fatfootdoc Report post Posted June 10, 2006 So New Mexico Game and Fish actually has a survey on their web site asking our opinion of whether or not they should continue with antler point restrictions, change them or leave them the same. The choices are aprd which is 3 points on one side or better, forked horn one antler must have 2 points or any buck. They give some of the pros and cons of each. But this is our opportunity to have some input on it hopefully, just wondering what the general feeling of antler point restrictions is on the site. Would also be interested to hear what Amanda's opinion of it is. Thanks AG Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BRYCE CANYON Report post Posted June 10, 2006 I like the 3 point restriction. I think New Mexico is gearing up for some great bucks in the coming years because of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SunDevil Report post Posted June 10, 2006 I wish AZ would go to it!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wklman Report post Posted June 10, 2006 definately a no no.if you place an antler restriction on deer all you will see is small bucks because now everybody will be hunting and killing the older class deer instead of some guys taking a spike or forkie.before an antler restriction is in place hunters have the opportunity to take any antlered deer.so there would be hunters that would be happy taking a smaller buck for meat.you put an antler restriction in and now all those hunters that were happy with a spike or forkie are now hunting and putting pressure on the rest of the buck population.not a good thing.inferior genetics will be passed on because all the older class bucks will be hunted up and the younger deer will be doing all the breeding. wade Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatfootdoc Report post Posted June 10, 2006 wklman, That is exactly what the web site said, at least for the 3pts to one side. It seems like there are many arguments out there about it , but it seems like with a 3pt restriction alot of the mature bucks get nailed as everybody is hunting for them. The average size of the racks actually decreased according to their data( not from NM however) so for what its worth. AG Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jamaro Report post Posted June 10, 2006 Like anything it has too sides... I think it is G &F's to try to get some age on our bucks... Studies have shown that mature deer are more successfull breeders.. Unfortunatly, most people have a hard time aging deer. In any,case at least the dept is trying things.. Jason Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hunter4life Report post Posted June 10, 2006 I was under the impression that in some states back East that went to a similar system, the age class of all bucks harvested basically went up by one year (ie. before x% were 1 1/2 years old and y% were 2 1/2 years old and so on, and after roughly x% were 2 1/2 years old and y% were 3 1/2 years old) and they ended up getting bigger bucks. I seem to remeber reading an article about this, but it was a few years ago and I haven't really followed the issue closely. The argument about younger deer passing on inferior genetics is total hogwash. That 6 1/2 year old 115" coues buck was once a little forkhorn when he was young and he had the same genetics the whole time. You could get more genetically inferior deer doing the breeding if the following were true. If deer that would eventually be bigger at maturity were more likely to start out with their first set of antlers having 3 points on a side than a genetically inferior deer that would be smaller at maturity, then a 3 point restriction would end up killing off more of the genetically superior deer before they could breed. I do not know if there has been a well designed study that has answered this question, maybe Amanda knows of one. A study like this would be hard to do looking at wild deer, as there are a lot of confounding variables such as maternal nutrition, nutrition of the deer during their first year and during the following antler growing season, and other factors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CouesSlayer Report post Posted June 16, 2006 They have to find the big mature bucks first guys! I think ultimately 3 point restriction will have a positive outcome, most of the hunters won't get out their trucks to go find the big ones, which means eventually there will be more deer. Because it is true that the bigger ones are harder to get and I think everyone on this site will agree. The negative side I see is that the success rates may go down for a few years. Uhhh but I'm just some guy , not a biologist or anything like that hee hee heeee....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muley Report post Posted June 16, 2006 I agree all the way with the 3 pt or better. Deer herds are down, and that will help dramatically, and big bucks don't always get big by being stupid, if so everyone would have a couple on the wall. I wish Az would go to that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Noel Arnold Report post Posted June 16, 2006 It might be a good thing.Although you would also be letting some giant two point's keep passing there gene's on.But I probally could live with that if the average age size was older.One other thing that would be a negative is that there would be plenty of two point's shot and left for the buzzard's because people thought they were three point's.So the more I think about it I do not know if it would be good or not. Noel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Couesi1 Report post Posted June 21, 2006 For breeding purposes, a buck is a buck is a buck, whether it is a 3pt, 2pt or a spike. Genetic makeup of a deer doesn't change as he gets older. Only his competitive advantage over little guys. This would effectively do nothing except shift a majority of the harvest to an older age-class animal. The first couple of years all of us braggers could talk about all of the bucks we observed and "passed" each day we went hunting. c-1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DEERSLAM Report post Posted June 21, 2006 All I've seen it accomplish is dead 2pts rottin out in the hills cause some slobs shoot first and count later Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Noel Arnold Report post Posted June 21, 2006 Deerslam, The more I think about it the more I think it would not work for coues.There horn's are so small anyway's it would be hard for people to judge.Even harder when you jump shoot them walking from one glassing spot to another.I can not tell you how many time's in the 32 year's of hunting coues that a buck jump's out with a big frame the look's in the 100's , I shoot him and he end's being either a 2x3 or 2x2 that score's in the 90's. Noel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Rabbit Report post Posted June 21, 2006 NM's neighbor to the north enacted point restrictions several years ago for both deer and elk in the hopes of generating more quality. Colorado has kept the elk restrictions, but dropped the point requirements for muleys as it did not help the age structures and quality. IIRC, too many two-points were left in the field. Surely, NM is not reinventing the squared wheel ? RR Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatfootdoc Report post Posted June 22, 2006 red rabbit, that would sure explain the rough ride we have in NM. I think that there should be no point restrictions, let the podunks come out and blast away at the first antlers they see and leave the big guys for those who want to hike out and work for the bigger deer. This anter point restriction is just a pain in the butt anyways. If I am out hunting and see a large framed deer I will shoot first and would hate to get there and have it be an old buck with a large forked rack. AG Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
