BSK
Well-Known Member
I promised myself I wouldn't do this, but I can't hold my tongue.
To start, I almost never watch TV hunting shows because they're so unrealistic, and often present inaccurate biological/management information. To say they infuriate me would be an understatement. I also think they often present hunters in a poor light, but that's the topic for a different rant. This rant is about how overblown and misused the practice of "management bucks" has become. The concept of "management bucks," bucks that can be removed from a population because they will never meet the goals of the management program, comes from massive trophy ranches in Texas. On these ranches, very, VERY few trophy bucks per area are actually being removed each year, hence more bucks have to be removed to keep deer densities in line. Since more bucks have to be removed, they choose to remove bucks that are highly unlikely to ever become trophy bucks, such as very underperforming (well below average) 3 1/2 and 4 1/2 year-old bucks. These are "management bucks" - bucks that are removed for total deer density concerns, and they are chosen because they are unlikely to meet management goals. But unless you have quite a few thousand acres to work with, and have near COMPLETE control over the local deer population, and ABSOLUTELY NEED more bucks removed than you currently are, few have any legitimate reason to actually be removing management bucks.
Well, I'm scrolling through the channels the other day and I come across a deer hunting program and I see the show's host talking about managing his small farm and all the things he's doing for the deer herd (and most of it is well thought out and appropriate), but then he gets on a kick talking about how important his management buck program is - removing "inferior" bucks. He talks about how he tries to take at least one management buck each year, and how that's just as important as taking enough does and habitat management.
So here's my soapbox opinion: I think "management buck" has become the new "cull buck" excuse for shooting a buck. Just claim the smaller than management goal criteria buck you shot was a management buck. Do so while sounding regretful that it has to be done. Explain how much good that buck's removal will do for the herd in the long run. Tada! You've just assuaged and hidden your inner guilt for the fact you really just like killing a buck or two every year. How about this instead? Admit you really want to kill at least one buck each year. You do your part by not shooting young bucks, but when the chips are down, you still want to take an older buck, even if it isn't a top-end older buck. So swallow your pride and do so. No harm to the herd done. Who cares what your buddies/peers think? Your hunting and management enjoyment is yours and yours alone, and should not be about what others will think. Shoot an older buck of choice, no matter his antler size, and enjoy the experience.
To start, I almost never watch TV hunting shows because they're so unrealistic, and often present inaccurate biological/management information. To say they infuriate me would be an understatement. I also think they often present hunters in a poor light, but that's the topic for a different rant. This rant is about how overblown and misused the practice of "management bucks" has become. The concept of "management bucks," bucks that can be removed from a population because they will never meet the goals of the management program, comes from massive trophy ranches in Texas. On these ranches, very, VERY few trophy bucks per area are actually being removed each year, hence more bucks have to be removed to keep deer densities in line. Since more bucks have to be removed, they choose to remove bucks that are highly unlikely to ever become trophy bucks, such as very underperforming (well below average) 3 1/2 and 4 1/2 year-old bucks. These are "management bucks" - bucks that are removed for total deer density concerns, and they are chosen because they are unlikely to meet management goals. But unless you have quite a few thousand acres to work with, and have near COMPLETE control over the local deer population, and ABSOLUTELY NEED more bucks removed than you currently are, few have any legitimate reason to actually be removing management bucks.
Well, I'm scrolling through the channels the other day and I come across a deer hunting program and I see the show's host talking about managing his small farm and all the things he's doing for the deer herd (and most of it is well thought out and appropriate), but then he gets on a kick talking about how important his management buck program is - removing "inferior" bucks. He talks about how he tries to take at least one management buck each year, and how that's just as important as taking enough does and habitat management.
So here's my soapbox opinion: I think "management buck" has become the new "cull buck" excuse for shooting a buck. Just claim the smaller than management goal criteria buck you shot was a management buck. Do so while sounding regretful that it has to be done. Explain how much good that buck's removal will do for the herd in the long run. Tada! You've just assuaged and hidden your inner guilt for the fact you really just like killing a buck or two every year. How about this instead? Admit you really want to kill at least one buck each year. You do your part by not shooting young bucks, but when the chips are down, you still want to take an older buck, even if it isn't a top-end older buck. So swallow your pride and do so. No harm to the herd done. Who cares what your buddies/peers think? Your hunting and management enjoyment is yours and yours alone, and should not be about what others will think. Shoot an older buck of choice, no matter his antler size, and enjoy the experience.
Last edited: