# The trouble with 3-point or better deer hunts



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

The deer herd around Evanston was in trouble. Instead of limiting the number of resident over-the-counter tags the F&G Department went to 3-point or better this year in units 133, 134, and 168 (Region K).

Our little hunting party has found two 2-points shot and left to rot. The G&F has located nine buck deer with less than 3-points poached....so far. The "shoot anything with horns" mentality is hard to overcome here.

see: http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/WYWGFD/bulletins/dc1151

On a positive note the numbers of small bucks in the herds that have moved to the wintering grounds looks encouraging. And there's some dandies out there too.

Be careful driving WY89 Evanston to Woodruff, and RT189 and Rt30 to Kemmerrerrererer.

.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

wyogoob said:


> The deer herd around Evanston was in trouble. Instead of limiting the number of resident over-the-counter tags the F&G Department went to 3-point or better this year in units 133, 134, and 168 (Region K).
> 
> Our little hunting party has found two 2-points shot and left to rot. The G&F has located nine buck deer with less than 3-points poached....so far. The "shoot anything with horns" mentality is hard to overcome here.
> 
> ...


Interesting read. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

It is a shame that hunters can't figure out what the rules and regulations are before they pull the trigger. 

From what I have seen it isn't just areas that are 3 pt or better. I have found dead 2 points and small 3 points actually quite close to roads that someone has shot and then figured that they didn't want to tag that small of a buck or that uncle Joe back in camp doesn't want it so they leave it. I have also found a couple of dead elk that people have shot during the spike hunt only to find out that it wasn't a spike but a 3 or small 4 pt. 

But then we will always have these kind of people shooting the deer and elk no matter what the rules are.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

We found 3 dead 2 points during our deer and moose hunt in region K.



With the great fawn survival rates the past couple years, I wonder if the the restriction was even necessary. Of course it might give a quick bump to buck numbers, but long term.....? I wonder how many "collateral damage" kills are really out there, undiscovered.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

I wonder if there is any biological reason to do it at all. That said, there are a lot of things we do to increase "hunt quality" that I'm not really that opposed to, so I won't take a hard-line stance on this one. I truly don't have an opinion one way or the other. If I researched a little more, or it was going to be implemented on a large scale in Utah in the future I'm sure it would be a different story. Interested to see how this in Wyoming turns out(scientifically) in a few years.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Its stupid, the whole thing is based on the idea we need more mature bucks to breed the does... so they go ahead and make restrictions to concentrate all the hunting pressure on the mature bucks? WTF kind of logic is that.

You want lots of big bucks to breed the does, you need to make it a 2pt and SMALLER harvest.

Sorry to hear WY is seeing this, but its ridiculous for anyone to be surprised about it... its been well documented in virtually every state that implemented it. Utah got rid of the 3pt or better in the bookcliffs due to the number of illegal kills.


-DallanC


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

That's the same thing that happened in the Wellsville Mountains. There were so many two-points shot and left that after two years they stopped the restriction.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

DallanC said:


> Its stupid, the whole thing is based on the idea we need more mature bucks to breed the does... so they go ahead and make restrictions to concentrate all the hunting pressure on the mature bucks? WTF kind of logic is that.
> 
> You want lots of big bucks to breed the does, you need to make it a 2pt and SMALLER harvest.
> 
> -DallanC


Been sayin' that for years.

⫸<{{{{{⦇°>


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

DallanC said:


> Its stupid, the whole thing is based on the idea we need more mature bucks to breed the does... so they go ahead and make restrictions to concentrate all the hunting pressure on the mature bucks? WTF kind of logic is that.
> 
> -DallanC


That's actually not why they had a three point or better tag in wyoming. The deer numbers were low and they still wanted to give opportunity without cutting tags. Saves revenue, people still get to hunt and some people get a buck. It's also only a temporary fix, when numbers go up the restriction is lifted. Should be a win win if it weren't for tards that cant count tines.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> That's actually not why they had a three point or better tag in wyoming. The deer numbers were low and they still wanted to give opportunity without cutting tags. Saves revenue, people still get to hunt and some people get a buck. It's also only a temporary fix, when numbers go up the restriction is lifted. Should be a win win if it weren't for tards that cant count tines.


That is correct, the 3-point or better is an attempt to increase deer numbers without losing revenue, cutting over-the-counter tag sales.

The rule has been in the making for three years. The Game & Fish held open house deer discussions in Evanston and Kemerrerrerrer. Those that attended were split up into working groups to brainstorm ways to manage deer in southwest Wyoming, particularly the Carter Lease herd (Utah to the Hamms Fork, I80 to Rt 30.) A number of us wanted to reduce tags dramatically; go to a limited quota system. I attended as many of the work group sessions I could, up to a point. A few even wanted to shut the deer hunt down for a year! But the majority of the attendees were from the SFW or were representing businesses, motels, restaurants, sporting good stores, etc. and the G & F was aligned with that group. My initial observation was the last thing they wanted was a reduction of tags, loss of revenue. I gave up, bailed out, about half way through the process when I seen it was clear how it was going to go - it would be 3-point or better after one more round, one more winter, of lip service.

Well whatever, you can't always get what you want. At least they finally done something, made an improvement.

.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> That's actually not why they had a three point or better tag in wyoming. The deer numbers were low and they still wanted to give opportunity without cutting tags. Saves revenue, people still get to hunt and some people get a buck. It's also only a temporary fix, when numbers go up the restriction is lifted. Should be a win win if it weren't for tards that cant count tines.


The idea is that by restricting hunters to shooting only 3-point or better bucks, more bucks will live through the hunts. So, in theory, after the hunt you could grow your deer herd. That part of the theory is sound...

....what is bad, though, about that theory is that you would ONLY be growing the male portion of your herd. It is, then, at best a bandaid approach that doesn't fix the real problem. And, in truth, could eventually hurt your overall herd instead of helping it.

I will repeat for the millionth time: THREE POINT OR BETTER REGULATIONS DO NOT WORK!


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I must say I'm surprised. I personally never found dead 2ptrs on Monroe when we had AR. I hear the stories, I believe them. I had more confidence in the modern day hunter that probably valued a deer life more than in the past. But it seems apparent that's not the case. DAHB's ruining a good thing. 

As to increased pressure on maturer bucks with AR. I must ask when is a mature buck not a prime target with or without AR. My thoughts are if a 4 pt is seen at anytime it's targeted. I'm not aware of any hunter that passes on mature bucks holding out for a 2 pt. So I would say smart or unseen buck survive. Lots of 2 pt aren't smart and are often seen so they get killed easily or frequently. Restricting hunters from taking low hanging fruit (2 pts) would give them a chance to gain another yr of knowledge and maybe be smart buck the next yr. I'm not aware that AR resulted in herds void of mature buck during breeding. Now I would say B/D ratios of 1/10 or less result in herds void of mature bucks during breeding. I'm not suggesting AR as an answer to anything but it won't ever result in low B/D ratios like unlimited any buck hunts do. Even with several wasted 2pts.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> The idea is that by restricting hunters to shooting only 3-point or better bucks, more bucks will live through the hunts. So, in theory, after the hunt you could grow your deer herd. That part of the theory is sound...
> 
> ....what is bad, though, about that theory is that you would ONLY be growing the male portion of your herd. It is, then, at best a bandaid approach that doesn't fix the real problem. And, in truth, could eventually hurt your overall herd instead of helping it.
> 
> I will repeat for the millionth time: THREE POINT OR BETTER REGULATIONS DO NOT WORK!


I'm not and will never buy into your kill all the deer moron mentality. First off we are no where near carrying capicity. So having a few bucks isn't going to take food out of any mouths. Second If you kill all the bucks it leaves a significantly higher percentage of does to be preyed on by predators/cats. Guess what if cougars are targeting mostly does it affects the herd numbers negatively.

Three point or better for short term management doest hurt and is better than tag cuts!


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

When we had 3 point or better, and some 4 point or better units here in the 80's deer hunting seemed pretty good and there were a lot more tags issued then too. My question is, why wasn't the entire state restricted to 3 or 4 point bucks back then? Was it just a trial thing on certain units to see if it worked or not? Would it work today statewide on general season units?


----------



## ram2h2o (Sep 11, 2007)

Depending on where you hunt in Mississippi they have a 10 inch spread or a 13 inch main beam regulation for a legal buck. ( Ever try to tape measure a buck before you shoot it?)
A lot of ground checking goes on there!


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Iron Bear said:


> I'm not aware of any hunter that passes on mature bucks holding out for a 2 pt.


I'll tell you flat out I have done so and will do so again. In fact once was with Packout who was trying to get me to shoot a big 4x3. I eat them and I'd rather have a young one over an old one. That's not to say I haven't killed big mature bucks, but I generally I don't give a chit about antler size... horns only mean its legal to harvest.

-DallanC


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

DallanC said:


> I'll tell you flat out I have done so and will do so again. In fact once was with Packout who was trying to get me to shoot a big 4x3. I eat them and I'd rather have a young one over an old one. That's not to say I haven't killed big mature bucks, but I generally I don't give a chit about antler size... horns only mean its legal to harvest.
> 
> -DallanC


same here. I have no use for antlers unless I intend on mounting something. Same goes for elk. The last elk I took was calf. It provided for my small family and is as good as it gets when it comes to elk. I'd rather eat lamb than mutton as well.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

DallanC said:


> I'll tell you flat out I have done so and will do so again. In fact once was with Packout who was trying to get me to shoot a big 4x3. I eat them and I'd rather have a young one over an old one. That's not to say I haven't killed big mature bucks, but I generally I don't give a chit about antler size... horns only mean its legal to harvest.
> 
> -DallanC


That makes one.

You should hunt does and leave the bucks to those who do give a chit.


----------



## COOPERD (Sep 16, 2007)

What iron bear said +1


----------



## 2full (Apr 8, 2010)

The 3 point or better was ended in the 80's because it did not work.....period.
I was on the board that was the pre-rack committee at the time. The main biologist spoke at the meeting in Salt Lake and stated that they had deducted that the illegal kill (shoot and leave) was equal to the legal kills (3 point and better).
Pretty expensive game management was my comment.
I have stated all this in threads like this many times over the years this has been brought up.
I have been called:
stupid
old
moron
and many other names each time........don't care.
I had bowed hunted up Salina canyon that year and I had come across 3 - 2 points shot and left in 2 days of hunting. That's the bow hunt when you are close to the animal, can't even imagine the rifle hunt.
I'll get blasted, but that's fine. I can take it.


----------



## klbzdad (Apr 3, 2012)

I've shot ONE trophy quality buck in my life. Made the mistake of bringing the antlers home while the cape was at the taxi and my dog chewed on them....no, he ATE them!!! Since then, I don't care anymore. If I stumble upon a trophy quality animal again and have a tag, I'll make a go at it but I'm not going to bust anyone's balls for getting outdoors with friends and family and harvesting something they enjoy. 

Three point or better? Yeah, ask anyone who's hunted the Lasal Unit in the late 80s along the Utah/Colorado boarder and how well the Colorado AR was for Utah side hunters. I've never smelled more dead dinks in my life!!!! It was horrible and those we decided to track back to where they were shot, on the Colorado side!!!! Yet, there's a saying about a leopard's spots.....some people just suck.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Funny thing antler restrictions are working back east in several areas. I've even seen a few articles in magazines recently.









There is no reason for shooting and leaving bucks all over the place. It's not as if people don't know what their shooting at. They just choose to poach. Hell I've practiced three point or better for the last 20 years and I've never accidently shot a two point or shot a two point on purpose. Antler restrictions can and would work if people followed the rules. It allows more people opportunity "which is what oportunist want" with less bucks getting killed.

I however could honestly care less though because I prefer to cut tags and control the amount of bucks getting killed. I also like higher 18-20 buck to doe ratios. I like the way things are run now and I don't see it changing for the worse anytime soon.


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

Iron Bear said:


> That makes one.
> 
> You should hunt does and leave the bucks to those who do give a chit.


Yeah but if you shoot a doe, you can't really know before the shot how old it is. It could be 1.5 years old or it could be 10.5 years old. If you shoot a fork horn, you *know *it's 1.5 years old. If you're looking for tender mild meat, fork horns are your best sure option.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

swbuckmaster said:


> Funny thing antler restrictions are working back east in several areas. I've even seen a few articles in magazines recently.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think that the east coast magazine cover is necessarily a ringing endorsement that antler restrictions will work to help recover a struggling mule deer herd.

Back East, antler restrictions are primarily used as tools to have bigger bucks present. The issue is not a struggling deer herd from my understanding.

However, I don't think it is the worst solution to having a bit more opportunity. I'm not sold that there is solid scientific reasoning behind it, but we make a lot of decisions about game based on perception and social pressures anyways, so that doesn't bug me that much I guess.


----------

