Top States for Mature Buck Harvests

[Howboutthemdawgs]

I’m using 170 as a proxy for a total upper end representation of what is possible in my neck of the woods. It could be 140 or 190 for others. The score is the metric that can follow age, albeit loosely. 150 is an awesome deer 100/100 times. It would just be nice for some bucks to have the ability to live long enough to express truly upper end potential.
What percent of 130” 3 year old bucks die of old age in the Midwest? I’d guess zero nowadays. I bet 20 years ago it was significantly higher. We are too efficient now

 

[Mortenson]

Nets are for fish.

They are, except to the guy who shoots the next 214" typical! Don't want a one inch sticker on that buck

 

[SwampCat]

I’m using 170 as a proxy for a total upper end representation of what is possible in my neck of the woods. It could be 140 or 190 for others. The score is the metric that can follow age, albeit loosely. 150 is an awesome deer 100/100 times. It would just be nice for some bucks to have the ability to live long enough to express truly upper end potential.
What percent of 130” 3 year old bucks die of old age in the Midwest? I’d guess zero nowadays. I bet 20 years ago it was significantly higher. We are too efficient now

According to a post here early, 51% of bucks harvested in iowa are 1.5 yr old. I would guess most states, a 130” 3 yr old is going down when it walks out in front of most hunters - wherever it is found.

Take what you want from the advertised harvest age of bucks by state. Dismissing the fact that most folks on this forum think the numbers are skewed to the high side - but lets just consider the numbers are skewed evenly to the high side. The midwest AVERAGE is 68% of bucks harvested are 2.5 yrs old or less. I bet they arent passing many 3.5 yr old 130” bucks.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Correct. And I’m not saying that will change with all the education in the world about what is possible. My argument is the states have made it so easy with lax regulations combined with technology that nothing can survive.

 

[T-Max]

The difference between a 160” and 170” typical 10 point is 1/2” on each measurement. I would have a hard time distinguishing in the field. If it looks big, it is big.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BenA]

Correct. And I’m not saying that will change with all the education in the world about what is possible. My argument is the states have made it so easy with lax regulations combined with technology that nothing can survive.

That's true. Regulations can destroy a neighborhood's potential or even keep it from ever being realized if the neighborhood allows for it.

 

[Mortenson]

The difference between a 160” and 170” typical 10 point is 1/2” on each measurement. I would have a hard time distinguishing in the field. If it looks big, it is big.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah but if those 2 deer were side by side, the 170 would dwarf the 160. Don't ya think? Obviously it's a little tougher if they aren't side by side.

 

[SwampCat]

Correct. And I’m not saying that will change with all the education in the world about what is possible. My argument is the states have made it so easy with lax regulations combined with technology that nothing can survive.

I have found, in my area, where our regulations are so biased to killing deer - except for our apr - thank you. Combine that with our southern heritage of hunting for food and self supportive life style - I really think a lot of our deer harvest, especially with larger acreage under one control - the landowner has far more influence on what is harvested than the state regs.

Did you ever have a dream that maybe you should have bought deer land n south GA, of all places?

 

[BenA]

I really think a lot of our deer harvest, especially with larger acreage under one control - the landowner has far more influence on what is harvested than the state regs.

That's a reason why some of the southeastern DMAP states have some really prime spots that defy the rest of the state. They control some larger areas when combined in cooperatives. Even without the cooperatives, alot of these properties are larger acreages than you see in other areas of the country. This also brings us back to what started this post. The data the deer association published saying that these southeastern states like LA and MS were harvesting the most mature bucks was based on these DMAP properties. That is not a true picture of what is happening in the rest of the state.

 

[Brian662]

Yeah but if those 2 deer were side by side, the 170 would dwarf the 160. Don't ya think? Obviously it's a little tougher if they aren't side by side.

I have a 158" that looks like it dwarfs a 181", so I guess it depends.

 

[Mortenson]

I have a 158" that looks like it dwarfs a 181", so I guess it depends.

I know those deer of yours. Yeah that 158 is a mega. I was just talking specifically of those 2 deer as he described them.

 

[SwampCat]

That's a reason why some of the southeastern DMAP states have some really prime spots that defy the rest of the state. They control some larger areas when combined in cooperatives. Even without the cooperatives, alot of these properties are larger acreages than you see in other areas of the country. This also brings us back to what started this post. The data the deer association published saying that these southeastern states like LA and MS were harvesting the most mature bucks was based on these DMAP properties. That is not a true picture of what is happening in the rest of the state.

Lot of hunters here got out of DMAP because of the requested doe harvest. The only thing DMAP does here that you cant legally do anyway is kill more bucks and does than state regs allow, and kill them with a rifle five months a year.

 

[BenA]

Lot of hunters here got out of DMAP because of the requested doe harvest. The only thing DMAP does here that you cant legally do anyway is kill more bucks and does than state regs allow, and kill them with a rifle five months a year.

DMAP is different here, atleast when I was involved. If a cooperator didn't kill their allotted tags, they got less the next year. They also did browse surveys each year and kept meticulous records. The land holdings are larger than most other places, so cooperatives are harder to start in the Midwest. If you can put together a cooperative in the Midwest like you can in the south, that neighborhood will produce giants. It was a pretty good program here. But, these cooperators here a managing for older bucks, so of course the age structure reported by the NDA is going to be skewed in that direction.

 

[KY wild]

I have a 158" that looks like it dwarfs a 181", so I guess it depends.

I would like to see the 158 that dwarfs the 181, I would find it interesting and perhaps use the tidbit of knowledge in the future. Any pics??

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

I have a 158" that looks like it dwarfs a 181", so I guess it depends.

My Victoria secret model girlfriend is hotter than my Mrs hooters model ex girlfriend.
Nice humble brag!

 

[Brian662]

I would like to see the 158 that dwarfs the 181, I would find it interesting and perhaps use the tidbit of knowledge in the future. Any pics??

 

[SwampCat]

DMAP is different here, atleast when I was involved. If a cooperator didn't kill their allotted tags, they got less the next year. They also did browse surveys each year and kept meticulous records. The land holdings are larger than most other places, so cooperatives are harder to start in the Midwest. If you can put together a cooperative in the Midwest like you can in the south, that neighborhood will produce giants. It was a pretty good program here. But, these cooperators here a managing for older bucks, so of course the age structure reported by the NDA is going to be skewed in that direction.

They basically do the same thing here - the not killing the allotted tags is what lost favor with a lot of hunters, and why they drop out. But I think a hard requirement on the harvest is now a suggestion - I think they were seeing declining participation in DMAP. Herd data is gathered from DMAP, road kill, meat processors, etc - not just DMAP

I can see DMAP a lot more beneficial midwest where there are a lot fewer hunting grounds less than a 1000 acres. 1000 acres actually probably on the small side here. I have been in several leases 3000 plus acres. Three of my adjacent landowners each own 1000 plus acres. Probably not a lot of that in Iowa or Illinois.

 

[BenA]

They basically do the same thing here - the not killing the allotted tags is what lost favor with a lot of hunters, and why they drop out. But I think a hard requirement on the harvest is now a suggestion - I think they were seeing declining participation in DMAP. Herd data is gathered from DMAP, road kill, meat processors, etc - not just DMAP

I can see DMAP a lot more beneficial midwest where there are a lot fewer hunting grounds less than a 1000 acres. 1000 acres actually probably on the small side here. I have been in several leases 3000 plus acres. Three of my adjacent landowners each own 1000 plus acres. Probably not a lot of that in Iowa or Illinois.

In LA, almost all the data is gathered from DMAP. Very little is from other sources.

DMAP is successful here for some properties because of the large land holdings. You can get a few landowners here together, and that would put several thousands of contiguous cover acres into a cooperative that are managing for older bucks. In the Midwest, that would take many more landowners in most cases. Here, you have a lot of joint ownership properties in prime areas strictly for hunting. I don't see a lot of that happening in the Midwest, but it's been happening for generations here. The same thing happens with fencing here. It's been going on for decades down here, but is just taking off in the Midwest.

 

[Bill]

My Victoria secret model girlfriend is hotter than my Mrs hooters model ex girlfriend.
Nice humble brag!

Guess it wasn't humble.

 

[SwampCat]

In LA, almost all the data is gathered from DMAP. Very little is from other sources.

DMAP is successful here for some properties because of the large land holdings. You can get a few landowners here together, and that would put several thousands of contiguous cover acres into a cooperative that are managing for older bucks. In the Midwest, that would take many more landowners in most cases. Here, you have a lot of joint ownership properties in prime areas strictly for hunting. I don't see a lot of that happening in the Midwest, but it's been happening for generations here. The same thing happens with fencing here. It's been going on for decades down here, but is just taking off in the Midwest.

I do think another thing that probably boosts the average harvested age structure in AR a lot - the observation data, gained from over 4000 hours of observation data in just my region, there were an average of 5.3 bucks seen per ten hours hunting, with 2.6 (half) of those bucks four pt or less. With our regulation of a buck having to have at least 3 pts on one side, that means half the bucks seen are illegal to kill - except for a youth. When you basically remove half the bucks from potential harvest, and almost all of them being 1.5 yr old, you are going to up the average age of those harvested. So you are basically harvesting 2.5 yr old bucks and older - and when they figure the percentage of 3.5 yr old bucks in the harvest - all of the 3, 4, 5, 6, and older deer are grouped as 3.5 or older.