Antler Point Restrictions

[Pucky Freak]

Strategies to have more mature MD in the unit:
-LQ
-Short season
-Season dates, e.g. no rut hunt
-Increase the population/improve the habitat
-APR

Social management of wildlife, options 1-4 can be expensive or cause stakeholders to complain. APR costs nothing and gives the appearance of trying to improve hunt quality, regardless of if it actually works or not.

I’d wager the G&F depts are fully aware they’re engaged in impression management.

 

[Blackcats06]

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.

Not killing bucks won't put more baby makers on the ground

 

[brymoore]

“Time stamp 7:19 (stolen from RS)

This slide discusses mule deer buck survival rates and demonstrates why you can’t “bank” or save yearling bucks for the future. It is important to understand that the survival rates used in this slide are based on non-hunting related mortality. The biologist’s example uses a year class of 1.5 year old bucks numbering 5,500 individuals, only 2,750 will live to age 2.5. That is to say that half will die between age 1.5 and 2.5. Hunting harvest is compensatory to that mortality. Meaning that hunting does not increase that number. Those bucks are going to die anyway, so hunters might as well be the ones killing them.”

The unit I live and hunt in sounds like the civil war end of the season during the migration hunt. Lots of forkies dying. Other side, there are 180+ bucks if you’re smart enough to figure out how to hunt them.

 

[std7mag]

We've had point restrictions in PA for a while now.

While I do watch for points before I pull the trigger, in the woods it's hard to count sometimes on a moving buck.
Luckily for most of the state, we just need to concentrate on one side. Namely 3 up on one side.

Which is good as a few years ago I had a buck come in and got a quick count on one side, 4 up. So I took the shot.
When I went to it, I saw that the other antler was missing. It only had the one side.

So with the restrictions in place, I feel it makes us actually look at what we are about to shoot. Sometimes causing us NOT to shoot.

Personally, I've hunted and harvested deer since I was 16.
I got my first buck at the age of 54.

Does or buck. They all look the same in freezer wrap.

 

[sclancy27]

“Time stamp 7:19 (stolen from RS)

This slide discusses mule deer buck survival rates and demonstrates why you can’t “bank” or save yearling bucks for the future. It is important to understand that the survival rates used in this slide are based on non-hunting related mortality. The biologist’s example uses a year class of 1.5 year old bucks numbering 5,500 individuals, only 2,750 will live to age 2.5. That is to say that half will die between age 1.5 and 2.5. Hunting harvest is compensatory to that mortality. Meaning that hunting does not increase that number. Those bucks are going to die anyway, so hunters might as well be the ones killing them.”

The unit I live and hunt in sounds like the civil war end of the season during the migration hunt. Lots of forkies dying. Other side, there are 180+ bucks if you’re smart enough to figure out how to hunt them.

I'm all for people laying the hammer on 1.5 year old forkies. It's the best way to randomly harvest (since there is not much phenotypical variation between individuals yet) and, like you state above, they have a high annual mortality rate anyway.

 

[idelkslayer]

Here is a study done interestingly enough by Wyoming. I've posted it before on several forums when this topic comes up. It is not a new idea. It has been tried in various configurations and locations. It is a quick read, the bulk of the report is just 7.5 pages and then a couple pages of table summaries.

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/media/31624/download?inline

Here are a few cherry-picked conclusion from the study:

"APRs DO increase total buck:doe ratios; however results vary and are usually temporary"

"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 hunterparticipation declined significantly, coupled with good fawn production."

"APRs have been shown to reduce the number and potentially the quality of mature bucks over time."

"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."

"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 longterm increase in either the proportion or number of mature bucks, or the total deer population"