and an occasional big whitey) in the flat scab lands west of Spokane. Put on tons of great stalks, helped a buddy kill a 6x6 muley with his bow, and zipped an arrow under a monster. Always have hunted with these same tactics on forest whiteys. Tried it different this year. Bought a nice ground blind I could hunt with my wife from. Borrowed a Cuddeback (SO BAD ASS). Baited at beginning of late season with alfalfa, corn, a mineral block and even some good smellin' stuff. Took my first Poper and it was the greatest feeling ever. After spending many seasons as a guide for elk, bear, turkey, and a few for rifle deer, during which I watched client after client kill amazing animals, I FINALLY GOT MY TROPHY. My wife is hooked on hunting for life because of this season. (She's a Diamond girl, has a sticker on her back window and she HATES stickers!)
I LOVED checking the cam pics! Coolest freaking thing I've ever experienced in my extensive tenure of hunting, which includes my time as a back country elk guide. To see my wife THAT excited to get home from work and see the pics from "our" camera...we baited it together, worked it together, passed on deer over it together in hopes of the nice 5x5 that was only nocturnally coming in. In the end a buck that we had not seen all year came in around midnight of December 9th. The next evening we climbed into the blind (not having known what had shown up the night before; we took the previous nights pics home with us when we left.) In walked my first Poper, I stuck it...and have never felt the kind of excitement we shared together...well except for maybe on our wedding night. ;)
I LOVE BAIT. I LOVE CAMERAS. I will continue to hunt this way every year until they decide to change our rules. It brought me GREAT joy and contentment as a hunter. I am proud to tell people this story. If you think I am not a good hunter because I shot a big buck 15 yards from a legal pile of bait, I could give a $hit. What matters to me is the happiness of my wife.
:rockin: BAITERS FOR LIFE :rockin:
The experience is what it is all about. We as hunters will take this right away from other hunters simply because it doesn't fit our idea of hunting. If you read 90% of the anti-baiting post they don't talk about the ill effect it can have on a herd (some rare instances it can) but rather they talk about how it's not really hunting. So in the end we will have it taken away due to lack of support from fellow hunters who think it isn't hunting.
Post by: huntnnw on December 31, 2010, 01:09:18 AM
Post by: rasbo on December 31, 2010, 02:49:38 AM
Post by: Hornseeker on December 31, 2010, 08:22:08 AM
Quote
If you enjoy having the hardest part of your hunt be carrying the bag of grain to your stand....more power to ya.
Have you ever ran a successful bait station Miles?? I used to bait bears when it was legal.... the work and time I put into baiting TOWERED over the work 99+% of spot and stalk hunters ever did... how do I know this? Because I've been around... thats why.
I am NOT a big baiting fan...and preaching about "if its legal, then I"m fine with it" is not the answer either. A guy has to have a little foresight in some things. IF..I say IF very theoretically.... baiting can be used as an excuse by the antis to screw up our hunting privileges even more than they do already...wouldnt' it be good to take pre-emptive action? Remember, I just used that as a hypothetical situation.
In Texas dam near anything is legal...and I dont agree with much of it and personally dont think it SHOULD be legal...
Anyhow, Im rambling here....
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 08:38:58 AM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,65013.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,65013.0.html)
For purposes of seeing what the majority thinks, I started a poll on the subject.
Thanks whacker for posting the poll, i had not seen it before. That poll is spot on with what I have heard from people.
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 08:45:36 AM
Its this mentality on here that divides us as hunters .. let's argue over hunting rights ..messed up thing about it is theses are the same people who would vote it out on a ballot cause it doesn't fit "their " idea of hunting ...idiots :bash:
I agree with you huntnnw, this is exactly why we are losing opportunity after opportunity. People figure if it's not for them it shouldn't be allowed and one thing after another gets voted out. I know archers and even spot and stalk bear hunters who voted to end hounds and bear baiting. Now look where we are at. Same story with trapping, it wasn't only the huggers that voted out trapping. Which method is next? We all know that there will be more!
I support all user groups even if it's something I don't do myself. :twocents: :hello:
Post by: Gringo31 on December 31, 2010, 08:50:58 AM
Post by: BeeMan on December 31, 2010, 10:34:10 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 10:40:06 AM
:yike: If were gonna do away with baiting we better take the scopes off of rifles while we are at it, :bfg: After all, to kill an animal from 500 yards isn't really hunting right, definitely an unfair advantage! Oh and we better do away with "calling" because those sounds don't actually come from other animals....Again, an unfair advantage and not really hunting cause were luring the animals in. How horrible of us to take advantage of a bull elks hormones like that during the rut! Oh and we better get the fisherman to stop using bait!! Afterall its not really fishing if you are using bait!! :fishin: What about the duck and geese hunters, better get rid of the mannequins they use to lure the other birds in cause that's not really hunting either!!! And what about using dogs while hunting for pheasant, afterall its not really hunting if the dog found it for you right? And while we are at it we should no longer be able to use camo, scents, scent eliminators or spotting scopes. Not really hunting if you cant find it, kill it, and get it out of the woods on your own, using only your God Given senses and abilities right. Oh and no hunting in or near any farmers fields!! (A tactic most any hunter uses to their advantage!) Afterall those fields are baiting the animals! >:( THE SAME ARGUMENT CAN BE MADE FOR ANY METHOD OF HUNTING!! >:( Some people's logic is pretty ridiculous!! :bash: I of course don't have anything against any of the hunting methods described! Just wanted to put the arguments against baiting into perspective for those who think they are on a "Higher Road" using other methods.
My exact thoughts too. Thanks for taking the time to write it all out. ;)
Post by: huntnnw on December 31, 2010, 10:48:17 AM
Post by: buckhorn2 on December 31, 2010, 10:50:47 AM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 31, 2010, 10:57:13 AM
:yeah:Its this mentality on here that divides us as hunters .. let's argue over hunting rights ..messed up thing about it is theses are the same people who would vote it out on a ballot cause it doesn't fit "their " idea of hunting ...idiots :bash:
I agree with you huntnnw, this is exactly why we are losing opportunity after opportunity. People figure if it's not for them it shouldn't be allowed and one thing after another gets voted out. I know archers and even spot and stalk bear hunters who voted to end hounds and bear baiting. Now look where we are at. Same story with trapping, it wasn't only the huggers that voted out trapping. Which method is next? We all know that there will be more!
I support all user groups even if it's something I don't do myself. :twocents: :hello:
I feel like I am constantly making this exact argument. It seems like we are amongst the few that see it this way :bash:. If we base our decisions on the voting block simply off what we "personally" deem equates to a hunting experience then soon we will have nothing left. I think instead.. it's people who think this way that are actually the ones who don't get what a "hunting experience" is all about. It's not about just what appeals to one individuals or groups senses of what constitutes that experience. There are many things that don't appeal to my senses in hunting but you can bet I will never vote to take a right away from a hunter who may feel just the opposite. If we need something for game management needs then that is for the professionals to decide and our "opinions" should never hold much influence because it should be "science" if they are managing the game properly. I certainly don't think we should vote to remove a right permanently from other hunters (or a tool that game managers can use). If we can't get our crap together and unite on things as hunters (speak with one voice) then we can never expect to persuade the non-hunting public to help us on the voting block. The non-hunting public will play the biggest factor in our future. Animal rights organizations are far more organized than we are in this state. Lets keep doing this and see how far it will get us. I guarantee a group speaking with one voice will have far more sway over the non-hunting public than a broken and splintered group who want's to give away the rights of their fellow hunters simply because it doesn't appeal to their own senses.
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 11:02:02 AM
Post by: 400out on December 31, 2010, 11:07:46 AM
:yeah: :rockin: :beatdeadhorse: :iamwithstupid: :llam: :cue: :tinfoil: :brew: :yeah: :party1:I can't decipher your code :chuckle: so I will just agree ;)
Post by: Decker on December 31, 2010, 11:08:43 AM
I support all user groups even if it's something I don't do myself. :twocents: :hello:
Couldn't agree with you more.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 31, 2010, 11:08:57 AM
QuoteIf you enjoy having the hardest part of your hunt be carrying the bag of grain to your stand....more power to ya.
Have you ever ran a successful bait station Miles?? I used to bait bears when it was legal.... the work and time I put into baiting TOWERED over the work 99+% of spot and stalk hunters ever did... how do I know this? Because I've been around... thats why.
I am NOT a big baiting fan...and preaching about "if its legal, then I"m fine with it" is not the answer either. A guy has to have a little foresight in some things. IF..I say IF very theoretically.... baiting can be used as an excuse by the antis to screw up our hunting privileges even more than they do already...wouldnt' it be good to take pre-emptive action? Remember, I just used that as a hypothetical situation.
In Texas dam near anything is legal...and I dont agree with much of it and personally dont think it SHOULD be legal...
Anyhow, Im rambling here....
Yet Texas hunting lifestyle/business/heritage/pride/voice is about 300x stronger than anything we have here in WA. I don't think that is such a bad thing.
Post by: Decker on December 31, 2010, 11:13:42 AM
Oh and we better get the fisherman to stop using bait!! Afterall its not really fishing if you are using bait!! :fishin:
Bahahaaahahaa...haha..eh.. so good. You made me laugh until it hurt.
Post by: Decker on December 31, 2010, 11:16:10 AM
I guarantee a group speaking with one voice will have far more sway over the non-hunting public than a broken and splintered group who want's to give away the rights of their fellow hunters simply because it doesn't appeal to their own senses.
This is so spot on. It inspires me to want to start an organization such as By Hunters FOR Hunters that helps to unite all of us striving to keep our rights.
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on December 31, 2010, 11:16:18 AM
QuoteIf you enjoy having the hardest part of your hunt be carrying the bag of grain to your stand....more power to ya.
Have you ever ran a successful bait station Miles?? I used to bait bears when it was legal.... the work and time I put into baiting TOWERED over the work 99+% of spot and stalk hunters ever did... how do I know this? Because I've been around... thats why.
I am NOT a big baiting fan...and preaching about "if its legal, then I"m fine with it" is not the answer either. A guy has to have a little foresight in some things. IF..I say IF very theoretically.... baiting can be used as an excuse by the antis to screw up our hunting privileges even more than they do already...wouldnt' it be good to take pre-emptive action? Remember, I just used that as a hypothetical situation.
In Texas dam near anything is legal...and I dont agree with much of it and personally dont think it SHOULD be legal...
Anyhow, Im rambling here....
Yet Texas hunting lifestyle/business/heritage/pride/voice is about 300x stronger than anything we have here in WA. I don't think that is such a bad thing.
No matter how much it doesn't "appeal" to our senses (and there are many things about TX hunting that doesn't appeal to my senses). They are an example of a state that got it right. I guarantee we will lose our rights before they will....and if I am not mistaken...we do want to keep our rights....right???? If we go at it thinking "baiting can be used as an excuse by the antis to screw up our hunting privileges even more than they do already...wouldnt' it be good to take pre-emptive action?" then we have already lost.
Post by: grundy53 on December 31, 2010, 02:40:47 PM
:yeah:Its this mentality on here that divides us as hunters .. let's argue over hunting rights ..messed up thing about it is theses are the same people who would vote it out on a ballot cause it doesn't fit "their " idea of hunting ...idiots :bash:
I agree with you huntnnw, this is exactly why we are losing opportunity after opportunity. People figure if it's not for them it shouldn't be allowed and one thing after another gets voted out. I know archers and even spot and stalk bear hunters who voted to end hounds and bear baiting. Now look where we are at. Same story with trapping, it wasn't only the huggers that voted out trapping. Which method is next? We all know that there will be more!
I support all user groups even if it's something I don't do myself. :twocents: :hello:
I feel like I am constantly making this exact argument. It seems like we are amongst the few that see it this way :bash:. If we base our decisions on the voting block simply off what we "personally" deem equates to a hunting experience then soon we will have nothing left. I think instead.. it's people who think this way that are actually the ones who don't get what a "hunting experience" is all about. It's not about just what appeals to one individuals or groups senses of what constitutes that experience. There are many things that don't appeal to my senses in hunting but you can bet I will never vote to take a right away from a hunter who may feel just the opposite. If we need something for game management needs then that is for the professionals to decide and our "opinions" should never hold much influence because it should be "science" if they are managing the game properly. I certainly don't think we should vote to remove a right permanently from other hunters (or a tool that game managers can use). If we can't get our crap together and unite on things as hunters (speak with one voice) then we can never expect to persuade the non-hunting public to help us on the voting block. The non-hunting public will play the biggest factor in our future. Animal rights organizations are far more organized than we are in this state. Lets keep doing this and see how far it will get us. I guarantee a group speaking with one voice will have far more sway over the non-hunting public than a broken and splintered group who want's to give away the rights of their fellow hunters simply because it doesn't appeal to their own senses.
I agree. i can't beleive how selfish and narrow minded people can be... :bash:
Post by: Decker on December 31, 2010, 05:43:53 PM
...baiting can be used as an excuse by the antis to screw up our hunting privileges even more than they do already...wouldnt' it be good to take pre-emptive action?
I know, let's make it easier on em (the antis) and just vote out hunting ourselves. :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: Tman on January 01, 2011, 03:41:23 PM
Post by: BullMagnet76 on January 07, 2011, 09:35:05 AM
Post by: SirSpencer on January 07, 2011, 01:04:34 PM
Why did this thread become a "sticky"?
Post by: bearpaw on January 07, 2011, 01:26:55 PM
Post by: Schwag173 on January 16, 2011, 02:42:00 PM
Post by: WABONEHNTR on January 16, 2011, 02:49:26 PM
I spoke at length with a WDFW officer a few weeks ago. He practically begged me to hunt GMU 124 (Spokane County) in 2011 due to a great abundance of whitetails. He also mentioned that (all) the GMUs north of 124 were experiencing a decline in deer populations. I believe the wolves are now making their presence known.
Snow is what is killing the deer in 113 and 117. 4 bad winters in a row will do that.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on January 16, 2011, 02:59:29 PM
Post by: Wa hunter on January 16, 2011, 03:10:10 PM
1. Have you seen any wolfs in your area ?
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on January 16, 2011, 10:01:42 PM
Thanks DB, that was what i was looking for. I'm getting tired of working the wide open palouse and was thinking about going to some different terrain. Saw these NE deer photos and it looked like a little more fun area to hunt.
You gotta get to know some farmers. You will have more fun, trust me. There are some huge bucks down there, and lots of bucks for the freezer.
Post by: SirSpencer on January 18, 2011, 05:41:19 PM
Post by: huntnnw on January 18, 2011, 09:47:38 PM
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on January 18, 2011, 10:34:15 PM
Yeah, I have my few farms that I can go hunt and I do see some bigger bucks usually one big one a year, never get them though. Getting to know the farmers these days isn't as easy as most of you guys seem to think it is, ive been out here at WSU for the last 3 years and i hit the dirt roads and knock on doors and do all the right stuff (and no not the week before the opener) but unless you're willing to shell out hundreds of dollars per person, you're not going to get much access to lands worth hunting for deer, but a lot of good bird access.
Yeah it is tough, a lot of the guys like to keep it for themselves and friends. I have been lucky, my dad lived down there and got to know the right people so it makes it easier getting on land every year that produces nice bucks with no people. There is state land on the palouse, but if you keep trying, im sure they will let you hunt. Check by rosalia, there is feel free to hunt land there that produces nice bucks. If you go up north, try the Inland paper company land, they own a lot and you pay a small fee for a permit to hunt their land. And i have seen very nice bucks come out of there.