APRs Statewide...Pro or Con??
- Thread starter dogghr
- Start date
Drycreek
Well-Known Member
I did not read all the responses, so I apologize in advance if I'm repeating what someone else has said.
We have AR in my area in Texas, and I generally support it. If nothing else, it makes some folks pass up 2.5 year olds for fear they won't make 13" inside. These bucks then get to be 3.5 years old and become harder to kill.
I know for a fact that we are killing bigger deer than ever before, but some of this can be attributed to the desire of hunters to kill bigger bucks IMO, therefore they let smaller deer pass, and has nothing to do with legality. Almost all of the "hunting shows", (which I don't watch by the way), show the hunters killing big bucks. I think this is a powerful influence on those who watch them, especially younger hunters. Coupled with the fact that QDM is at the forefront in film, literature, and internet forums, the desires of the average guy has shifted from putting meat in the freezer to putting mounts on the wall.
Some of us are after mature bucks, (count me in that group), whether they have big antlers or not. My definition of that is 4.5 in the areas I hunt.
The only buck I killed last year wouldn't even have made P&Y, but he was aged at 5.5 years by cementum annuli. I aged him at 4.5 on the hoof. I figure from what I've read that my "guess" is as good as theirs. My criteria changes depending on where I'm hunting though. Another property I hunt has many nice 3.5 and 4.5 year old bucks. I see one almost every time I hunt. Most of my hunts include an evening, an all day hunt, and the morning I leave. So, really, two days of hunting and I let a couple nice bucks walk. Here's the kicker: I hunt this place by invitation, and they manage for 5.5 year old bucks. Bucks I pass here I would kill in a New York minute on my place or my lease. But the rules are the rules and I respect them.
Overall, I think AR has been a good thing for East Texas. Now, if the state would quit encouraging the killing of spikes !
We have AR in my area in Texas, and I generally support it. If nothing else, it makes some folks pass up 2.5 year olds for fear they won't make 13" inside. These bucks then get to be 3.5 years old and become harder to kill.
I know for a fact that we are killing bigger deer than ever before, but some of this can be attributed to the desire of hunters to kill bigger bucks IMO, therefore they let smaller deer pass, and has nothing to do with legality. Almost all of the "hunting shows", (which I don't watch by the way), show the hunters killing big bucks. I think this is a powerful influence on those who watch them, especially younger hunters. Coupled with the fact that QDM is at the forefront in film, literature, and internet forums, the desires of the average guy has shifted from putting meat in the freezer to putting mounts on the wall.
Some of us are after mature bucks, (count me in that group), whether they have big antlers or not. My definition of that is 4.5 in the areas I hunt.
The only buck I killed last year wouldn't even have made P&Y, but he was aged at 5.5 years by cementum annuli. I aged him at 4.5 on the hoof. I figure from what I've read that my "guess" is as good as theirs. My criteria changes depending on where I'm hunting though. Another property I hunt has many nice 3.5 and 4.5 year old bucks. I see one almost every time I hunt. Most of my hunts include an evening, an all day hunt, and the morning I leave. So, really, two days of hunting and I let a couple nice bucks walk. Here's the kicker: I hunt this place by invitation, and they manage for 5.5 year old bucks. Bucks I pass here I would kill in a New York minute on my place or my lease. But the rules are the rules and I respect them.
Overall, I think AR has been a good thing for East Texas. Now, if the state would quit encouraging the killing of spikes !
catscratch
Well-Known Member
In my opinion points restrictions makes an assumption on what makes ALL hunters happy. I don't want more government regs determining what makes me happy. I have self imposed restrictions on what I shoot and I think everyone should have the ability to decide for themselves what makes them happy (even if someone's harvest takes away from my goal of shooting mature bucks). Who took the vote and determined that antlers should be the sole goal in everyone's hunt? Do I think point restrictions would help in growing older and larger racked bucks? Yes. Do I think that should be the goal of the regulations? Maybe, if selling deer is your ultimate goal. Want more bucks to survive, sell less buck tags and up the pressure on poachers. Manipulate seasons so that there is less opportunity to hunt during the rut. It just doesn't jive well with me creating more regulations on my hunt that have nothing to do with conservation. Now I'm going to conflict myself and say that if all my neighbors wanted to cooperate and restrict young buck harvest I would jump on it! But that would be a voluntary act...
Drycreek
Well-Known Member
I agree 100% with the idea of selling less buck tags. Trouble is, where I live, there would be a great uproar from the deer hunters. Our bag limit in ETexas is two bucks, one of which must be 13" or more inside spread, the other must have at least one unbranched antler. So a lot of folks will kill the first spike they see, almost always a yearling, then "hunt" for another legal buck. The state says they base this philosophy on a (decades old) study of penned deer that shows spikes to be inferior bucks, but in truth, I believe they lack the cajones needed to limit the public to one buck per season. I have a self-imposed limit of one buck per county I hunt, because I'm not killing a spike unless he's two years old or more, and I've seen exactly one of those since 2008 on my place. I saw another on trail cam with a nice four point rack on one side and a 12" rapier on the other. He would have been dead if I had seen him, if no other reason than that he could have seriously injured another buck in a fight, but I never saw him again. I suspect he wound up in someone's freezer.
I guess state management will never please everybody, maybe not even a majority, but as hunters, we can do our part where we can. My objectives have certainly changed through the years.
State management will never satisfy everyone. APR's dont necessarily reduce opportunity to harvest a buck - in many cases, they just shift the age of the bucks harvested. When AR went to the 3 pt restriction, we were back to harvesting the same number of bucks within two or three years. Instead of taking a 125 lb spike home, we were taking a 145 lb basket racked 8 pt home.
I dont know that any studies have been done comparing antler restrictions to lowered bag limit as far as saving bucks, but it would be interesting to see one. In my own state, we are allowed two bucks with at least 3 pts on a side. I have read that about 20% of hunters who kill one buck, kill a second buck. With annual harvest of 100,000 bucks - that second buck probably accounts for 15,000 of the total harvest. But, if you reduced the bag limit to one buck, that doesnt mean all those 15,000 second bucks would escape harvest - other hunters may very well kill quite a few of them. Now, if you reduced the limit to one buck, and did away with the antler restriction altogether - I bet you would see a huge increase in the buck harvest because the 50% of the bucks now protected by the 3 pt reg would all become legal game.
I dont know that any studies have been done comparing antler restrictions to lowered bag limit as far as saving bucks, but it would be interesting to see one. In my own state, we are allowed two bucks with at least 3 pts on a side. I have read that about 20% of hunters who kill one buck, kill a second buck. With annual harvest of 100,000 bucks - that second buck probably accounts for 15,000 of the total harvest. But, if you reduced the bag limit to one buck, that doesnt mean all those 15,000 second bucks would escape harvest - other hunters may very well kill quite a few of them. Now, if you reduced the limit to one buck, and did away with the antler restriction altogether - I bet you would see a huge increase in the buck harvest because the 50% of the bucks now protected by the 3 pt reg would all become legal game.
dogghr
Well-Known Member
I certainly could argue both directions. I hate regs but without them we would still never shoot a doe in this state. I have to correct in that we don't have antler point restriction but only a 15 in min width and one Buck only on the lands I mentioned. Which that gives options to those that want more mature bucks to hunt yet open rest of state.
I think Buck number limitations is my first choice. Like I said we can shoot 6 bucks a yr I think which is too many in my mind. I can legally kill 11+ deer and that should fill anyone's freezer.
My other pt was my example of my friend who hated the regs but is now it's biggest supporter in PA. It's easy for guys in KS or OK type states to not need or want regs. They already have limited buck numbers and regs and don't have 20+ hunters/sq mile that shoot anything. Complicated indeed. I see us having Buck number limits in the future here. I've shot 3 bucks in 8 yrs in my property so no prob for me.
And here's a thot. If you banned camera use, mature bucks would survive longer as you would often not know they were there and and thus not chased hard during seasons by hunters. But now we are really messing with today's norm. Uproar.
I think Buck number limitations is my first choice. Like I said we can shoot 6 bucks a yr I think which is too many in my mind. I can legally kill 11+ deer and that should fill anyone's freezer.
My other pt was my example of my friend who hated the regs but is now it's biggest supporter in PA. It's easy for guys in KS or OK type states to not need or want regs. They already have limited buck numbers and regs and don't have 20+ hunters/sq mile that shoot anything. Complicated indeed. I see us having Buck number limits in the future here. I've shot 3 bucks in 8 yrs in my property so no prob for me.
And here's a thot. If you banned camera use, mature bucks would survive longer as you would often not know they were there and and thus not chased hard during seasons by hunters. But now we are really messing with today's norm. Uproar.
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
If we ban game cameras shouldn't we ban fishfinders too?
I agree, not everywhere needs APR's Those mid west states grow a deer in two years that we grow in three - or four years. Another thing APR's accomplish by protecting an age class of bucks - is allow longer seasons. If you are protecting almost half your deer - you could kill every legal deer and still have plenty left to do the breeding. A state with a 9 day firearm season protects some of their bucks with a short season. A state with a longer season can protect some of their deer with APR's
dogghr
Well-Known Member
Sure. I only trout and smallmouth river fish so why should I care? Lol. All about me.
