Buckstopshere

Thanks for posting that article SteveB. I think the study at Mississippi State University, and now the conclusion of the new report from Pennsylvania should at least put a halt to AR in the scientific community, but there evidently is still motivation to purse the policy, even though it has been demonstrated now to do the opposite of what it intended. And any student of deer management will have to admit that the rules that govern our precious whitetail deer are pushed and pulled by politics as much if not more than by science. There are a lot of well-meaning hunters out there who have been sold a bill of goods.

"Guys who see big bucks don't shoot little ones..." Well it happens to me almost every year. Doesn't it happen to you too? I invariably pass on a decent buck, waiting for that bonfide tanker and then all of a sudden...only a week to go in the season. And it is either tag soup or hunt like heck for a final opportunity to put some venison in the freezer. I see big bucks every year but only once in a while do I get lucky and tag one.

I've never seen so many bucks as this year. It's crazy. How did so many antlered deer make it through when so many hunters are after them for such a long time? Boggles my mind.

What I try to do before the season is walk and look and mentally record what is going on in the woods. What is going on in adjacent properties to the ones you hunt? Did they put corn in again? Is the guy down the hill building a cabin and turned the side hill into an excavation project? How are the Black cherry trees this year...bumper crop down here in Allegany County. Did the farmer on the edge of your hunting property do the same thing this year as he did last year to his crop fields? How is the beech, apple, acorn crop this year... IN other words, don't get tied down to specifics before you have a global view of your hunting areas. Sometimes land use patterns and nature (like a bumper crop of apples on one hillside) can make or break a deer season on a specific hill... and you need to change because why? Answer: Deer seasons are never the same.

My heaviest buck dressed out at 196 lbs (shotgun.) I know I've got a photo of him, somewhere. My second heaviest was 167 pounds and won three archery deer pools for the heaviest buck. Here's an old picture of him... So I am not a member of the 200 lb. club...yet. Post photos so we can see.

It's beginning to appear that deer hunters who do not have many (or in erussel's case...ANY!) opportunities at shooting a legal buck during the gun and 'loader season are more for AR than those of us who have adequate chances at shooting a buck. AR's is not going to get you to where you want to go. I'm afraid it will have the opposite effect. Any decent young buck will get shot off under ARs... ARs do NOT protect the little six's and eight's. On the contrary...It TARGETS them. I know it is a tough idea for those who support ARs to understand because it stands on its head the common understanding that we've all had rammed down our throats by the experts on TV. (I passed...did not shoot at 30-some antlered bucks all, spikes, forks and little six-pointers, during rifle, which was a record number of sightings during season for me...holding out for a big buck (for my area) and more importantly, if not as important, not wanting to end my season. And I hunt on heavily hunted private and state land. (Not "Sanctuary" land that few hunters can hunt on, groomed for whitetail hunting.) But I hunt on a bunch of small properties. I don't know if I have ever seen a mature buck, dead or alive in my life, except in photos because someone tells me in the cutline (caption) it is...as SteveB says, five or six years old and I have a shot a few three and a half year olds. I remember a guy came up to me from a nearby town and showed me a picture of a buck (a little seven point...about a 80-Class) that the DEC had aged at 11 years old. Maybe that was true, and maybe it wasn't. I know that the only real way to accurately age deer past three years is by pulling the tooth and sending it in. Tooth wear has a lot of variables. New York is such a diverse state in so many ways. But I guess I understand the frustration of hunters who want to see more bucks and believe that the state can change it's management system so that will increase their chances in the woods. But this talk about "the correct buck to doe ratio" that sounds good...but I think it is more B.S., one of those things that makes us sound like we know what we are talking about, but proves we don't. I'm not trying to offend anyone here, please don't take it that way. I grew up "in the old school" so I say things a bit harshly for modern sensitivities, I know. Heck, nobody even knows the deer population in an area, right? Do you? Well, if you don't know the population number, then tell me, how in the h..e...double L can we know a complex formula like the ratio? Now I know that we can easily know the kill ratio of bucks to does. But that is not the same as the population ratio. We hunt bucks as one species (with its own regs. and rules) and we hunt does (well antlerless deer, including button bucks) as another.

If you have about 10 minutes to burn, follow the link and click on the video on the right rail and watch the amateurish video I put together on my 2009 bow kill. It was very satisfying because it was my first attempt at zip-typing licking branches over a scrape, course I used a frozen tarsal, a grunt tube and a can bleat call too...sometimes we luck out. Hope you enjoy it. Just paste the link in your browser... http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/outdoors/x109291619/VIDEO-November-success-in-the-leaves Click on where it says Video over on the right rail...we are working on the link.

I have and will shoot small bucks on occasion, as I will shoot big bucks on occasion. Problem is, the big buck don't seem to be as frequent as the small buck occasions. ;0) I know I sound radical and off the wall, crazy...but I think that the "shooting only big bucks" is one of the reasons why we don't see more big bucks...I know it may seem counter-intuitive to the "let him go so he can grow" crowd. But in the real world, there is so much pressure on bigger bucks in some areas...and none on the little guys, that the big guys don't stand much of a chance...especially now that we shoot rifles. And I know because I am one of them. It may seem crazy but on a property I bow and gun hunt, if it came down to the last day of the rifle season and four bucks went past me,...a spike, two sixes and a small eight...and I wanted the meat...then I would drop the spike. And the meat is just as good on the spike than it is on the one- or two and half year old buck. I know that since I archery hunt on the same property, the three bucks with racks would be more than decent the following year, but the spike,...it would take him a couple years to get decent. We need to de-emphasize the more points a buck has the "better" or more worthy it is... We need to emphasize that it is all about the hunt, the shot, etc. and get away from the old-point-fixation thing.

I filled out the bowhunter sighting log for years and it varied, through the 1990's up to about 2,001 it was a bit better than one deer per hour spent in the stand. Now it is not quite that, but last year it was pretty close to one deer per hour. This does NOT count the ones I see walking in to the stand or walking out (especially at dusk.) And it holds true during the gun season too, but then, I chose stands where I can see further through the woods and fields in general.

Doc: The Pa. study on page 14 shows us the Pa. success rate. I think it mirrors the hunter satisfaction rate. Prior to the watershed year of 2002 when Gary Alt, et. al. instituted AR's in Pa., deer hunters tagged over 200,000 bucks (in 2,000 and 2,001.) In 2007, that total buck take figure dropped like a stone to an all time low of 109,000 bucks in 2007. Is it a stretch to say that buck hunters in Pa. took HALF the bucks they were tagging back a few years prior to "The Pa. Experiment?" I don't think so. So flip over a few pages to page 36 of the study. License sales over the last 20 years. 'Course it shows the drop in hunting....like everywhere. But, Pa. was selling over 1 million deer licenses up until "The Experiment" now it has dropped 75,000 after 2004. Why 2004? I think hunters gave ARs a chance for a couple years, but became discouraged by the lack of success in the woods. I think the results of "The Pa. Experiment" are as plain as the nose on my face. Hunters are not happier with AR's. In fact, AR's have caused the opposite of its stated intention...less deer, though better quality will make hunters happier. But in reality, there were less deer, the timber interests were happy, but the average guy is becoming very discouraged in Pa. And I have been buying a license there since 1971 and I am seriously considering saving my money this year because the deer population there...not to mention the buck population is ridiculously low now. And you should know me by now that with me, it is not all about the kill. But when there is no sign, no tracks, no rubs and scrapes, licking branches to fool with...and all I have to do is spend my time with my trail cams and scouting back here in NY...I can use the Pa. non-resident fee to buy another trail cam! In other words, I do not think that we need another study. Pa. and Mississippi have both experimented with AR's and the results are in. Though the intentions were good, in reality AR's were colossal failures in both states and have severely damaged participation in our hallowed sport. Of course if someone wants to practice AR's on his or her property...go for it. More power to you. I am speaking about this Management Philosophy on a global (statewide) level. One size fits all where the average guy who 1. Isn't rich, or 2. Does not want to dedicate his life to deer hunting...the average Joe, doesn't stand a chance. The results are in. Larry: Exactly. But according to the new Pa. study, since 1/2 the genetics come from the doe, and since breeding does by bucks is completely random, even the effect of High Grading (breeding by the smallest, protected animals) is watered down. It would be like if you and I were breeding bird dogs and we decided to always pick the smallest, runtiest, camel-gaited, possum-tailed dog as a sire. (That's what you are in effect doing when you shoot off all the big bucks and leave the squirts to do the breeding.) But....the does carry the genes of the bigger bucks in their population...like if we allowed our runty sires to mate at random with any bitches in the breed. At least that is what the Pa. study concludes... But I used to fuss with bird dog breeding and talking to some experts like the late, great Bob Wehle of Scotsville who was a student of not just bird dog breeding, but horses and cows...he said that there was a tendency of all breeding to go towards the mediocre in any strain and it took a real effort to elevate the qualities through selective breeding. If that is true, (And who am I to doubt those words from a true breeder of animals?) Then as the Pa. Study concluded, there is really little effect by letting the spikes and forks do most of the breeding (because they are all that's left and protected.) But thankfully, the does still carry the good genes to ameliorate the influence of the protection and overabundance of runts and inferior males.

I like that old expression...maybe some of you haven't heard it lately: "If you could buy a man for what he's worth and sell him for what he thinks he's worth, you'd make a heck of a profit."

Reading between the lines, it sounds to me that they are (pardon the pun,) pulling in their horns a bit. Yes, Steve863, they are admitting that ARs have virtually no impact on the future antler size, age structure, physical size, population ratio or anything else for the whitetail deer in Pa. And those points have been great selling points to Joe Deerhunter. But, I'm afraid that in a way, the Pa. Game Commission deer biologists are digging in and holding the position that the majority of hunters would be more satisfied shooting a six-point, whether it was a 1.5 year old or a 4.5 year old once every few years, than shooting a spike or a fork buck every year. If the deer hunters would just say on the survey forms that it does not matter whether they shoot a four-point, five point or a six-point buck, it would go a long way. It is more about hunter satisfaction than anything else, I think. Which would you rather shoot, a five point buck or a six point buck? (In a non-AR zone of course.) It shouldn't matter a hoot. But we have been sold on this antler point worship thing instead of the quality of the hunt, the shot, the total experience, etc. etc. Obviously we all fondly remember some of the smaller bucks we have killed in great detail and yet have all but forgotten some of the bigger bucks...that proves that the great god of antler points is something that has been sold to us. Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox now. I think they are wrong. Hunters care more about the total experience than they do points down deep in their hearts. And a glance at the new Pa. Game Management format it says that they are not going to be based on a "Deer density" model (like NY,) but upon one that is more flexible, bowing to the will of the majority of hunters, landowners and the general public. It seems that the biologists of the Pa. Game Commission have come down out of their Ivory Tower a bit, at least in this 123-page tome. After the next round of meetings, if the organized hunters in Pa. protested enough against ARs, if I am reading it correctly, then AR's may be suspended in those areas. The new Pa. study is encouraging for that alone.

Today, the Pa. Game Commission released its 10-year whitetail deer management plan 2009-2018, and at first glance, it seems quite comprehensive taking into consideration new findings, especially where it concerns ARs. Check it our yourself on the Pa. Game website. Here is an excerpt from the section on antler restrictions. Here is the direct quote from the study, minimizing the perceived effect (without mentioning it by name) of "High Grading": "An expanding research base supports the position that antler restrictions will have minimal impact on future antler development of Pennsylvania‘s deer herd. First, yearling antler points appear to have limited impact on future antler development (Koerth and Kroll 2008). Studies have concluded yearling antler points to have low heritability (Williams et al. 1994, Lukefahr and Jacobson 1998) and should not be used for harvest schemes to alter the genetic composition of a population (Lukefahr and Jacobson 1998). Thus, use of yearling antler points, as a harvest criterion should have limited influence on future antler development. Antler points at 2.5 years of age have higher heritabilities (Williams et al.. 1994, Lukefahr and Jacobson1998), but the Game Commission‘s antler restriction allows most 2.5 year-old males to be harvested. Second, research on impact of sire on antler points is not applicable to our antler restriction. Research from the Kerr Wildlife Management Area in Texas concluded that antler points are related to genetics of the father (Harmel 1983). In this study, spike sires produced more spikes than a buck that had 6 points as a yearling. Sample sizes for this study were 8 spike-antlered sires and 1 six-point sire that was initially noted in the pens at 3.5 years of age as a buck with superior antler quality. Results of this study can be summarized as spike antlered males produce more spike offspring than a male with superior antler quality. These results apply to extremes – spike antlered males versus a superior quality male. Pennsylvania‘s antler restriction is not designed to compare the smallest antlers with the largest antlers. In the 3-point area, the relevant question concerning the impact of the proposed regulation is: What is the difference between antlered males with 2 or fewer points to an antler versus antlered males with 3 points or more to an antler? In the 4-point area, the relevant question is: What is the difference between antlered males with 3 or fewer points to an antler versus antlered males with 4 points or more to an antler? Research indicates there may be no relationship between yearling antler points and antler points at 4.5 years of age and older (Koerth and Kroll 2008). Third, simulations of antler restrictions suggest no difference in antler growth between restrictions similar to our proposal and no restrictions. Strickland et al. (2001) conducted antler restriction simulations on a sample of 220 captive deer maintained on complete diets for optimal growth. Using a 75% harvest rate and a <6 antler-point restriction (both antlers combined), their results failed to show a statistical difference between 4.5 year-old antlers with or without an antler restriction. The average Boone and Crockett score of a 4.5 year-old buck with the restriction was 122, and without the antler restriction, the average 4.5 year-old buck scored 126. Besides a lack of statistical difference, there is no indication of biological significance of 4 Boone and Crockett points at 4.5 years of age on the reproductive success of bucks. Therefore, we do not expect a biologically significant decline in antler quality of Pennsylvania‘s deer population as a result of antler restrictions. Fourth, most of Pennsylvania‘s antlered males are harvested after the breeding season. Around 75% of Pennsylvania‘s antlered deer harvest occurs during the firearms season in late November and early December. The peak of breeding is mid-November (Figure 4). As a result, most antlered males harvested in Pennsylvania already have passed their genes onto future generations. Timing of the firearms season further reduces the potential for negative genetic effects of antler restrictions in Pennsylvania. Fifth, a few mature males are not dominating deer breeding (Sorin 2004, Shaw 2005, Sumners et al. 2007). In 2 different studies, yearling males successfully sired 14 percent and 22 percent of the offspring tested (Shaw 2005, Sumners et al. 2007). While the majority of fawns were sired by 3.5 old or older males, yearling and 2.5 year old males sire more than a third to almost half of fawns being born in a population (Shaw 2005, Sumner et al. 2007). In fact, most males only sire 1 litter annually (Sumners et al. 2007).Sixth, multiple paternity is common. In 2002, multiple paternity was documented in captive deer (DeYoung et al. 2002). Twenty-six percent of litters with greater than 2 offspring had more than 1 sire. This information completely challenged some aspects of ungulate reproductive ecology that were thought to be understood. In 2004, the first case of multiple paternity in free-ranging white-tailed deer was documented in Michigan (Sorin 2004). Here, 22 percent of litters with 2 or more offspring had more than 1 sire. This research also showed the oldest males did not monopolize breeding, demonstrating that a few dominant males do not do all breeding (Sorin 2004). Further male dominance ranks were not necessarily predictable or stable during the breeding season (DeYoung et al 2006). Early genetic studies of paternity involved captive deer and those in non-hunted populations having older male age structures. White-tailed deer are hunted across Pennsylvania. Age structures in hunted populations are skewed toward younger age classes. However, even in publicly hunted areas, multiple paternity still has been documented (DeYoung et al. 2007). One study tested 6 different populations with different male age structures and found evidence of multiply paternity in 20 percent or more of litters with 2 or more offspring in all areas (DeYoung et al. 2007) Finally, a male‘s mother also plays an important role in antler development (Harmel 1983, Lukefuhr and Jacobson 1998), but is nearly impossible to consider in statewide regulations. There are no methods to selectively remove females to improve antler characteristics. Therefore, 50 percent of the genetic contribution to future antler development is randomly selected. Given all of this information, the complexity of the white-tailed deer‘s breeding ecology, and high genetic variation, large scale alteration to Pennsylvania‘s deer herd‘s genetics is unlikely."

Split: I respect your opinion. We agree to disagree....;0) All the Best!

When you whittle it all down, AR's does exactly opposite of what it intends. The smallest, scrubbiest bucks in any woodlot is held sacred, sacrosanct. "Oh...we must protect the little buck so he can grow..." And yet, the best, the 1.5 year old six-point or even eight-point is immediately shot off. AR's have it exactly wrong. Instead, shoot that spike and four-point and don't let the know-it-all's make you feel bad about it. Instead, give the best, the little six- or eight- a chance. A buddy of mine has a property where for years, all legal bucks have been fair game, despite the AR chest-pounders. A bunch of guys have hunted the property over the last few years and guess what? When they shoot a spike or three-point they are tagged out and out of the woods. This gives the bucks with better potential a chance to grow. Under AR's the scrubs would be all over the place. His trail cam photos of this year's crop of dandy bucks is truly impressive, and last year they shot a 160-class buck...that's right no AR's. How can it be? AR's have it exactly upside down. AR's protect the culls. The spikes and three-points should be shot...and they taste great...certainly a lot better than tag soup.

I know I'm going against the grain, but from what I've seen in my area of Southern Allegany County, I think they have it about right. The proof is that the population has been pretty stable for the last five years or so. I think the non-reporting rate, that is the automatic calculation the DEC figures into the overall population figure, is computed by an analysis of check stations, field checks (violations) and processor checks and match those who report their tags against how many are not reported. Usually it is around 65% of the check station, processor, and those who have field checks done by CO's actually report. The DEC has had a statistical analysis company look into their methodology and it has been validated. But New York is so vast with so many different whitetail populations, age structures, etc. far be it for me to give a statewide thumbs up or thumbs down. From what I've read, some areas seem to have been skewed by politicians and large landowners (farmers with lots of kill permits.)

I think that is a very good idea and would go a long way towards answering a lot of questions. One thing I noticed last year (at the end of last deer season.) When the DEC violations came out, there was a number of non-reporting violations, about a handful. How did it happen? I didn't see a correlation with any other violations, so why did just a few get busted? I suppose I could check with the DEC and find out, but Doc's post got me thinking. Maybe somebody here knows. For the record, I always report my kills and would be glad to report my non-filled tags, if given the opportunity.

Rightly or wrongly, I attribute the lack of breeding sign in an area to two things, each to a greater or lesser degree....food and hunting pressure. We all know that food sources change and this skews patterns from one year to another. Even in the "big woods" I hunt in Pa., mast crops from beech, cherry, oak, vary greatly. And two, hunting pressure can not be over estimated as a factor. Other hunters can move in on adjacent properties that we have no awareness to their presence. We can over-scout and over-hunt our properties too. Combined, these two factors can push deer into patterns outside our hunting area and as it does, they are continually leaving breeding sign as the rut approaches. I believe that once deer establish key breeding sign in an area, that area becomes (if it is not overly disturbed) the key breeding area or zone for a specific localized herd (what I call the Whitetail Breeding Nucleus.) The WBN is composed of the top breeding animals, run of the mill deer, and even fawns. It is something to witness when they are all running around like crazy...but it has a pattern to it. We can easily screw our chances of having a successful hunt up before the WBN forms by over-hunting or over-scouting (trail cams, etc.) an area, the WBN can naturally dissipate as food sources shift, or other human activity spins it off to an adjacent property. And I have seen it literally washed away as what occurred here (Southern Allegany County) during the 2006 season when we had moonsoon rains that washed the scrapes and scent away.

That's very interesting! Why do you think that was?

2009 was a good year for me, not just because I tagged four deer, but because I learned a lot by using my trail cams and more or less discovering the importance of the overhanging branch. For me, part of the real excitement and enjoyment of deer hunting is learning more about whitetail behavior. I'm like a kid on Christmas morning and can't wait to try out and test new ideas. My wife and I eat a lot of venison (and do cook-outs for friends and family.) We only have three packages of backstrap left and here it is...third week of July! Luckily we have processed venison (hot dogs, sausage, and pepperoni) to get us through until bow season. I killed an eight-point with my bow during the last weekend before gun season at the peak of the rut. Saw him the night before staging with some does. I had noticed a couple days before some un-huntable scrapes (near a barn, used at night) with overhanging branches ripped up. So I cut them off, transported them in a clean garbage bag to a small scrape up on the ridge where the thermal was good, and zip-tied them above the scrape. That next morning when the buck came in to my grunts (I saw him in the field about 100 yards away,) when he came in below the scrape, along with frozen tarsals I had from an eight point the previous season, he came in. I center-punched him. It was not the biggest buck, but very rewarding because of the tactic. I hold off shooting any mature does before I get a buck during archery because I think now that it can screw up the rut if you take one or two of the old long-nosed gals out of your hunting property. Wait 'til after you fill your buck tag, or after the rut. I think that, as so well said in the earlier post on this thread, keeping the does "happy" does wonders for bringing in bucks. And shooting them off doesn't make them happy! They know and a hunting property can go virtually dead if you take out a couple. I've seen it happen. Shoot the young ones if you want the meat. It does not have such an effect on the overall movement in the prelude to the rut and during the rut as it does if you kill an old doe there. I shot a doe with my bow a few days later, so I had two hanging. After passing about 30 bucks through rifle season (an all-time record for me,) because I wanted a big one, and knew he was there, hanging back with the does, I took a spike buck on the last Saturday of the rifle season. Good eating deer! A couple days later I shot a horse of a doe during muzzle loading season with my .50 cal. inline. But she ran down on posted property, so I went home and called up the owner and he gave me permission to go get her. But I couldn't sleep at night, worrried the yotes would get her before me. So my wife thought (Knows) that I am crazy so I got up at 4 am,...she should be used to me by now!... drove up on the hill and walked through the woods in the dark without a light and found the doe. Sure enough, the yotes had got to her first, but only taken a few bites. Dragged her a mile (on the snow) got home, got her hung and still made it work on time. In the old days we could leave our deer overnight and come back in the morning...but not anymore. A buddy of mine did and when he came back in the morning, all that was left of his deer was a gruesome skeleton. I made kind of an amateur video of my eight-point bow kill, but haven't put any music to it yet.

Yeah, right Doc. It was a big deal back then for me to save up my dollars and buy one. Man was I proud of that thing! My old Bear is "losing glass" as we used to say. But I still have it. I think it would be dangerous to string and draw back. I tried that with my Uncle Jim's long bow (he bowhunted in the 1950s) about 20 years ago...and it shattered in a million pieces. All I had left in my hand was the leather-covered grip and probably one of the dumber looks on my face of the many that I have had.

I got two Robin Hoods. When I was shooting in the indoor archery leagues at Belmont, I used my hunting arrows. They were Easton Super Slams, 2315's, I think. So I had to shoot 100,000 arrows....according to SOB...that all?..I used to shoot a lot. Ha.

You guys are a few years older than me, I feel like the youngster in the group...Ha! I shoot an older Bowtech, set at 65 lb. and shoot Easton Superslams, and it is tipped with the 150 grain Magnus (formerly Rothhaar) Snuffer. (I still have some 145 grain screw in practice points to practice with.) I still prefer feathers to vanes, the last holdover to my recurve and long bow days. I didn't start shooting a compound bow until 1996. Had to switch from right-handed long bow 70lb. custom chinese bamboo Howard Hill, to left-handed compound. (Bad shoulder.) Killed my first antlered buck in 1971 with a 50 lb. Bear Kodiak Magnum recurve, wooden shaft, and Bear razorhead.

Biggest bucks ever recorded in the state were shot in Allegany County in 1939. Here is my garage, some of the bucks I shot that I didn't get mounted. None of them are huge, but I was happy to take each and every one. They are "average" bucks in my opinion. Here is one taken by my buddy's son, outside of Wellsville in 2008. Scored just shy of 160, gross. Now that is big for our area. Anything over 120 is big, here.

Here in Southern Allegany County, the overall deer population is pretty stable for the last few years, maybe slightly growing. Ten years ago the whitetail population was really high. The DEC flooded the area with almost unlimited permits, the the population dropped like a stone through around 2003, now it has come back and for the last five years or so has been pretty stable and the DEC has not fluctuated the permits much.