Boone & Crockett research

[snowymtnwolf]

I’m fairly familiar with Wyoming big buck grounds. My dad hunted Region G for mule deer since the late 1960s and I started hunting Region G + H since the 2000s.

Now I’m stationed in Colorado and not as familiar with Big Buck grounds. Statistically speaking, big bucks can be found spread across Colorado with historic hot spots at the the top of the charts.

But I found some old articles about timing and geographic areas, and became more interested in the subject so I paid the $50 for the annual subscription to Boone & Crockett research.

Now I’m left wondering, how many B+C book bucks are not entered and how skewed the historic records may be. I personally know of at least three B+C Colorado bucks and two Wyoming bucks that were not entered in B+C.

I guess I understand the obvious reasoning why everyone doesn’t want to enter their buck with B+C, but I now wonder how many hot spots may not be hot after all. And how many cold spots might possibly be hot spots.

My main objective to conduct the research from B+C was to know that “I had a chance” when setting foot in a unit to possibly see a giant. As long as there’s a chance, I’ll be out there glassing…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Andrew12gauge]

I think the reality is there are giants in every unit throughout the west, you just can’t shoot them from the truck in most of them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jpmulk]

I think those are good questions. And I agree, I know of several deer not in the books. I think the research is worth knowing, but would take it with a grain of salt and use other resources as well.

 

[alecvg]

I know of some B&C bucks here in MT that have not been entered. I know some good big buck hunters, and bull hunters who would never enter an animal. I personally never would enter anything in either, I don’t want my damn name in a record book. Seems like what once was a good research tool has turned into such an ego thing. I have someone I know well, who has mentioned multiple times how great it would be for people to see his name all over the record books. Who gives a shit, I just want to be in the mountains.

 

[Dos Perros]

I just had a similar thought to the OP. I turned on the B&C layer(s) on onX and found areas with only a couple entries ever, and I personally know one guy who has killed three booners in there, and I know of others, too. Those are all fairly recent, last 5 to 10 years. Which means the number of animals actually entered must be miniscule compared to the actual numbered killed, which calls into question the statistical validity of the entire premise. I guess you're counting on the idea that submission rates will be consistent across the country, and I don't think that's a fair assumption.

Someday I will enter the animal in my avatar, but probably not for a long time, when I am old and the information would be stale. I mostly want my name to be searchable for generations down the line, where somewhere someday one of my familiar descendants might look me up, find the entry, and sit and think "holy shit, my great great grandpa was one of those hunter people!"

 

[snowymtnwolf]

I know of some B&C bucks here in MT that have not been entered. I know some good big buck hunters, and bull hunters who would never enter an animal. I personally never would enter anything in either, I don’t want my damn name in a record book. Seems like what once was a good research tool has turned into such an ego thing. I have someone I know well, who has mentioned multiple times how great it would be for people to see his name all over the record books. Who gives a shit, I just want to be in the mountains.

Now that’s funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[snowymtnwolf]

I just had a similar thought to the OP. I turned on the B&C layer(s) on onX and found areas with only a couple entries ever, and I personally know one guy who has killed three booners in there, and I know of others, too. Those are all fairly recent, last 5 to 10 years. Which means the number of animals actually entered must be miniscule compared to the actual numbered killed, which calls into question the statistical validity of the entire premise. I guess you're counting on the idea that submission rates will be consistent across the country, and I don't think that's a fair assumption.

Someday I will enter the animal in my avatar, but probably not for a long time, when I am old and the information would be stale. I mostly want my name to be searchable for generations down the line, where somewhere someday one of my familiar descendants might look me up, find the entry, and sit and think "holy shit, my great great grandpa was one of those hunter people!"

I’ve used OnX B+C layers too and compared that to the actual B+C website heat maps. They are close but not a mirror image. I agree with you that the stats likely are not a “true and accurate depiction”.

I hope your descendants can look up at the rack(s) on the wall too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TaperPin]

While genetics are important, the not so glamorous factors like winter range condition, weather, hunting pressure, poaching, illegal feeding, and selective killing on large private ranches factor in.

Large racks are big money makers - the guy making $10/hr can make many months his regular pay by poaching one deer - and there are a lot of guys in rural areas still making $10/hr. It’s also no secret when an oilfield opens up in muledeer winter range, there is a noticeable decrease in mature bucks that make it through the winter. With gun in hand during the season it’s an easy thing for some to ignore boundaries to closed areas or to “extend the season” a few days before or after.

Looking at some B&C records and where they were taken, the odds of producing big deer again go way down because the conditions that contributed to the big racks are long gone. Ranches are bought and sold, grazing goes up and down, fire suppression increases or decreases different plants. Laws didn’t always exist or weren’t enforced.

The historic records also don’t tell the whole story - personal gut feeling is 20% of stories behind big deer are inaccurate, less so now with digital records following us around forever, but still significant. Since DNA testing became a thing, I’ve been in favor of making it mandatory for B&C inclusion - there are ways around it, but the guys who buy poached racks have to work a little harder to get their name in the book as the shooter.

I also can’t help thinking we are our own worst enemy - YouTube, FaceBook and websites that are great sources of information for how to find big bucks has changed what areas can still hide big deer. Great optics for eyes on spotting, satellite images to identify likely bedding areas, and drones to do the walking all make seeing deer easier. Drones can now be programmed to fly an exact gps course and adjust camera angles to show exactly the same prime areas day after day - illegal or not, being buzzed by drones in the back country will increase. If you haven’t been buzzed by a drone in the back country it’s only a matter of time before it happens - just check YouTube for the ever increasing illegal drone videos. There are rocky hard to get to ridges near roads that I hunted because nobody else would - now these prime bedding areas can be scanned by drones in a half hour day or night - heat sensitive cameras are under $5k that will pin point every deer on a ridge.

Sorry for the long rant, but it’s hard to see what we grew up with change - the truth is it’s always been changing. What was 30 years ago was much different from 30 years before that, and 30 years before that game laws were scarce and the Great Depression had subsistence hunter trying to survive and big racks were sold to feed families.

 

[snowymtnwolf]

I hear ya. Lots of valid insight there with your post and thought that went into that.

Some of it, I’d like to not believe, but I know it’s ever so true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk