Young buck dispersal and growth potential

[redblood]

I know several old timers who cling to the preference of shooting a buck, even if it's a little one. Getting a "buck" is important to them.

And in these parts nothing is easier than a 1.5 or 2.5 yr okd buck. I only bowhunt now, and it is much much easier to kill a young buck that a fully mature doe. I agree, they want to mention the word buck when they are discussing their harvest i believe

 

[Ski]

And in these parts nothing is easier than a 1.5 or 2.5 yr okd buck. I only bowhunt now, and it is much much harder to kill a young buck that a fully mature doe. I agree, they want to mention the word buck when they are discussing their harvest i believe

My father is a little bit like that. Apparently back before and a while after reintroduction, bucks were a rarity, and there was an effort to let does live so they could reproduce. Obviously those aren't relevant issues today but at one time not terribly long ago it was.

I also think bow hunters and/or habitat managers are a bit more informed and set stricter limits for themselves than the typical weekend warrior recreational gun hunter. You can only arrow so many 2yr old 8s before it's not exciting or challenging anymore, so you strive for older deer. And if you're managing habitat then you're intimately aware of not only herd dynamics, but also aware of the big boys running around. It's hard to pop a spike when you know a 5yr old 10pt is in the area.

 

[redblood]

I guess if you hunted the earlier yrs of reintroduction you became accustomed to protecting does at all costs. Maybe its hard for many to overcome that.

 

[mike243]

If you are trying to grow the herd or keep it at a certain level spikes dont have fawns lol pretty simple concept, always been a lot more deer west of Crossville/ Nashville and been reading for for a lot of years those folks telling everybody who shoots a young buck they are bad hunters and they need to shoot does instead, Twra has the limit set low except for the bow hunters who can take 4 during bow only,

 

[TheLBLman]

A few years ago, I'm near certain we had a yearling spike develop into a 168-inch gross buck by the time he hit 3 1/2, at which time a good friend killed him.

Many spikes are just late-born as fawns, and having spikes their first year of antlers in not genetics, but attributed to late birth (and/or less or low nutrition). But that said, they are often about a year behind on antler development until they're 4 1/2 or older.

Since the particular buck above has the "45" tag, would be great if he could survive to 5 1/2 before being killed. Will be a real eye-opener to many hunters who follow the saga.

 

[TheLBLman]

Crazy to think TWRA allowed spikes to be killed on WMA's "managed" for bigger deer.

Believe it or not, this is not necessarily as bad as it may sound to you.

In most cases, managing for larger antlered bucks also means maintaining the deer density below a certain threshold, so that there is more deer food per deer. Better nutrition means bucks' antlers "express" more of their genetic potential, and do so at younger ages.

In trying to reduce deer numbers, one of the "fears" is accidently shooting a button or spike buck, mistaken for a doe. Making spike bucks legal allows for a higher doe harvest, while not overly punishing a hunter for accidentally shooting a spike. This is also why "button" bucks are commonly counted as "antlerless" rather than as antlered bucks.

Lastly, just a fact, most spike bucks, are about a year behind in antler development until they reach 4 1/2 or older. Then, some spike bucks are indeed genetically inferior regarding antlers. So among the yearling buck cohort, it is spike bucks being killed that do the least damage to a "trophy" buck management program.

The bucks most needing to be protected are the 2 1/2 & 3 1/2's with superior antler genetics. But good luck finding any regulatory method of protecting those particular bucks. In fact, most antler restrictions actually contribute to higher harvests of the best antler genetics (as compared to no antler restrictions at all).

 

[Crappieaddict]

Awesome!

 

[Carlos]

My father is a little bit like that. Apparently back before and a while after reintroduction, bucks were a rarity, and there was an effort to let does live so they could reproduce. Obviously those aren't relevant issues today but at one time not terribly long ago it was.

I also think bow hunters and/or habitat managers are a bit more informed and set stricter limits for themselves than the typical weekend warrior recreational gun hunter. You can only arrow so many 2yr old 8s before it's not exciting or challenging anymore, so you strive for older deer. And if you're managing habitat then you're intimately aware of not only herd dynamics, but also aware of the big boys running around. It's hard to pop a spike when you know a 5yr old 10pt is in the area.

Your Father was wrong, that's never been a valid point. From a management standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Andy S.]

Believe it or not, this is not necessarily as bad as it may sound to you.

In most cases, managing for larger antlered bucks also means maintaining the deer density below a certain threshold, so that there is more deer food per deer. Better nutrition means bucks' antlers "express" more of their genetic potential, and do so at younger ages.

He was referring to PI buck hunt (spike or 9 point or better for years) where does were off limits, thus no way one could spin it as "herd management".

 

[BSK]

Your Father was wrong, that's never been a valid point. From a management standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense.

Back during the Restoration Era, it actually did make some sense. Hunters paid for the deer restoration. The Wildlife Agencies wanted to provide some deer hunting opportunities as quickly as possible to those paying for the effort. And because one buck CAN breed multiple does, it was believed that removing some bucks in buck only hunting until the population was restored was the best practice. Of course, back then no one had any idea about herd dynamics and how they work. No one had any idea that it was actually harmful to force a few bucks to do a lot of breeding, or that having a young buck age structure was harmful.

 

[TheLBLman]

He was referring to PI buck hunt (spike or 9 point or better for years) where does were off limits, thus no way one could spin it as "herd management".

I was thinking female deer were still legal game on the PI buck hunts?

As much as I don't want to agree with Alan Peterson
(just kidding, Alan, miss all our "discussions")
President's Island is actually one place where a spike buck has greater likelihood
of being genetically inferior rather than just late-born as a fawn.
This is simply because of the tremendous level of nutrition there for deer,
between those Mississippi delta soils and soybeans.

 

[Ski]

Your Father was wrong, that's never been a valid point. From a management standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense.

Care to elaborate?

 

[BSK]

The dispersal distance is interesting. I always find that kind of data fascinating.

 

[Andy S.]