Don't understand ODFW deer rules for E. Oregon.

[gunguy]

I have lived in or. my whole life, hunted in just about everyware in the state the last 30 years. deer,elk, pronghorns, I have chased them all. BUTT, my question is, why do they allow east or. deer hunting for any "deer with visable antler". it makes no sense to me. why go shoot the little dinkers and toeheads?. I think it wise to let them grow up and become bigger bucks, this will help out greatly for deer numbers, and after a year or two the quality of the animals and the hunting should be much better. some common sense in the management would go a long ways, I mean how much worse can they let it get before everyone says, to heck with it! sorry had to vent.

 

[KILLERBEE]

basic common sence??

west side, alot thicker as a whole, you have to IDENTIFY and it must be a Forked horn? but the east side, usually a little more open, if it has bone it's dead? dumbest thing in ODF@W management i've seen...........

 

[ORsouthpaw]

Well I'm not sure but I think that it should at least be the same as the West side, Forked horn or better and in some eastern units it should even be 3 point or better. IMO

 

[ruttinbull]

Why no antler restrictions????

Because they have been down that road and they have failed.

The young bucks (or bulls) are the dumbest and most prone to any type of predation whether it be by cougars, coyotes or people. It's simple really, Human little boys are the ones to be more daring and bold, breaking bones, getting stitches etc. Little deer and elk are no different. So why protect them if a large percentage are going to get snuffed anyways? Why not let some puke roadhunter knock it over and be happy?

Antler restrictions were tried in many western states and most have gone away from them. Most biologists would love to do away with them entirely (like Oregon) but cannot due to uniformed political pressure.

Anyone remember the Steens and all the large three points that were running around?? We artificially select AGAINST big bucks when we have antler restrictions. The big threes and big forks are left to do the breeding. End result is a gene pool that produces sub-standard bucks.

This is one of the reasons why the "Spike Only" bull hunts are going on. They are controlling the harvest of the larger breeding bulls and hammering the spikes. The end result is that we have some very very nice bulls in NE Oregon now and they are passing on their juice.

Another thing to remember is that managing mule deer is not like managing for whitetail. They are two different animals and have to be managed differently. I do think that one of the things that many western states are guilty of (in the early years through the mid eighties) is trying to manage muleys like whitetails (excessive doe hunts). Mule Deer do not breed their first year like whities. They simply do not reproduce as fast and the heavy doe hunts (over time) took their toll.

My opinion only.

 

[NASCAR88]

Years ago eastside was forked- horn or better, but to many hunters were shooting spikes thinking they were forked-horns and then just leaving them lay. Really you don't want spikes in a herd (bad genes). It seems now that spikes probably do 1/2 the breeding in OR. I think eastside should be three point or better. At least then you would be taking a animal that would be over 100 pounds.

 

[gunguy]

thanks for your guy's input. I think that after so many years of the same old ways the gene pool in the deer herds are all screwed up anyways. most all the bucks one see's are perty small. one or two out of one hundred mite be a shooter buck. I still think some changes are in order for E. oregon. someone in management needs to come up with a real workable plan, and get it started soon! also the new game regs. are out, price of tags are going up.

 

[440sixpack]

Why does ODFW do anything they do? point restrictions do work but if you're not going to make it 3 point or better you're still shooting yearlings so big deal.

I've come to the conclusion Oregon hunters just want an excuse to go camping, quality and quantity are not important and ODFW has done well capitolizing on that.

 

[ruttinbull]

LAST EDITED ON Nov-17-09 AT 10:46PM (MST)[p]Several here have advocated that point restrictions "work." Can you tell me where they have "worked" and what you mean by "worked"?

I can tell you where they have not... Steens, Trout Creeks....

As stated before, those states that still have point restrictions, the bio's really want to dump them but are forced to keep them due to politics. As stated before, it's better to let some Joe shoot a spike than to have it get whacked crossing the highway or get hung up in a fence (remember teenage boys take more risks...). Might wanna take some time to really educate yourself than to keep pushing old ideas.

 

[440sixpack]

I remember the Steens, and it did work, and if it had been 3 point or better rather than 4 point or better those magnum 3 points would have been harversted.

There is no logic whatsoever that says shooting yearlings off in masses makes for better hunting. what part of letting dumb forkie survive his first year and get past the road hunters sounds like a bad idea? nobody is going to tell me that would make for a lower quality and lower quantity hunt.

There is an argument to be made if point restrictions carry on too long and game populations get too high or too many old animals revert back, but too many or too old of an age class is the last thing an Oregon hunter has to worry about right now.

 

[OregonCoast]

I agree with 440.

Oregon needs to implement something that will help the population increase........who cares right now about letting the bigger bucks do the breeding.

human example. if all our newborns were dying then the population could not maintain or grow........it would only decrease. old people would still die, disease would still exist, accidents, etc. We need the young to be able to survive long enough to be part of the population and to procreate and keep the population from dwindling.

So with deer, I would love to see 3 point or better. They do it with elk........even in the thick coast range (tioga unit).

This would give a buck a chance to breed as a fork. It would also give a buck a chance to learn some behaviors to escape hunters thus giving him more years to breed. I guess I am just rambling common sense here.

 

[gunguy]

oregoncoast, I think you hit the nail on the head! but I have read the new regs, and again it's the same old thing. you have to wonder why ODFW dosent change anything, I mean 3300 tags in the Fort Rock unit? come on! 3300 tags for the High Cascade hunt, come on! I could highlight many more draw hunts but I think you get the point.IT'S ALL ABOUT THE DOLLERS! those poor little spikehorns dont have chance to live.

 

[440sixpack]

The tag quotas are easy to figure, take the ODFW budget, divide it by the price of the various tags and you have the quota, then just simply juggle the tags around a little and create new private land hunts so it looks like you're changing something.

 

[gunguy]

Quick story, I have a very good friend at work that has hunted in the Fort Rock unit every year for about 25 years, same camp,10/15 people. this year they had 10 tags in camp and hunted the whole week. NO bucks taken this year. only seen a few does here and there. From guys that know the area, are good hunters, are not lazy, and hunt the same areas every year. He tells me that it's been going downhill for the last 10 years.I tell him to scout out a new spot, he replies, to where? it's all the same!

 

[440sixpack]

Same situation as me with Murderer's Creek, I've been hunting it for 35 years and it's flat pathetic. I thought it was bad after the big winter kill in the early 90's, but it's far worse now than then.

As hunters our role is to harvest the excess and manage the herds, if we were to honestly do that deer hunting in eastern Oregon would be closed off totally.