Let them grow?

[littlebigtine]

Ill leave this here

 

[AHayes111]

A lot of bucks will be their biggest at 3 or 4 years.

I can agree with everything you have written down but bucks at there biggest at 3 or 4. I have found little evidence of this. Some bucks will be big at age 3, they will be bigger at age 7 or 8 barring some disease or catastrophic weather event.

 

[LostWapiti]

I can agree with everything you have written down but bucks at there biggest at 3 or 4. I have found little evidence of this. Some bucks will be big at age 3, they will be bigger at age 7 or 8 barring some disease or catastrophic weather event.

Given consistent feed and weather conditions they will probably peak older but we all know that weather and range conditions change a lot. If 3 or 4 is when they have the best conditions then that could be their biggest year. Mass will always go up but length may not. Being biggest at 3 or 4 is definitely not the norm but entirely possible and somewhat common, especially 4 as 4 will be very close to the peak anyways given constant range conditions.

 

[ReaptheHeat]

I do pass on lots of deer thanks. I just don't thump my chest all over social media telling everyone about the deer I passed on and how I'm better than them because of it. I just shoot deer that make me happy when the science says it supports it.

The tricky bit is that actually shooting bucks creates more deer. More deer creates more potential bucks. You don't want to have 50 bucks per 100 does or the does and the fawns will be pushed off feed. If you keep your buck numbers below 20:100 you can have a lot more does on the landscape which can in turn create a lot more deer. Even the most heavily hunted OTC units can and do turn out huge bucks.

I'd love to see 190" deer behind every tree as much as anyone and if there was evidence that supported a way to create that then I would be for it. I think that closing some units to mature deer for a couple years on a rotating schedule would be awesome. Issue a controlled number of tags to let people shoot some of the smaller bucks but 4 points are off limits for 2 or 3 years then open the unit back up. You should still have healthy buck to doe ratios and a lot of really nice deer. If you do it right I think you could ull it off without having a missing age class but that would be a risk if not well managed. If yo really want to see a successful deer program and see places turning out big bucks consistently it would take careful management like this. Like I said before, asking people not to shoot small bucks will never work at scale because for a lot of people a 150-160" deer is an absolute giant and they would never pass on it.

The other tricky bit on passing smaller bucks (150") is a lot of deer will never get much bigger than that or the "small 4 point" you just passed on is actually a 7 year old deer. A lot of bucks will be their biggest at 3 or 4 years.

Fair points. But wouldn't it also be effective to institute minimum point restrictions? A lot of 1-2 year old forkies and barely legal bucks get shot in the early seasons. I'd argue the ratio for my units are in the 5-15:100 range without looking up stats just based on anecdotal observations this year. CPW says its 23. I have found a lot of those bucks are forkies and barely legal spikes. Huge lack in older aged bucks.

 

[LostWapiti]

Fair points. But wouldn't it also be effective to institute minimum point restrictions? A lot of 1-2 year old forkies and barely legal bucks get shot in the early seasons. I'd argue the ratio for my units are in the 5-15:100 range without looking up stats just based on anecdotal observations this year. CPW says its 23. I have found a lot of those bucks are forkies and barely legal spikes. Huge lack in older aged bucks.

Every unit must be managed different to achieve its objective, unfortunately that sort of attention is not hardly every given. In the case above as you say, you would need to find a way to let some of those deer survive to maturity while still harvesting some of the small ones to keep the buck:doe ratio in balance. 5 is really low ratio and they should just close the unit for a couple years.

Unfortunately if you close a unit or prevent people from shooting small 4 points you are going to have a lot of pissed off people showing up at commission meetings, facebook commenting, and generally raising hell. Just like asking people to not shoot small bucks won't work, people will also not see the value in reducing opportunity for the future.

Large tracts of private are able to achieve these things through careful management that the government does not generally offer or have the practical ability to implement. Its sad to see how biologists can sometimes put in the work and create a good plan only to get steamrolled by the commission.

 

[cutty98]

Want bigger bucks? Super easy.

Shut down half the roads through their habitat. Especially lower range where they rut and winter.

Food
Water
Sanctuary

Or hunters can just keep bickering with each other. That’s not getting us anywhere.

This is the way.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

[PathFinder]

A couple points to draw out from this thread and referenced information from podcasts/biologists:

1. When referencing the low survival rate of 1.5 yr old bucks, it's always (appropriately) expressed as a percentage or ratio. To conclude from that data that it's best to kill a bunch of them because most will die anyways is statistically illiterate (for anyone who wants mature bucks on the landscape). Leaving a larger number on the landscape means a larger number survives...to become, a couple years later, something worth hunting.
   1. 1.5 year olds are the one age group that could be easily excluded from hunting. It has been done with elk, in both directions, for a long time. Anyone who can't tell the difference between a 1.5 and 2.5+ year old deer shouldn't be holding a tag.
2. "Killing more bucks puts more deer on the landscape" is a biologically illiterate statement. It's a gross oversimplification. If that were the case, why would there be such excellent deer populations in LE units? Utah's Oak Creek and Henry Mtns are good examples. I'm not advocating for everywhere to be anything like those units, but they're a clear demonstration that killing more bucks does not mean there will be more deer. Many more factors have to be accounted for. It is likely true, as suggested by the data, that populations near carrying capacity with higher buck to doe ratios will experience higher mortality. Few habitats are anywhere near carrying capacity on typical years. Only in severe conditions are the carrying capacities of some units reduced to at or below the deer population. That can occur with drought in some areas, winter in others, or with other factors like human development or overgrazing.

3. Don't forget that most hunters are absolutely terrible at most everything. Just look at all of the clowns on YouTube proudly putting their lack of competence on display. Clowning around for days, with a camera stuffed in their face more often than their binoculars. Putting the cherry on top when showing just how terrible most hunters are at shooting, and then displaying their 2-3 year old buck as if they've accomplished something. Personally, I'm quite comfortable allowing them to flounder around cluelessly in hopes of finding some 2 yr old near the road with sufficiently depleted mental capacity to be killed by such a hunter. It means a lower percentage of hunters actually hunting mature deer. Forgive me for the harsh take, but my patience with incompetence ends when they put it on YouTube

4. For me, the reason for passing on immature deer is mostly the education that replaces killing something easy and going home early. The most valuable part of being disciplined is the knowledge and skill that replace a bunch of immature deer. Extra time in the unit, extra time behind the glass, hours more thought combined with more days worth of knowledge. That is more valuable than scratching the itch to shoot at something to me.

In terms of policy, I'm 100% on board with disallowing the harvest of 1.5 yr old deer. It works on elk, and has no detriment to deer populations.

 

[cutty98]

1) HABITAT
2)WEATHER
3)PREDATION

These are in order the major influences on deer mortality. Really HABITAT and WEATHER are the same. One we have some control over. The other not so much.

You want big bucks? Focus on the number 1 determining factor: Habitat.

You think predation is the limiting factor? You dont want to shoot a dink? Thats fine but the effect isnt as directly correlated to your desired outcome as you think.
.5-2 yr old deer have a very high mortality rate but not because of hunting. Because the world is a dangerous, unforgiving thing.
I see as much roadkill on the side of my local highways as fish and game records buck harvest in my local units on an annual basis. Id guess that %75 lying in the ditch are fawns.

We are hunters so naturally you look to hunting to figure out ways to improve deer numbers but id wager that our efforts are better spent protecting wildlife corridors or replanting burns on winter range.

Conservation is way more than not pulling a trigger

This is the way.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

[AHayes111]

Given consistent feed and weather conditions they will probably peak older but we all know that weather and range conditions change a lot. If 3 or 4 is when they have the best conditions then that could be their biggest year. Mass will always go up but length may not. Being biggest at 3 or 4 is definitely not the norm but entirely possible and somewhat common, especially 4 as 4 will be very close to the peak anyways given constant range conditions.

Maybe it is different where you live, but I have watched or found sheds from dozens of bucks that have lived to old age, I have never seen one that grew his best set of antlers at age four. Some of those bucks were big at a young age, but they were better a few years later. I have seen studies that indicate bucks have nearly reached there potential at age four, but the problem with these studies is that they rely on B&C gross score. B&C scoring is the best system available, but it relies heavily on tine length and when you combine this with NT points the results can be miss leading. This buck is a good example. The buck was at least four when he grew the smaller antler and two years older when he grew the bigger antler. The smaller antler is an 81 inch four point with a 6 3/8 inch inline. The bigger antler is nearly 85 on the frame with a 7 inch inline. Not a huge percentage difference score wise, but the bigger antler weighs 30% more and when you hold them there is no doubt that the bigger antler is much bigger. I have three more singles from this side of the buck, all bigger than the smaller antler but some do not score as much because of less NT.

 

[LostWapiti]

Maybe it is different where you live, but I have watched or found sheds from dozens of bucks that have lived to old age, I have never seen one that grew his best set of antlers at age four. Some of those bucks were big at a young age, but they were better a few years later. I have seen studies that indicate bucks have nearly reached there potential at age four, but the problem with these studies is that they rely on B&C gross score. B&C scoring is the best system available, but it relies heavily on tine length and when you combine this with NT points the results can be miss leading. This buck is a good example. The buck was at least four when he grew the smaller antler and two years older when he grew the bigger antler. The smaller antler is an 81 inch four point with a 6 3/8 inch inline. The bigger antler is nearly 85 on the frame with a 7 inch inline. Not a huge percentage difference score wise, but the bigger antler weighs 30% more and when you hold them there is no doubt that the bigger antler is much bigger. I have three more singles from this side of the buck, all bigger than the smaller antler but some do not score as much because of less NT.View attachment 793910

I think you experience is aligned to what I said about score not really changing but mass will. Yeah in the desert I'd say you have bigger fluctuations year to year than in MT.

 

[CorbLand]

Maybe it is different where you live, but I have watched or found sheds from dozens of bucks that have lived to old age, I have never seen one that grew his best set of antlers at age four. Some of those bucks were big at a young age, but they were better a few years later. I have seen studies that indicate bucks have nearly reached there potential at age four, but the problem with these studies is that they rely on B&C gross score. B&C scoring is the best system available, but it relies heavily on tine length and when you combine this with NT points the results can be miss leading. This buck is a good example. The buck was at least four when he grew the smaller antler and two years older when he grew the bigger antler. The smaller antler is an 81 inch four point with a 6 3/8 inch inline. The bigger antler is nearly 85 on the frame with a 7 inch inline. Not a huge percentage difference score wise, but the bigger antler weighs 30% more and when you hold them there is no doubt that the bigger antler is much bigger. I have three more singles from this side of the buck, all bigger than the smaller antler but some do not score as much because of less NT.View attachment 793910

How do you know the age of these bucks?

 

[AHayes111]

I think you experience is aligned to what I said about score not really changing but mass will. Yeah in the desert I'd say you have bigger fluctuations year to year than in MT.

Some times the score will change to. This whitetail went from about 140 as a four year old to 186 at age 8.

 

[AHayes111]

How do you know the age of these bucks?

I don't for sure, but when you find enough antlers form the deer or watch them from a very young age you can get a good idea. For example on the buck I posted I have the opposite side from the year earlier than the smaller antler in the picture. Confident that he was not a 180 class NT as a two year old, possible that he could have been as a three year old so that would make him at least four when he grew the smaller antler but he easily could have been older.
The whitetail was lab aged, If I was going by the antlers I found, I would have said at least seven.

Here is another whitetail. I found every antler he grew. At age four he was a mid to upper 150's four point. At age 6 when he died of EHD he was a three by four typical with two NT points on the four point side that gross scores close to 180

 

[DenimChicken]

I gotta say, all debate aside, it's pretty cool to see the antler progression over the years. Kudos to those who are tracking and picking up sheds yearly.

 

[S.Clancy]

I don't for sure, but when you find enough antlers form the deer or watch them from a very young age you can get a good idea. For example on the buck I posted I have the opposite side from the year earlier than the smaller antler in the picture. Confident that he was not a 180 class NT as a two year old, possible that he could have been as a three year old so that would make him at least four when he grew the smaller antler but he easily could have been older.
The whitetail was lab aged, If I was going by the antlers I found, I would have said at least seven.

My buddy shot a 200" NT in Eastern MT a couple years ago that was aged at 4.5 yrs old. They found one of his white sheds (hard white) the same trip that would have scored in the low/mid 170s as a 2.5 yr old, which is insane (obviously there is some error in the tooth aging, maybe they missed a ring and he was 5.5). I know they also track bucks that are in the 160's or bigger as 2.5 yr olds in Region H and G in WY, as well as 3.5 yr olds well into the 180's+, so it can happen. I trust the WY stuff more because they are collaring them as fawns, so they know the exact age. Pretty crazy.

 

[AHayes111]

My buddy shot a 200" NT in Eastern MT a couple years ago that was aged at 4.5 yrs old. They found one of his white sheds (hard white) the same trip that would have scored in the low/mid 170s as a 2.5 yr old, which is insane (obviously there is some error in the tooth aging, maybe they missed a ring and he was 5.5). I know they also track bucks that are in the 160's or bigger as 2.5 yr olds in Region H and G in WY, as well as 3.5 yr olds well into the 180's+, so it can happen. I trust the WY stuff more because they are collaring them as fawns, so they know the exact age. Pretty crazy.

It could also be that the shed was from the spring if they found the antler in the fall. I have found plenty of hard white antlers in the fall that were shed in the spring. Just depends on how much sun they get. These antlers are from a buck I shot. Found the biggest brown in the spring the match I found hunting the buck in September. I will try to get a picture with better lighting.

 

[AHayes111]

A little better picture. The left antler is hard white and found the end of September the year it was shed.

 

[Szwampdonkey]

“Let them grow” is the DUMBEST statement ever coined by bad hunters and adopted by most today. It is a result of social media. No one said this back in the day.

I got my start THANKFULLY in the 80s. We shot what we wanted when we wanted. A trophy class animal was celebrated but not required. We killed for table fair. My grandfather AND father didn’t even keep most racks and if they did they were just skull caps and put in the garage.

Those were the last great days of hunting.

 

[CorbLand]

My buddy shot a 200" NT in Eastern MT a couple years ago that was aged at 4.5 yrs old. They found one of his white sheds (hard white) the same trip that would have scored in the low/mid 170s as a 2.5 yr old, which is insane (obviously there is some error in the tooth aging, maybe they missed a ring and he was 5.5). I know they also track bucks that are in the 160's or bigger as 2.5 yr olds in Region H and G in WY, as well as 3.5 yr olds well into the 180's+, so it can happen. I trust the WY stuff more because they are collaring them as fawns, so they know the exact age. Pretty crazy.

Hobbs killed a 200 plus that was 3.5 if I remember correctly.

 

[S.Clancy]

It could also be that the shed was from the spring if they found the antler in the fall. I have found plenty of hard white antlers in the fall that were shed in the spring. Just depends on how much sun they get. These antlers are from a buck I shot. Found the biggest brown in the spring the match I found hunting the buck in September. I will try to get a picture with better lighting. View attachment 794434

I should have specified further and said hard white/chalk. It was definitely not a 7-8 month old antler.