Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New Trophy's
New trophy room comments
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Classifieds
Trophy Room
New items
New comments
Latest content
Latest updates
Latest reviews
Author list
Series list
Search showcase
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Quality Deer Management
Looking for buck high-grading
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BSK" data-source="post: 5657533" data-attributes="member: 17"><p>I wish I had an answer for you Ski, but I don't. There's a lot about deer in different parts of the country that are a real mystery. And what exacerbates the mystery is the difference between how a researcher sees things and how a hunter sees things. A hunter sees huge bucks being grown/killed out of Midwest and wonders why this doesn't occur as often in the Southeast. A researcher doesn't care about the one individual monster buck and wants to see the entire data set - a graph of all antler scores per age-class. The difference is, the hunter sees the big bucks killed and thinks that's the norm. The research sees the entire data set and realizes those monsters are somewhat statistical anomalies. That being said, why is it that those statistical anomalies occur almost never in the Southeast?</p><p></p><p>I have a few management friends that work in the Midwest (a couple each in Illinois and Iowa) and we've compared data a few times. What I find fascinating is how different their bell curve distribution of antler scores per age-class are from the data I have from TN (all of this data coming from camera censuses). In TN, the bell curves for an age-class will be very "normal" in distribution/shape. In essence, the leg of the bell curve to the left of the mean (below average) is a mirror image of the leg to the right of the mean (above average). However, in the Midwest, the bell curves will be heavily positively skewed (skewed to the right). And the left leg will be truncated not far below average (no very low scores in that age). The averages for the same age won't be that far off from location to location (max 10-15 inches for the oldest age-classes) but the rightward tail of the Midwestern curves go way, WAY out to the right, and don't fall off fast like they do in the Southeast. Plus, the left tail is truncated, in that few <strong>very</strong> low-scoring bucks for that age are ever photographed in the Midwest. But this heavily rightward skewed bell curve explains much of why 150+ bucks are so much more common in the Midwest than in the Southeast. The question is, why? Best guess, very fertile soils in the Midwest that grow a much wider assemblage of plants deer can eat and grow a lot more digestible plant material per plant.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BSK, post: 5657533, member: 17"] I wish I had an answer for you Ski, but I don't. There's a lot about deer in different parts of the country that are a real mystery. And what exacerbates the mystery is the difference between how a researcher sees things and how a hunter sees things. A hunter sees huge bucks being grown/killed out of Midwest and wonders why this doesn't occur as often in the Southeast. A researcher doesn't care about the one individual monster buck and wants to see the entire data set - a graph of all antler scores per age-class. The difference is, the hunter sees the big bucks killed and thinks that's the norm. The research sees the entire data set and realizes those monsters are somewhat statistical anomalies. That being said, why is it that those statistical anomalies occur almost never in the Southeast? I have a few management friends that work in the Midwest (a couple each in Illinois and Iowa) and we've compared data a few times. What I find fascinating is how different their bell curve distribution of antler scores per age-class are from the data I have from TN (all of this data coming from camera censuses). In TN, the bell curves for an age-class will be very "normal" in distribution/shape. In essence, the leg of the bell curve to the left of the mean (below average) is a mirror image of the leg to the right of the mean (above average). However, in the Midwest, the bell curves will be heavily positively skewed (skewed to the right). And the left leg will be truncated not far below average (no very low scores in that age). The averages for the same age won't be that far off from location to location (max 10-15 inches for the oldest age-classes) but the rightward tail of the Midwestern curves go way, WAY out to the right, and don't fall off fast like they do in the Southeast. Plus, the left tail is truncated, in that few [B]very[/B] low-scoring bucks for that age are ever photographed in the Midwest. But this heavily rightward skewed bell curve explains much of why 150+ bucks are so much more common in the Midwest than in the Southeast. The question is, why? Best guess, very fertile soils in the Midwest that grow a much wider assemblage of plants deer can eat and grow a lot more digestible plant material per plant. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Quality Deer Management
Looking for buck high-grading
Top