High Grading, Bait, Cams and Crossbows is no good for anyone!

[yoderjac]

And, you received your degree in wildlife biology from where? With all due respect, it is not “impossible” to change the genetic makeup of a free ranging group of whitetails. I don’t believe in “culling”, but high grading is not culling. I do agree that 50 percent of the genes come from the doe, and there is no way to know what she is carrying genetically. However, very few and I mean very few bucks within a three mile radius (an area that will hold most bucks 85% of the time) are ever going to reach 170 inches. In my case, we have harvested far too few bucks over the years. Most years we only harvest 2-3 bucks on 2500 acres. They have always been some of our best bucks. On that 2500 acres we generally never had more than 1-2 bucks that were at or above 170. I am just throwing out numbers, but if there are 30 deer per square mile on my farm which is probably close to right, then 85 % of the bucks that are breeding are throwing genes that did not produce a 170. Again, the doe is a wildcard, but you can rest assured the average score of the bucks on my farm has declined in 20 years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I thought "culling" was selectively removing animals from the herd. Maybe I don't understand "High Grading". I thought that it was targeting large antlered bucks. Do I have it wrong?

I agree that "impossible" is probably an overstatement. "Unachievable" might be a better description. In order to have a genetic impact, culling would need to be so severe that it simply won't happen in a free ranging deer herd. If a degree is what convinces you, take a listen to those two pod casts. There is a lot of paper hanging on the walls of those guys. What I find even more impressive is that they modeled the problem and then conducted a field study over 7 years on 100,000 acres and the measured results matched the genetic model.

The pod cast provides much more detail than I can list here, but they had 3 areas, a control area with no culling, an area with "moderate" culling, and an area with "Severe culling". The results between these areas was compared.

It is pretty easy for us to draw the wrong conclusions from anecdotal observations, especially when the underlying processes are counter intuitive. Our nature is to infer causal relationships from correlation and to assume statistical significance where it does not exist. We fail to see our own biases. A great example was a study done when hunters were asked to carry a device in their pocket. After the hunt they were asked to complete a post hunt survey with a variety of questions about what they observed and other things regarding the hunt. The study question was imbedded in the survey asking them to estimate how far they walked into the woods from their vehicle. The device ended up being a GPS recorder and the hunters had a huge overestimate of how deep into the woods they went. Similarly, we keep a hunting log of every hunt on our farm with observations. In years with bumper acorn corps we all thought (including myself) that deer numbers were down. It wasn't until we established the wireless camera network and began collecting year-round data that we learned were simply more responsive to hunting pressure those years. Deer just became more nocturnal when food in cover was bountiful and we observed fewer deer.

Our ad hoc observations can be great at helping us form a hypothesis, but until we collect and analyze data, it is just a hypothesis. The data can support or debunk it.

I think the data has spoken pretty loudly in this case.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[MN Slick]

WTNUT, I encourage you to listen to the podcasts Yoderjac linked and also read the book Strategic Harvest Systems written by the MSU Deer Lab guys. The Cliff Notes version: 1/3 of bucks born each year will be below average antler wise, 1/3 average, and 1/3 above average for any specific area. The lower 1/3 need to be indentified as young as possible and killed and the upper 1/3 need to be allowed to reach their potential. The middle third will be harder to classify but once done should be on the target list. Note: this strategy has nothing to do with changing genetics. You are just trying to influence which bucks live.

I recently started conversations with neighbors about selecting a few bucks to protect. Prelim stages now but the guy that complains the loudest aren't too interested so far. They also stack up the bucks each year and some are in the top 1/3 for sure but are killed too young. I'm not too confident in getting buy in but it's worth a try.

 

[SwampCat]

I just dont think what the OP alludes to is possible in a free range herd with bucks coming and going. And while the does supply 50% of the genetics, there are some researchers who believe that the doe actually controls up to 70% of the features a buck will exhibit later in life - things like health of the doe, nutrition of the doe while nursing the fawn, number of fawns the doe carries and has to care for - things that jumpstart a fawn but are not attributed to genetics. Maybe deer numbers have increased over the years, causing competition for food sources, maybe the food source has changed, maybe the high percentage of bucks in the herd is causing excessive fighting and the big bucks are killing each other. I have assisted a landowner with late winter controlled burns. This was a large high fence area. It was fairly alarming to me the number of dead, mature bucks we found while doing this. He estimated as many mature bucks died from fighting as were killed by hunters. He said it was more severe as the buck component, and the age component of the bucks - increased. Several things could be going on. I, too, have more bucks than does - but the bucks tend to go to the food sources and to the does - and I dont have enough land to control what happens to the herd - so I dont really worry about it. Most of us wish we had your problem.

 

[goatman]

I ain't read all of this but it is foolish to think that a year and a half or a button buck don't do any breeding. Please raise some livestock.

 

[Chainsaw]

I ain't read all of this but it is foolish to think that a year and a half or a button buck don't do any breeding. Please raise some livestock.

 

[roymunson]

WTNUT,
I get what you're saying, and it is frustrating that 50# of corn can trump a heck of a lot of sweat equity from all summer long. We're in a different time, and none of us are going to change it. Our energy is better off trying to figure out how to use it to our advantage.

Given the choice, We all want to kill giant deer. However, I think we'd all be surprised at what a small segment of bucks have the genetic ability to be 160+ inch deer.
On our farm this year, we killed a 139" 6 year old, and a 149" 5 year old. Have been watching them for the last 3 years and waiting for them to "blow up". They grew, but didn't explode like the deer on TV do. Those deer are statistical anomolies. And if you have enough property, you'll have some of those.

I try to get myself to hunt for age rather than rack size. If those 2 things intersect, great. If not, then enjoy the journey.

We killed a 5 year old last year that went 119". He was a buck we'd chased for 2 years. Proud of having homed and killed that buck.

Our overall deer health is noticeibly better, our holding capacity is up, and our yearling and young bucks are generally putting on better looking first and second year racks. That's rewarding. But if I hold myself up to the measuring stick of the guys who make a living doing this, i'll always fall short.

Enjoy the time on your tractor. Kill what makes you happy. Burn bar and chain oil. Everyone on this forum is pretty blessed to be in the situation they're in. Have fun with it.

 

[SD51555]

Where is the talk of trail cams and crossbows?

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

Over the past several years we have had multiple different 3 y/o bucks on camera each season that gross over 150". At least one of them gets harvested every year. We have good dirt and a good mix of ag and cover in the driftless area. It is the same all over the area. We have had a number of 5 year old 8 pts over the years that would barely make P&Y and we have also had a few 8 pts that gross over 150". That is is a huge 8 pt. Our problem is just getting the bucks to survive through enough seasons to express their potential. It is rare in our area for a 5 year old buck with 10 typical points to not gross 150". 170" is rare for any buck but for us i firmly believe they never reach that mark because the rack doesn't get any bigger once it's hanging on the wall.

 

[PatinPA]

I'm no whitetail scholar but I don't think it's possible to affect the genetics of a wild herd. There are just too many variables. You definitely can't tell which doe have inferior genes so if you shoot all the inferior buck you're still only controlling 50% of the equation. Then if you don't know if the inferior buck you shoot have inferior genes. Maybe they have good genetics but grew smaller antlers for another reason, injury, etc.

On the personal side, Man I would love to be at the point where I pass on 130's. Where I hunt a 3 yr old is big. 4+ yr olds are like a fairy tale. I've only seen two deer that would score 130+ in 30 years of hunting and I missed one of them last year. (It still hurts my soul).

Here in PA the game commission had to force out the brown is down mentality. When I first started hunting you shot the first buck that walked by because you might not see another. As long as it was bigger than a 3 inch spike you shot. Back then if you got a buck that scored 100 it was big news. Hell if you saw a buck spotlighting that big it was big news.

Thanks to antler restrictions we now see bigger buck than we ever have. 3 pts on a side restriction is in a form high grading because the biggest yearlings are still getting killed but it at least allows some of the populations of bucks to make it to 2 yrs. I think people are finally starting to see what can happen if you don't shoot the first buck you see but it's still an uphill battle.

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

I'm no whitetail scholar but I don't think it's possible to affect the genetics of a wild herd. There are just too many variables. You definitely can't tell which doe have inferior genes so if you shoot all the inferior buck you're still only controlling 50% of the equation. Then if you don't know if the inferior buck you shoot have inferior genes. Maybe they have good genetics but grew smaller antlers for another reason, injury, etc.

On the personal side, Man I would love to be at the point where I pass on 130's. Where I hunt a 3 yr old is big. 4+ yr olds are like a fairy tale. I've only seen two deer that would score 130+ in 30 years of hunting and I missed one of them last year. (It still hurts my soul).

Here in PA the game commission had to force out the brown is down mentality. When I first started hunting you shot the first buck that walked by because you might not see another. As long as it was bigger than a 3 inch spike you shot. Back then if you got a buck that scored 100 it was big news. Hell if you saw a buck spotlighting that big it was big news.

Thanks to antler restrictions we now see bigger buck than we ever have. 3 pts on a side restriction is in a form high grading because the biggest yearlings are still getting killed but it at least allows some of the populations of bucks to make it to 2 yrs. I think people are finally starting to see what can happen if you don't shoot the first buck you see but it's still an uphill battle.

That is similar to our situation. We had big bucks before apr's but after the 4 pt on one side went into effect (we have a lot of 8 pt yearlings and a few with 9 and 10 pts that are not off limits but....) It made a big difference in only 2 seasons. The have since removed the APR but it is here to stay because the hunter saw how it helped grow bigger bucks. Most hunters in my area pass several bucks before harvesting one unless they just plain get lucky. (Which is a big part of hunting anyway)

 

[Mortenson]

I wonder what percentage of hunters would pass up a 140" 2 year old in favor of shooting a 120" 4 year old?

I passed up a buck this fall that would fit the requirements to be shot by a lot of guys. I think he's a minimum of 4.5 and would score maybe 130ish, a heavy, narrow rack with 8" brows and some real nice H measurements. He seems to have moved right in after the best buck got shot across the fence the prior day. My criteria for a long time has been to shoot only a buck I want to shoulder mount. By shooting this guy, I'd accomplish: removing inferior genes (but that's already been agreed upon to not make any difference), using up my only gun buck tag, getting a lot of meat that doesn't taste as good as a doe, removing a buck that might be taking up the space of a better buck (but what if the space gets filled by one even worse?), having another rack that gets tossed in a tub of antlers at the toolshed (limited wallspace). I guess for me, it comes down to maybe I'll shoot him late in the season, if given another chance, because the pros outweigh the cons, but before then I can still hold out hope some unknown monster strolls by.

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

I would without a doub't pass on the 2 year old for a chance to take the older buck. Never noticed a difference once its summer sausage.

 

[Mortenson]

I would without a doub't pass on the 2 year old for a chance to take the older buck. Never noticed a difference once its summer sausage.

I agree with you. Most my neighbors don't though. The giant racked 2 and 3 year olds that need group protecting get piled up. They're too dumb to stay alive and look too big not to get shot. The ones that get passed up pretty easily however are the scuzzy looking 3 year old 7 points that score only double digits. I realize I'm in the horn pyorn territory at this point of the conversation. Just admitting that so I don't get yelled at. I still firmly wish everyone would shoot what makes them happy.. I just wish that it would take larger, more mature bucks to make a lot of people happy. haha

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

Pretty hard for most to pass up a 3 year old buck that sports a nice rack. I deal with the same thing and don't fault the hunter one bit for taking them just wish they wouldn't. Good fried of mine hunts the neighboring property has shot a 150+ 3 year old the last two years in a row. I don't blame him for shooting it but man I wish those deer would live another year.

 

[trampledbyturtles]

Guess I won't have to worry about high grading issues.
I'll shoot a forkie if the moment feels right.

 

[trampledbyturtles]

But just to stir the pot.

Dont think cell cams should be legal.

Crossbows should only be legal with permit during the archery season.
Otherwise put them with muzeloaders.

All baiting including mineral should be illegal.

And trespassing fees doubled, just since we are shooting for the moon.

 

[BenAllgood]

That study done on the King Ranch where they showed over time no increase in antler measurements under a very extreme harvesting regime, showed in that situation, genetics were not being manipulated in as far as antler inches are concerned.

But, on the other hand, that is a much different system than other parts of the country. That study area has very limited barriers to the incursions or excursions of bucks. Other parts of the country can have more barriers that may possibly hinder the flow of genetics.

We have to look at studies for what they are. They are showing what happens under certain circumstances. You try to control as many variables as possible. That's why it's hard to do a study in one place and transfer the findings to another entire ecosystem.

I lean to the side of you can't control genetics in a wild herd, but I also have a foot in the side saying, under certain circumstances, there just might be a chance. But, I also don't think you can identify the future Booners by their first one or two racks.

 

[Mortenson]

Pretty hard for most to pass up a 3 year old buck that sports a nice rack. I deal with the same thing and don't fault the hunter one bit for taking them just wish they wouldn't. Good fried of mine hunts the neighboring property has shot a 150+ 3 year old the last two years in a row. I don't blame him for shooting it but man I wish those deer would live another year.

I'd wager a guess that most hunters can't tell the difference between a 2 or 3 year old under a lot of circumstances. To those with knowledge and keen eyes, it gets easier. Many of my neighbors wouldn't even care to know. It just isn't important to them. No worries. I suspect your neighbor wasn't gunning for a 3 year old so much as he was the 150" rack. At least that would be case a lot of the time. So I just lump 2s and 3s in the same category.

 

[Mortenson]

How about a law that if you have cell cams, you must be 150+ miles away? Seems if you live on your hunting property, cell cams may be a tad unfair. If you live out of state, the need changes somewhat.

 

[DrDirtNap]

How about a law that if you have cell cams, you must be 150+ miles away? Seems if you live on your hunting property, cell cams may be a tad unfair. If you live out of state, the need changes somewhat.

A law?...really?...I, for one, don’t want a stinking law telling me how I can use a cell camera...that would be real close to communism in my book.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk