Antler Restrictions - What are your thoughts?

[nyantler]

Models dont work.

"Experts" dont know what works either.  Pennsylvania is proof of that.

The only thing that works is no doe hunting, no Big Woods, and lots of grain production and that is based on the very great hunting we had in the 50's and 60's.

Again, if you shoot a doe this year, you killed this years buck, next years buck, and the buck for the year after.

Uhoh. here is the type of hunter that got us into this mess in the first place. Hate to tell you that when you shoot a buck you may be killing more than just one of next years bucks. Especially if you kill him on opening day at 7 am like you probably do.

[Three00rum]

It works. We have a number of local farms on board and even with lots of people on the borders shooting little bucks, in 7 years our 1st year deer have gone from spikes and fours to sixes and eights. Our two year olds are 80 to 100 inches and there are four and five year old deer getting shot every year now. In the past these deer would be shot once every four or five years. It works, Penn is proof!

[Culvercreek hunt club]

It works. We have a number of local farms on board and even with lots of people on the borders shooting little bucks, in 7 years our 1st year deer have gone from spikes and fours to sixes and eights.

How does letting the 1-1/2 yo's wal;k increase the rack size of the new 1-1/2 yo's. I understand they would be bigger the next year but what effect does it have on the new generation?

[Three00rum]

I dont know?????? All we can assume is that if a doe is bred by a bigger older buck its fawn will be bigger and have a better rack. It not so different from a short man having short sons amd a tall man having tall sons. I dont know the  answer but we really dont see many spikes or fours anymore.

[WNYBuckHunter]

I dont know? ??? ?? All we can assume is that if a doe is bred by a bigger older buck its fawn will be bigger and have a better rack. It not so different from a short man having short sons amd a tall man having tall sons. I dont know the  answer but we really dont see many spikes or fours anymore.

Thats a bad comparison and bad assumption. What you describe as your theory is not how genetics work. Besides, it is impossible for you to change the genetic makeup of a wild deer herd in the span of your lifetime, let alone a few years. Sounds like your deer are just getting age on them and may be using your area as a core area. There is no way that 1 1/2 year old deer are getting bigger racks without getting older through AR.

[Three00rum]

The most important thing I wrote was " I dont know". we really dont see many deer with less than six points anymore, they are a year and a half old, only 110-125 lbs. The subject is "does antler restrictions work" and for us the answer is yes, we shoot and see more mature deer since we stopped shooting the little ones. As far as how genetics works?????? People do breed does with breeders bucks to get a better fawn so there is something to it. Im not saying we changed the genetic makeup of the wild herd, I love to hear from anyone why this has happened. As fun as it is to talk about, all I really care about is that our herd is healthier, we are happier and are having a blast watching things get better year after year.

[nyantler]

passing on 1 1/2 year olds automatically increases the number of bucks present for the next few years which narrows the buck to doe ratio especially if the right number of doe are being taken from the herd. This allows more does to get bred during their first estrus meaning buck fawns are born earlier which will produce slightly bigger racks in the younger bucks.

[Brushbuster]

"Uhoh. here is the type of hunter that got us into this mess in the first place. Hate to tell you that when you shoot a buck you may be killing more than just one of next years bucks. Especially if you kill him on opening day at 7 am like you probably do."

nyantler,

Did you read my post?  I suggest you do and then you can comment on the fact that Pennsylvania's deer herd is decimated in areas where it was once known as the "Whitetail Capital of the World"

By the way,  bucks tend more than one doe and that is why they call it a rut.  Your comment that does will go unbred if a spike is shot is laughable but not unexpected given that industry people like yourself often have a hard time understanding that AR and ignoring habitat has ruined hunting in former meccas like Potter and Tioga counties.  Industry people have a hard time understanding that where drives used to put up hundreds of deer, now hunters will see more coyote and bear than deer on opening day.

Nyantler, why is that so hard for you to understand - that millions of acres in Pa. that were once thriving with deer herds are now devoid.

[Three00rum]

Thanks nyantler, that has some logic to it.

[WNYBuckHunter]

The most important thing I wrote was " I dont know". we really dont see many deer with less than six points anymore, they are a year and a half old, only 110-125 lbs. The subject is "does antler restrictions work" and for us the answer is yes, we shoot and see more mature deer since we stopped shooting the little ones. As far as how genetics works? ??? ?? People do breed does with breeders bucks to get a better fawn so there is something to it. Im not saying we changed the genetic makeup of the wild herd, I love to hear from anyone why this has happened. As fun as it is to talk about, all I really care about is that our herd is healthier, we are happier and are having a blast watching things get better year after year.

Actually, the most important part of what you said was "All we can assume". The "I dont know" IS however, important because it just points out that you are spouting off without any knowledge of what you are talking about. Thanks for clearing that up. 

Now, your further comparison of deer farming and wild deer being shot is just more of your way off base assuming. With deer farming, you have deer with a pretty extensively documented lineage, so you breed deer that have the best chances of carrying the traits you are looking for. You simply pick the best bloodlines and mix them to make big antlers. There is no possible way of doing this in a wild deer herd. Period.

[Brushbuster]

"...if the right number of doe are being taken from the herd. This allows more does to get bred..."

Nyantler,

HaminahaminaWhat? ??? !!!?!

Shoot more does so more does get bred?

Hah!  Is that how they pitched AR in Pa?  If they believed that, they deserve what they got. 

All you doe hunters - if you shoot them later on in Jan, you can actually see the fetuses and the buck fetuses will have little buttons on their heads.  Hang that on the wall  ;-)

[burmjohn]

Thats because PA Screwed up with their DMP issuance which has nothing to do with the way they implemented AR.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I think that has been a lot of our points...AR is not a stand alone....could it part of a management plan...sure. But before I could ever support any chage I would have to see a concise study ...impartial...and public debate to discuss it. seems to be too may folks getting their bread buttered by these "studies" for me to buy it at this point.

I have a great idea though.....how about we table all this crap and get to concentrating on the task at hand....the game pole...and filling it ;) ...resume this conversation in Jan. over a few beers???

[WNYBuckHunter]

"...if the right number of doe are being taken from the herd. This allows more does to get bred..."

Nyantler,

HaminahaminaWhat? ??? !!!?!

Shoot more does so more does get bred?

Hah!  Is that how they pitched AR in Pa?  If they believed that, they deserve what they got. 

All you doe hunters - if you shoot them later on in Jan, you can actually see the fetuses and the buck fetuses will have little buttons on their heads.  Hang that on the wall  ;-)

Ahhhhh, cherry pick the comment and attack. Typical.

I dont necessarily agree with AR, but from what I have seen of your logic concerning does, I completely disagree with your line of reasoning.

Doe numbers need to be controlled, otherwise you end up with a situation like you had in the late 80s and early 90s where deer were so overpopulated, they ate themselves out of food and began starving. The land is only capable of sustaining a certain number of animals. To allow them to overpopulate is just as bad as over hunting them.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

"...if the right number of doe are being taken from the herd. This allows more does to get bred..."

Nyantler,

HaminahaminaWhat? ??? !!!?!

Shoot more does so more does get bred?

Hah!  Is that how they pitched AR in Pa?  If they believed that, they deserve what they got. 

All you doe hunters - if you shoot them later on in Jan, you can actually see the fetuses and the buck fetuses will have little buttons on their heads.  Hang that on the wall  ;-)

Ahhhhh, cherry pick the comment and attack. Typical.

I dont necessarily agree with AR, but from what I have seen of your logic concerning does, I completely disagree with your line of reasoning.

Doe numbers need to be controlled, otherwise you end up with a situation like you had in the late 80s and early 90s where deer were so overpopulated, they ate themselves out of food and began starving. The land is only capable of sustaining a certain number of animals. To allow them to overpopulate is just as bad as over hunting them.

OR WORSE!!! Disease can run through an overpopulated herd like crazy!

[Three00rum]

Wow, whats with the insults? wnybuckhunter not cool. I didnt think I was spouting off at the mouth, or claiming to know things others dont, just voicing my thoughts and experiences. It sounds like your just a sour man. Joining was my mistake. To the rest of you, good hunting. Im done with this, if I wanted to argue I would save it for people against hunting. Not my fellow hunters. See ya.

[Brushbuster]

"Doe numbers need to be controlled, otherwise you end up with a situation like you had in the late 80s and early 90s where deer were so overpopulated, they ate themselves out of food and began starving."

Where?  That never happened in this part of the world.  And neither have we ever had a disease problem.

BTW, I live in Morris County NJ where they have more deer per sq mile than anywhere else in the world.  There is no starvation and no disease and there are many times I go out and dont see a tail either.

The "need" to kill does is a myth.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

"Doe numbers need to be controlled, otherwise you end up with a situation like you had in the late 80s and early 90s where deer were so overpopulated, they ate themselves out of food and began starving."

Where?  That never happened in this part of the world.  And neither have we ever had a disease problem.

BTW, I live in Morris County NJ where they have more deer per sq mile than anywhere else in the world.  There is no starvation and no disease and there are many times I go out and dont see a tail either.

The "need" to kill does is a myth.

Well here is something that is not a myth. you don't have a clue.  i have personally been on surveys int he early 80's on the tug hill plateau with DEC. stand of pines with hundreds of deer in various stages of starvation. Ever walk up to a deer with so little energy they can't even get up to walk away from you....just lay there and look at you with glazed eyes...The marrow in thier legs was like pink water. If you broke a femor you could pour the marrow out. DEC put 50 down in one day. and that isn't counting th eones that were already dead. You know what.......they all died with full stomachs...park...twigs...pine boughs...FULL but no nutrition. SO before you get on your box thinking you know what you are talking about....study up.

[steve863]

I don't know if I'd like to see where the deer population would go if NO doe were shot??  Heck, thousands of doe do get shot every year and yet deer numbers keep going up.  I don't buy many of the stories that it was way better hunting in the 50's, 60's and 70's.  I had relatives who hunted then and if they did get a deer it was a major event!  These days just about anyone who puts in their time will get one or at least have a shot at one.  So, no way was the hunting better then, than it is now.  Many people fill several tags each year these days and yet there isn't any real shortage of deer in most places.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I am not old enough to remember this, but my father hunted and told me the stories of how the NZ use to be. No doe tags....but the last day of the season you could fill your buck tag with anything. He told me some horror stories about al the shooting up there. He maintained that was what really hurt the deer herd in the NZ. They didn't have the population densities we have today and a lot of the land they hunted was big woods., not Agricultural lands. They have come back alot since then. I think the residential deer herd numbers are way up...at least in my area. I wish I had 8C land to hunt in the bow only.....loads of deer there and even bonus tags when you fill your doe tag. and the bucks are really huge!

[wztirem]

I don't know if I'd like to see where the deer population would go if NO doe were shot??  Heck, thousands of doe do get shot every year and yet deer numbers keep going up.  I don't buy many of the stories that it was way better hunting in the 50's, 60's and 70's.  I had relatives who hunted then and if they did get a deer it was a major event!  These days just about anyone who puts in their time will get one or at least have a shot at one.  So, no way was the hunting better then, than it is now.  Many people fill several tags each year these days and yet there isn't any real shortage of deer in most places.

I would most certainly agree with you Steve. The DEC wants deer killed period. If the hunting community exceeds their expectations they will be ecstatic. On the other hand if fewer deer are killed and DEC expectations are not met_________________? One can easily fill in the blank.

[First-light]

Three00rum,

Don't let one person sway you onto leaving. There is alot of good information on this board and yours is welcomed. You have to have some thicker skin with some of the members here, don't let it get to you.

[Brushbuster]

"you don't have a clue.  i have personally been on surveys int he early 80's on the tug hill plateau with DEC. stand of pines with hundreds of deer in various stages of starvation. "

Culver Creek,

You are wrong and this is due to the 10' of snow they get up there sometimes from lake effects.  If the open water does not freeze, those deer die from too

much snow cover and not because of over population.

Culver, I have hunted and fished all around the world - hunted whitetails from Alberta (50 miles from the nearest paved road)  to Eastern Shore to Potter Cty to the Adirondacks after backpacking 5 miles in.  I might know a thing or three and killing breeding does (which is what AR really turns out to be in practice) DECREASES the number of bucks.  There is no getting around that simple fact. 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I agree the heavy snow pack contributes to the die off up there, but the fact remains that adequate brows exists for a certain number of deer. As in any given environment there are limited food resources and the habitat can only support a certain number of game animals. I would think the Alberta and ADK  expamles you used are good ones. the vast amount of land there, although not heavily agricultural, would support a large number of deer. I do not believe they are any where near capacity. That is the reason the ADK's are not included in the DMP's for the most part. The bow kill, ML kill and other factors like predators and cars keep the population in check.

In areas like residential WNY the story is much different. I can tell you the population needs the control of the dmp's. Talk to the farmers out here. I know of one Nursry that take over $75,000 a year in deer damage and resorted to a 5 strand electric fence around the entire nursry...woked for a bit until the deer figured if the hit it running they could jum right through it. I have seen them jump through it...lol I can also show you out here big beautiful houses with their landscaping all wrapped in chicken wire because of the browsing damage from the herd.

I guess I am somewhere in the middle here. I will never be convinced that dmp's are not needed for population control....and I have seen nothing that shows me that AR's are the end all cure all of management.

If 50% of the fawns are does....and you do not harvest does...the group has to over populate...it is math.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Wow, whats with the insults? wnybuckhunter not cool. I didnt think I was spouting off at the mouth, or claiming to know things others dont, just voicing my thoughts and experiences. It sounds like your just a sour man. Joining was my mistake. To the rest of you, good hunting. Im done with this, if I wanted to argue I would save it for people against hunting. Not my fellow hunters. See ya.

Look I'm not insulting you. Just pointing out that you are throwing out a whole bunch of assumptions about things you admit to not knowing about. Rather than say "oh I didn't know that" or attempt to learn about what you are talking about, you just make what seem to be excuses and on you go with the same stuff. I don't understand why you have to say joining was a mistake instead of taking the time to learn about new things. Sorry of you took it the wrong way, but I never said anything that was an insult. Im not a "sour man" at all, I just call things as I see them.