Antler Point Restrictions

[nrpate05]

I want to get an idea of how Hunttalk folks feel about antler point restrictions. The WY G&F commission voted yesterday to retain antler point restrictions in the Wyoming Range and Jackson area that were implemented after the 22/23 winter. The G&F Dept. recommended removing them in those areas.

My understanding is that these really only work for a couple of years and that they can impact trophy quality in the long run because you harvest a lot of 2.5 yr old 4 points that would be giants with a few more years, but you don't kill the 3.5 yr old 3 point that likely wouldn't get huge.

https://www.jhnewsandguide.com/news...cle_7f1e6b2b-bfe6-4fe6-862f-488a19b71bad.html

Curious of any opinions on the issue.

 

[fowladdict]

IMHO trophy quality is down in the areas that Idaho has implemented long term antler restrictions. I'm sure other reasons factor in as well.

 

[Elkmagnet]

My understanding is that these really only work for a couple of years and that they can impact trophy quality in the long run because you harvest a lot of 2.5 yr old 4 points that would be giants with a few more years, but you don't kill the 3.5 yr old 3 point that likely wouldn't get huge.

I agree with this.
I listened to a podcast where a biologist laid out a good case for point restrictions as a short term tool but said the studies show diminishing returns after a few years.
Also you are forcing every meat or casual hunter to spend more time looking for a big deer.

 

[cgasner1]

I like the restrictions in over objective areas where they have implemented 5 point or less for elk. It lets them take elk off the landscape and protect the mature animals

 

[FairWeather]

Genuinely curious: Why should trophy quality be of any concern to the F&G dept. if their goal is managing for heard health & stability?

 

[rookieforever33]

Seeing all the spikes killed on day one of the season tells me some good genetics get taken out before they have a chance to show. If they have a point restriction to help herd health I am for it. If the restrictions are for trophy quality I dont think they will work.

 

[cgasner1]

Genuinely curious: Why should trophy quality be of any concern to the F&G dept. if their goal is managing for heard health & stability?

75 dollar pp and 2000 dollar tag

 

[sclancy27]

Genuinely curious: Why should trophy quality be of any concern to the F&G dept. if their goal is managing for heard health & stability?

They manage for the public trust, which partly means not decimate populations and partly means managing for social pressures. Anymore, I think most bios would agree that the social part is the overwhelming majority of their jobs.

 

[Gerald Martin]

What good is a Hunttalk thread without a tangential hijack?
In regards to antler point restrictions for deer, I don’t think they work to raise the overall age class since many bucks that would meet the antler restriction requirements can do so at a young age. And many that don’t meet antler restrictions at 2 1/2 years old may never meet them.


However, I do think antler point restrictions for bull elk do work to increase age class due to the way elk antlers develop and the high probability of bulls to develop at least one 6 point antler by 4 1/2 years old

 

[Elkmagnet]

Seeing all the spikes killed on day one of the season tells me some good genetics get taken out before they have a chance to show. If they have a point restriction to help herd health I am for it. If the restrictions are for trophy quality I dont think they will work.

This brings up a thought.
Do people lump spike only elk seasons/ 2pt only deer season as a "point restriction" hunt.
I do and am generally opposed to them from a biological standpoint unless it is designed to add youth opportunities.

 

[nrpate05]

Genuinely curious: Why should trophy quality be of any concern to the F&G dept. if their goal is managing for heard health & stability?

I think the APRs are a tool to stabilize a herd especially after a catastrophic winter. In this case, it is region G and H in Wyoming, so most people go there with the intent of shooting a good one. WGFD serves the public as well. They updated some of their proposals due to public comment.

Herd health and stability can be achieved in many different ways. A lot of OTC hunts still are stable and have healthy herds. Similarly, a lot of heavily limited quota hunts have healthy herds as well.

 

[fowladdict]

I drew a Wyoming deer tag the first year they implemented the antler restriction to more than two points after the rough winter (2019ish?, I don't remember). It made sense at the time, as I don't recall seeing any 1.5-year old bucks. We did see very few forkys, but they looked to be bigger 2.5-year old forkys.

 

[WYWINCHESTER]

Although Mule deer are my favorite. I would support a 3-5 year ban on killing mulies state wide. We need to get the population back up to good numbers. I don't like it, but let's manage for the deer instead of the money.

 

[Elktrack]

Although Mule deer are my favorite. I would support a 3-5 year ban on killing mulies state wide. We need to get the population back up to good numbers. I don't like it, but let's manage for the deer instead of the money.

Can I buy points during this ban period?
Just kiddin
Kinda….

 

[Clarq]

I don't like APRs and would only support them for a short duration after a die-off.

I hunted on a 4+ points unit for deer not too long ago. I had a pair of bucks at 200 yards - a very small 4 point and an old and large 2 point. I'd have been very happy with the old 2 point, but couldn't legally harvest him due to the stupid rule.

 

[Bighorner]

I would rather see a 20" inside spread restriction.

 

[Nick87]

Haven't seen them work out to well ime. Maybe they do in situations like @cgasner is talking about. I'll take his word for it.

 

[huntin24/7]

Antler restrictions are great for killing off all the good genetics in mule deer and allowing 3 points to do the breeding similar to how lengthy rut seasons kill off most every up and comer by allowing hunters to cherry pick the 2-3 year olds with any potential.

 

[ImBillT]

Texas spent a lot of time and money studying them in other states, on high fence research facilities, and massive low fence properties. They examined real outcomes, statistics, and made computer models. In the end they determined that while management could improve antler quality, a simple antler point restriction could not improve outcomes compared to typical hunter harvest. A few decades later younger people in the department decided that they needed to claim that they improved something, so now we have antler width restrictions, which I am HIGHLY skeptical of.

Additionally, this all assumes that the value of the animal is tied entirely to his antler size. I want big antlers. Of course I do. But I also like to eat the animals, and I find it offensive that I have to manage the deer population for someone else’s future trophy when a perfectly edible deer is staring me in the face. Even more so when a huge percentage of the guys chasing these trophy animals are donating the meat at best, and chucking in the dumpster after they let it freezer burn more often than not. And yes, I know a guy that eats about 10% of what he kills and ends up tossing the rest. I’d ask him to give to me, but he doesn’t take good care of the animal after he kills it, likely because he doesn’t plan on eating it anyway. I thought hunters were increasingly leaning on the food value of wild game as one of our justifications for hunting, and now we have game departments acting like we should only kill the ones with big antlers and we have to manage for trophies. Hmmmm.

 

[Nick87]

Antler restrictions are great for killing off all the good genetics in mule deer and allowing 3 points to do the breeding similar to how lengthy rut seasons kill off most every up and comer by allowing hunters to cherry pick the 2-3 year olds with any potential.

Yup