kill

Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Author
MuskyMastr
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3032
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/06/30 17:39:29
  • Location: Valley of the Crazy Woman
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/06 01:48:19 (permalink)
Genetics are less important here where food sources and nutrition vary from year to year, but they are ultimately the defining factor on how big a buck can get.

Better too far back, than too far forward.
#31
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/06 18:16:57 (permalink)
 
Genetics are overrated in the growth of large antlered bucks.  Health of the mother, good nutrition and feed, and being allowed to live longer are WAY more important.
 
 
 
Care to cite your source for that information?
#32
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/06 18:35:29 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

 
Genetics are overrated in the growth of large antlered bucks.  Health of the mother, good nutrition and feed, and being allowed to live longer are WAY more important.



Care to cite your source for that information?


Thats a known fact anymore,where is that cave you live in!
#33
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/06 18:41:50 (permalink)
I will say that 10 pointers (with good genetics) will have the potentiol of producing babys that will have 10 points,but without good nutrition they will still be smaller racked bucks!
post edited by SPIKER - 2008/09/06 18:48:37
#34
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/07 09:46:51 (permalink)
Thats a known fact anymore,where is that cave you live in!
 
 
Care to cite any controlled studies, game biologists, white papers, articles of any sort by recoginized professionals-----anything but bar talk with your drinking buddies that will support your exact statement?
#35
DanesDad
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3087
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/03/21 15:35:43
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 00:34:42 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

 
Genetics are overrated in the growth of large antlered bucks.  Health of the mother, good nutrition and feed, and being allowed to live longer are WAY more important.



Care to cite your source for that information?

 
Well, you could start with Deer and Deer Huntings article, "Top Tips for Buck Management"-May 22, 2008.  Many articles in the magazine i(n the past several years that I've subscribed) have dealt with antler growth and have stated that genetics is important-but not as important as good nutrition, the birth mother being healthy, and age-that is, letting the deer get older before harvesting it.  Most of the articles are written by experts in the field of biology-particularly deer biology.  I dont have the back issues but if you looked into them, I'm sure you'd find evidence supporting my theory.  Remember, I stated that genetics are overrated.  Not that they are meaningless.  I believe genetics play a part, but are not as important as good nutrition and living longer.
 
In fact, D&DH has a monthly column where  Dr. Leonard Lee Rue answers questions specific to deer and deer behavior.  You could write and ask him this yourself.
 
My point with all of this is, I didn't just make that statement up.  While it is, in a strict sense, only my opinion, there is research out there that agrees with it.  I admit, I too believed that this was pretty common knowledge.
#36
DanesDad
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3087
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/03/21 15:35:43
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 00:41:22 (permalink)
BTW, I dont hang out in bars and have "drinking buddies" to talk about deer biology with...I consider the guys on this forum to be much more enlightened and (with the exception of peacy and younguru) more coherent on such topics than anyone I might find in a bar.
#37
SilverKype
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3842
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/24 11:58:02
  • Location: State
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 07:39:22 (permalink)
Genetics is least important in reality.  Why?  Because we can't change it for the better or worse in a free ranging herd.  Nutrition and age, we can.  In a fairytale, they are all equally important, but we don't live there.  It's said that 62% of a bucks genes comes from the doe.  Her health is most important.

My reports and advice are for everyone to enjoy, not just the paying customers.
#38
dpms
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3447
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 08:11:08 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: SilverKype

Genetics is least important in reality.  Why?  Because we can't change it for the better or worse in a free ranging herd.  Nutrition and age, we can.  In a fairytale, they are all equally important, but we don't live there.  It's said that 62% of a bucks genes comes from the doe.  Her health is most important.

 
Bingo!!
#39
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 16:38:16 (permalink)
Genetics are the building block of ALL plant and animal life.
 
Your genetic makeup determines your potential before you are born and all the food, exercise, etc will not let you exceed your genetic potential.
To suggest that 40% (if that's a good number) is not important or can not significantly alter a buck for the better is to say that an additional 40" on a 100" buck is not important. Try taking a 40% pay cut and tell me it's not important. Remember that 40% affects the doe fawn also and she is next years mother.
You don't really know the potential of a buck for several years and good food will and age will allow a buck to reach it  but to say all you need is age and food for "Large Antlered Bucks" is simply not true and I have read a lot of info and no one claims that.
Don't forget that large studies done in Texas, Arkansas, and Mississippi have all indicated a DECREASE in antler mass due to AR reducing the better 1-1/2 year bucks.
Gary Alt and the PGC promised us the Largest Antler Study in the World when he was selling us HR/AR but they must have decided they might not like the outcome so it didn't happen.
 
 
#40
dpms
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3447
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 16:53:15 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10
 but to say all you need is age and food for "Large Antlered Bucks" is simply not true and I have read a lot of info and no one claims that.

 
That is correct if the goal is maximum antler potential where you can control feed, age, and selective harvest such as high fence operations or large tracts of highly controlled land.
 
In a real world hunting situation, which is the case in Pa., if "large antlered bucks" is the goal, age becomes the #1 factor. 
 
We can grow a pretty darn impressive buck on marginal feed and genetics but if we shoot them all at 1.5 no chance.
#41
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 18:11:09 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: dpms

ORIGINAL: S-10
but to say all you need is age and food for "Large Antlered Bucks" is simply not true and I have read a lot of info and no one claims that.


That is correct if the goal is maximum antler potential where you can control feed, age, and selective harvest such as high fence operations or large tracts of highly controlled land.

In a real world hunting situation, which is the case in Pa., if "large antlered bucks" is the goal, age becomes the #1 factor. 

We can grow a pretty darn impressive buck on marginal feed and genetics but if we shoot them all at 1.5 no chance.


Totaly agree,thats why antler restrictions and a heavy doe kill in PA will never work like they said.We got people shooting spikes 4 points and having there kids/handicapped/old people tag them legally.Others see a buck running they shoot it anyway thinking it meets antler requirements,walk up and if it doesnt they leave it to rot.

Its a mess in PA right now,wanna help out dont shoot the doe.Wait till the PGC wake the hell up and see this!The doe are our buck producers,less does equals less bucks.Antler restriction and a buck to doe ratio will never work in PA....
#42
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 18:17:49 (permalink)
It would work if it was strictly controlled and every hunter was on the same track,but trying to do that state wide is  FUBAR.They pulled the wool over all the early believers eyes (which I was never for eliminating the population for a healthier heard),now you gotta actually hunt for those doe,not many left good luck!!!!!
#43
bingsbaits
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5026
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 20:39:13 (permalink)
now you gotta actually hunt for those doe,
 
Isn't it called hunting????

"There is a pleasure in Angling that no one knows but the Angler himself". WB
 
 


#44
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 20:55:18 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: bingsbaits

now you gotta actually hunt for those doe,

Isn't it called hunting????


You mean instead of the slaughter in PA,I would have to say Yes!!!!
#45
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 20:56:53 (permalink)
The slaughter is over,still lots of tags left to slaughter more if you can find the deer!
#46
gobyking
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1195
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/08 21:11:16 (permalink)
15 years ago you could see 30-45 doe in northwestern counties on a good DAY. The antler restrictions are a good thing, too bad some who go into the woods hungover can't focus enough or are too impatient to follow the law which changes from year to year. Ratio was too high for buck to doe statewide and now is the hard time when it is getting back in line. I don't expect to see any results for the positive for another 5 years, if ever. But it is a hell of a lot better than it was, just harder now. I'm in 2B now though so there are deer everywhere. Good evening.


Had to edit, I apologize and did not wish to offend another opinion different than mine.
post edited by gobyking - 2008/09/08 21:21:05
#47
MuskyMastr
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3032
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/06/30 17:39:29
  • Location: Valley of the Crazy Woman
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 00:35:53 (permalink)
It has nothing to do with hangovers and focus and law changes.  It has to do with Pi$$ poor mickey mouse science.

Better too far back, than too far forward.
#48
gobyking
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1195
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 00:56:31 (permalink)
Please expand, what is the problem? I have seen a ton of deer around my 15 mile radius of my house. Granted, it is not the big woods but a patchwork of farms and small housing plans in Washington County. Deer are everywhere day and night. Maybe I don't see the impact of the laws.
#49
dpms
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3447
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 07:54:09 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: SPIKER

ORIGINAL: dpms

ORIGINAL: S-10
but to say all you need is age and food for "Large Antlered Bucks" is simply not true and I have read a lot of info and no one claims that.


That is correct if the goal is maximum antler potential where you can control feed, age, and selective harvest such as high fence operations or large tracts of highly controlled land.

In a real world hunting situation, which is the case in Pa., if "large antlered bucks" is the goal, age becomes the #1 factor. 

We can grow a pretty darn impressive buck on marginal feed and genetics but if we shoot them all at 1.5 no chance.


Totaly agree,thats why antler restrictions and a heavy doe kill in PA will never work like they said.

 
I think you missed my point as I totally disagree with your statement.  Bucks get older through AR and herd reduction helps the feed.
#50
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 09:04:46 (permalink)
The smaller antlered bucks do get one year older due to AR and there is more feed due to HR. The interesting thing is there was a steady INCREASE in both the number of P&Y or larger bucks and total bucks through the 90's up to and including the start of AR/HR which would indicate that the overpopulation was not statewide and there was sufficient feed in most areas. As stated before there are several large studies that indicate AR (at least point restriction) leads to a DECREASE in antler mass due to the better bucks being shot off as 1-1/2 year olds. There are many areas in the state that have not been greatly impacted by AR/HR due to being  urban areas and the increase in private property in general. As the state continues to reduce the deer on public land more and more people are either leasing land or posting land they own and are starting to manage it themselves. This will lead to an Increase in larger bucks but a steady Decrease in hunter satisfaction for those forced to compete on public land with a smaller deer herd which has had the genitically superior deer being gradually shot off as 1-1/2 year olds. As for the claim that it will not happen in Pa. due to does being bred before buck season ---- 25% of the larger bucks are shot in archery season before peak breeding--also all the fawns that come into estrous do it AFTER rifle season when most of the better bucks have been shot off. Even though some of the scrubs left to breed have good genetics ALL of the bucks with POOR genetics are left. It is impossible not to be gradually decreasing the genetic potiential of our deer herd and the PGC has to realize it and is why Alts  Greatest Deer Antler Study in The World won't happen in Pa.
#51
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 09:28:36 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

The smaller antlered bucks do get one year older due to AR and there is more feed due to HR. The interesting thing is there was a steady INCREASE in both the number of P&Y or larger bucks and total bucks through the 90's up to and including the start of AR/HR which would indicate that the overpopulation was not statewide and there was sufficient feed in most areas. As stated before there are several large studies that indicate AR (at least point restriction) leads to a DECREASE in antler mass due to the better bucks being shot off as 1-1/2 year olds. There are many areas in the state that have not been greatly impacted by AR/HR due to being  urban areas and the increase in private property in general. As the state continues to reduce the deer on public land more and more people are either leasing land or posting land they own and are starting to manage it themselves. This will lead to an Increase in larger bucks but a steady Decrease in hunter satisfaction for those forced to compete on public land with a smaller deer herd which has had the genitically superior deer being gradually shot off as 1-1/2 year olds. As for the claim that it will not happen in Pa. due to does being bred before buck season ---- 25% of the larger bucks are shot in archery season before peak breeding--also all the fawns that come into estrous do it AFTER rifle season when most of the better bucks have been shot off. Even though some of the scrubs left to breed have good genetics ALL of the bucks with POOR genetics are left. It is impossible not to be gradually decreasing the genetic potiential of our deer herd and the PGC has to realize it and is why Alts  Greatest Deer Antler Study in The World won't happen in Pa.


EXACTLT!


#52
dpms
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3447
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 12:34:39 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

 better bucks being shot off as 1-1/2 year olds.

 
In regards to this, not every 1.5 y/o buck with great genetics will be legal.  There are many 1.5 y/o bucks that for various reasons do not sport antlers that meet the requirements thier first year. 
 
It is a rare buck indeed that is 3.5 or older that is not legal here.  I have seem maybe 3 bucks in all of my time in the woods and on my cameras that were mature 6 pointers, let alone 5's, 4's or spikes.  We have one on a farm we hunt that is 5.5 we think.  Huge body, mass and spread but lacking in points.  Disappears with any pressure.  Been trying to put a junior on him for 3 years now.
 
 
#53
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 13:10:58 (permalink)
DPMS--bring that junior up my way-- An area I hunt,  for whatever reason, has a good number of 6 points that never get any brows. I'am in a 4 point area. I have seen at least two each year since 2003  that are mounters if I could only shoot them. About the time they start pushing 20" they dissapear so I think someone isn't quite so particular but no one admits to taking them so I assume it's not a junior hunter. There is one pushing 20 that has already showed up this year.
#54
dpms
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3447
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/09 20:07:56 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

 About the time they start pushing 20" they dissapear so I think someone isn't quite so particular but no one admits to taking them so I assume it's not a junior hunter.

 
Problem with our big 6 is he disappears during the season only to reappear afterwards.  We might have to find some of those not so particular hunters.
#55
DanesDad
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3087
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/03/21 15:35:43
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/10 21:46:42 (permalink)
How many bucks in PA are born with the potential to be 160 inches?  But, how many 160 inch bucks are killed each year?  The limiting factor is not genetics, but nutrition, health of the birth mother (nutrition again) and bucks being shot at a young age.  No buck is gonna be 160 inches in it's first year and probably not in its second.  But, in PA, we were shooting anything with horns and were killing the deer before they even had a chance of reaching their genetic potential.  Plus we were overprotecting does, leaving more mouths to feed, thus reducing quality browse for the bucks remaining.  Anyone on here older than 30 remembers the days of seeing 25, 35, 45 or more deer on opening day.  I saw 40 one year myself.  But when you see 40 deer and 39 of them are does and one is a spike, or forkhorn, doesn't anyone see anything wrong with that?
 
AR is not a perfect solution.  S-10 pointed out that the possibility that we are shooting the best bucks every year and leaving lesser bucks to carry on (a process called High grading).  A better way would be if bucks under 2.5 years old were not legal.  But it is too hard to age a deer on the hoof for that to work.  We are shooting more big bucks now, partly as a result of leaving some young ones walk.  That has to be good.
#56
MuskyMastr
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3032
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/06/30 17:39:29
  • Location: Valley of the Crazy Woman
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/10 22:13:54 (permalink)
I agree that some of AR makes sense, BUT the original intent of AR was to shrink the window in which the does were being bred.  Data is not supporting this type of shift since AR was implemented.
 
The other factor is that Some of us still hunt for enjoyment.  Do I like to shoot big bucks?  Of course, but I am no less proud of the numerous scrubheads I have shot.  Antlers are not a factor for me.

Better too far back, than too far forward.
#57
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/10 23:05:50 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: DanesDad

How many bucks in PA are born with the potential to be 160 inches?  But, how many 160 inch bucks are killed each year?  The limiting factor is not genetics, but nutrition, health of the birth mother (nutrition again) and bucks being shot at a young age.  No buck is gonna be 160 inches in it's first year and probably not in its second.  But, in PA, we were shooting anything with horns and were killing the deer before they even had a chance of reaching their genetic potential.  Plus we were overprotecting does, leaving more mouths to feed, thus reducing quality browse for the bucks remaining.  Anyone on here older than 30 remembers the days of seeing 25, 35, 45 or more deer on opening day.  I saw 40 one year myself.  But when you see 40 deer and 39 of them are does and one is a spike, or forkhorn, doesn't anyone see anything wrong with that?

AR is not a perfect solution.  S-10 pointed out that the possibility that we are shooting the best bucks every year and leaving lesser bucks to carry on (a process called High grading).  A better way would be if bucks under 2.5 years old were not legal.  But it is too hard to age a deer on the hoof for that to work.  We are shooting more big bucks now, partly as a result of leaving some young ones walk.  That has to be good.


So your opinion is that killing all the doe off is going to make it better to produce more feed for the non existing trophy buck in PA?

Hmmm,makes sence if your a moron!




#58
gobyking
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1195
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/11 00:00:01 (permalink)
Well, I happen to agree with Danesdad. Years ago when there were tons of doe, browse was hard to find for all deer in the winter. Get the doe to buck ratio less than 30:1(or whatever it was)and you'll have more bucks even though there is still the same browse. I'm not saying you'll have bigger bucks or better genetics. Just killing the first one with horns you see doesn't seem appealing to me.

If there is a better solution than the one the PGC has now, please fill us in.
#59
SPIKER
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 165
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/19 11:12:57
  • Status: offline
RE: kill 2008/09/11 00:06:58 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: gobyking


If there is a better solution than the one the PGC has now, please fill us in.



I really have no clue,but just saying slaughtering of the herd was definitely not where to start IMO....
post edited by SPIKER - 2008/09/11 00:10:23
#60
Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Jump to: