phade

FYI, for the original topic, read this; I know Lindsay and he does his homework - he has access to the best deer biologists on the planet. http://www.qdma.com/articles/why-we-cant-manage-deer-genetics

What are you taling about? He left a quality job for a dream job...walking away from a 100k job is nothing to sneeze at to gamble on a dream with little realistic possibilities. I have a quality job. I don't have a dream job. I think most "normal" people would fall in the same category. They, don't.

I think the UA contract they have has two commas in it. I think the own 3 farms and manage 8? Not a bad job to have. Sure beats what I'm doing now.

Didn't start out that way, but they own some serious working farms now. Lee quit a big-time engineering gig to move to Iowa and farm/hunt. Same with Kisky, Drury, etc. Not saying I'm a fan of theirs, but I do admire that they captured their dream, and busted through that dream's ceiling. Not many people can say that regardless of profession/passion.

I can tell your intentions are good, but I strongly suggest you completely drop the idea of shooting bucks to improve genetics...culling a free range buck is not something you should be doing, even given 1,100 acres of "managed" land. A buck needs, age, nutrition/cover/water, and then genetics to become a high scoring buck. Genetics is so far down the list from a management perspective on a small scale property and free range herd that you simply should not consider it. It won't work, anyhow...free range overrides it. Just let that buck go if he doen't meet your criteria (or make you happy to simply kill), and ignore it. Imagine a bucket with holes in it...the genetics question would be a hole at the very top of the bucket. Age Structure and ratios would be the lowest two (assuming the ground can hold deer at all, which is a given). Nutrition, cover, and water would be above Age Structure and ratios. Now, pour water into the bucket. What is plugging the top hole now going to do for you with water leaking out the bottom holes? It simply doesn't make much sense from a biology and management perspective. Focus on getting the age structure, ratios, and enviornment right...that's it. Aim for 140, 150, etc...but that's not QDM. I strongly suggest you look at an age class and used that as a kill guideline if you have to have one. A "management buck" in most layman's hunter's terms is no more than an excuse to shoot somthing that falls under the rules and continues to undermine the overall management plan. I can't tell you how many times this has girdled a plan with proper intentions. A real management buck is usually housed inside a fence in TX. One thing that I have seen done, and this is very rare, is that a buck is taken out because of its temperment. A mature buck, or even say an "underperforming antler size buck", that is super aggressive may need to be killed just to improve the hunting quality. I've seen situations where a scrubby 8 with a beast like body and a temperment of a bull on the PBR tour rules the roost over other mature bucks that score higher - and it's not done because of genetics...its done because that buck runs off the others on a parcel all of the time and screws up the hunter's odds of tagging those bucks. Not saying it makes sense from a biology standpoint, but from a hunting experience POV, it does. Personally, I'd shoot the SOB because I'm the baddest MoFo in the woods, not him, ha.

With the recent rains we had (Im north of you I think)...I'd consider hanging a cam over a puddle off of a tractor path or field path (the kind with a hedge row near cover). It may get hit hard in the short time there is water in it. Worth a try.

I think alot of it goes back to the water/drought you brought up in another thread. I think it impacted some food sources to a degree, too, as mentioned, which is probably a game changer for some. Any luck on water holes?

He also said management buck in his very first statement of this thread. That's culling...unless you care to disagree? Seriously, he's talking about trying to change genetics ina free range herd...AND he is talking about doing that before he's even reached a healthy age class structure. First off, it doesn't work. Second, he's pulling the cart before the horse even if in theory it did.

I have accounted for that - refer to the statement about backing up to non-hunted parcels, etc. Still, 150" min. as a requirement is darn near unrealistic anywhere in this state. To say so otherwise is imprudent - even OUTFITTERS in places like Illinois have lower minimums. While we can certainly grow big deer in certain places of the state, 150" min. as a kill rule is foolish. I mean, look at how many times that guy uses the term "trophy" in his posts...seriously...trophy management in NY? TDM? in NY? Can we get a doctor? I've been around plenty of high-end properties. I've been on arguably two of the best in the entire state - one won the QDM manager award nationally and Grant Woods was running the data collection - and the other was the PRIVATE land of the former Chairman of the Board for QDMA. Neither could come close to having 150 as a goal...but then again they weren't TDM...they were practicing QDM.

I jumped several deer bedded in corn fields on Sunday while walking out to hang cams. Was rather surprised to say the least. Certainly not a food source, but they're bedding in it already. I'd look at hedge rows along corn fields, water sources, and field edges. I'd not opt to bump into a bucks bedding area. Try to find him coming out just after dark...he's not bedding far from that point. But, all of that can change too, come fall, so I'd be more concerned with just inventory right now.

ooooh burn. and i just bumped yours up 20%.

Show me a forum where posts don't go off-target and I'll show you a forum that doesn't have many participants. Also, the basic rule in education/business is that the off-shoots is where the learning occurs...because they connect the dots to their real world applications. See what I did just there, eh? Let me throw this out there, too. Say 3 guys on that 300 acres. I'm guessing leased (which is stupid to try and manage leases that are not locked in long-term), but maybe owned outright by one. The group shoots one buck meeting the minimum every two seasons...that means 2 don't shoot a buck there, or maybe at all during the season. So, your odds as a hunter (assuming 3) is one mature buck every 6 years and no other bucks in-between? Make that 4 hunters and it jumps up to what...8? Considering most hunter careers are not THAT long...maybe 10-20 years in their prime hunting career-wise...not the best odds.

400-600 acres give or take is a bucks typical home range. The'll increase that during rut to a degree. 640 acres is a square mile. Now, look at this, too, chances are, you aren't going to have many, if ANY, living entirely inside your 640 acres year round and especially during hunting season. You're more likely to have bucks using only a portion of a property that size (640 acres)...they overlap/sattelite between multipls parcels. Sure, as a buck ages, his core area shrinks, but geeze, what at most you'll house 40 deer per square mile in better parts of the state (keep in mind this is carry capacity...not home range or core area), and of that, you'll likely only have a small % of that being mature bucks...probably 5%. (Even big time ops in Kansas only hit 10% range). Now, given all that, he's only working with 300 acres...so cut that in half right off the bat. If I were a betting man, 3.5 would be the "highest" realistic goal for that parcel...and even then, you may not be taking a buck off of it every season based on hunting pressure and skill, and bordering properties. There are anomalies, such as having 300 acres that backs up to a non-hunting parcel (park, private company, etc.). That changes all dynamics as bucks can realistically age through the classes better. Having a 150 min goal seems to me to be a pretty lofty goal and one that will surely result in burnout if people are not fully dead set and let it wear on them. Seems to me that most who do this usually come back saying "it was no longer fun." 150 min is more indicative of Illinois, Kansas, Iowa, etc, where there is better soil and better managed pressure and seasons. Keep it fun...3.5 is fun...because it's realistic.

Sold.

Check out archery talk classifieds. Best deal there more than likely.

I initially thought the same with the mild winter. Drought years tend to produce fewer high scoring mature bucks though - and we've been bordering that until the past week or so across much of the state. A mild winter and wet spring seem to result in better antler score.

Not even does? That is a long time not to drop a string or squeeze a round. I hope the goals match the parcels capabilities for your sake.

I'm very interested to see how this year turns out for antler size and the numbers that hunters down...will there be more than the norm of mature bucks? Might not be so clear cut after all...interesting to see that you have had issues getting the larger bucks on cam. Hope its not a sign of things to come.

LOL, that's horrible. Why not just leave it out, altogether.

Them things hurt when they bite. Don't ask me how I know.

It's high because the # of tags issued is much larger than the #of tags actualyl filled. It's a relationship allotment.

That's what the answer should be. Not whether he should be taken out in the name of management.

Management buck = culling. See below: Culling a free range herd has been largely discredited in 99% of the hunting world. Even the King Ranch in TX has issues with it and they own a chunk of land close to the size of some of our smaller states. In fact, they pioneered the groundbreaking study on it - part of their land had no cull while another did...and shockingly, little to no change was observed in average antler score. I know a fair amount about it because I was working with the QDMA while that study was ongoing - they were involved in radio collaring with helicopters in that study. Lots of experiences with cactuses (Cacti) that I don't want to remember. Big difference between choosing to take a buck becuase you want to shoot him and he makes you happy, and burning a tag on a "management" (read: cull) buck to try and improve free range genetics.

Culling a free-range buck? RRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhttttttttttttttttttttttttttt. In NY? DOUBLE RRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhtttttttttttttttt.

Most bucks lose velvet end of August/first of September here in wNY.