small 4x's

[Colorado Cowboy]

View attachment 923151
Got this off GoHunt..front buck is your typical 2.5-3.5 4x4 in many places. deer behind is probably 4.5 maybe older.

Shoot the 3pt please.

If it's the last day, I'd shoot either one. Why....I love to eat venison!

 

[Slick8]

Great thread, I agree with most above. It's your first muley hunt and you're doing it with stick and string. That makes any legal buck a trophy IMO.

I'm hunting in south-central NM this year which is the land of the 130 class muley but also where a lot of road hunters kill the first forkey they see....I'm not a fan as it really hits the herd hard taking out so many deer. Like I've seen with antler restrictions in Texas, I'd love to see NM make many of these marginal units 4x4 only. I believe you'd see a difference in 2-3 years and impactful change in 5-7.

I'm one to take what the mountain offers but don't need the meat bad enough to kill a forkey. Two years ago I passed on 3 120 class deer then didn't see anything other than forkeys on days 4 and 5. I went home to a big bowl of tag soup but happy to have had the opportunity and a great hunt. The year prior, I killed a 135ish 4x4.

 

[RockAndSage]

@robby denning , would love to hear your thoughts on this (the horn growth/mother nutrition/genetics/water subject).

 

[willfrye027]

@robby denning , would love to hear your thoughts on this (the horn growth/mother nutrition/genetics/water subject).

not Robby here but super interesting subject..but a pretty different topic than OP brought up to be fair. Sounds like OP is not necessarily trophy hunting and wants to have a good time on an archery hunt.

To continue the derail of the thread, I wonder if the desert/high desert places where experienced guys have described deer “blowing up” or really shrinking year to year is a bit different of a habitat dynamic than the more migratory herds that are usually talked about in the big research studies.

A deer in the Wyoming range is going to have pretty darn good feed pretty much every year in the spring and early summer with a receding snow line.

A deer in northern Arizona may be in literal feast or famine during antler growth time depending on monsoons. To the same point, his mother may have had a terribly dry fall and winter when he was in utero and been on the verge of starvation.

The studies supported the massive effect that mother’s health had on expressed antlers characteristics. Take a listen or go read it, it’ll make a lot more sense. Can’t necessarily be extrapolated to the desert stuff except that a healthy mom will probably give birth to a fawn with more genetic (well, epigenetic) potential for big antlers.

 

[RockAndSage]

To continue the derail of the thread, I wonder if the desert/high desert places where experienced guys have described deer “blowing up” or really shrinking year to year is a bit different of a habitat dynamic than the more migratory herds that are usually talked about in the big research studies.

Man, that is a really good point, and would make sense. Apologies to the OP on sidetracking his thread, but hopefully it's interesting to him. Looking forward to reading that study, and listening to that Meateater podcast, should be pretty interesting.

 

[IrkedCitizen]

I am a firm believer that everyone's first muley should be a forked horn especially a youth hunter.

In the scheme of things I was late to hunting I started at 23 using rifles. I killed my first buck with my 2nd drawn tag as I got skunked on my first one. So at 25yo in 2009 I killed my first mule deer buck and he was maybe a 25" forked horn. I was stoked

That said, shoot whatever you want if it is legal and makes you happy.

Here is a buck that my good friend's 76yo Uncle shot in 2024. It was his first mule deer and likely last one due to his fading health. He is from back east and has been hunting whitetails his whole life. Me and my friend were able to get him on this 4x4 with eye guards that doesn't break 120". He made the shot count and afterwards He teared up a little. It was a great trip with plenty of memories made.





All too often hunts are ruined due to the expectations of the animals score.

 

[AHayes111]

Sounds like it could be a great listen. Were they talking the nutrition during gestation, or broader for the doe'

The other thing, is that I just have a hard time believing that you could take any random sampling of buck/doe pairs from different herds across the west, give the does perfect nutrition, and all the buck fawns would end up with more or less equally massive racks. No species works that way, not even humans.

Agree, If nutrition and body condition was the only factor. Every buck that was rased on my alfafa fields would grow up to be much better than avrage. Sadly that is just not the case.

 

[madtinker]

This is a pretty good resource for judging a mature buck afield:

What makes a 160 inch Mule Deer? Basic field judging. - Flat Tops Wilderness Guides

Do you really care if you can tell the difference between a 190″ and a 215″ deer? Me neither. In those situations, I just shoot it! It is more useful when hunting public land to know how to judge a 2-3 year old deer from a 4+ year old mature deer. This is usually the […]

www.flattopswildernessguides.com

Thanks for posting this! Quick read with good info.

 

[Brad1974]

I’d say archery hunting stalk whatever gets you excited and is legal. Have fun and sharpen your hunting skills. Too much emphasis these days on monster bucks can ruin the spirit of the adventure and the hunt

oh I. certainly not holding out for a monster. I would prefer a "decent" buck (whatever that means...) over 3 yrs old if I can find one.

 

[Brad1974]

Shoot what makes you happy. Yes plenty of younger 4s. Here’s a smaller 4 I got a picture of. I’d be static to shoot this buck but that’s just me personally. If it gets my adrenaline going then he’s the deer for me. Don’t get me wrong I’d love to shoot a 200 inch deer but the tags I’ve drawn it’s unlikely. Yes sure their there but like you I’m limited on time. Enjoy it and make sure you have fun!View attachment 922162

If I get my eyes on a buck just like that I would go for him without
question. That said, what would a buck like that score? It wouldn't change that fact that I'd call him a shooter, & eoild be happy to tag him, but Im just curious.

 

[Brad1974]

Genetics of an area can have the muleys trend bigger or smaller, but that's a trend. And there are almost always exceptions. And definitely take what "guys who've hunted this place a lot of years", and even wildlife biologists' advice, with a grain of salt. Don't dismiss it, but do put an asterisk on it.

It's been my experience that guys who hunt an area yearly, especially if they're local, who say "their ain't no big bucks around here man"...those guys aren't learning much, because they keep doing the same thing over and over, every year, when they keep finding small bucks. Most of what they learned came from their dads and grandpas, and they're just hunting how their family has always hunted - often with a lot of complaining about how good it "used to be." That creates a doom-loop of not believing there's a massive buck somewhere in that unit, so they don't try, or figure out what it takes. They get into a kind of groove of mediocrity. And that is absolutely fine if the goal is meat or just a satisfying hunt. But they don't push themselves to learn, get to tougher places, or how to discipline themselves to pass up smaller bucks. A good marker of that mediocrity in someone who lives close to their regular unit, is whether or not they put in about as many days scouting as they have available in a given season. If they only have a 2-3 week season in September or October, but didn't put in about 10-14 days scouting across the prior 4 or 5 months, they're probably not serious about finding a big buck in that mediocre unit - or really learning how to hunt it. That's a rough benchmark, but it seems to correlate somewhat.

Biologists need an asterisk too, in some places. They're a great resource, but some may just rarely or never see really big bucks when they're herd counting, and it may be hit or miss if they personally see any tagged. Especially if its an area not known for big bucks. They're generally just not looking for those needles in the haystack that intentionally separate themselves from the herds those biologists are counting for big chunks of the year. But do look at the data that comes from harvest reporting - that'll tell you pretty accurately how often something gets taken beyond a 4-point.

Always go into a unit with the belief that there's an absolute banger of a buck in it - and go from there in figuring out how he'd keep himself alive and unseen in that geography, in that context. But as a good general rule, don't pass up a buck on the first day that you'd never pass up on the last day.

One last point on winter kill - I'm not the only one who has noticed that even after a really bad winter, really big bucks seem to have a better than average chance to survive. I suspect it's because they tend to have more body mass to burn through than smaller and younger bucks/does, etc. And the bigger ones seem to also behave differently during the rut, not running around everywhere competing with the 3-4 yo bucks, running them off and trying to ride herd on a half-dozen does at once. Instead, the really big muley bucks seem to often keep above the fray, cut out one doe at a time, keep her up and away from the rest of the nonsense and chaos of the rut, and stay on her until estrus. One at a time. I suspect that burns less calories over the weeks too, so they may be going into winter with both more body mass from maturity, and more retained energy reserves than the younger bucks running around burning it all off just before winter hits. It's not a guaranteed thing, but you can still find some absolute brutes the season after a winter kill that wipes out big portions of a herd.

Yea, I don't take any one persons word as gospel, but the guy I talked to that has hunted the area was extremely beyond helpful. We talked over the phone and text, I eventually shred pins of areas of interest and he gave me great feedback. He advised me to go after the smaller 4 points if I get an opportunity, but he also said there are good ones in the area & the smallest he has tagged in the area was 162". He didn't offer any spots, but I didn't want his spots. I wanted just to get better understanding of what to expect and he was beyond helpful.
I ask alot of questions, sometimes even "dumb" questions. Not because I don't have a clue, or can't come up with answers, but because I am a perpetual learner who is always searching for little nuggets of knowledge & to gain second hand experience. from guys who get out there and do it.

 

[RockAndSage]

Yea, I don't take any one persons word as gospel, but the guy I talked to that has hunted the area was extremely beyond helpful. We talked over the phone and text, I eventually shred pins of areas of interest and he gave me great feedback. He advised me to go after the smaller 4 points if I get an opportunity, but he also said there are good ones in the area & the smallest he has tagged in the area was 162". He didn't offer any spots, but I didn't want his spots. I wanted just to get better understanding of what to expect and he was beyond helpful.
I ask alot of questions, sometimes even "dumb" questions. Not because I don't have a clue, or can't come up with answers, but because I am a perpetual learner who is always searching for little nuggets of knowledge & to gain second hand experience. from guys who get out there and do it.

Sounds like a great contact, especially if he's sharing pins of areas, and has solid, thorough answers for a lot of questions.

Personally, if I didn't have time to scout a tag thoroughly, especially if my time in the area during season was limited to just a week or two, I wouldn't have a problem at all shooting a 160" buck. Even if I did have a bunch of time in an area, unless I was dead certain there was a really big buck in the area that hadn't been taken earlier in the season, if it's the last day or two then a 160" buck is a great buck, and one to be very happy with.

 

[JLH3]

Agree, If nutrition and body condition was the only factor. Every buck that was rased on my alfafa fields would grow up to be much better than avrage. Sadly that is just not the case.

They did a mixture of control groups and year after year examination of tagged animals. One of the things they found was that a severely stressed doe may take up to two years to fully recover. But I'm most definitely not a biologist, so here is the link to their podcast:

https://www.themeateater.com/listen/meateater/ep-746-healthy-mamas-grow-big-bucks

 

[Pafarm]

If I get my eyes on a buck just like that I would go for him without
question. That said, what would a buck like that score? It wouldn't change that fact that I'd call him a shooter, & eoild be happy to tag him, but Im just curious.

Somewhere in 130 range if I had my best guess. Give or take as I am no expert.

 

[Brad1974]

not Robby here but super interesting subject..but a pretty different topic than OP brought up to be fair. Sounds like OP is not necessarily trophy hunting and wants to have a good time on an archery hunt.

To continue the derail of the thread, I wonder if the desert/high desert places where experienced guys have described deer “blowing up” or really shrinking year to year is a bit different of a habitat dynamic than the more migratory herds that are usually talked about in the big research studies.

A deer in the Wyoming range is going to have pretty darn good feed pretty much every year in the spring and early summer with a receding snow line.

A deer in northern Arizona may be in literal feast or famine during antler growth time depending on monsoons. To the same point, his mother may have had a terribly dry fall and winter when he was in utero and been on the verge of starvation.

The studies supported the massive effect that mother’s health had on expressed antlers characteristics. Take a listen or go read it, it’ll make a lot more sense. Can’t necessarily be extrapolated to the desert stuff except that a healthy mom will probably give birth to a fawn with more genetic (well, epigenetic) potential for big antlers.

That's exactly what I'm looking for. I will have a couple days to look around and do some glassing. If I'm seeing 130" 4 pointers all over the place before my tag becomes valid, I will likely hold out for a bigger one for at least the first few days of my hunt. Now if I'm able to find a 150" buck I think I may have an opportunity at, I will definitely be going for it day one. The area I am hunting has a winter range very close to it, but there are resident deer in the area I plan to hunt. It is a very high pressure area during rifle season, but hopefully some big ones have made it through & I can get eyes on some.

 

[Brad1974]

Agree, If nutrition and body condition was the only factor. Every buck that was rased on my alfafa fields would grow up to be much better than avrage. Sadly that is just not the case.

I remember hearing about these studies. It wasn't that the mothers health is the only factor, but it is the factor that sets the bucks total potential.
For instance a very healthy well fed mother will birth a buck with the potential to become a stud. If that buck is malnourished and overstressed, he may not live up to that potential.
On the other hand a stressed and malnourished mother will birth a buck that has a lower overall potential. That buck will have less potential even if he is extremely healthy and well fed his entire life.
I can't remember the podcast where I heard all of that but it was extremely interesting. I am not a wildlife or deer biologist, but I guess I am a biologist since I do have an undergrad degree in biology... but I am still a deer nerd that loves listening to deer science.