Washington High Buck

[dreamingbig]

Dude, 7 bucks getting killed by hunters in roadless 500K acre areas is not what's hurting the mule deer populations. That's almost an anti-hunting argument.

We need to stop being selfish as hunters and support what is right. I wish the population could support but I disagree with shooting the last 7 just because we always have.

With no predator management and unlimited native harvest we can't continue with the historical seasons.

If it was archery only I think you could continue but not with modern rifles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[landis07]

Definitely not the last 7 bucks in the area
People should be active on predator control 2 bear tags fill them get a lion tag and try to fill it and shoot every coyote you see year round and believe or not after a few years of doing this in a area it makes a difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[landis07]

I heard the Lion density down your way was getting bad, but haven't tooled around at elevation in the winter time to see the impacts first hand. Seen an unbelievable amount of coyote pups this year though, and an abnormal number of bobcats at lower elevation. Not good for sure...you knocking cats down regularly?

In other news, here's a couple WA bucks at ~6500', and then an after pic of the left buck. That old swayback was a badass buck, double split eye guards and splits on both G4's making him a 7x7. Never did see him again, but man what I wouldn't give to have seen him in his prime...

Slammer buck ( we need more pics !!) and ya even with cat prices down at auction I still stack a handful up every year but have kinda been on a marten kick the last few years but this year I’ll run 40-50 cat cages


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Harvey_NW]

I agree that is the problem that got us here but also why the season can't be sustained. You are NOT going to get support from this commission or King County to ever manage predators effectively.

We need to stop being selfish as hunters and support what is right. I wish the population could support but I disagree with shooting the last 7 just because we always have.

With no predator management and unlimited native harvest we can't continue with the historical seasons.

Again, submitting to the rogue commission and advocating to close certain hunting seasons because they don't effectively manage predators is literally an anti-hunting argument. From a conservation standpoint no hunter should ever advocate for closing seasons when there's progressive alternative methods. We don't need to close any of the seasons, we need to combat the commission and hold them accountable to make sensible decisions based on sound science, and listen to the department biologists that present the data at the meetings.

Also, I don't know what logic you're using to state the populations in these areas are so bad 7 harvested bucks will have a noticeable negative impact, but I don't follow it. I can only assume you don't actually scout and hunt these areas, or you need to brush up on more effective tactics on finding mountain mule deer. The first year I hunted high buck, there was more than 7 legal bucks in the single basin I hunted, and more than that ran out that I wasn't able to see before I shot one. The success rates aren't low because there's low deer population, they're low because it's 500,000 acres of roadless wilderness that you have to hike your ass off to get into and out of.

 

[LostWapiti]

I’m now feeling guilty for not shooting this cat a few years back when I had the chance. I didn’t buy the tag and he walked out 50 yards in front of me broadside.

 

[dreamingbig]

Again, submitting to the rogue commission and advocating to close certain hunting seasons because they don't effectively manage predators is literally an anti-hunting argument. From a conservation standpoint no hunter should ever advocate for closing seasons when there's progressive alternative methods. We don't need to close any of the seasons, we need to combat the commission and hold them accountable to make sensible decisions based on sound science, and listen to the department biologists that present the data at the meetings.

Also, I don't know what logic you're using to state the populations in these areas are so bad 7 harvested bucks will have a noticeable negative impact, but I don't follow it. I can only assume you don't actually scout and hunt these areas, or you need to brush up on more effective tactics on finding mountain mule deer. The first year I hunted high buck, there was more than 7 legal bucks in the single basin I hunted, and more than that ran out that I wasn't able to see before I shot one. The success rates aren't low because there's low deer population, they're low because it's 500,000 acres of roadless wilderness that you have to hike your ass off to get into and out of.

I am not submitting to the rogue commission. I am fully aware we are in this position because of no effective way to control mountain lions (no hounds for the past ~20 years) and unlimited native harvest since the early 80s.

But, it doesn't mean we shouldn't reconsider what the resource can currently handle. Those same bucks head to the winter range for the rut and modern season. Look at how much they have reduced tags for modern draw permits.

I can tell you will never give up your high buck but I think it is one of the many changes that should be made. Right along with tossing out 5 of the commission members.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Harvey_NW]

I am not submitting to the rogue commission. I am fully aware we are in this position because of no effective way to control mountain lions (no hounds for the past ~20 years) and unlimited native harvest since the early 80s.

See your next 2 statements.

But, it doesn't mean we shouldn't reconsider what the resource can currently handle. Those same bucks head to the winter range for the rut and modern season. Look at how much they have reduced tags for modern draw permits.

I can tell you will never give up your high buck but I think it is one of the many changes that should be made. Right along with tossing out 5 of the commission members.

So we should take away a season because predators are improperly managed by decisions made by the commission, and now the resource can't handle it? - That's submitting to the commission. "Well you guys didn't manage it well enough and now there's not enough deer, better take away a season". Classic anti hunter argument.

I digress.

 

[WaWox]

When deciding what seasons to ban in order to protect declining resources -- if we want to go into that direction at all, versus investing in protecting and strengthening the resource, be it predator control, habitat improvements, etc -- one should ban the highest success rate hunts first.

The legislated goal of the WDFW commission is to maximize quality and opportunity. I'd call the high buck hunt very high quality hunting (even if not high success rate) and almost limitless opportunity (as success rates are low and thus there is little cost to giving hunters this opportunity). On the other hand, the first hunts to go should be cow/doe hunts with >50% success rate -- high cost and limited opportunity.

In other words, high buck hunt should be the *last* hunt to go ..

 

[ianpadron]

Disagree but you do you. Shooting bucks during September and again in November with rifles is a big part of why our mule deer are where they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gonna need some data to support an outlandish claim like the HH affecting MD populations.

If you could shoot a doe during the HH you'd have an argument.

 

[ianpadron]

I agree that is the problem that got us here but also why the season can't be sustained. You are NOT going to get support from this commission or King County to ever manage predators effectively.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How many bears get killed by high buck hunters every year? Would that number go up or down if WDFW banned the HH?

I'm trying to wrap my mind around what could have possibly led you to believe that would help anything.

 

[Harvey_NW]

Gonna need some data to support an outlandish claim like the HH affecting MD deer populations.

If you could shoot a doe during the HH you'd have an argument.

The hundreds that get plastered on the mountain highways heading into wilderness areas each year are just sacrificial culls, shooting 7 with rifles is detrimental!

 

[ianpadron]

The hundreds that get plastered on the mountain highways heading into wilderness areas each year are just sacrificial culls, shooting 7 with rifles is detrimental!

Genuinely curious what has led him to his conclusion, we'll stand by

 

[ianpadron]

Definitely not the last 7 bucks in the area
People should be active on predator control 2 bear tags fill them get a lion tag and try to fill it and shoot every coyote you see year round and believe or not after a few years of doing this in a area it makes a difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm coming over from MT to hunt bears and help you fellas out, no excuses for residents that don't roll at least one big fuzzy a year.

 

[WaWox]

Are buck to doe ratios even particularly low in the wilderness areas? Like, above some ~20:100 ratio or so, there's no way removing bulls has any impact on fawn recruitment (except perhaps a positive one if it lowers food competition for pregnant does.. )

 

[ianpadron]

Are buck to doe ratios even particularly low in the wilderness areas? Like, above some ~20:100 ratio or so, there's no way removing bulls has any impact on fawn recruitment (except perhaps a positive one if it lowers food competition for pregnant does.. )

I've never seen good data specific to summer range. Winter range there is a good bit on the Methow and Wenatchee/Chelan herds. I'd assume the numbers are similar/identical.

Buck:doe ratios came to prominence from the whitetail QDM explosion and imho are relatively useless for monitoring anything that actually increases total population.

More does on the landscape = more deer, and bucks are incredibly efficient at doing buck things. 12:100 is where some does go unbred... that's super low.

At the mule deer regional meeting here last Spring in MT (Region 1), our bios shared data that showed every single doe they have collared for the past 5 years was pregnant...and we've got the same buck:doe ratio as most herds in the Western states that manage for opportunity.

You could likely kill 10x more bucks on the HH every year and it would have zero effect on the overall population trend.

Cats that eat 1-2 mule deer a week though...regardless of if it has antlers, yeah that'll make a dent

 

[Wrench]

The guys that have the mettle to hunt that hunt are the guys who will kill a deer regardless of the season. If they can only hunt the general.....they'll kill one then. Those are the 1% who make up 40% of the dead deer.

 

[Justin Crossley]

I would only like to see the HH go to draw so that people have to decide which hunt they really want to do. It's a selfish thing for me and has nothing to do with helping the population. In fact, I wish all deer hunting in WA was through a draw.

It would go something like this.

Basicall unlimited tags for the current general seasons. But you wouldn't be able to draw a late hunt or the HH because you already got a tag. If you decide to put in for the HH (also unlimited), you couldn't draw the regular season or a late hunt. Late hunt tags would work just like they do now, except the competition for those tags would be way less because you make people decide what is really important to them instead of letting them hunt every season.

The next step would be doing similar to Idaho in regards to drawing O.I.L. tags and deer/elk.

Finally, get rid of points.

 

[ianpadron]

The guys that have the mettle to hunt that hunt are the guys who will kill a deer regardless of the season. If they can only hunt the general.....they'll kill one then. Those are the 1% who make up 40% of the dead deer.

Ain't that the truth.

I would only like to see the HH go to draw so that people have to decide which hunt they really want to do. It's a selfish thing for me and has nothing to do with helping the population. In fact, I wish all deer hunting in WA was through a draw.

It would go something like this.

Basicall unlimited tags for the current general seasons. But you wouldn't be able to draw a late hunt or the HH because you already got a tag. If you decide to put in for the HH (also unlimited), you couldn't draw the regular season or a late hunt. Late hunt tags would work just like they do now, except the competition for those tags would be way less because you make people decide what is really important to them instead of letting them hunt every season.

The next step would be doing similar to Idaho in regards to drawing O.I.L. tags and deer/elk.

Finally, get rid of points.

Disagree wholeheartedly.

At the absolute max you get 20 days to rifle hunt mule deer in WA state. Modern+HH. You already have to choose your weapon, so archery guys get hosed if they can't get it done with a bow.

With typical WA fall weather, it's usually half that, at least up top where it's actually worth hunting.

Giving up opportunity, especially in WA state, is a pretty dang slippery slope, particularly when it won't have any effect on population dynamics, and your commission is actively working to erode the state's hunting heritage. If you want to take the gong show pumpkin patch units on the Eastern slope of the Cascades and make them draw only to address crowding, guess what happens to the Cascade crest units that are totally void of hunters but loaded with deer during modern? New gong-show.

The most remote places with the fewest hunters I've been are not in Idaho, Wyoming, or Montana...they're deep in the WA cascades. Shoot, just last year I saw more dudes in one day, 3 miles from the nearest trail in the Bob Marshall Wilderness than I saw in 5 years of high hunts in WA state.

What would your proposal be looking to accomplish?

 

[Harvey_NW]

Disagree wholeheartedly.

At the absolute max you get 20 days to rifle hunt mule deer in WA state. Modern+HH. You already have to choose your weapon, so archery guys get hosed if they can't get it done with a bow.

Giving up opportunity, especially in WA state, is a pretty dang slippery slope, particularly when it won't have any effect on population dynamics, and your commission is actively working to erode the state's hunting heritage.

Those are exactly the reasons I could never get behind shutting that hunt down as a general option. We're already dwindled down to a couple weeks of opportunity a year at best by having to select a weapon type. With harvest report numbers like 8-12 for BOTH the HH and general seasons in units within, there's zero logic to closing it for population, or any other reasons. Splitting up the seasons further is just extorting more money and taking more opportunity away from sportsmen, which is a classic WA tactic..

 

[LostWapiti]

Can we please let go of the idea that shooting bucks is somehow hurting deer populations?