idelkslayer
WKR
Oh how I wish for the gift of brevity, but I'm addicted to context.
The only listed option that I think could have an impact is weapon restrictions. It is something that could potentially increase escapement, leading to buck survival. I'm not certain whether or not it would be a big enough impact to make a difference or if it is even necessary at this point.
Ultimately, the number of bucks on the landscape depends on the number of fawns hitting the ground. The number of "big" "mature" bucks depends on prenatal condition, winter survival, nutrition, and to a lesser degree age and nutrition. Another recent thread revealed that even with good conditions most hunters here think that >160" mule deer bucks comprise no more than 7% of the overall buck population. So no matter what season structure or weapons restriction or other scheme we concoct, the percentage of deer that will reach "trophy size" will remain low. They don't all grow up to be giants. Most areas have already eliminated or greatly reduced doe harvest so the population will
Everyone losing their heads right now seems to have forgotten the 3 deadly winters that mule deer have endured in the last 7 years. And since the does came out of those winters in poor condition, guess what?, the fawns they produced had poor prenatal condition which predicts that fewer of those bucks will reach trophy sizes. So not only did we lose all or part of 3 fawn age classes, we also got 3 years of fawns that will be predisposed to smaller body size and antler growth their entire lives. Let me add that up for you, 6 poor years of buck fawn production out of 7 years. If it was 7% reaching >160" before it will probably be much lower than that now. And yet, everyone seems to think that controlled hunts, season dates, or APRs will fix everything.
Part of the issue is self regulating, In 2017 there were 98,583 mule deer hunters, in 2023 there were 72,000.
We are in the low part of the population cycle but it will get better. The best thing we can do is think long term towards conserving habitat. String a few more easy winters together and we'll be back to shooting bucks instead of arguing about NRs, weapon restrictions, and APRs.
rokslide.com
IDFG recently published an article on deer age in the clearwater region. It is focused on whitetail deer but I think some transferable things can be learned and hopefully future tooth aging projects will be targeted at various mule deer herds in the state. Many of the points raised by the study match Robby's conversations with mule deer biologists on the Rokcast this year.
idfg.idaho.gov
First obvious point, antler size is not a predictor of buck maturity. Second point, even in heavily hunted areas with long general seasons, 30% of the bucks were older than 4yrs.
And the biggest takeaway that I had from the article how closely the curves match for bucks and does. Even though whitetail does can be harvested they make up only 25% of the total harvest and therefore do not see nearly as much harvest pressure as the bucks. And yet, we see that even that portion of the harvest (does) shows a steep drop off after age 3.5. I interpret that to mean that even if you reduced harvest pressure on the bucks, you would still see a steep drop off after age 3.5 or 4.5 similar to their less-pressured counterparts. In other words you cannot stockpile young bucks and expect that it will mean a larger number of mature bucks. If that were true we would see a larger representation of older age class does in the population as compared to bucks.
Obviously, there are differences between whitetail and mule deer, and hopefully we can get some actual data from a similar age study for various mule deer herds so we can know the age structure.
The only listed option that I think could have an impact is weapon restrictions. It is something that could potentially increase escapement, leading to buck survival. I'm not certain whether or not it would be a big enough impact to make a difference or if it is even necessary at this point.
Ultimately, the number of bucks on the landscape depends on the number of fawns hitting the ground. The number of "big" "mature" bucks depends on prenatal condition, winter survival, nutrition, and to a lesser degree age and nutrition. Another recent thread revealed that even with good conditions most hunters here think that >160" mule deer bucks comprise no more than 7% of the overall buck population. So no matter what season structure or weapons restriction or other scheme we concoct, the percentage of deer that will reach "trophy size" will remain low. They don't all grow up to be giants. Most areas have already eliminated or greatly reduced doe harvest so the population will
Everyone losing their heads right now seems to have forgotten the 3 deadly winters that mule deer have endured in the last 7 years. And since the does came out of those winters in poor condition, guess what?, the fawns they produced had poor prenatal condition which predicts that fewer of those bucks will reach trophy sizes. So not only did we lose all or part of 3 fawn age classes, we also got 3 years of fawns that will be predisposed to smaller body size and antler growth their entire lives. Let me add that up for you, 6 poor years of buck fawn production out of 7 years. If it was 7% reaching >160" before it will probably be much lower than that now. And yet, everyone seems to think that controlled hunts, season dates, or APRs will fix everything.
Part of the issue is self regulating, In 2017 there were 98,583 mule deer hunters, in 2023 there were 72,000.
We are in the low part of the population cycle but it will get better. The best thing we can do is think long term towards conserving habitat. String a few more easy winters together and we'll be back to shooting bucks instead of arguing about NRs, weapon restrictions, and APRs.
In what percentile is a HARVESTED 160 inch buck on a general unit?
We got talking on another thread on here about how common a mature buck is. On a general unit how rare is a harvested 160 inch buck? For sure different areas or different states will have a little higher percentage, not but without getting to specific and anal I'm just talking overall.
rokslide.com
IDFG recently published an article on deer age in the clearwater region. It is focused on whitetail deer but I think some transferable things can be learned and hopefully future tooth aging projects will be targeted at various mule deer herds in the state. Many of the points raised by the study match Robby's conversations with mule deer biologists on the Rokcast this year.
Clearwater wildlife blog series: Installment #3- White-tailed deer teeth results
Now that year 1 of the north-Idaho deer aging study results are back from the lab, we were able to analyze some of the results and provide a short summary for you to enjoy! Take a peek at this write-up & video!
First obvious point, antler size is not a predictor of buck maturity. Second point, even in heavily hunted areas with long general seasons, 30% of the bucks were older than 4yrs.
And the biggest takeaway that I had from the article how closely the curves match for bucks and does. Even though whitetail does can be harvested they make up only 25% of the total harvest and therefore do not see nearly as much harvest pressure as the bucks. And yet, we see that even that portion of the harvest (does) shows a steep drop off after age 3.5. I interpret that to mean that even if you reduced harvest pressure on the bucks, you would still see a steep drop off after age 3.5 or 4.5 similar to their less-pressured counterparts. In other words you cannot stockpile young bucks and expect that it will mean a larger number of mature bucks. If that were true we would see a larger representation of older age class does in the population as compared to bucks.
Obviously, there are differences between whitetail and mule deer, and hopefully we can get some actual data from a similar age study for various mule deer herds so we can know the age structure.
