If harvesting larger racked bucks was restricted until the main rut has ended ( pick an appropriate date for any area) the better quality bucks would do more of the breeding instead of being removed from the gene pool prior to mating. The gene pool of the herd would tend towards better quality all around, more so as the years progress. This is how nature handled it before hunting. The big guys could still be harvested, just not before contributing, or trying anyway. There must be a downside (other than some hunters will not like it, at first). Put on your thinking caps and tell us about it. Thank you in advance for your diligent attention to this important matter
Just because a buck has a big rack, doesn't mean he is the dominant buck. So this logic wouldn't work. The most aggressive buck is usually the one that does alot of the breeding. Also studies have shown that a doe will breed with multiple bucks during her cycle. And have proven that a doe that produces twins the next season, can actually be from different bucks. So leaving bucks to breed is a complete crap shoot. We cant control that unless you put them in a cage.
I'll speculate that there exists a strong correlation among rack mass, health and dominance. I understand that other bucks will get in the mix. One year I got the dominant buck and that night I caught a video of a nubby from his harem doing the deed in his place about a hundred yards from where I took grandpa off her back. Ever see a deer grin? So if all those several lovers were the quality type, the odds are good. Crap shoot is about chance, but the deck would be stacked and with time get stacked even better. This approach would not in anyway diminish the herd, and eventually those guys could be harvested same year. Where is the down side?
How would you know which does not to shoot aftet they were bred? Why are the genetics of the doe not as important as the buck that breeds her? Just too many unknowms factoring into your equation for it to make sense.
That makes sense. A buck with a big rack just means he eats good and got through a few seasons. The biggest buck I got on my cams this season, who hung in the area for a solid month, suddenly disappeared right after a slightly smaller 8pt started showing up on my cams. I think he was bullied out of the area, because that smaller 8pt was still around as recently as Nov 19th. Never saw that real big 8pt again.
How would it matter? Every doe has half their DNA contribution from dad. Eventually they would all carry mostly better buck genes to hand off to fawns. The inferior buck genes would be bred out of the entire herd regardless of sexual identity . ( like nature used to ) Doe shooting is a population management issue. I don't anymore. I used to take an old gray mare or 2 each year when feeding the family. Kids are all out of college and doing fine on their own. 2 mature bucks a year is my limit for consumption now. I have the luxury of never harvesting any type of younger deer because I can always whack a big old gray mare if need be. It has been along time since that happened. I am unaware of anyone ( personally known to me) that wants me to whack a doe for them to eat. Everyone wants to hunt here. ....wait for it .... because the very local population supports/produces mature animals. They are, why do you proffer that they are not? See above. My 'equation' as you call it is about genetic inheritance, and improving it. Many other things go into any individuals situation, like nutrition, disease and environment for just 3 examples. Thank you for moving this conversation along. Perhaps we can get a movement going and Make Buck Hunting Great Again!
Not really 'just'. He also had to have the genetics for that rack. Then the feed and longevity allows it to manifest.
Sounds like you have it all figured out for your area, congrats! So lets not shoot does or fawns country wide and only take a mature buck or two per hunter. Sounds like a recipe for a nationwide deer farm. CWD should thrive within 7-10 years. Have to wonder why ballistic coefficiencies and such need to be figured out for this management system? So many questions being answered with questions anymore, is that a new thing I'm unaware of?
Thank you. I actually do have it mostly figured. Why would you go and say a damn fool thing like that? You want to impute that on me but I disallow. Not sure we ( the public) have the definitive science on CWD yet. Looks like it came from a research based feeding operation out west compounded by a ton of mismanagement following. Me too. Why do you claim that? Can you explain why you think BC's in trajectory models have anything to do with herd genetics? You caught me ( and perhaps all of us) by surprise with that notion. Self awareness is your friend. How do you explain your asking so many questions?
Good luck in your endeavors and venture into this. Your sesquipedalian speaking has left me feeling a bit inadequate, trying to avoid feeling inferior. You and atlas are too smart for me.
No problem RC, you still have your pompousness as your number one trait. Baiting is illegal, even if you felt it was in good intention. Going for ban 7 or is it 8 now?
I agree that genetics will play a role as well. But, in the woods I hunt (20+ years) where genetics, like in the mid west, are not condusive to large antler growth, and quality food sources aren't available, mainly just browse, there are still some nice bucks with large racks. So, I don't think genetics are necessarily the difference maker.
My guess is RC and atlas found each other after a couple years of separation and decide to tag team idiocy on the forum for fun. Looking at it as a whole there really hasn't been a lot of trolling over the past year or two, at least not in this manner. RC posts up some ballistical BS and atlas starts in with some bullchit image depicting an average archery killed buck score per state that everyone, including his mom, could call out as fake as chit then tries to demean anyone that disagrees. They're both useless fools living in a lonely world....
I am not any person you mistake me for. This is my first and only time joining this forum. Stop insulting me. What do you feel was baiting about tossing out an idea I have?
My term for the giant fawnless does around here. Some dress out better than 190#, no chit. Not sure why they never have fawns (anymore/ever did)? Don't go into estrous? Can't get preggers? Past menopause? Don't take care of fawns? Who knows. By teeth they may be as much as >10 YO. Not having the fawn gives them the luxury of growing big, and unlike the bucks taking a beating in the rut they fatten up. They are useless to the herd anymore and actually a detriment because they out compete all the smaller deer for scarce resources in winter. If they do go into heat then they waste the big bucks efforts when they should be out dealing with does that function re-productively. They run in packs of 3 or 4, or even a pair. They aggressively fight off the other antlerless. They have to respect the bucks because they are armed with ouchie headgear. At least until they shed. If I take a Doe, it is one of them. I wish the others around here could learn too figure out which ones they are and selectively target them for the freezer fillers. I'd be happy to drop some for them but they want to hunt here themselves.
I'd appreciate if you would stop insulting me with your unfounded false fabrications. Additionally I'd prefer you avoid my threads and any posts I make if you can't stay on topic and behave in a civil manner. Is that to much to ask of a gentleman? I have no way to force any improvements in your behavior so you should undertake this on the honor system. I don't know who is charge here, but I think if they had a stern talking to you this would be a nicer forum and maybe some new blood would find it a nice place to participate. I am already nearing my limit for tolerance. Thank you.
Their stature actually does sort of resemble that of a horse, not enough that you would mistaken them for one, but more so that other does.
