point restrictions

[ThomC]

I believe that experts that use real science have studied this over and over and came to the conclusion that removing the dinks was good for the population. You horn hunters would further your cause by shooting a few dinks to help the big ones live longer, and get bigger and produce deer with better genetics. How about every 2-3 years spikes and forks only.

[mikep35]

I don't know any facts about what science has proven, but I believe that it comes down to what limits you put on yourself. If someone wants to go out and kill a spike or 2 point, they taste better anyway. If someone wants to hold out for a 110" monster, they look better on the wall. I have enough cow elk and deer meat in my freezer to feed a small country, but nothing on my wall. Bring on the big 'inz.

[billrquimby]

I don't know any facts about what science has proven, but I believe that it comes down to what limits you put on yourself. If someone wants to go out and kill a spike or 2 point, they taste better anyway. If someone wants to hold out for a 110" monster, they look better on the wall. I have enough cow elk and deer meat in my freezer to feed a small country, but nothing on my wall. Bring on the big 'inz.

 

 

My sentiments exactly, except I have a house and a cabin filled with antlers and heads and no space for more. I've been applying for cow elk tags the last couple of years with no luck.

 

Bill Quimby

[parothead]

I would like to give everyone something to think about before the next session of G&F meetings. Last year there were cries of foul play when we lost the late season hunts for whitetail and early season hunts for bull elk and recieved the Oct and Nov hunts to allow more hunters in the field.

 

The G&F has decided to increase the elk herd by eliminating some of the cow tags. This could be a great thing for elk hunters by having more animals we could have more elk tags.

 

If we had a 6 point rule on early season bulls (RUT) and a 3 point rule on late season whitetails, the number of tags could increase and the resource would not be damaged from over-harvesting. The trophy hunters would still have the option to hunt for trophy class animals and the meat hunters could hunt whatever they could find during the Oct/Nov deer and Nov/Dec elk hunts. There could be enough tags to allow us more chances to draw that quality tag. More tags , more money for the G&F....More hunters coming in for the Outfitter Industry....It could be a win win for all of us.

 

We have the genetics to produce the finest Buck Deer (Muledeer and Coues Whitetail Bucks )and Bull Elk in the world. But to do so in quanities, we must manage the herds for everyone to enjoy.

[mattys281]

I've had two shot opportunities so far this year at coues bucks, and managed to miss them both. One was a spike, and the other a forky. As of today, I've shot several other animals with my bow but stand at 0 for 5 on deer. If I see a spike or forky in a good spot, I'm going for it, and I don't think anyone has the right to pass laws, rules, restrictions or whatever else you call them to stop me, just because they'd like to see bigger antlers. There are enough nice bucks posted in these forums to demonstrate that there are plenty of them out there, perhaps people just need to do some more leg work to find them. These big guys are good at surviving, that's how they get big. There'll still be plenty next year.

[mikep35]

Hey Parothead, I think thats a pretty good idea. Make a Dec hunt a "trophy" hunt, and the oct nov hunts with no restrictions For the people who want some meat for the freezer.

[Diamondbackaz]

Hey Parothead, I think thats a pretty good idea. Make a Dec hunt a "trophy" hunt, and the oct nov hunts with no restrictions For the people who want some meat for the freezer.

 

 

I have been trying for 3 years to convince the G&F that the December hunt is a premium hunt that should have a premium tag price. They did come up with premium hunts for Kaibab mulies and and early bull elk, but was then shot down by the commission.

[parothead]

Hey Archery Hunters,

 

Please understand that I am referring to rifle hunts only for whitetails in December not archery, and Archery Bull hunts in Sept and rifle/blackpowder hunts in Oct..

These hunts are premium hunts that provide us with the opportunity to harvest some world class animals!

 

Our archery seasons for deer are not a threat to the species.

 

We must face the facts, we will lose tags due to supply and demand. The more people apply the less chances we have i.e. less tags to go around.

 

The only way we can convince the G&F to increase the tags in prime time is to provide them with the management tools and REVENUE.... Popular opinion will not do it.

 

Just something to think about...

 

Travis Roberts

Tucson, AZ

[SunDevil]

how many bucks that don't meet the point restriction would be accidentally shot and left to lay?

[IHunt2live]

I don't think that there should be any point restrition. I think that there is plenty of opertunites out there for the trophy hunter in the romote canyons of Arizona. I know a lot of places have ponit restritions but I see them as more of a managment tool in heavly hunted areas like back east were access is all that difficult.

I recently got married, and my wife and her family on some property that boarders a national forest and in this section of the forest access is very difficult so her and her family are the only ones who hunt the area for a max of two deer taken each year. I thought O' great there must be some trophies back there but this past season was the first season I went back there and we saw a total of 2 bucks, small three points, after hunting the entire Nov. season. I seen all the bucks they have taken in that area and I would say non are over 105' most are big, "mature", two points. I don't know why that area can't produce big bucks but its not that fact that there taken out to many deer or that they are to young. So i don't think there should be point restritions at least on on Coues. I know we all want more chances at trophies, I sure do, and we would get more of them if we would just get MORE RAIN.

[runningbird]

I do not favor any more restrictions. what I do want is more rain!! then restrictions won't matter.

 

I would be interested to see what Amanda or deernut have to say on this issue.

[CouesWhitetail]

Antler point restrictions are just a way to reduce hunter success and thereby allow the same number of hunters out in the field while reducing harvest. So I think the real question is do hunters really want the opportunity to get out there and have less success? I personally do not like instituting more complicated regulations just to reduce hunter success. I also think that there are several pitfalls to antler point restrictions including an increase in illegal harvest (people shoot something that doesn't meet the regulations so they leave it in the field) and an increase in harvest pressure on older bucks. Antler point restrictions reduce harvest of young bucks, but increase harvest pressure on older age bucks because now all the hunters out there are being forced to try and harvest an older buck.

 

Someone from the forum posted a PDF from NM a while back about the antler point restriction debate there. I have copied a portion of that article into this post. They give some data from other western states that had antler point restrictions. To read the entired PDF, click on the link later in this post.

 

 

Option # 1 – The Current Bag Limit - APRD

Antler Point Restricted Deer (APRD)—at least 3 visible points on one side; established in

New Mexico beginning with the 2004-05 season.

 

This restriction was put in place in the 2004 season and was expected to:

• Allow for a relatively high number of permits to be issued assuming the 3-point

restriction would reduce the overall number of deer harvested.

• Allow younger bucks (spikes and forked-horns) to survive the hunting season

resulting in more mature bucks and improving hunting in subsequent years.

New Mexico has not completed any research to determine what impact this point restriction has

had over the last 2 years, but other western states have. Based on their experiences, it is expected

that, over time, the following will occur in New Mexico as well:

 

• An increase in the number of “Illegal” bucks killed and left in the field.

o California found an illegal harvest ranging from 100-120 percent of the legal

harvest. After the restriction was abandoned in 1990, the number of bucks

with more than 3 points increased by 25%.

 

• An increase in the number of “Mature” bucks killed, which will have the opposite

effect with fewer, not more, mature bucks surviving the hunting season.

o Oregon (with a 4-point restriction) found the average antler spread of legal

bucks was reduced from 24” to 17”.

o Montana (with a 4-point restriction) found that all the older, mature bucks

were completely shot out. No bucks survive once they reach a 4x4 antler.

 

• An increased harvest of bucks showing more desirable genetic traits.

o In New Mexico many yearling bucks are fork-antlered or even have 3 points, so a

“3 points or better” restriction may actually encourage the removal of the best

bucks, or the bucks with the most potential, from the population.

 

• A prolonged breeding season because more inexperienced males were left to breed.

Prolonged breeding seasons result in fawns being born later in the year. Fawns born

later in the year have a much harder time gaining weight and growing big enough to

survive the winter. As more fawns die, deer populations drop.

 

• A reduction in overall hunter success with fewer legal deer to harvest.

 

 

 

The entire PDF can be read here:

http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/documents/...estionnaire.pdf

[audsley]

I recall reading a few years ago that Colorado had experimented with antler restrictions and found the desired results were not achieved. I'm absolutely against antler restrictions.

 

Parothead brought up another subject that hasn't received sufficient discussion, though I'm not sure Coueswhitetail is necessarily the ideal forum for it. This year's reduction to 2007 cow elk permits was pretty anemic in my opinion. They should have reduced cow permits even further in order to help the herd recover.

 

In March 2006, Arizona's post-hunt elk population was pegged at about 30% below AG&F's target level. We are currently short about 8,000 elk (actual of 17,000 vs. target of 25,000.) How did it get so low? I've been told G&F was downsizing the herd to meet drought conditions. (I also suspect many elk fled the national forests for the Apache reservations after the big fires of 2002 generated better food there, but I can't get anyone in G&F to confirm this theory.) Cutting next year's cow permits by a few hundred is lame. They should have reduced 2007 cow permits by 50% and tried to reach the target of 25,000 within 3 years. That's the best way I know to increase hunter opportunity, which I believe Parothead has already suggested.

 

Also, I believe it was wrong to take virtually all of the reductions out of the archery sector. In order to keep the harvest the same, it's necessary to keep 3 bowhunters home for every rifle hunter you put in the field. This is due to the disparity in success rates between archery and rifle hunters for cow elk. That's inconsistent with AG&F's stated goal of increasing hunter opportunity.

 

Next year we should press for further reductions to cow elk tags and all reductions should come from the rifle allocation.

[audsley]

Correction: Should have said it's necessary to keep 3 bowhunters home for every two rifle cow hunters.

[Couesnut]

I must disagree with the last post.

We have lost far to many mule deer, partly do to the rise in elk #s.

I think the Az G&F should increase the tags by 50% or more. That would make more elk hunters happy.

Just see what happens to the Kaibab in 10 yrs. if we don't exterminate the elk up there. I't's already happend in central Az.

But my name is Couesnut ...Not Elknut...