Buckstopshere

Over the years I have tried a lot of different scents, it would make a long list. Sometimes they worked, sometimes they didn't. I do know that some of the scents, including Tinks, seemed to spook deer off. And as Doc posted above, how do you know? I mean, how can we know how many deer we spooked off when we use scents? But do they work? Absolutely. One thing I've been fooling with the last couple years is the overhanging branch on a scrape. I think it is much more significant than the scraped up soil. Last year, to experiment (just goes to show you are never to old to learn) I cut a few overhanging branches over unhuntable scrapes and transported them to a mediocre scrape under one of my stands in a plastic garbage bag. I ziptied the branches to branches on the scrape. I also had some frozen tarsals from the buck I shot the year before. I experimented with the zip-tied overhanging branches with my tail cam and have tons of photos of bucks and does coming in the same night I put them up! So much for them being spooked by human scent! The combo of the two things (overhanging branch and tarsal glands) sold a buck I had grunted in. When he hit the scent stream about 50 yards down-thermal, his ears went back, his hair puffed out and he came in kind of sideways, like he was looking for a fight. Nice 2.5 year old eight point a few days before the gun season started. No doubt scents work...but they are not a sure thing, every time. Everything else has to be right. Last year the rut was a bit late, not peaking until the middle of November, so tactics that we find effective in the early going, are different than those as the rut peaks and Whitetail Breeding Nucleus (as I call it,) forms. Check the photos out. I cut the branch the big guy is working on Rich's Prop. and took it to my property. That night I had three bucks come in, including this nice eight-point. Notice the blaze orange zip tie on the branch. You guys ought to give it a try.

Great post! Thanks.

And sometimes you don't even know then! LOL. Check out my little video: Enjoy. http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/videos?vid_id=JWTtFS_SzCs&feature=youtube_gdata

Here is a fawn I got the other day. It is surprising how shy the little fawn is of the trail camera. The older deer...doesn't surprise me. The wariness is so innate in them, and at such a young age. Fawn_video_.AVI

Good point Doc. My "guess-timation" is just that. It is simply a percentage of what I see (assuming that my judgment of age is somewhere correct.)

And here is that doe a few minutes later, coming right up to the camera. Doe_checking_out_camera_.AVI

A doe and a yearling do not like the trail cam. It is funny, some deer do not seem to mind it and others are on the alert. Doe_and_yearling_checking_out_camera_.AVI

Ironic, I agree that there is a good population of deer, but here in Allegany County I have seen very few road kills...only a couple.

Nice buck! Congrats. Another example showing that you can not determine age by looking at the rack. One would think a buck that old, in any range, would have a much larger, heavier based rack. Here in southern Allegany County I would say that 85% or so of the bucks are buck fawns and 1.5-year olds, probably 12% are 2.5-year olds, 2% are 3.5-year olds, and the last one percent is 4.5-year olds and older.

Well, a lot depends on the temperature of the meat, right? To give a specific time to age meat is too simplistic because it assumes that meat aged at 36 degrees F. and meat aged at 44 degrees F. would be the same when obviously it isn't. Last year in late November and December we had a cold spell that kept my deer at about 34 degree F. with very little fluctuation for a month. Secondly, older deer seem to tender up better when it is aged longer. Some of the long nosed does I get are quite old, I think about six or seven years. Their teeth are worn down, flush with their gums and black. One size fits all when it comes to aging meat really misses the mark. That's what I mean when I say that there is a lot to it. By the way, all beef is dry aged from one week to a month.

I cut up, wrap, and freeze from four to seven deer a year and have for about 40 years. There was a spell of about eight years when I tried different meat processors and learned more tricks of the trade, so to speak from them. But now I do it myself, except I take about 50 pounds or so to Wilson Farms and have them turn it into hot dogs, sausage, pepperoni, etc. I really enjoy cutting my own deer. I am very careful to make the best cuts possible so that the meat is the most appealing and evenly balanced so it can be cooked evenly.

I age venison when the temperature is right sometimes a month. I control the temperature by filling the body cavity with frozen 2-liter bottles full of water, check them twice a day and rotate them out as they melt. Leave the skin on. I have a cement floor in a closed garage. I know it is easier to skin a deer on a fresh kill, but the meat's texture and flavor is much better when the meat is properly aged. A lot of people grew up eating green venison and said it was gamy tasting. No wonder. The best cuts of beef are aged. Use a digital meat thermometer to keep tabs on the meat every day. Everyone says my venison is the best they ever had. We feed the family and friends, venison is such a blessing. It's getting near dinner time and my mouth is starting to water just thinking about it. There is a lot of info on the internet about aging meat. There is a restaurant out in Vegas that displays the aged meat in a glass cooler in the casino. The more it is aged, the more expensive it gets. There is a lot to aging meat. I learn more about it every year.

I never pee out of a stand. I always climb down and walk away and usually go to a different stand. I do pee in certain scrapes though. I just don't want deer to know I'm around in hunting season.

I got one last year and one the year before. I know a few guys who got two, here in 9Y. But most everybody gets just one.

Right Doc, that's what I mean about "managing" hunters. It is a pain, but that is what it will take to increase hunter participation. When I go out in the woods, the last thing I want to do is "manage" people, but in fact, that is what the sport needs. Deer hunting is not so much about managing deer, it's more about managing people. I understand your Dad's frustration, and it has been played out a million times and all good reasons to post the property to all hunters. But that's throwing out the baby with the bath water. If we (and I mean WE....me too) each and every one of us, would take the time to allow others to hunt our property, help them be successful, in one word, Share...then the ranks of the hunters would dramatically increase. I get a bit tired hearing the moaning about fewer deer hunters when it is coming from other hunters who do nothing to help the sport by stretching out a hand to hunters less fortunate than themselves. I know of two guys who open up their property and take the time to manage the other hunters and actually enjoy all the gregariousness, and riding herd over the young and inexperienced... and what a great gang of guys in each camp. It is not "open" hunting on either property by any means, but each one is full of hunters during both the archery and regular seasons.

Exactly Steve. Around me, down here in southern Allegany County, there are landowners who have tied up their lands and do not let anyone hunt on it but them. I mean, 400 acres...tighter than a drum... and they even leased more! Thirty years ago, 20 maybe 30 guys hunted on those properties. Now it is down to just a couple guys. All I am saying is don't bemoan the drop off in hunter numbers when we are the major cause. It's our greed. We know that if we let other hunters on our land, our success rate will fall and there is one more person to "manage." And I am as guilty of it too, owning a hunting property and a young man with a family asked to hunt it, I told him "No." Not meaning to hijack the thread...this is certainly grist for another one, just agreeing with Doc's earlier post that there are other issues...

Oh, I forgot to say that Doc, I agree with your point that AR's may not be the most important thing we can discuss, frankly, there are some other deeper issues like the dialectical construct between growing your deer and hunting deer. But even bigger than AR's or hunting vs. growing, may be the access issue. All the deer are owned by the people of the state, right? The landowners only own the land, not animal one, no matter how much they post it, how many foodplots they plant, or how many $$$$ they pour into the soil, Period. And yet people..the people of the state are not allowed to hunt their animals. Without getting on a soapbox...I think that large property landowners who have carved out their own pluralistic philosophy for hunting (one property it it QDM,) one is only bucks, one is no doe hunting, the next it is "brown it's down," the next property is state land, (just for kicks) and next to that is an anti-hunter who is a college professor and owns 200 acres! Different properties. Different management schemes!! Pluralism in the deer woods. And it goes on and on in reality. If we wanted to really increase our hunter ranks we would stop being so selfish and greedy and allow those less fortunate than ourselves to hunt with us on our properties. I guarantee there would be more hunters... Stop bemoaning the drop off in hunter numbers when in fact, we are the reason. it's getting late, and I'm old.

If you really wanted to have bigger bucks,...as a goal for AR, wouldn't you want to shoot the spikes of the same yearling age class as the best of the lot, like six-points and once in a blue moon, a yearling eight-point? Why shoot the best off before they can really turn into something and not shoot off the mediocre, those sixes and eights may sure be dandy bucks in four years....But...if you SHOULD shoot a yearling, why not prune out the herd? So if you follow my reasoning, don't the AR proponents have it upside down? In other words: Don't shoot off the best of the little guys. Give them a chance, I say. Shoot off the spikes. By the way, thanks SteveB. As far as spikes go, I have only seen a couple "spikes" that are actually button bucks... that have these little weird spikes on their heads. These are fawns. They are not wearing the smooth polished spikes like a yearling buck has, but these little nubby things. Probably some of you other guys have seen them too. They seem different than polished antlers. I haven't come across one in quite a few years. If is see one, I'll shoot it and post the photos. You know I'm not kidding. I have not come across a study that fawn bucks with little spike bone things on their heads grow into the best, larger rackers...dominant bucks. Spikes on fawns may be just an aging phenomena, such as something that peaks too early, a hormone imbalance. By the way, I would have thought that there would have been more pro-AR guys posting here from the poll results... Chime in. That's the only way we learn and hone our edge.

Keith McCafferty is a retired deer biologist from Wisconsin. Here's what he had to say about ARs. What kind of undesirable baggage comes with antler restrictions? Here’s what deer biologist Keith McCaffery says: "All Western states have tried antler restrictions in an effort to increase the number of mature male mule deer and bull elk. All have now discontinued them as statewide rules for two primary reasons. First, antler restrictions focused mortality so heavily on mature animals that they were virtually extirpated. Better age structures were found where harvests were spread across all age and antler classes. Secondly, states experienced an unacceptable level of accidental-illegal kill of animals with wrong antler condition. E.g. – spikes were regularly shot in Wisconsin prior to 1956 when only forked-bucks were legal. A third problem with antler restrictions is that there is no easy way to define an antler condition that will protect most young bucks without the best-antlered yearlings still being harvested. Point restrictions tend to protect only the smallest-antlered deer. A fourth problem with mandated antler restrictions is, what type of fine should be imposed on, say, a 14-year old that shoots a deer of sub-legal condition? Finally, the age structure resulting from antler restrictions is far from “natural”, if that is a goal. This would be especially true in heavily hunted states like Wisconsin. To produce a “natural” sex and age structure in anuy deer herd one should “open the hunting season within 2 weeks of the peak of fawning and then shoot 40-80% of the current year’s fawns – that’s how Nature did it.” (the late Dr. Tony Bubenik). While biologically sound, few of us would be enthused with this type of hunt." (Maybe after what he said about shooting fawns... my call for shooting yearling bucks in high density areas, like in southern Allegany County is not quite so whacky sounding.)

Here's a good place to start from research from Mississippi: I lifted this from the Mississippi study. "At the same time, bucks with eight or more points decreased from 81 to 47 percent. The big shift in prevalence of antler points within the 31⁄2-year age class on this public property shows how the 4-point antler restriction can decrease average antler size. Protecting two- and three-point yearling bucks results in smaller-antlered 31⁄2- year bucks only if there is a link between antler size at 11⁄2 and 31⁄2 years." This quote is from: By Dr. Bronson K. Strickland, Assistant Extension Professor, Wildlife and Fisheries; and Dr. Stephen Demarais, Professor, Wildlife and Fisheries Publication 2427 Extension Service of Mississippi State University, cooperating with U.S. Department of Agriculture. Mississippi is a good place to start because they instituted a statewide AR system in 1995. The above quote came from a study after the 2003 season when they noted significant reduction in antler size on state land. Of course, on managed, groomed, and controlled land where we can literally "grow" deer, with food supplements, amended soils, etc. But can the average guy hunt there? NO. Most of these places are locked down so only a few can hunt. And don't forget, those are our deer. But what about the average guy who likes to hunt but does not have the where-with-all to own 400 acres, tons of cash to spend on food plots, or the time because he may be just a working guy with a family that loves to hunt, so he hunts on state land. I really don't care about these holier than thou types...I care about the average guy and if biologists in Mississippi say that AR's have caused a decrease in antler size on their state land, then it would probably be the same here. But I know it is just one paper. There is an interesting study in Texas too, and it rings true. I'll try to dig it up if you want and post the url here so you can check it out. You're right Doc, guys will flame me. But Somebody has to stand up to the so-called big shots and Experts...and speak up for the average guy. And you know what is driving this...the almighty buck...pardon the pun.

Hi Doc: Well, I hate to say it, but I think we should shoot more 1.5 year old deer, at least around here in Allegany County. At least in the southern part, where I hunt, we are overrun with little bucks. I think, that if we really want to get bigger bucks here...then we should have slot limits like they do in some lakes for some species of fish. Shoot the little guys and enjoy the venison. But if it is a 2.5 year old eight point, or a precocious 1.5 year old eight point, let him walk. But if it is a spike or a three-point, have at it. And of course...trophy animals would be fair game. That way we would see a lot more big bucks...but guys would have to lay off pulling the trigger or releasing the arrow on a small eight point. But in one year...or two...if it was possible to implement, we would have some real brag deer! They wouldn't taste any better though. I also like the idea of more guys shooting a small spike or fork and getting out of the woods, they are happy, their family is happy, they will be back. And they leave the woods for the rest of us who are after something different. I think AR's as it is presently conceived has it exactly backass-wards. AR proponents say shoot the little 2.5 year old with six or eight points, no matter if it will be a great deer in the future or a mediocre old guy. Thanks of the comments on my column (Oak Duke on AR.) I am held to only about 750 words, so I don't have space for a bibliography, or citing specific research articles. But I will cite them if you want. (They are from Mississippi and Texas.)