Antler restriction question

[JoseCuervo]

In Idaho, they moved to 2pt because in some areas Bucks were all getting hammered. So now, we have 2 point only in some areas, with Controlled Hunts for the 3+ bucks.

When this happend, many people, including my self, quit hunting these units, allowing fewer bucks to be harvested. And once a buck grows bigger than a 2x, he gets lots of protection.

Those big buck Tags in some units are the most sought after in the state.

Also, for some reason, must be "Clumsy Lovers", but the 2x's do a lousy job of breeding, so you need higher buck/doe ratios. With Mature bucks, you can keep your herd regenerating with a lower ratio.

If we were to close down all the Fat-Assed ATV Riders in some of these units, we would be able to remove the restrictions. But in open country, and a 600cc ATV, you can run down any buck you want...

 

[BrianID]

mini moose,

I don't know how you could see about a 100 deer with only one of them being a buck in any unit in SE Idaho unless you are hunting an area that has tons of roads or you didn't check close enough for antlers.
More than one day in while scouting and hunting in 2003 I saw more deer with antlers than without antlers. From what I have seen I would guess that before hunting season starts about 25%+ of the deer (not including fawns) are bucks in every unit in Eastern Idaho.

I think the 2 point rule along with the new ATV restrictions are good ways to increase the ratio of mature bucks because most hunters aren't willing to hunt more than a half a mile from the road. What percent of the hunters that hunt more than a half mile from the road are going to shoot a two point?

Considering that I hunted about 15 days/half days during the general archery and rifle season in 2003 and that I only saw hunters more than 400 yards from the road on only one occasion(90% of the time I was hunting on public land and I spend a lot of my time glassing for animals in fairly open country). I would say there are very few guys out there that hunt for those 2 points smart enough to stay more than a half a mile from the road.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-16-2004 12:33: Message edited by: BrianID ]</font>

 

[BrianID]

To those who disagree with antler restrictions,

I would agree that hunting deer/elk not during the rut or after snow has forced them onto the winter range is a better alternative than antler restrictions.

Sure a few animals will get shot by hunters who made an honest mistake. The guys that shoot first and count points latter are poachers and most of them are the same guys who shoot deer out of season or tag a deer they shot with their wife's tag.

Antler restrictions also prevent hunters from taking marginal shots at running animals and animals in thick brush because the hunter isn't able to count the points. I would bet that during hunts that have antler restrictions that there are more animals killed by hunters that aren't recovered than animals left to rot that don't meet the antler restrictions.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Brian, I agree, but check your last sentence...shouldn't it read "I would bet that during hunts that don't have antler restrictions that there are more animals killed by hunters that aren't recovered than animals left to rot that don't meet the antler restrictions.

That I would agree with and I think that is a good point. I still think that in many areas there needs to be other limitations besides just the antler restrictions, such as a limit on the number of hunters, or a ban on the use of ATV's, like Idaho has in several units.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-16-2004 13:15: Message edited by: Washington Hunter ]</font>

 

[kirkl]

I think the 3pt rule for deer and spike only for elk has worked good here in washington. There is alot of big bulls around now which is good for when you draw a permit and theres alot of spikes at the feeding stations this time of year. Its amazing how many spikes go into hiding and dont get found come hunting season. Theres getting to be some decent size bucks around to with the 3pt rule and permit only areas.

 

[Washington Hunter]

kirkl, this may be a little off topic, but since you live in the area, what did you think of the WDFW changing the Umtanum unit from a permit-only unit to a general season unit? I hunted it in 2000 with a permit, and I saw a lot of deer, but very few bucks. Do you really think the deer population had increased enough to justify going to a general hunt, or did they only do it because of complaints from hunters who had hunted it for years and were no longer able to?

 

[kirkl]

I agreed with it, I live 1 mile from the unit and i shot a 4pt out there this year. They started doing it to make a trophy area out of it but that area doesnt produce deer like that, sure theres a few 24-25 inchers but most are like my 18 incher or smaller. I do alot of scouting and 4 wheeler riding in that unit and ive really noticed a buck increase since the permit only began. My buddy muzzleloader hunted that unit this year and ive talked to other guys as well and there was bucks running all over the place. Where i hunted people were seeing a 28-30 incher but nobody got him. They also said the reason they opened it up is because they were always getting hunted during the general season in the manashtash unit then coming down for the winter range and getting hunted during the permit area. Plus the indians like to go up there and kill alot of deer.

 

[Erik in AK]

Comparing whitetails to mulies is apples to oranges. Different herd dynamics, range utilization/habitat preference and rut behavior. All in all I think Bambi hit the nail on the head for fixing Missouri's problem--too many deer and a skewed sex/age ratio.

More than likely, a combination of methods used in conjunction with each other to allow for regional differences would be best.

-Requiring hunters to take a set number of does to qualify for a buck tag.

-Antler restrictions work best and in the long term when set up like slot-limits for bass--spike/fork and 4 point or better and protect the ones in the middle.

-Lottery tags for any buck in some areas.

The key to reducing whitetail herds is culling does. The problem for eastern and many midwest states is suburban sprawl. By carving up farms, fields and especially woods for new subdivisions, development is creating lots of edge habitat which favors deer and simultaneously creating a political climate where hunting becomes controversial.

The problem out west is different--new subdivisions tend to be built in the foothills--on winter range, places where does tend to congregate naturally. The public (newly relocated from town to deer habitat) see a lot of does and assume that there aren't any bucks.

Remember folks, the buck only ethic was created in the aftermath of the depression. Deer herds were nearly exterminated in most of the northeast in the 30's and 40's. People were hungry. For instance, my grandfather once told me that from 1932 to 1934 he never saw a deer much less a buck and he was a Vermont dairy farmer working fields nearly every day.

A lot of people put in a lot of effort to educate the public to not shoot every deer they saw in order to build the herd. One buck can breed many does and every doe is needed to produce fawns etc. etc. and besides, it played to our own cultural norm of protecting women and children. It was a good strategy for the time and it worked and the public became comfortable with it.

That belief, which doesn't work any more because the deer have recovered, is still tightly held in many communities.

In areas where there are simply too many deer, the answer is kill more does.

 

[BrianID]

Erik in AK,

Comparing mulies and whitetails isn't like comparing apples and oranges, it is more like comparing red apples to green apples.

The idea limiting the harvest to "spike/fork and 4 point or better" wouldn't work very well in the long run. Not allowing the harvest of 3 points would only protect a small percent of the bucks. Some deer will never grow anything larger than a 3 point rack. After several years you would have a lot of old 3 points doing a lot of the breeding which would hurt the genetics of the heard.

 

[BrianID]

Washington Hunter,

Sometimes I try to put too many words into one sentence. I should do a better job of proofing my posts before I click on the “Add Reply” button.

This is what I meant to say.
I would bet that during hunts with antler restrictions there are more animals killed by hunters that aren't ever found by the hunter, than animals left to rot because they don't meet the antler restrictions (at least in the areas that I hunt).

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-16-2004 19:00: Message edited by: BrianID ]</font>

 

[Erik in AK]

Brian,
I agree with you if we're talking mulies, I have seen many big 3x3's myself over the years, but with whitetails it is very rare for a buck to reach 4 years old and not be 8 point or better. He might have a rack smaller than a grapefruit if browse is poor but he'll usually be an 8 point if he survives to 3 years old.

I know we don't have whitetails here in AK. I'm basing my opinion on my upbringing in central NY.