Kip Adams on ARs

from Kip Adams wrote 5 days 7 hours ago
In response to ENO's questions about (1) antler restrictions leading to poor genetics, (2) antlerless bucks in earn-a-buck hunts, and (3)system for aging bucks.
(1) there is often discussion about "high grading" the best bucks in antler restriction programs. The last national survey was completed in 2008, and at that time 22 state agencies used some form of antler restrictions (see page 50 of QDMA's 2010 Whitetail Report at http://www.QDMA.com for a complete discussion of buck management options) to protect young bucks. At the state level, all states (with the possible exception of Texas) that employed antler restrictions did so to protect yearling bucks while making 2.5 and older bucks available for harvest. A properly-designed antler restriction will protect the majority of yearling bucks so it reduces the opportunity for "high grading". Also, there is abundant research that suggests a yearling buck's first set of antlers is not a good predictor of his antler growth potential. Bucks that start small (and are easily protected by an anter restriction) can blossom into some of the biggest bucks in the herd.

muskiemaster asked if shooting the big bucks left the small ones to breed. We used to think that a few dominant bucks did the majority of breeding (like with elk and Alaskan moose). DNA analysis now allows researchers to identify paternity in deer herds and the results are a bit surprising. Dominant bucks do not dominate the breeding in deer herds. Rather, a little of the breeding is done by a lot of different bucks. The vast majority of bucks sire very few fawns (1-3) each year that survive to 6 months of age! One study conducted in a deer herd where over 50% of the bucks were 4.5 years and older showed yearlings and 2.5 year-old-bucks still sired about a third of the fawns. The rut is pretty short and whitetails are solitary breeders so it's nature's way to ensure the does are bred and to keep a lot of genetic variation in the herd. Also, many hunting seasons occur after the rut when the majority of breeding has already taken place.

ORIGINAL: S-10

AR's by themself protect approx 30% of the yearling bucks. None of AR's proponents will say with certanity that AR's won't lead to long term reduction of antler mass. They are all very cautious of not stating that. It is not possible to have any other outcome, it's just a matter of how long it takes and how severe the reduction.

ORIGINAL: deerfly

 The PGC claims they don't know how many deer we have ,so how could they possibly know how many 1.5 buck were saved by ARs. . Alt said that ARs would double the number of 8 pts and that we would likely have more and larger buck than ever before and both claims were flat out lies, so why would anyone believe that ARs save 50% of the 1.5 buck?

ORIGINAL: deerfly

The PGC and WM both agree that the harvest estimates are reasonably accurate. Therefore,it is statically impossible to double the number of 8pt. bucks while reducing the harvest by 47%.

ORIGINAL: dpms

ORIGINAL: deerfly

The PGC and WM both agree that the harvest estimates are reasonably accurate. Therefore,it is statically impossible to double the number of 8pt. bucks while reducing the harvest by 47%.

Show me the stats that prove that Alt's claims that we would double the number of 8 points in the herd and that our bucks would be larger are "flat out lies". 

ORIGINAL: S-10

And I really don't mind him calling me that because he is just a youngin, still wet behind the ears, that wishes he had my experience but doesn't want the age that goes along with it. Heck, he still fishes with bobbers and has a hard time with math. He needs to spend more time listening to DarDys.

ORIGINAL: S-10

This discussion doesn't mean near as much as an E-mail or call to a BOC member but it does have a bit of an impact.

ORIGINAL: deerfly

 Just like they don't know if ARs have decreased the average rack size of 2.5+ bucks like it did in Miss.