my own "mule deer plan"

[KILLERBEE]

well feel free to tear it apart , but i've tried and this seems to make sence.- so here we go----


1st: why do the people on the west side of this state have to "identify " there bucks [ 2 point or better] when it is alot thicker vegitation, and the east side have an "any antler" rule? dumb-

we can argue all day long , with hundreds upon hundreds of scientific studies to prove are point, about what antler point restriction is better.
4 pnt or better, clear to spike only.

argueing aside, lets just make "SOME BUCKS" illegal. lets go to a 2 point or better.

what this does is more than the "2" points", it makes people "identify" their bucks. anyone with hunting experiance knows, that that time spent "identifying a buck" will cost alot of hunters a kill. i honestly dont care if you make " any buck with some goofy looking antler " illegal, make SOMETHING illegal to kill. you will have to IDENTIFY that buck before you kill it. that is a drastic change in harvest % IMO

there- you have lowered kill % and kept 98% of everyone happy.






2ND: why cant we take the hunting units, any unit, and take 40% of the tags away? [ we can play with that number- just keep reading] from the normal tags, but then turn around and offer 10% of those tags back in a november hunt? [ the key here is to make those number work, take away so many tags, but even though that 10% is going to be a high% kill tag, it will HEAVILY outweigh the number of tags that youve taken from the general draw.


in this plan you've taken the guys who want a quality hunt, they will apply for those late hunts, but the guys who want a family hunt, will still get to hunt early. intodays times i think its almost a 50-50 split. also you WILL raise the age objective, because you lowered harvest % and made some bucks illegal to kill.

remember, i'm not trying to give "exact" numbers right now. the key point is, take away alot more tags than you give back for the late season hunt, because that late hunt will be a high % kill hunt.


what could possibly be wrong with that? [ i'm sure there is something]

well, lets hear it?

 

[Wanted]

You must of stole my notes........

Oregon was going to go to a rut hunt for units that met the MO several years ago but they scrapped it. I think it was back in the late 90's.

 

[NickW]

I strongly agree with your "Identify your buck". In My 50 years of shooting muleys and blackies, I've never even come close to shooting a buck that I didn't know was legal, antler wise!
That is not difficult if you pay attention to what you are gonna take!

 

[440sixpack]

I'm in favor of point restrictions but it needs to be at least a 3 point or better so the yearlings will make it through their first season. one a buck is 2 1/2 he's 5 times smarter than yearling.

The late hunt idea would be OK if we had a few mature bucks to spare, I'd rather just cut the tag numbers to what the herd can sustain and if you don't like it buy golf clubs.

Still considering the fact we haven't had a winter kill in over 15 years and the fact hunters harvest very few deer out of many units that still have no deer I think it's only a small part of the needed fix. hunters chase deer a few weeks a year, lions and cyotes do it 24/365, theres where your major problem is. go ahead and do your plan it's a start, just don't expect it to be a cure.

 

[ArrowheadWy]

Be careful what you wish for! Lots of three points and most two points are yearlings. The yearlings with the best gentics!

 

[KILLERBEE]

as we can see, that is going to be the problem- even us hunters cant agree on what to set for an antler restriction.



heck ya, i'm all for a 3 point restriction,it only makes this plan better. But we have to satisfy the "MOST" hunters we can. we cant just look at guys who want to hunt trophies, but also the families who have a tradition.



the "2 point or better" is BY FAR an easier antler configuration to identify. you would end up with less "oohps" kills to later be found by the buzzards.



like i said originally- we could argue for yrs about what antler restiction to go with. but more importantly we need to implement SOME KIND OF RESTRICTION. 2 point or better still helps alot, that first yr doesn't predict as much for genetics as the second yr on.



the # of animals that will make it will be higher than "just spikes" , MANY other bucks will offer missed oppertunities by simply not hanging around long enough to get identified.



1 thing i did forget to include for my managment plan [ but i think is obvious] PREDATOR CONTROL! we have to do something about cats.

 

[KILLERBEE]

also, i do realize that hunting the mature deer in the rut is a pretty strong plan for oregon right now. but remember - i wasn't using exact numbers. the key is that you are taking such i high% of tags away and giving back so little, that the # of rut tags will still be far better than the way it is now. maybe take away 500, give back 5 for a rut hunt. [ still not so important my exact # but the idea] or take away 1000, give back 5 etc....

again we are going to have to please more people than not, or none of this will ever happen anyway, and we are right back here or worse year after year.

 

[Hiker of the Woods]

Hopefully Scoutdog will post on this thread. He has brought a pretty good and scientific data mule deer plan together on another website. It goes over what has shown to work and not work across some western states and what would help Oregon mule deer herds out.

 

[KILLERBEE]

i copied and pasted this to the 'ifish" forum too.
all of us hunters usually think somewhat similer. so the replys i'm getting here are pretty similer to there.

 

[ArrowheadWy]

What about managing for 25% or high post hunt buck /doe ratio.

 

[440sixpack]

25% of nothing still isn't very much.

 

[HKShooter]

I thought all we had to do was to "hunt harder...get off the road...hit the gym...go in deeper," and Oregon is just fine hunting. Huh.

HK

 

[KILLERBEE]

i realize you get confused easily, i've always said the same thing- never saying oregon is great hunting, in fact agreeing with how bad off are mule deer hunting is. but when someone get on here and just wants some general hunting info- you basically tell them to not even go out and try. it supposedly "impossibble" to find any decent hunting here in oregon. and thats where we dissagree.

as HORRIBLE as it is- with some hard work( which believe it or not some ARE willing to do) you can find some "decent" hunting.

maybe that same "hard work" attitude is why i like to try and help find a solution, and you'll just sit back and b!tch and mone that you cant find a deer?? just a guess of course

 

[HKShooter]

Ease up...I couldn't help it...just giving a jab back. Just having a conversation about our herds is good. Keep it going.


HK

 

[KILLERBEE]

no worries, again- i believe all of us know there is a problem with oregon's mule deer. i think we could help come up with a plan that takes all hunters in to consideration, generates money for fish and game, and bring back the deer herds. ( boy that sounds simple enough huh?) only then will ODF&W even begin to listen. if you think about it, even the best plan in the world would be hard to walk into a Fish and game office and hope to get any consideration. after all they would have to basically admit to not being smarter than the general oregon hunting community. and we know their not going to do that......


again when it comes time to stand in line at ODF&W- i'll be standing right there with you, but on here- hunter to hunter, i'm going to give any help i can to someone wanting to give it a good effort to try and make something out of this mess- because it CAN be done.