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

[Howboutthemdawgs]

That's fine, but you said "you personally". Projecting your personal views on someone else is a pretty muddy thing to start on.

I digress, I get where you're coming from and generally agree with you. But I also know, there are differing goals out there, and the line of what's ok for some is different than the line for others.

I’m absolutely certain that I never once said I think everyone else should do as I do. As a matter fact you did the same thing as me when you express your views. That’s kind of the whole point of a message board is to have dialogue about views, opinions and experiences. Just because you don’t agree with me doesn’t make me wrong. It just makes us different

 

[Natty Bumppo]

Wouldn't get my engine started, but hey, end game is we're killing deer. Not discussing biblical morality. Go have fun.

If guys want to bait, use dogs, use crossbows, bring a laptop and 3 cameras to the stand for their live feed...fine. Not my thing, but as you said, if that's their idea of fun, go for it. To each his own.

I don't forfeit my opinion of things I find distasteful though. I am also not out to simply "kill deer." If that were the case, I would simply throw a huge bait pile in my backyard and have venison in the freezer on opening day. Some hunters will do anything to kill a deer. Others draw the line somewhere based on their personal tastes and morals and ethics, as you said.

I do not think sneaking out and killing a deer you saw walk by a live camera is hunting. It's just killing. But that's just my opinion. Ain't losing sleep about it or talking biblical morality. Just having a friendly discussion on an open forum where differing views can be shared.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

I have been sitting in stand, and got a notification from one of my food plots. I pulled up the picture and there was the neighbor gutting a deer in the middle of my food plot. I climbed out of stand quickly for that one. Other then that, my cameras really don’t help my hunt much. I sit in the same enclosed stand, I don’t go out earlier, or go in later from what a camera is sending me. I work from the phone at my cabin from 10-2, so I sit until 9:50, and go back out at 2. Sure I may get a notification that there are deer in a food plot, and I may decide to sneak up on them and get a shot, but it hasn’t happened yet. I just walk quieter to my stand and patiently wait them out.
I don’t shoot monsters, but there isn’t really any around me anyhow. I use the cameras for inventory.
For an example, my land is in Wisconsin, I live in MN, so I need to purchase a $160 out of state licensee, and a $20 doe tag. I rifle hunt with my son every year, so it is tradition. But if I see a few nice bigger bucks roaming my land, I will also purchase another $160 bow license. But if I don’t see anything worth shooting, I save my $160 bow license. But this next summer I will be moving there, so I will always be bow hunting.

 

[roymunson]

I’m absolutely certain that I never once said I think everyone else should do as I do. As a matter fact you did the same thing as me when you express your views. That’s kind of the whole point of a message board is to have dialogue about views, opinions and experiences. Just because you don’t agree with me doesn’t make me wrong. It just makes us different

Fair enough... Like I said, we're probably more in line than it would appear.

Some people wanna kill, some people want the challenge. We all have our lines. Some folks thing a compound is too easy, so they use a recurve, etc. Stay within the laws and enjoy being outside.

 

[SwampCat]

There are so many variables that drive us to be different in our pursuit of game - and that is a good thing. As bowhunters, we wouldnt want the same number of folks in the woods as there is during modern gun season. Everything from how much spare time you have to how many deer you have to hunt. When I first started deer hunting in Georgia back in the late 60’s - whether with gun or bow - any legal deer was great deer. One time, Three of us camped out for a week and hunted hard - and none of us saw a deer. Even during the 80’s in Arkansas - it was all about killing a deer. You shot the first spike you saw - and got on about duck, quail, rabbit, and squirrel hunting.

Now, deer are the focus of most hunters. Some are still meat hunters, and some wont shoot anything less than a trophy for their area. Some a purists use a single weapon and some just like to get in the woods. Some are engrossed with the weapons themselves. I have a friend that knows as much about archery equipment as there is to know. He has bought as many as three new bows in a year. Practices more than anyone I know. Is a great shot on target. Yet his shot to dead deer ratio is poorer than anyone I know. Because you choose to hunt with a more “difficult” weapon, doesnt mean you know how to hunt. He only hunts with a bow. I have another friend who is a rifle junkie. Any and all kinds. He even travels around the country and participates in long range shooting competition. He will hit a four inch plate all day long at 1000 yards. His proficiency with a rifle would seem to negate the need for a portion of hunting prowess - yet he is probably the best hunter I know. He doesnt hunt that much, yet he typically kills the biggest deer, or the only deer if hunting is tough - and he is far and away the best still hunter I know - a technique that has little to do with rifle proficiency. Then there is my wife. After hunting with the same gun for 15 years, she probably still doesnt know what caliber it is. She knows how to load and unload and how to be safe. She has never shot at a target with the rifle. Same with her bow - she doesnt even know it is a mathews, she shoots it a couple days before season, she kills a deer every year with it, and has missed one deer with it in ten years. She has the patience of Job. She will let a deer walk around her stand for thirty minutes and if it doesnt present the perfect opportunity, she lets it walk off. During rifle season, she has a favorite stand - and hunts there even if I tell her a deer hasnt been there in a week. A thermos of coffee and a good book is reason enough to go.

In my hunting career, I have gone from the days of shooting the first legal deer I saw with any weapon to only quality buck hunting with a recurve. I now hunt with any and all weapons, typically for a quality buck. Now, my favorite choice of weapon is an AR 15 - even though I have only killed one deer with it in three years. It just seems more relaxing to me to hunt with a modern rifle than a bow. I still kill more deer with a compound than all other weapons combined - just because our seasons are set up to give bow hunters the easier times of the year to hunt. My passion now is not killing deer, but managing the land for deer. And yes - I like my game cameras and run about 15 of them, year round.

And it is important for our hunting community to be involved in all facets of the sport. There is strength in numbers. And hunters, especially, need to support each other. We face plenty of adversity from outside the sport - we dont need it from within.

 

[yoderjac]

Where does that information come from?

And why is intent a requisite for benefit?

Most cell cams are use by hunters for hunting. Most hunters are not deer managers, but hunters are important tools used by deer maanagers.

 

[roymunson]

Most cell cams are use by hunters for hunting. Most hunters are not deer managers, but hunters are important tools used by deer maanagers.

I have 8-10 cell cams. I'm a hunter and a manager. A manager first, I'd like to think, but i'm definitely also a hunter.

I'm very entertained to deer movement as most managers are. Cell cameras allow me to know what's going on in a more detailed, and entertaining way.

 

[yoderjac]

I have 8-10 cell cams. I'm a hunter and a manager. A manager first, I'd like to think, but i'm definitely also a hunter.

I'm very entertained to deer movement as most managers are. Cell cameras allow me to know what's going on in a more detailed, and entertaining way.

Which puts you and I in the minority. My wireless cams have been a huge contributor to providing solid data for my QDM decisions. From a hunting standpoint they don't add much beyond knowing what is out there. While they do let you pattern deer, that only matters when deer follow patterns. Our deer react to hunting pressure very quickly now that we have improved the habitat providing food in cover. They simply stop moving much during shooting hours once hunters infest the woods.

My point is that reliable wireless cameras can be a great asset to the deer manager collecting data. Using them to "target" specific bucks really doesn't contribute much to management. What is more important from a management perspective is which bucks you let walk (young ones). You don't need a camera for this. Targeting a specific buck is a small advantage to a hunter. It simply gives him assurance that this particular buck that he wants to shoot has used the property at some point. Perhaps early in the season it helps select a stand with a slight statistical advantage of seeing the buck over another stand. In no way does this targeting of specific shooter bucks benefit the herd in general. The only possible benefit to the herd is if you have an undisciplined hunter that, knowing a target buck is other there, passes a young buck he otherwise would have shot.

In general, folks without sufficient scale may be doing practices that are good for wildlife or make their properties easier to hunt, but they, in and of themselves, are not managing deer, they are hunters. As I said in a previous post, while they may not be managing deer, folks at your game department are managing them, and hunters are an effective tool for that. By education, ethics advocation, and regulation changes, they influence hunter behavior to attempt to achieve deer management objectives on a larger scale.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[SwampCat]

In my area - if you want to see deer, you have to manage them or hope your neighbor does - in spite of what our G&F allows or desires hunters to do. We have a six deer limit, two of which may be bucks. There are four of us, plus grandkids, that regularly hunt my 300 acres. We could legally kill twenty or more deer. If we did that for a few years, we would be lucky to see a deer. We usually kill a couple of bucks and at most two does - often, no does. I have 15 adjacent landowners - most who own ten or twenty acres - and manage with a corn feeder and a rifle. Two of the other property owners show some restraint - big property owners - so three of us are managing deer so that all fifteen of us have something to hunt. The three of us improve habitat, plant, feed, and selectively harvest based upon fawn recruitment numbers, buck/doe ratios, buck and doe age, deer density, etc. Many hunters with control of at least some acreage, in my area, would have the same quality and quantity of deer were legal year round. They know if they hunted and harvested as allowed by g&f regulation, quality and quantity would suffer

 

[yoderjac]

In my area - if you want to see deer, you have to manage them or hope your neighbor does - in spite of what our G&F allows or desires hunters to do. We have a six deer limit, two of which may be bucks. There are four of us, plus grandkids, that regularly hunt my 300 acres. We could legally kill twenty or more deer. If we did that for a few years, we would be lucky to see a deer. We usually kill a couple of bucks and at most two does - often, no does. I have 15 adjacent landowners - most who own ten or twenty acres - and manage with a corn feeder and a rifle. Two of the other property owners show some restraint - big property owners - so three of us are managing deer so that all fifteen of us have something to hunt. The three of us improve habitat, plant, feed, and selectively harvest based upon fawn recruitment numbers, buck/doe ratios, buck and doe age, deer density, etc. Many hunters with control of at least some acreage, in my area, would have the same quality and quantity of deer were legal year round. They know if they hunted and harvested as allowed by g&f regulation, quality and quantity would suffer

We have the same thing here, sanctioned by the state. Cooperatives, formal or informal are the only shot most of us have at deer management. Few have the scale necessary on their own to manage deer. That is not to say smaller property owners are not managing their properties, they are.

On private land, do harvest is legally unlimited in most of the state. We get 6 deer tags with our big game licenses. Two of them can be used on bucks in the west part of the state and 3 can be used on bucks in the east. All can be used on antlerless deer. We then have something called "Bonus Tags". You can buy as many of these as you want. They are only good for does and only good on private land. So, the game department assumes that land owners want to protect the resource and will show much more harvest restraint (both them and the folks they allow to hunt) than people will hunting public land. Over the years this has generally proven true.

We also have special programs like DMAP that our farm is enrolled in. They assume folks enrolled in this program are even more interested in managing their lands. In exchange for collecting data and biological samples, the state provides DMAP tags. They are good only on the specific property they are issued for and only for antlerless deer, but they are good any day of the season, not just doe days for that area. The biologist generally issue a number of doe tags commensurate with their management objectives.

Our state deer biologists at our state level understand the social differences between private and public property and construct the regulations accordingly to achieve management objectives.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[IkemanTx]

There was a big thread on this on one of the Texas sites I am on, and their overall consensus was age, age, and age. Most of those free range ranches are aiming for 7-8 year old bucks as their “new mature”.

Dealing with 150 acre properties, if each landowner shoots 1 or 2 “trophy” bucks off their properties a year, then basically no deer are making it to 6, 7, or even 8 years old.

You are high grading, but not via genetics. The neighborhood is killing bucks as soon as they hit the acceptable threshold.

My dad has hunted a ranch in west Texas for years. They were stuck at the 130-135” class for years. 4,500 acres, 10 hunters, 2 bucks a piece. That’s 1 buck per 225 acres. They decided to drop to 1 buck a piece for a couple years, and only 5yr old plus bucks approved by more than one lease member. Within 2 years they had several bucks get into the 7 year age class and jump into the 60’s and 70’s. Once the guys on the lease knew what could happen by killing only half the bucks they used to, they had no problem letting 5 year olds walk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Baker]

Just home from the ranch where I've been since Thanksgiving. I think threads like these are greatI'll throw my unsolicited .02 in fully confessing I have no degrees in anything useful, just a redneck unencumbered by the scientific method.

I don't believe any harvest strategy can shift genetics. Many [ most ] harvest strategies only compromise herd quality by not letting bucks fully maturity which is much older than most want to believe. Fully mature certainly is not 4 or 5. ( or even 6) In my experience we frequently see buck quality oscillate quite a bit between 5-6. This is because in a well balanced herd they have fully entered the breeding pool, get incredibly run down , injured , stressed etc thus slow to recover post rut. I can provide countless examples of this but the best example I've ever had is this year. We took a 7 yr old 16 1/2" wide super massive nontypical mainframe 8 that scored 211. Last year he was a more typical 8 with a few kickers but good mass scoring between 155-160 tops. Thats the biggest jump I've ever seen but 20-30" jumps are not uncommon as bucks get more mature. By 6 they have become far more efficient at the rut , or less involved thus they run down less and recover faster. Thats when you start seeing the second big jump in antlers; the first being between 3 and 4.

Nutrition is what can shift genetics...either way up or down. Nutrition in any given year can have an immediate impact by allowing bucks to fully express their current potential. Long term nutrition can actually shift and change genetics thru epigenetic response. I contend there are hardly any places anywhere where nutrition is 100% 365 days a year much less this over decades. Yet both science and actual results from folks that are doing that have proven genetics can be improved .

 

[Baker]

Do you see a future 211 in this buck. How many folks would shoot him here...heck he's a mature 8 pt. Probably all he will ever be. Right???

 

[yoderjac]

Just home from the ranch where I've been since Thanksgiving. I think threads like these are greatI'll throw my unsolicited .02 in fully confessing I have no degrees in anything useful, just a redneck unencumbered by the scientific method.

I don't believe any harvest strategy can shift genetics. Many [ most ] harvest strategies only compromise herd quality by not letting bucks fully maturity which is much older than most want to believe. Fully mature certainly is not 4 or 5. ( or even 6) In my experience we frequently see buck quality oscillate quite a bit between 5-6. This is because in a well balanced herd they have fully entered the breeding pool, get incredibly run down , injured , stressed etc thus slow to recover post rut. I can provide countless examples of this but the best example I've ever had is this year. We took a 7 yr old 16 1/2" wide super massive nontypical mainframe 8 that scored 211. Last year he was a more typical 8 with a few kickers but good mass scoring between 155-160 tops. Thats the biggest jump I've ever seen but 20-30" jumps are not uncommon as bucks get more mature. By 6 they have become far more efficient at the rut , or less involved thus they run down less and recover faster. Thats when you start seeing the second big jump in antlers; the first being between 3 and 4.

Nutrition is what can shift genetics...either way up or down. Nutrition in any given year can have an immediate impact by allowing bucks to fully express their current potential. Long term nutrition can actually shift and change genetics thru epigenetic response. I contend there are hardly any places anywhere where nutrition is 100% 365 days a year much less this over decades. Yet both science and actual results from folks that are doing that have proven genetics can be improved .

Completely agree on genetics, but as IkemanTx suggests, high grading can certainly impact the current cohort.

Just to be clear for others, when we talk about altering genetics in a population we are referring to changing the proportion of particular genes in the population. This would take a very large number of generations. When we are talking about having a genetic impact through nutrition, we are talking about changing which genes are turned on and off (epigenetics) which can happen in the next generation. I believe hunting (predation in general) itself has an impact on epigenetics. While some fear of predators is probably learned behavior, I personally believe there is an epigenetic impact that makes the general population more warry when predators are present. There are some grasshopper/spider studies that a change to a lower quality diet (in favor of security) when predators are present.

It is certainly a fascinating topic!

Thanks,

Jack

 

[IkemanTx]

Completely agree on genetics, but as IkemanTx suggests, high grading can certainly impact the current cohort.

Just to be clear for others, when we talk about altering genetics in a population we are referring to changing the proportion of particular genes in the population. This would take a very large number of generations. When we are talking about having a genetic impact through nutrition, we are talking about changing which genes are turned on and off (epigenetics) which can happen in the next generation. I believe hunting (predation in general) itself has an impact on epigenetics. While some fear of predators is probably learned behavior, I personally believe there is an epigenetic impact that makes the general population more warry when predators are present. There are some grasshopper/spider studies that a change to a lower quality diet (in favor of security) when predators are present.

It is certainly a fascinating topic!

Thanks,

Jack

I think Baker is describing exactly the situation I was talking about by reassessing our idea of mature. After following a 200 page thread of Baker’s on a different forum, he is the epitome of letting bucks get age. Honestly, he is on the cutting edge of quality herd management. Consistently growing deer nearing (and into) the 200’s in his locale was considered impossible before him and his neighbor accomplished it. I know in many of his posts, he talks about having history with individual bucks over 6-7 years, and letting deer in the 180’s walk because they are only 6.

I have never even seen a 180” deer, so I doubt I could even let one walk just to see what he does at 7 or 8, but it is what let’s them get to 200”. If your management practices have reached a plateau, the management practices need to be changed. Letting deer walk another year is by far the cheapest management plan change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yoderjac]

I think Baker is describing exactly the situation I was talking about by reassessing our idea of mature. After following a 200 page thread of Baker’s on a different forum, he is the epitome of letting bucks get age. Honestly, he is on the cutting edge of quality herd management. Consistently growing deer nearing (and into) the 200’s in his locale was considered impossible before him and his neighbor accomplished it. I know in many of his posts, he talks about having history with individual bucks over 6-7 years, and letting deer in the 180’s walk because they are only 6.

I have never even seen a 180” deer, so I doubt I could even let one walk just to see what he does at 7 or 8, but it is what let’s them get to 200”. If your management practices have reached a plateau, the management practices need to be changed. Letting deer walk another year is by far the cheapest management plan method.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With sufficient scale, I completely agree! The problem for most of us is limited scale for controlling harvest. We need to balance recreational opportunity with harvest restrictions. Since trophy management is not what I'm after, it is QDM balanced with other objectives, restricting harvest to very old age classes simply isn't practical. Bucks here simply don't live that long. For us, the most practical harvest limitation is targeting the to 10%. This gives our hunters an opportunity for a personal trophy, but my area will never produce record book bucks.

As long as folks realize that the impact they are seeing is not genetic, but with the current cohort, I think raising the age/size limit for Trophy deer management approaches is reasonable.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[SwampCat]

I think Baker is describing exactly the situation I was talking about by reassessing our idea of mature. After following a 200 page thread of Baker’s on a different forum, he is the epitome of letting bucks get age. Honestly, he is on the cutting edge of quality herd management. Consistently growing deer nearing (and into) the 200’s in his locale was considered impossible before him and his neighbor accomplished it. I know in many of his posts, he talks about having history with individual bucks over 6-7 years, and letting deer in the 180’s walk because they are only 6.

I have never even seen a 180” deer, so I doubt I could even let one walk just to see what he does at 7 or 8, but it is what let’s them get to 200”. If your management practices have reached a plateau, the management practices need to be changed. Letting deer walk another year is by far the cheapest management plan method.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree - Baker has really shown what can happen by giving deer the opportunity to age and reach their full potential. What is odd is those same deer in that more controlled environment seem to mature at a later age than a deer in a less controlled environment. For example, my deer are usually starting down hill antlerwise at 6.5. My across the street neighbor has 1400 acres under high fence and those bucks are still going strong at 6.5-8.5.

But, most of us dont have a realistic opportunity for our deer to get 8.5 years old. If we never killed another deer on my land - it is very doubtful any of them would make it even to 6.5. I know everyone is in a different situation. To me, it is a little like fishing for a ten lb bass on your home lake - for most of us outside of texas or Florida - it probably isnt going to happen. But the thing about fishing for a ten pound bass - you catch a lot of others along the way. If you held out only for a 7.5 yr old buck - you might not ever pull the trigger - in your life. And just like bass fishing, deer hunters can employ methods that aid in increasing their chance for success.

 

[Troubles Trees]

I think Baker is describing exactly the situation I was talking about by reassessing our idea of mature. After following a 200 page thread of Baker’s on a different forum, he is the epitome of letting bucks get age. Honestly, he is on the cutting edge of quality herd management. Consistently growing deer nearing (and into) the 200’s in his locale was considered impossible before him and his neighbor accomplished it. I know in many of his posts, he talks about having history with individual bucks over 6-7 years, and letting deer in the 180’s walk because they are only 6.

I have never even seen a 180” deer, so I doubt I could even let one walk just to see what he does at 7 or 8, but it is what let’s them get to 200”. If your management practices have reached a plateau, the management practices need to be changed. Letting deer walk another year is by far the cheapest management plan change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am with you there, I have never seen a 180" deer on the hoof with my own eyes so I couldn't possibly let that one walk when that day comes. Maybe the management for us is to let 130's walk and hope to see them next year in the 150's, but my situation doesn't allow me much control in any of this. I am only in control of 30 acres so the best I can do to help achieve a better herd is to keep them fed well as much of the year as I can through habitat management.
God bless you all that have farms and the acreage to play with this concept, I am more than happy to read this thread and follow your success.

 

[Baker]

One thing I completely agree with Jack on is that there are very few places where scale allows deer herd management. Most harvest strategies are a compromise based on circumstance and have little to do with the overall herd other than diminish potential. And thats ok as that is reality for the vast majority of places.

I believe there are a couple of factors effecting antler growth as bucks age into the older age classes. Overall herd nutrition is what I consider most important and focus on the most. This can be trickier than the obvious considerations. For example; Our best bucks this year at the ranch come from a LF pasture that because of a severe drought over the past 2 years has been grossly overgrazed by cattle. It is somewhat fragile country and when it barely rains fro a couple years the herbivore impact is dramatic. The pasture looks absolutely horrible with no ground cover, no spring weeds, cattle living off the brush the deer eat, and the dust biblical. Nonetheless the buck quality was dramatically better than the more " controlled" game fenced pastures that haven't had cows in years. To the eye those pasture look far better. All the country is managed the same with equal feeder density and water distribution.Yet there are a bunch of bucks in the 180's and 190's in the LF pasture and that is the pasture we took the 211 from. Whereas the biggest buck we have found on the pastures with no cattle was 183[ archer got him] .

Why? What happened? My theory is the deer on the LF pasture had to live in the protein feeders cause there was nothing else to eat. With a feeder per 150 acres and abundant distributed water the entire herd was able to adapt to environmental conditions on a high nutritional plane. The bucks in the better looking country were actually on a lower nutritional plane by not getting as high % of their diet from supplementation and the habitat wasn't as robust as it is with rain. This same principle could play out in different ways anywhere in the country in ways we don't always understand challenging our understanding of how to keep deer in optimum health.

Another thing to understand when looking at aging is how the different subspecies age. Comparing the deer on my farm to the deer in Mexico [ 2 different subspecies ] I'm slowly becoming convinced that the deer in Mexico age better...differently?...Seems the sweet spot here on my farm is 6 or 7 whereas in Mexico it is 7-10 though we have some terrific bucks older than that down there. I'm still exploring that relationship by letting the majority of bucks in both places die of old age. Deer breeders have been introducing a % of northern genes into the southern genes for years because they mature faster, an asset when selling deer. What I haven't seen from northern subspecies though is large scale management of deer herds to see how well the bucks can age up there when also kept on a high nutritional plane year round. How many places are around especially in the north where the preponderance of deer are allowed to die of old age to see how the bucks adapt their antler growth in full maturity?

I find conversations about age and nutrition a lot more fun than genetics!

Enough for now, gotta do chores on the farm.

 

[Baker]

Jut for fun here is a 12 yr old still looking good. Got 5 drops this yr