collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Deer Antler Point Regs  (Read 3534 times)

Offline Blacktail_Slayer

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2019
  • Posts: 12
  • Location: Oregon
Deer Antler Point Regs
« on: January 22, 2020, 07:52:57 PM »
Mule Deer Antler Point Regs (APRs) Dont Work
https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/cont...VIE0006790.pdf

All APR strategies resulted in a short term gain in the proportion of males in the population. However, male:female ratios eventually returned to pre-APR levels after varying lengths of time, regardless whether the APR was continued. Most western states have concluded that sustainable improvements in buck:doe ratios and the number of mature bucks can only be realized by reducing harvest through: 1) a limited quota license system that decreases the total buck harvest while allowing some level of doe harvest (Bender 2011); or by setting a very short hunting season.

Further, increases in buck:doe ratios have never been shown empirically to improve either herd production or population size (deVos et al. 2003; Bishop et al. 2005).

Several observations from our analysis of APR use in Wyoming and throughout the west are summarized below:
APRs DO increase total buck:doe ratios; however results vary and are usually temporary.
APRs are very popular with the hunting public. However public understanding of the pros and cons appears to be limited, and is complicated by popular literature concerning APRs.
Most benefits occur in ≤ 3 years; use of APRs beyond this often appear to result in negative impacts to both total buck ratios and mature buck ratios. Continued long term use of APRs (≥3-4 years) may result in lower total male:female ratios.
No APR strategy produced a long-term increase in adult (mature) male:female ratios, or an increase in the number of adult bucks, except in a handful of cases where hunter participation declined significantly, coupled with good fawn production.
Temporary APRs are most effective following a year of high fawn production and recruitment or when doe harvest is increased.
Managers have found most effective way to recover from chronically low buck:doe ratios is through a dramatic reduction in harvest pressure on males ≥2 years of age (through a conservative limited quota season or very short season length). Available data also tends to support this.
APRs have been shown to reduce the number and potentially the quality of mature bucks over time.
Long-term use of APRs may target legal bucks that have not realized their full antler growth potential while protecting bucks with low antler growth potential (i.e., hunters select against legal bucks with smaller antlers). Although not validated by research, this is a concern among wildlife professionals and the public.
APRs may dramatically reduce hunter participation, harvest success, and total harvest.
APRs increase the number of deer shot and illegally left in the field; this can be significant and has been documented in Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and Montana.
APRS do not increase fawn production or population size. Even in herds with singledigit buck:doe ratios, pregnancy rates are well over 90%. Large increases in buck ratios result in relatively few additional fawns (White et al. 2001). The extent to which relative proportions of yearling and mature bucks influence timing of conception and fawn recruitment/survival needs further evaluation.
Some APRs displace hunting pressure to the oldest age classes of bucks, gradually eroding that segment of the population. Others reduce recruitment to older age classes by displacing harvest pressure to yearling males.
APRs may decrease interest of hunters whose primary motivation is to obtain meat.
APRs may discourage beginning and young hunters by increasing the difficulty of locating and identifying legal deer.
Long-term use of APRs in areas with limited security/escape habitat potentially impedes maintenance of publically acceptable total and mature buck:doe ratios.
Empirical studies of APR regulations have not been conducted. We recommend this become a priority research topic for the WAFWA.
APRs should be viewed as a legitimate management tool in areas with chronically low male:female ratios provided they are applied on a time-limited basis. Managers and the public are cautioned that available data and experience suggest APRs result in no long term increase in either the proportion or number of mature bucks, or the total deer population.

Offline hunter399

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2014
  • Posts: 2032
  • Location: In your hunting spot
  • Groups: NRA RMEF
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2020, 08:48:14 PM »
Mule Deer Antler Point Regs (APRs) Dont Work
https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/cont...VIE0006790.pdf

All APR strategies resulted in a short term gain in the proportion of males in the population. However, male:female ratios eventually returned to pre-APR levels after varying lengths of time, regardless whether the APR was continued. Most western states have concluded that sustainable improvements in buck:doe ratios and the number of mature bucks can only be realized by reducing harvest through: 1) a limited quota license system that decreases the total buck harvest while allowing some level of doe harvest (Bender 2011); or by setting a very short hunting season.

Further, increases in buck:doe ratios have never been shown empirically to improve either herd production or population size (deVos et al. 2003; Bishop et al. 2005).

Several observations from our analysis of APR use in Wyoming and throughout the west are summarized below:
APRs DO increase total buck:doe ratios; however results vary and are usually temporary.
APRs are very popular with the hunting public. However public understanding of the pros and cons appears to be limited, and is complicated by popular literature concerning APRs.
Most benefits occur in ≤ 3 years; use of APRs beyond this often appear to result in negative impacts to both total buck ratios and mature buck ratios. Continued long term use of APRs (≥3-4 years) may result in lower total male:female ratios.
No APR strategy produced a long-term increase in adult (mature) male:female ratios, or an increase in the number of adult bucks, except in a handful of cases where hunter participation declined significantly, coupled with good fawn production.
Temporary APRs are most effective following a year of high fawn production and recruitment or when doe harvest is increased.
Managers have found most effective way to recover from chronically low buck:doe ratios is through a dramatic reduction in harvest pressure on males ≥2 years of age (through a conservative limited quota season or very short season length). Available data also tends to support this.
APRs have been shown to reduce the number and potentially the quality of mature bucks over time.
Long-term use of APRs may target legal bucks that have not realized their full antler growth potential while protecting bucks with low antler growth potential (i.e., hunters select against legal bucks with smaller antlers). Although not validated by research, this is a concern among wildlife professionals and the public.
APRs may dramatically reduce hunter participation, harvest success, and total harvest.
APRs increase the number of deer shot and illegally left in the field; this can be significant and has been documented in Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and Montana.
APRS do not increase fawn production or population size. Even in herds with singledigit buck:doe ratios, pregnancy rates are well over 90%. Large increases in buck ratios result in relatively few additional fawns (White et al. 2001). The extent to which relative proportions of yearling and mature bucks influence timing of conception and fawn recruitment/survival needs further evaluation.
Some APRs displace hunting pressure to the oldest age classes of bucks, gradually eroding that segment of the population. Others reduce recruitment to older age classes by displacing harvest pressure to yearling males.
APRs may decrease interest of hunters whose primary motivation is to obtain meat.
APRs may discourage beginning and young hunters by increasing the difficulty of locating and identifying legal deer.
Long-term use of APRs in areas with limited security/escape habitat potentially impedes maintenance of publically acceptable total and mature buck:doe ratios.
Empirical studies of APR regulations have not been conducted. We recommend this become a priority research topic for the WAFWA.
APRs should be viewed as a legitimate management tool in areas with chronically low male:female ratios provided they are applied on a time-limited basis. Managers and the public are cautioned that available data and experience suggest APRs result in no long term increase in either the proportion or number of mature bucks, or the total deer population.

Your info says it doesn't increase herd ,only shorter seasons,or permit quota can increase deer herd numbers.
But right in the middle it says.

APRs may dramatically reduce hunter participation, harvest success, and total harvest.

So that tells me APRs can increase herd numbers without permits or shorter seasons It has its pro and cons .One way or another sometime in the future your gonna have to pick OTC Hunting or permit hunting for all deer season in Washington.
Two birds in the Bush is always better than one in the hand-that way you can always go to the Bush and hunt another day .conservation=Better hunting.
Wrote by hunter399

Offline bowhunterforever

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Lincoln, Co
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2020, 09:35:05 PM »
Tag
You sure you know how to skin griz pilgram

Offline Rainier10

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Posts: 9228
  • Location: Over the edge
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2020, 06:59:38 AM »
Very interesting
Pain is temporary, achieving the goal is worth it.

I didn't say it would be easy, I said it would be worth it.

Every father should remember that one day his children will follow his example instead of his advice.


The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of HuntWa or the site owner.

Online buckfvr

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Posts: 3054
  • Location: PREDATOR PIT UNIT 121
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2020, 08:11:24 AM »
Full of misinformation and agenda driven...........

FOR SURE, it doesnt work for wdfw in n.e. wa. where region 1 (whitetail) is managed for the sole purpose of high yield of young animals.,
« Last Edit: January 23, 2020, 09:59:53 AM by buckfvr »

Offline JBar

  • The Family "Guide"
  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 1976
  • Location: Puyallup
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2020, 08:20:04 AM »
I often wonder if a rotation of APRs would be more effective. Something like one year of 3 point minimum to two years 2 point max. I know there are flaws in this idea but do they outweigh the benefits long term?
Shut up and Hunt!

Online buckfvr

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Posts: 3054
  • Location: PREDATOR PIT UNIT 121
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2020, 09:16:38 AM »
Nothing gets adopted without predictable results whether flawed or beneficial.

Offline Wsucoug

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2018
  • Posts: 71
  • Location: Leavenworth
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2020, 09:36:11 AM »
The link was broken for me.

Here is another. This is for MULE deer.

To be honest there would be zero mule deer in the low lands without APRs. It would be a slaughter with how docile this species is in the open.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Habitat/Mule%2520Deer%2520Initiative/MULEDEER_ANTLERPOINTREGS_REVIE0006790.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi0q_iBoJrnAhVOLK0KHYO0B0IQFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0ATDZhP2ZT_ZXIEbnkq_GB

Offline bigmacc

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 1616
  • Location: the woods
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2020, 11:23:23 AM »


I know a lot of folks who I highly respect, some who have great history and/or have worked around wildlife and who,s opinions I  respect. It seems that managing healthy, robust deer herds for sportsmen/women and hunters stopped awhile ago in this state, managing healthy predator populations are a much higher priority it seems. Making sure there are just enough deer to sustain thriving predator populations is way ahead of putting a healthy deer herd front and center for us hunters, you don't have to look any farther than the Methow and whats been going on there to see that opinion in action unfortunately.

If they do anything, get rid of the 3 point rule and put restrictions on shooting spikes, at least they are easier to distinguish and it may cut down on the hundreds of 2 points that are left to rot around the state. When my dad was young and no spike shoots were put up in the Methow he said he never found a dead spike in the field, we have found dozens of dead 2 points since the 3 point rule went into effect...... :twocents:

Offline Bango skank

  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2014
  • Posts: 4063
  • Location: colville
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2020, 11:29:59 AM »


I know a lot of folks who I highly respect, some who have great history and/or have worked around wildlife and who,s opinions I  respect. It seems that managing healthy, robust deer herds for sportsmen/women and hunters stopped awhile ago in this state, managing healthy predator populations are a much higher priority it seems. Making sure there are just enough deer to sustain thriving predator populations is way ahead of putting a healthy deer herd front and center for us hunters, you don't have to look any farther than the Methow and whats been going on there to see that opinion in action unfortunately.

If they do anything, get rid of the 3 point rule and put restrictions on shooting spikes, at least they are easier to distinguish and it may cut down on the hundreds of 2 points that are left to rot around the state. When my dad was young and no spike shoots were put up in the Methow he said he never found a dead spike in the field, we have found dozens of dead 2 points since the 3 point rule went into effect...... :twocents:

I really think that just removing browtines from the applicable points in the apr would have the same effect.  Especially for mules, which so often have tiny brows or none at all.  A "3 up" rule.  I guess that would have to be tried to find out though, and man people would howl about that, not being able to shoot a forkie with brows.

Offline jstone

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 3155
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2020, 12:00:29 PM »
I think people shooting the two points is cause they dont take the tie to look and study the deer. They see something with points and want to shoot them look. Tell me why it is so hard to let a deer walk if your not sure if its legal or not?? I do it every year. You dont have to shoot something.

Offline hunter399

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2014
  • Posts: 2032
  • Location: In your hunting spot
  • Groups: NRA RMEF
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #11 on: January 23, 2020, 12:05:09 PM »
N.E WASHINGTON needs a 4pt rule for both species mule/whitetail deer.Combined with zero doe harvest.

I agree we would have no mule deer if not for the APR.
People that disagree with APR must be in favor for shorter seasons,quota limits,and permits instead of OTC.
Two birds in the Bush is always better than one in the hand-that way you can always go to the Bush and hunt another day .conservation=Better hunting.
Wrote by hunter399

Offline Bango skank

  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2014
  • Posts: 4063
  • Location: colville
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #12 on: January 23, 2020, 12:07:35 PM »
I think people shooting the two points is cause they dont take the tie to look and study the deer. They see something with points and want to shoot them look. Tell me why it is so hard to let a deer walk if your not sure if its legal or not?? I do it every year. You dont have to shoot something.

Clearly you have a rare ability known as "self control."  Many people dont have that.  My guess is that a lot of the idiots that shoot forkies do it just hoping that there will be a 1" browtine on it when they walk up to it.  I really do think the "3 up" thing would solve a large part of that problem.

Offline hunter399

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2014
  • Posts: 2032
  • Location: In your hunting spot
  • Groups: NRA RMEF
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #13 on: January 23, 2020, 12:23:12 PM »
I think people shooting the two points is cause they dont take the tie to look and study the deer. They see something with points and want to shoot them look. Tell me why it is so hard to let a deer walk if your not sure if its legal or not?? I do it every year. You dont have to shoot something.

Clearly you have a rare ability known as "self control."  Many people dont have that.  My guess is that a lot of the idiots that shoot forkies do it just hoping that there will be a 1" browtine on it when they walk up to it.  I really do think the "3 up" thing would solve a large part of that problem.
The problem with this is you have to change definition of what a point is.1 inch point is a point.What if it's some 6in eye guard that's a drop tine around the eye but it's a fork on top.

With a higher APR your reducing the amount of hunters.Which you reduce the amount of accidental shooting of two point.Higher fines for shooting deer under APR.Published in the reg book may discourage the two point shootings.also would like to see higher fines for multiple regulations, road closed,hunting out of season, Hunter orange,ect.
Problem is most game regs are a slap on the wrist with a very affordable fine.
Two birds in the Bush is always better than one in the hand-that way you can always go to the Bush and hunt another day .conservation=Better hunting.
Wrote by hunter399

Offline bigmacc

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 1616
  • Location: the woods
Re: Deer Antler Point Regs
« Reply #14 on: January 23, 2020, 12:28:58 PM »
I think people shooting the two points is cause they dont take the tie to look and study the deer. They see something with points and want to shoot them look. Tell me why it is so hard to let a deer walk if your not sure if its legal or not?? I do it every year. You dont have to shoot something.

I think what they are saying is that studies are showing that point restrictions don't seem to be doing any good. Now, IMHO, a negative sidebar to point restrictions(3 point or better) is that a lot of 2 points are shot and killed each year then left for coyotes and magpies and no one knows for sure how many, could be hundreds, could be thousands and then that hunter continues to hunt and may or may not kill another buck. IMO, if you put a 4point restriction on your going to find dead 3 points. IMO, finding one rotting 2 point carcas in a 3 point area is too many. Between 9 of us in the Methow, we have found over 30 since the rule went into effect. You are right jstone, it shouldn't happen, if we are taught to "make sure of our target" then it should be just as automatic to "make sure it has 3", if your confused on either, you don't squeeze the trigger. That being said, I would be in favor of spike restrictions, they are much easier to distinguish for some than trying to put a 3rd point onto a massive 2 point running from you. I also love what Bango suggested, I can't tell you how many Bios and Department guys I have brought it up to myself, DO AWAY WITH COUNTING EYEGUARDS ON MULE DEER, they should not be included as a "legal point" in point restricted areas. Will that alone stop the rotting 2 point carcass problem? No, but I bet it would definatly reduce it....... :twocents:

 


* Advertisement