So what happened to all the big buck genes from the 2000 years + prior including the 1960 and 70's.
If what you say is true then back in the hay days all the breeding was done by the big giant genetically superior bucks. So all the little buck genes were bread out. So what happened to bring in those inferior genes so that us trophy hunters could tip the genetic scale the other way? Here are my theories?
1. Someone brought a coues deer up from arizona cross breeding and destroying the genetics.
2. There was a major genetic breakdown and an inferior genetic buck (2 point max or maybe a 3 point max) was magically formed in 1980, perhaps some DNA was inserted by the guys at dugway proving grounds. This spead the darwinian process up by lets say 30-40 thousand years. Then this one deer with the pure 2 point genetic line survived and bread lets say 10 does as alot of the bigger bucks were killed due to increased hunting pressure. But then there is another problem all of the damned does have good genetics and this mixes up the pure 2 points genetics and after about 3-4 generations the 2 point gene is pretty much bread out of the population so by the mid 80s or 90 we should be seeing no more of the inferior gene.
The point is that deer genes are just like people we just can't get rid of certain genes by selecting for a trait. Killing deer or people because we like or dislike a gene does nothing to the gene!!!!!!! The gene doesn't know that smaller antlers help a deer survive, especially in a 30 year period. It has been shown that by killing people with trisomy 21 or other mental handicaps or casterating them (which was done) did not change the proportions of these individuals in society.
Unless there is a major genetic event:
1. Bottle necking (increases the chances of a major genetic event)
2. Gene insertion, drifting, etc
This does not happen and if a major event does happen, then the actual gene has to give the animal an advantage of some sort to survive. This is a thousand +year process not a 30 year process. Believe me this has not happened with any of the mule deer populations. We would propably have a new species if it did.
Now I am really surprised that you Utah boys are buying into this anyway, as everything you are talking about is a simplistic view of darwinism.
This is what actually happens:
1. Deer are killed before they mature, drought, lions, cars, hunting.
2. The mix of genes allows a few deer in any population to reach what we consider a B & C measurement. The deer don't know what this is.
3. Perhaps the bigger horns make a deer more vulnerable to lion attack, or when fighting to lock horns and die etc.so not many survive to maturity with this type of genetics.
4. Obviously, the mix of genes and the environment allows a bell curve to happen in regard to antler points and size and the largest part of the curve holds the 20-26 inch buck with no advantage to number of points to be the best form of the mule deer to survive in all situations. The smaller bucks will be numerous because, like humans they die over time, and there are less adults than kids. On the other hand believe me there are very few 16 inch 2 points that are mature bucks. The other end of the bell curve shows that deer with big horns don't appear to give the species the best chance of survival or so few survive to bring out this genetic trait that there are not a lot of them.
My point shoot what you want, you won't change the trophy potential for your kids, that is all about management and letting deer live longer. The genes will always be there.
T
