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
Interesting shift in MS management techniques
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: 1131518" data-attributes="member: 17"><p>I couldn't agree more megalomaniac. And that's why I'm not a big fan of antler restrictions (ARs). Now I do agree with those who argue that antler restrictions "do something" where over-harvest of young bucks is a serious problem, and that they are at least something simple and finite that the average hunter can follow. Look at the benefit of ARs in PA. They have definitely helped. With a million hunters pursuing around a million deer, there simply weren't enough bucks to go around, and even a 1 buck limit was producing severe over-harvest of the young buck population. ARs were absolutely biologically necessary in that situation.</p><p></p><p>But for ARs to work well, they must be developed through critical study of the target buck populations. And biologically, the critical factor(s) is/are not what percent of the yearling buck population the AR would <em>protect</em>, but what segment of the yearling buck population the AR would <em>allow to be harvested</em> as well as what segment of the <em>older buck</em> population the AR would protect. You don't want an AR that allows a large percentage of your best yearlings to be harvested and/or a significant percentage of your smallest antlered older bucks to be protected. That could lead to the high-grading problem MS is experiencing in their best habitat areas. ARs must also be evaluated unique habitat region by unique habitat region. PA has different ARs for their best habitat versus their poorer habitat because yearling buck antler production is different in those areas, just as MS experiences, or as many state experience.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BSK, post: 1131518, member: 17"] I couldn't agree more megalomaniac. And that's why I'm not a big fan of antler restrictions (ARs). Now I do agree with those who argue that antler restrictions "do something" where over-harvest of young bucks is a serious problem, and that they are at least something simple and finite that the average hunter can follow. Look at the benefit of ARs in PA. They have definitely helped. With a million hunters pursuing around a million deer, there simply weren't enough bucks to go around, and even a 1 buck limit was producing severe over-harvest of the young buck population. ARs were absolutely biologically necessary in that situation. But for ARs to work well, they must be developed through critical study of the target buck populations. And biologically, the critical factor(s) is/are not what percent of the yearling buck population the AR would [i]protect[/i], but what segment of the yearling buck population the AR would [i]allow to be harvested[/i] as well as what segment of the [i]older buck[/i] population the AR would protect. You don't want an AR that allows a large percentage of your best yearlings to be harvested and/or a significant percentage of your smallest antlered older bucks to be protected. That could lead to the high-grading problem MS is experiencing in their best habitat areas. ARs must also be evaluated unique habitat region by unique habitat region. PA has different ARs for their best habitat versus their poorer habitat because yearling buck antler production is different in those areas, just as MS experiences, or as many state experience. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Quality Deer Management
Interesting shift in MS management techniques
Top