Sacrificing weapon quality for buck/herd quality and opportunity

[BRTreedogs]

Every bio says hunters have no measurable effect on heard size.
So it may help trophy quality and may lead to more tags being issued.
But I definitely don’t think it will improve overall heard quality.

 

[Plainsman79]

It’s a good idea to increase quality while maintaining opportunity for the general season hunter. I doubt the meat hunters spend much time on the hunt because it’ll be considerably harder than what they’re used to and willing to do. More than likely it’ll catch on with the trophy hunting crowd, which could lead to heavy hunting pressure. Take the wasatch front archery only hunt. Some really great bucks are killed every year in some really rugged country with heavy heavy pressure. Why would this be any different aside from not being a hop, skip and a jump from a major metropolis?

As mule deer numbers continue to decline for a multitude of different reasons, this solution is only 1 piece of the puzzle to slow the decline down. Cats, cars, coyotes and drought kill more deer in a year than all the hunters.

 

[MallardSX2]

Been saying it for years.

Flintlocks and Recurves.

Bring.
It.
On.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Won't that just increaes the amount of guys doing the ol Kentucky windage hold over leading to an increase in wounding/unrecoved animals?

I get the feeling this happens… a lot anyhow… would have to at least get closer… somewhat

 

[bigsky2]

Sign me up.

 

[long hunter]

Just put a stopped deer season say for three years and give the animals time to recover perhaps.

 

[Wrench]

Seeing guys pound animals over 500 yards with what is supposed to be a primitive weapon (muzzloader) is an easy place to start in my book.

I used an open sighted hawken with lead and loose powder.

 

[flyfisher117]

Judging by the typical person I see on the range,trying to sight in their rifles 2 weeks before season, I don't believe primitive weapons will reduce wounding loss.

I do think it would reduce success across the board. Which will anger the "if it's brown, its down" orange army.

I wish more states could standardize their Muzzy requirements and could eliminate these 500+ yard "muzzle loaders".

As someone who doesn't own a Muzzy but has been wanting one it's tough as shit making sure my choice complies in the majority of western states I may hunt. Without just buying the most primitive possible and setting myself up for failure against the inline crowds.

 

[TrinityAlps]

Just put a stopped deer season say for three years and give the animals time to recover perhaps.

Absolutely not.

 

[270Hunter]

Just put a stopped deer season say for three years and give the animals time to recover perhaps.

I’m gonna say it, terrible idea. We do not need to stop deer seasons.

 

[JJ1179]

I agree. When you give something up, it’s hard to get back.

 

[270Hunter]

It’s a good idea to increase quality while maintaining opportunity for the general season hunter. I doubt the meat hunters spend much time on the hunt because it’ll be considerably harder than what they’re used to and willing to do. More than likely it’ll catch on with the trophy hunting crowd, which could lead to heavy hunting pressure. Take the wasatch front archery only hunt. Some really great bucks are killed every year in some really rugged country with heavy heavy pressure. Why would this be any different aside from not being a hop, skip and a jump from a major metropolis?

As mule deer numbers continue to decline for a multitude of different reasons, this solution is only 1 piece of the puzzle to slow the decline down. Cats, cars, coyotes and drought kill more deer in a year than all the hunters.

Interesting correlation between what this could become and the watch front, I never even thought about that!

I agree that there are many different reasons as to why mule deer are declining in parts of the West. But every little bit we do helps them! Really good insight thank you for commenting!

 

[270Hunter]

Judging by the typical person I see on the range,trying to sight in their rifles 2 weeks before season, I don't believe primitive weapons will reduce wounding loss.

I do think it would reduce success across the board. Which will anger the "if it's brown, its down" orange army.

I wish more states could standardize their Muzzy requirements and could eliminate these 500+ yard "muzzle loaders".

As someone who doesn't own a Muzzy but has been wanting one it's tough as shit making sure my choice complies in the majority of western states I may hunt. Without just buying the most primitive possible and setting myself up for failure against the inline crowds

There may be some options for a muzzleloader that’s legal in every western state but I think you’ll be limiting your options if you tried to do that. I would recommend looking at the states that you want to muzzy hunt in, learn their muzzleloader laws and then go from there. I mainly hunt Utah, Idaho and Colorado with a muzzleloader so I found a muzzleloader that’s legal in all three states! I hope this helps!

 

[Robobiss]

I’m all about it, mostly trading rifle seasons for archery seasons. Maybe some muzzleloader.

I wish like hell my state would do it, we have rifle season for the entire whitetail rut, and the hills run red with the blood of stupid spikes and forkies.

 

[S.Clancy]

In order of likelihood:

1. Decrease success rates

2. Small increase in buck:doe and potentially age class

3. It could decrease pressure. But, given that success rates would likely decrease I imagine they would increase tag #s which would increase pressure.

It won't do anything for "herd quality".

I'm a huge fan in states trying these primitive weapons to get good data and creates an awesome opportunity to make hunting difficult.

 

[270Hunter]

I’m all about it, mostly trading rifle seasons for archery seasons. Maybe some muzzleloader.

I wish like hell my state would do it, we have rifle season for the entire whitetail rut, and the hills run red with the blood of stupid spikes and forkies.

I think we still need general rifle seasons, I love to hunt with my rifle but I do think in some units replacing the centerfire rifle with a muzzleloader is a good idea to keep the hunt general while reducing opportunity.

And that’s the way it goes in most states on most hunts, spikes and forkies are the majority of the bucks killed.

 

[TaperPin]

I find it interesting to reduce the quality of animals taken even further than normal in order to increase the quality down the road. If someone is complaining now, they will be howling when forced to buy a new muzzleloader or bow and learn how to use it.

Herds will increase and decrease just fine all by themselves with normal seasons.

I don’t mind things how it is. Some of the largest deer have been in quite marginal areas with very few deer overall. There is one area in Wyoming that had some good animals come out of it and everyone was excited - I laugh because it’s so devoid of any kind of life. 99% of hunters would hunt there for two days, never see a single deer and leave.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

I like this thread , haven’t voted yet still on a few fences. But good to have the discussion.

I will say I agree that it won’t help the herd quality, but should help buck age class.

I’m curious @robby denning what gets your vote if you’re ok making public or PM : )

I think the big factor here is that it depends on the unit or region on your state. I hunt some OTC that is almost completely void of mule deer hunters so there would be no good reason for restrictions from my point of view. Here the herd numbers and trophy quality is low but age class is good. Then I’ll hunt another OTC mule deer zone later season that is def crowded, maybe too crowded. Age class is lower in some mountains and decent in others. So it really all depends!

 

[robby denning]

I like this thread , haven’t voted yet still on a few fences. But good to have the discussion.

I will say I agree that it won’t help the herd quality, but should help buck age class.

I’m curious @robby denning what gets your vote if you’re ok making public or PM : )

I think the big factor here is that it depends on the unit or region on your state. I hunt some OTC that is almost completely void of mule deer hunters so there would be no good reason for restrictions from my point of view. Here the herd numbers and trophy quality is low but age class is good. Then I’ll hunt another OTC mule deer zone later season that is def crowded, maybe too crowded. Age class is lower in some mountains and decent in others. So it really all depends!

Hey, sure, I stuck to the questions as posed but struggled with the mix of "herd/buck quality" as they're two different measurables, but I figured the spirit of the questions was "better/bigger/more bucks = higher herd quality" so that's what I voted (choice 1 in the poll).

And to add a point of clarification on the Idaho trial units, there would not be an increase in tags given, because they're still general season units. If tags increase that only means more hunter chose to hunt the unit, but that's probably not likely for a while because they'd have to give up centerfire privileges. That's the whole idea in Idaho--preserve OTC opportunity but potentially let more bucks get into upper age classes due to the open-sighted muzz rule, vs. going limited quota, decreasing tag numbers and watching draw odds plummet faster than buck quality/size increases (the nature of LQ hunts IMO)>

now utah would be different, they could increase tag numbers if there was a corresponding increase in buck quality/size/age

 

[270Hunter]

I like this thread , haven’t voted yet still on a few fences. But good to have the discussion.

I will say I agree that it won’t help the herd quality, but should help buck age class.

I’m curious @robby denning what gets your vote if you’re ok making public or PM : )

I think the big factor here is that it depends on the unit or region on your state. I hunt some OTC that is almost completely void of mule deer hunters so there would be no good reason for restrictions from my point of view. Here the herd numbers and trophy quality is low but age class is good. Then I’ll hunt another OTC mule deer zone later season that is def crowded, maybe too crowded. Age class is lower in some mountains and decent in others. So it really all depends!

I think you make a lot of great points! It really does depend on the unit/region. I think in some areas it could help things like age class of bucks and hunting pressure. But other general areas I think it would be limiting the already minimal amount of mule deer hunters that are hunting that area. There's definitely a lot of factors that play into decisions like this!