When I hunted colorado years back you could not shoot a two point or a spike mule deer.In all of the Az mule deer hunts you can shoot any buck with an antler? When I was a member of the MDA in Az and none of the board members wanted to put any restrictions on any deer hunt in Az---why?This always fell on deaf ears?As I hunt across the west now I see muledeer #'s falling-drought,predation,over harvest.If point restrictions were put on the trouphy units in Utah,Id,N.Mex and Az please tell me why this would not increase deer numbers.The only real reason that G&f dept's do not want this is MONEY nothing else!!!!!!!All of the easter states that put point restrictions on whitetails have much bigger bucks taken.If you let a two or three point live for that first couple seasons ,he will be harder to kill and have a shot producing his genes.On great units like The Bookcliffs or Kaibab or White rock if point restriction would be put in place the average hunter would have a real shot at a true trouphy buck---yes--no?
Point Restrictions in western draw hunts
- Thread starter Idcurs
- Start date
D
DallanC
Guest
http://www.createstrat.com/muledeerinthewest/harvest.html
Scroll down to the section on "Antler point restrictions"
-DallanC
Scroll down to the section on "Antler point restrictions"
-DallanC
T
thebuckstopshere
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Dec-05-07 AT 04:40PM (MST)[p]Utah charges $40.00 for a general season deer tag. I would pay double, triple, quadruple, that (maybe even more), as would MANY others. Don't tell me its ALL about money. Its not.
What many have a hard time understanding, is its not ALL about antler growth - or troUphy hunting. LOL!
What many have a hard time understanding, is its not ALL about antler growth - or troUphy hunting. LOL!
B
Bigbuck9
Guest
Scremim
Read the article
This article, the Mule deer managment book that a bunch of biologist put together for the western game and fish agencies and the biologists I have talked to all agree that point restrictions DO NOT WORK for mule deer in the west.
So why would you want them!
The best way to manage mule deer for quality is to severely limit access. However I for one would much rather get to hunt every year or at least every 2-3 years than wait 10-15 years to go hunting just so I could have a great chance at a monster.
Read the article
This article, the Mule deer managment book that a bunch of biologist put together for the western game and fish agencies and the biologists I have talked to all agree that point restrictions DO NOT WORK for mule deer in the west.
So why would you want them!
The best way to manage mule deer for quality is to severely limit access. However I for one would much rather get to hunt every year or at least every 2-3 years than wait 10-15 years to go hunting just so I could have a great chance at a monster.
JakeH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,271
I noticed you added the bookcliffs into your post, the books dosent need point restictions to boost the trophy quality of the herd it needs mangment hunts.
If you implement a 3 point or better restriction it would only alow all the big 2 points out there to do alot more of the breeding.
Currently there are 300 rifle deer tags in the bookcliffs, (way to high a number if you ask me) why not take 100 to 150 of those tags and make them 3point or smaller on one side. For atleast 2 years, I dont think this is something they should implement permently.
Also all managment deer should be checked in by a F&G officer or at the offices. This would keep people from cheating.
I dont know if this will work on all the limited entry units but it would do wonders in the Bookcliffs, in my oppinon.
I would like to know what you guys think of this.
Thanks.
Jake H. MM Member since 1999.
If you implement a 3 point or better restriction it would only alow all the big 2 points out there to do alot more of the breeding.
Currently there are 300 rifle deer tags in the bookcliffs, (way to high a number if you ask me) why not take 100 to 150 of those tags and make them 3point or smaller on one side. For atleast 2 years, I dont think this is something they should implement permently.
Also all managment deer should be checked in by a F&G officer or at the offices. This would keep people from cheating.
I dont know if this will work on all the limited entry units but it would do wonders in the Bookcliffs, in my oppinon.
I would like to know what you guys think of this.
Thanks.
Jake H. MM Member since 1999.
I will never trust a biologist that works for the G&F depts to come up with an unjaded report--it aint going to happen!!!!!!Now also how in the hell does a biologist from princeton have any clue as to how point restrictions will work out here.I have hunted some truely great mule deer ranches in western texas -that do not allow any buck less that a four point to be taken and they have bucks that rival the Az strip.Bucks that are two points and breed at two years carry the same genes as they will at 7 years and carry a 28 inch 6x5 frame.Age does not change the genetics.Age only gives the buck a chance to produce a truly great set of antlers on a good wet year at 5 to 7 years.Its is always about the money to G&F depts. in the west,muledeer and elk make up over 70% of the G&F budgets in Az,N.m, Nev,co, Id and Ut.
I have
>hunted some truely great mule
>deer ranches in western texas
>-that do not allow any
>buck less that a four
>point to be taken and
>they have bucks that rival
>the Az strip.
>
They don't allow fences under 6 feet either...LOL
If huntin is a sport.....Well your lookin at an athlete!
>hunted some truely great mule
>deer ranches in western texas
>-that do not allow any
>buck less that a four
>point to be taken and
>they have bucks that rival
>the Az strip.
>
They don't allow fences under 6 feet either...LOL
If huntin is a sport.....Well your lookin at an athlete!
"they have bucks that rival the Az strip"
Of course they do. They are ranches and can grow them that big. Just like the elk ranches that produce 550" bulls.
Also, the size of a deer or elk ranch is much smaller than most game units. Not sure it is a valid comparison.
It's Bush's fault!!!
Of course they do. They are ranches and can grow them that big. Just like the elk ranches that produce 550" bulls.
Also, the size of a deer or elk ranch is much smaller than most game units. Not sure it is a valid comparison.
It's Bush's fault!!!
LAST EDITED ON Dec-06-07 AT 10:51AM (MST)[p]Just have to keep in mind that not everyone out there desires to pass up the spikes and forkies to shoot a 30", so the ideal situation for each state is to try and determine the percentages of their hunters Res/N-R that want any buck area's, occaisional big bucks and then trophy area's and then manage their states units in direct proportion to those numbers. That way it is fair across the board for everyone. I believe that most if not all states are there or headed in that direction already. It is a constantly changing situation that is very difficult for the states to stay on top off. Especially if you have a group of hunters that may only represent a very small percentage but their voice sounds as if they have the backing of the majority of hunters. Then you have the vast majority of hunters who don't voice their opinion until after a change has been submitted, then what they do is whine and cry cause they can't do what they have been doing for the last # of years.
You have to put your self on their sidelines and imagine yourself trying to make 1+ million people happy with the supplies to only make 100,000 happy??
No, I'm not a state represenative, i just try to see all sides of the story before I jump in feet first and I wasn't intending to attack anyone it is just a generalization.
Mntman
"Hunting is where you prove yourself"
You have to put your self on their sidelines and imagine yourself trying to make 1+ million people happy with the supplies to only make 100,000 happy??
No, I'm not a state represenative, i just try to see all sides of the story before I jump in feet first and I wasn't intending to attack anyone it is just a generalization.
Mntman
"Hunting is where you prove yourself"
B
Bigbuck9
Guest
Belive what you want, but you have to remember that these ranches in Texas also limit the # of bucks harvested as I said this is the best way to increase antler size as you allow more deer to live and increase the age structure. However simply putting antler point restrictions on does not increase the age structure infact it can have the opposite effect. Think adout it the same number of people hunting fewer deer (those that are legal), there are going to be more 4*4's killed leaving fewer and fewer up to a point. Also the harvest of spikes and forked horn is about as close to compensatory mortality as you can get in many mule deer pops as a higher proportion of these bucks will die due to natural mortality events even if not harvested.
Anyway I know some of you will not listen no matter wat anybody says so belive whatever you want.
Anyway I know some of you will not listen no matter wat anybody says so belive whatever you want.
You just flat out cant compare a ranch (which is probably high fenced) in west Texas to public/private lands throughout the west. On a ranch even if its 10,000 acres you have the ability to control feed, water, and hunting pressure. Not to mention what deer are taken off said ranch. There's just to many uncontrolable circumstances in the wild to accomplish what those ranches are. That being said, I think each state if not specific regions in those states has thier own set of problems to deal with. Other than that IMO I think some states do better jobs than others but just antler restrictions alone does'nt dictate the deer herd quality in any state.
If huntin is a sport.....Well your lookin at an athlete!
If huntin is a sport.....Well your lookin at an athlete!
". . .Another harvest strategy sometimes employed to improve depressed buck:doe ratios is a ?four-point or
better? hunting season. It may seem counterintuitive, but antler point restrictions do not necessarily
produce more large bucks. In a 4-point or better season, the hunter is restricted to harvesting bucks with 4
points or more on either antler. Consequently, all harvest pressure is redirected to the largest deer in the
population, which reduces their number. Since most yearlings and some 2-year old bucks are protected
until they become small 4-point deer, the overall ratio of bucks to does will increase somewhat as a result
of having more young bucks in the population. However, harvest is merely delayed until a buck grows its
first set of 4-point antlers. The maximum benefit of a 4-point season is typically realized after the season
has been in place 2 or 3 years, at which time most 4-point bucks are being harvested. Thereafter, the
buck:doe ratio does not continue to increase and fewer bucks actually survive to grow truly large antlers.
Over the long-term, persistently targeting large bucks may also eliminate desirable genetics (the ability to
grow large antlers) from the population. If the objective is to produce more large deer, the 4-point
restriction must be lifted after 2 years so harvest is once again spread over more age classes. This allows
more of the incoming cohort of 4-point bucks to survive to an older age and potentially grow much larger
antlers. Should the overall buck:doe ratio again decline to an unacceptably low level, the 4-point or better
season can be reinstated for another 2-3 years to augment the number of bucks in the population, and the
process is repeated. Permanent 4-point or better seasons do not produce more large bucks and actually
reduce the harvestable surplus because some of the younger bucks that could have been harvested will die
from other causes before they grow 4-point antlers. In addition, some small bucks are mistaken for legal
bucks and are illegally killed and abandoned. Those deer represent a resource that is lost from the
population and impact hunter opportunity in future years." (The Wyoming Mule Deer Initiative).
better? hunting season. It may seem counterintuitive, but antler point restrictions do not necessarily
produce more large bucks. In a 4-point or better season, the hunter is restricted to harvesting bucks with 4
points or more on either antler. Consequently, all harvest pressure is redirected to the largest deer in the
population, which reduces their number. Since most yearlings and some 2-year old bucks are protected
until they become small 4-point deer, the overall ratio of bucks to does will increase somewhat as a result
of having more young bucks in the population. However, harvest is merely delayed until a buck grows its
first set of 4-point antlers. The maximum benefit of a 4-point season is typically realized after the season
has been in place 2 or 3 years, at which time most 4-point bucks are being harvested. Thereafter, the
buck:doe ratio does not continue to increase and fewer bucks actually survive to grow truly large antlers.
Over the long-term, persistently targeting large bucks may also eliminate desirable genetics (the ability to
grow large antlers) from the population. If the objective is to produce more large deer, the 4-point
restriction must be lifted after 2 years so harvest is once again spread over more age classes. This allows
more of the incoming cohort of 4-point bucks to survive to an older age and potentially grow much larger
antlers. Should the overall buck:doe ratio again decline to an unacceptably low level, the 4-point or better
season can be reinstated for another 2-3 years to augment the number of bucks in the population, and the
process is repeated. Permanent 4-point or better seasons do not produce more large bucks and actually
reduce the harvestable surplus because some of the younger bucks that could have been harvested will die
from other causes before they grow 4-point antlers. In addition, some small bucks are mistaken for legal
bucks and are illegally killed and abandoned. Those deer represent a resource that is lost from the
population and impact hunter opportunity in future years." (The Wyoming Mule Deer Initiative).
ColoradoOak
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,920
Now also how in
>the hell does a biologist
>from princeton have any clue
>as to how point restrictions
>will work out here.
Biologist from Princeton? LMAO!!!
>the hell does a biologist
>from princeton have any clue
>as to how point restrictions
>will work out here.
Biologist from Princeton? LMAO!!!
E
Elksnuffer
Guest
Idcurs,
Utah tried a 3-point or better,and a
4 point or better point restrictions some years back.
A lot of people feel that it was the beginning of the decline of our deer herds.Of which we haven't fully recovered from yet.
Later
Snuffer
Utah tried a 3-point or better,and a
4 point or better point restrictions some years back.
A lot of people feel that it was the beginning of the decline of our deer herds.Of which we haven't fully recovered from yet.
Later
Snuffer
When 13b on the Az strip was open after it was closed for years only 25 permits were issued.The average buck was 28 inch 5x5.For the next 6 years the tags stayed below 50 permits and only a very small hand full of idots took anything less than a 4x4.In 1995 the average buck was still up around 28 inches,but hunters were starting to kill much smaller bucks.Now many will shoot a three point or a small(140)4x4.How many hunters sang the blues about not seeing big bucks or many bucks at all????If point restrictions are in place then the sorry hunters that will not put in the effort will not be able to just fill a tag the last couple days.Mortality rates are different in all areas,strip deer don't get run over on the highway--there aint none.Lions take as many big bucks as they do small ones and does.Coyotes are not a big threat to bucks no deep snow to help them out there.Hunters are the main predator next to lions.I wished that the number of tags would be less and it cost a whole lot more then you would weed out the hunters that only wanted to just shoot a buck.But with the Az G&F less tags aint going to happen till there are no deer left like in the late eighties.Not all ranches in Texas are small and high fenced,I get to hunt on three that are from 77 thousand to 125 thousand acres.None are fenced with any more than four strand barbwire,and most are slick strand on the bottom.Most of the country that I hunt deer in is just like the strip pj and scrub oak.No corn or wheat feilds and the only water is cattle water just like the strip.Would point restrictions work in an area that you could find every deer--I don't know.But in an area like the az strip where you may not see a deer for days and in no way could harvest all the four points-I believe it would help.Tag numbers will not drop on the strip or kaibab so tell me how will this ever be the super buck hunting spot it once was.I have lion and deer hunted the area for over thrity years,so all the experts that know how to produce big bucks please tell me how.And yea Az has a bioligist from princeton!!!
D
dancasey2
Guest
Good information!
