Bigjav
Active member
Saw a go hunt article that now Wyoming will place a 4point restriction on mule deer in region F, can anyone confirm this and if so does anyone have the details?
New Wyoming antler restrictions
- Thread starter Bigjav
- Start date
Looks like most of those areas are going that route according to the proposed regs. Maybe we'll hear something about it in our meeting Monday night, we'll have to ask.
Look up the [proposals here:https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/April_CH-6_Draft-3-19-18-4a.pdf
Look up the [proposals here:https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/April_CH-6_Draft-3-19-18-4a.pdf
Bigjav
Active member
Dang..that's what it looks like. I usually hunt that area and am always on the lookout for a 4pt buck the first half of my hunt but sometimes the weather doesn't cooperate, and the bigger ones are still in the wilderness and inaccessible for a nonresident diy hunter like myself.
uncle sage
Member
A big framed mature buck has always been my desire, how many points the buck has usually means little to me. Last year in Wy, we saw a abnormal amount of clearly adult Forkeys. So many in fact that we talked of them having a special youth hunt or something similar, just for the big forks so they'll do less breeding. Our hunt was in a limited draw area, though in F, not your general season hunt.
In general i like it, there just following what they did last year in g/h with winter kill. Its not just region f deal, several changes propossed with tags # etc but will be good for couple years. I truley think the only people this point rule will impact are residents who are just meat hunting, kids or road hunters. But i do not believe the state should dictate how big racks are before big enough to be steaks on a general tag. Working guy who has 1 weekend off and just wants a freezer deer should be able to shot any antlered deer they wish. Its a antlered or antlerless deer tag in general zones, if they want point restrictions make it controlled hunt and good luck with that. As long as these are short term plans to address management numbers/herd health i am fine but if this is new norm its a bad thing. I hope my rant is understandable...lol
Bigjav
Active member
I understand the goal of increasing deer numbers with it, and I know they decreased tags last year as we weren’t able to draw last year due to the harsh winter. But I’d be curious what the actual toll hunters have on the numbers? I’d like to think that the 3 pt ‘meat bucks’ me and my dad took two years ago didn’t crash the population. I guess just a little more transparency in the process would be nice.
BrentD
Well-known member
I've been hearing rumors about this new regulation. It doesn't bother me a whole lot, though I suspect my chances of punching a tag just dropped substantially. However, is this 4 pt rule for both left and right or just one side? I have a hard enough time figuring how many points are on one side before I shoot. I do not use a scope on any of my rifles so figuring this out in a hurry will often not be easy.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
One side needs 4 or more. I would make sure you use your binoculars to verify points or put good glass on your rifle.
BrentD
Well-known member
No chance of putting glass on my rifle. But I'll be carrying and using Binos. Just another variable that figures in.
Thanks for the clarification on the ruling.
Thanks for the clarification on the ruling.
There's actually quite a few units with 3pt and 4pt restrictions through-out the state. I hope it doesn't stay that way forever because of various reasons but I'm happy to see a state trying to actively manage Mule deer and try different things.
Point restrictions have been tried in many places. Please provide any shred of evidence the restrictions have been beneficial. They ain't exactly inventing the wheel here...
Power54
New member
APRs alone really don't work and that is well documented. I can only assume WYGF is implementing APRs based on the same justification for not allowing NRs to hunt in designated wilderness.
https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/con...ive/MULEDEER_ANTLERPOINTREGS_REVIE0006790.pdf
From their own paper:
"All APR strategies resulted in a short term gain in the proportion of males in the population. However, male:female ratios eventually returned to pre-APR levels after varying lengths of time, regardless whether the APR was continued. Most western states have concluded that sustainable improvements in buck:doe ratios and the number of mature bucks can only be realized by reducing harvest through: 1) a limited quota license system that decreases the total buck harvest while allowing some level of doe harvest (Bender 2011); or by setting a very short hunting season.
deVos et al. (2003) suggested that while APRs increase the proportion of bucks in a population, there is no evidence they substantially increase the total number of adult (mature) bucks. Further, increases in buck:doe ratios have never been shown empirically to improve either herd production or population size (deVos et al. 2003; Bishop et al. 2005)."
https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/con...ive/MULEDEER_ANTLERPOINTREGS_REVIE0006790.pdf
From their own paper:
"All APR strategies resulted in a short term gain in the proportion of males in the population. However, male:female ratios eventually returned to pre-APR levels after varying lengths of time, regardless whether the APR was continued. Most western states have concluded that sustainable improvements in buck:doe ratios and the number of mature bucks can only be realized by reducing harvest through: 1) a limited quota license system that decreases the total buck harvest while allowing some level of doe harvest (Bender 2011); or by setting a very short hunting season.
deVos et al. (2003) suggested that while APRs increase the proportion of bucks in a population, there is no evidence they substantially increase the total number of adult (mature) bucks. Further, increases in buck:doe ratios have never been shown empirically to improve either herd production or population size (deVos et al. 2003; Bishop et al. 2005)."
BuzzH
Well-known member
I've never seen Wyoming maintain an APR for a long period of time, and doubt they will. In fact, the APR's in some areas have been dropped and some went from 4 point to 3 point restrictions.
In the short term, they can result in higher buck to doe ratio's. I believe its worth trying these in the short term, beats the hell out of going limited quota, which I strongly oppose.
Not that I'm opposed to anyone killing a deer, but if more people could refrain from shooting "freezer bucks" and fill their freezers with 2 pronghorn bucks, 4 pronghorn does, or 3 elk that we're allowed...these type of management decisions may not be necessary. It would also be nice if Wyoming R and NR hunters remembered we have 2 species of deer here too.
In the short term, they can result in higher buck to doe ratio's. I believe its worth trying these in the short term, beats the hell out of going limited quota, which I strongly oppose.
Not that I'm opposed to anyone killing a deer, but if more people could refrain from shooting "freezer bucks" and fill their freezers with 2 pronghorn bucks, 4 pronghorn does, or 3 elk that we're allowed...these type of management decisions may not be necessary. It would also be nice if Wyoming R and NR hunters remembered we have 2 species of deer here too.
Last edited:
Tbass, we had antler point restrictions for the Snowy Range for a few years and it did really seems to make a difference.They lifted the restriction after a few years and we had many more nice mature bucks harvested.
Like Buzz stated , they will not leave them for a long period and it should help with younger buck survival during the hunting season.
Locals will find another area for their meat bucks.
Like Buzz stated , they will not leave them for a long period and it should help with younger buck survival during the hunting season.
Locals will find another area for their meat bucks.
icebreaker12
Active member
Generally speaking APRs are added when an area sees a decline to a certain Buck-Doe ratio. Then the APR is removed when the Buck-Doe ratio exceeds a certain ratio.
For example an APR was implemented in Area 66 when Buck-Doe ratios dipped below 25:100, and was then removed when Buck-Doe ratios exceeded 35:100.
For example an APR was implemented in Area 66 when Buck-Doe ratios dipped below 25:100, and was then removed when Buck-Doe ratios exceeded 35:100.
C'mon man. Do you think I actually want to waste my time searching for evidence to furnish to you? All I said was that I don't think an APR is bad if not implemented forever, for various reasons which I'm sure you already have in mind. I think it will increase survivability of bucks even though a few will be ground checked and left. You can't fault a state for at least trying to do things with their mule deer herd.
I'll be hunting a unit this year that is on the second year of an APR, which I hunted as well before it went to an APR. I'll PM you my own observations and any differences I see after the hunt.
CampRipleyLF
Active member
I don't think its that big of a deal if this becomes a rule. Just pull up you class and take a look. Not that much time to determine if its a legal buck. Yes it throws another variable in but that's hunting.
Eric.MN
Well-known member
Anyone know when those proposed changes would be decided on and finalized? I can't get on the Wyoming fish and game web site, seems to be down. Is it on 4/24?
Last edited:
Topgun 30-06
Active member
The G&F website has been down all day and yes, it's 4/24 or 4/25.
