deerchaser007 said:
BSK said:
Just remember, MS "4 point rule" is TOTAL points, so a fork-horn is legal for harvest.
In the southern swampy poor soil areas of the state, this rule has actually been quite affective, as few yearling bucks produce fork-horn antlers. But in the Delta agricultural region, many yearlings produce fork-horn or better antlers hence the yearling buck population is getting severely high-graded, resulting in much lower antler scores of older bucks.
So your saying in ag regions the yearling harvest is much higher because the restriction ,. correct??BUT,.. what yearlings are not killed are the ones with the worst genetic potential,.. the spikes.
In the South, where breeding dates are often more strung out, yearling buck antler development is driven by three primary factors: birth date, nutrition, and genetic potential. A young buck must reach a specific age/developmental stage before his first set of antlers can begin growing. Buck fawns born earliest and in the best habitat areas can begin growing their antlers earlier in the summer and have the opportunity to grow much larger antlers than buck fawns born late (often several months later). Late born bucks can take several years to "catch up" in antler production to the earlier born bucks the same year, often not catching up until 3 1/2 of 4 1/2 years of age. In addition, due to the cyclic natural of deer growth (produce most of their growth during the spring and summer months) "missed opportunity" for summer growth their first year of life may be "missed" forever, producing permanent stunting in boh body and antler development.
The problem with MS's 4-total-points Antler Restriction (AR) is that in the best habitat areas, early born bucks regularly produce 4-total-point antlers and are being killed, while the AR only protects the late-born and possibly even poor genetic potential yearlings and even 2 1/2 year-old bucks.
So the MS ARs, in the better habitat areas, allow early-born bucks and/or those with great genetic potential to be harvested, while late-born, potentially permanently stunted, and/or the worst genetic antler potential yearlings to be protected. These bottom-end antlered yearlings then make up the majority of the future older buck population. This is leading to amazingly severe high-grading. Since the implementation of the AR, in the best habitat areas, older bucks are now producing astonishingly lower antler growth than they did before the antler restrictions were enacted. 2 � year old bucks are now producing antlers 10 inches less and 3 � year-old bucks are producing antlers a whopping 20 gross inches less than they did before the AR was enacted.
Is that what hunters want? Hunters are ultimately focused on antler size. Do hunters really want 3 � year-old bucks to harvest that now average
20 gross inches less than they used to? That's the difference between 3 1/2 year-old bucks that used to average 115 gross now only average 95 gross. That�s a HUGE difference. And worse yet, we do not currently know if that damage done is
permanent. That is biologically possible.
I personally like AR's. I'm not saying they are appropriate for every area,.. but are a valuable management tool in other areas when combined with adequate doe harvest.
As I�ve said before, I see ARs as a measure of last resort, when even low buck bag limits are not protecting enough yearling bucks. ARs have too many limitations and can cause too many problems, and we don�t know how long-term the problems they cause can be.
I'm sure if MS set different goals for each region they could come up with a compromise for every area.
Perhaps, but that�s easier said than done. Then throw in the fact MS never wanted ARs in the first place�they were enacted by their state�s legislature with no input from biologists. The legislature may over-rule any attempt by biologists to correct the problem. That�s a prime example of letting the uninformed make critical and complex biological decisions.
I feel GA has proven this with different techniques for their state.
GA�s system is very different. Their system only places an AR on a 2nd buck harvested. This produces much less unnatural selective pressure on young bucks hence less damage done.
IF TN ever was forced to use ARs, I believe that type of system would be best considering the low percentage of hunters that kill two bucks. In essence, much less chance of high-grading and/or potentially damaging the deer herd.
If a state agency see's a need to protect more yearling bucks in certain areas , units with AR's can improve the herd for that area.
The problem is, an AR
might do more harm than good. Yes, increasing the buck age structure (protecting young bucks) is a good thing. But high-grading out the best and only protecting the worst
might produce long-term damage to the herd. We don�t know yet because these systems haven�t been in place long enough to test these ideas.
BUT,.. i agree ,.. it must be done county specific or unit specific.
Unfortunately, even county specific may not work. Some counties have portions of very good habitat and portions of very poor habitat. Antler development can vary dramatically across even a single county. No biologically sound AR could be designed for these counties that didn�t harm one or the other section of the county.
Using TN as a example and if there were a need to protect more yearling bucks ,.. what result would come from a 3 pt 1 side AR from nashville eastbound? Its been said that this area has the most hunters and poorest soils. Would a AR help this area?
Again, that�s way too generic of a region. Within that entire area there will be areas where a 3 point rule could do tremendous harm while other areas it might help.
Unless
absolutely biologically necessary, ARs shouldn�t be used. They have too much potential for doing harm to the herd. If good biological data indicates too many yearling bucks are being harvested from an area, other techniques should be tried first, preferably low buck bag limits. Only if those measures have been tried and fail should ARs be considered. And honestly, I would try other measures beyond a 1 buck limit before I went to ARs.
