number one B&C continued........

cabinfever

Very Active Member
Messages
2,382
Ah yes, Rio Arriba has produces more B&C mulies than any other county but you have to consider that Rio Arriba county is 5,858 square miles whereas Eagle county is only 1,688 square miles.Furthermore, divide the number of B&C entries in Rio Arriba county by the number of square miles and you have 1 B&C entry (all time) for mule deer for every 51.84 square miles, whereas using the same equation for Eagle county you have 1 B&C entry (all time) mule deer for every 33.10 square mileage.Yep, Eagle has more B&C entries per square mile than Rio Arriba!Consequently, many of the B&C trophies entered from Rio Arriba county are from the Jicarilla Apache Reservation which has very limited hunting, thus more bucks reaching maturity. I also think that people who pay the big money to hunt the Jicarilla are more likely to make a B&C entry as opposed to a regular Joe who whacks a monster on public land.Rio Arriba definately has the genes for producing big bucks but ranking by counties that are all different in size and management may not give you the accurate information your after. Anyway, it's just another way to look at ranking by counties.

Mike
 
interesting post!


dan-henderson_wanderlei-silva.gif
 
You know what else is interesting huntsonora ? If you took the B.C. out of the picture and went by S.C.I. trophy record book. Just look up scores that start from 160 up to 189 what area is the top-state?
Most hunters would be thrilled to have a mule deer buck at 160 do you agree?
 
A 160 buck? If it were a blacktail or if I were hunting the state of Washington for mule deer.
 
No offense Quest but unless he is a giant 2 point, a 160 buck is an immature buck just about anywhere mule deer live and has no business in any record book. The very idea of a record book is to document exceptional animals, not lower the standards to the point that almost any 4-point buck can get the hunter's name "in the book." Even for archery hunters a 160 buck could be considered a "nice buck" but certainly not records worthy. That being said, the trophy is in the eye of the beholder.
 
Another little tidbit about Eagle is this...There is more than one unit in Eagle county, and most of the booker heads from Eagle County didn't come out of 44.
 
A 160 "NET" buck is definately no slouch in ANY book.
It takes a good "gross" buck to net 160".

But i get the point. :)






48288e6577d023b6.jpg
 
Not to leave AZ out of the picture, here is some food for thought in the BC per square mile category. Coconino County as a whole is very large and would not compete, but I would be willing to bet 85-90% of the BC entries from Coconino County come off the North Kaibab. So let's take a look at this: 92 entries (from quest's original thread); 85%= 78 90%= 83; North Kaibab is 1010 sq. mi (per Forest Service website)...

1010/78=12.94 BC per sq. mile
1010/83=12.16 BC per sq. mile

While there is no real way to prove 85-90% have come off the North Kaibab, it is by no means a stretch to think so.

However, taking the BC entries that ARE listed as Kaibab you still get:

1010/33= 30.61

It is not producing the numbers (quantity) it used to, but it is still producing numbers (size) and deserves some consideration in the scope of your discussion.

What do you think?

JB
 
BUCKSPY no offense taken. If you look at the S.C.I the minimums I believe its less than 160. My desert mule deer that I harvested last year was 160 + . Its 29 inch wide 4X4 with eye guards and it hard to pass on a buck like that. I guess what I'm getting at is there are places out there that we should look at. Not everyone can hunt those area that give up B.C. bucks. The S.C.I. is a great source of information for those type of bucks. As far as the book buck goes I'll enter a 160 inch buck in the S.C.I book in hopes that maybe one day I'll get the one that puts me in both S.C.I and B.C. books...and I certainly see nothing wrong with that :D
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-02-08 AT 10:10PM (MST)[p]Score, score, score...why is everyone so concerned with score? I know people have a need to see their name in a book, but what does it really matter? I like any big framed buck, regardless of score. Bottom line is, not every buck is capable of hitting 160, let alone book.

Look at these bucks, they are not bookers, but they are nice bucks. That buck on the left wouldn't score squat, but I still consider him a toad. (I didn't shoot these)

pair1.jpg
 
The two things both Rio Arriba and Eagle County have in common? Both are migration/winter range units comprised of Colorado deer. All of our high country deer (and cats) in Routt County migrate down into Eagle County when the heavy snows hit. Migration corridors from surrounding units really help in making both of these units the producers that they are. With the right weather both units really have the ability to "turn it on" as deer from surrounding areas pour into them. Throw good genetics into a unit where deer from a grouping of units mix and you have the recipe for the big boys. (I live in NM now but grew up in Routt County and shot and found just about every buck and shed of my life in Eagle County).

Pay attention to cat hunters during the years and you will see how they tend to move from high to low country as the snows dictate the movement of the deer herds. It's worked for us as a barometer for where the deer are going to be and it sure aids in figuring out where the deer are coming from in these two relatively low-lying units.
 
>You know what else is interesting
>huntsonora ? If you took
>the B.C. out of the
>picture and went by S.C.I.
>trophy record book. Just look
>up scores that start
>from 160 up to 189
>what area is the top-state?
>
>Most hunters would be thrilled to
>have a mule deer buck
>at 160 do you agree?
>

I cant speak for most hunters but personally I wouldnt consider a 160" deer a "big deer". I think its just a matter of personal preference though.

I have seen some giant deer where the score was not indicative of how big they really were but I would be hard pressed to find a 160" deer that I would consider shooting unless it was a cull buck on one of our Mexico ranches.

Drum


dan-henderson_wanderlei-silva.gif
 
Interesting points here......

"I also think that people who pay the big money to hunt the Jicarilla are more likely to make a B&C entry as opposed to a regular Joe who whacks a monster on public land."
Reasonable assumption.

"Most hunters would be thrilled to have a mule deer buck at 160 do you agree?"
Most hunters would be thrilled.

"A 160 buck? If it were a blacktail or if I were hunting the state of Washington for mule deer."
This is probably true and an indicator that a 160 buck doesn't represent the top-end of mule deer potential.

"The very idea of a record book is to document exceptional animals, not lower the standards to the point that almost any 4-point buck can get the hunter's name "in the book."
No explanation needed unless you dropped out of high school early to become a Governor's tag deer guide.

"Score, score, score...why is everyone so concerned with score?"
I think its a conveniant and handy reference for most people instead of saying that 26" buck with medium mass, average forks, short main beams and gnarly bases.

"I have seen some giant deer where the score was not indicative of how big they really were."
I would agree completely. There are a great number of bucks way bigger than just "nice bucks" that have some serious wow factor. Absolute whoppers where score is completely irrelevant.

"A 160 "NET" buck is definately no slouch in ANY book"
Agreed but a 160 class buck is really a buck that is quite a ways from his full potential in most areas with big buck potential.

"Another little tidbit about Eagle is this...There is more than one unit in Eagle county, and most of the booker heads from Eagle County didn't come out of 44."
Insider information that most of the so-called experts don't realize.

"Look at these bucks, they are not bookers, but they are nice bucks. That buck on the left wouldn't score squat, but I still consider him a toad. (I didn't shoot these)"
Nice wide and framey buck. Most would be thrilled to kill a buck like that. First day, last day, I would let him walk. Great looking mount and great example of what to expect from a taxidermist. Clean sharp ears, well set eyes and looks have some professional attention to detail. If your taxidermist isn't doing work like this, you need a new one and let him practice on someone else's buck.

"The two things both Rio Arriba and Eagle County have in common? Both are migration/winter range units comprised of Colorado deer." If they couldn't rut-hunt migration bucks in the rut on the Jicarilla, the record book would look way different.
I would say most deer in Eagle county are resident year round to the county with the exception of the deer north of the Colorado river in which some do move in from Routt county.

The Henries are a top 5 mule deer area in the West right now. For whatever the reason. The bucks have a few too many extras to score well as typicals and not enought to go nontyp. Who cares! I'd give my left nut for a tag there
 
Another note. Of all the entries coming from Rio Arriba, NM only a handful have come from outside the boundaries of the Jicarilla Res.
-Raptor
 
More facts using the same equation as above.........

The state of CO has 103,717.53 square miles.

CO has 471 mule deer entries typical and non typical combined as of 2006 (I'm sure there have been a few more added since than but it will not skew the numbers too bad)

The states listed below have the following B&C all time mule deer entrys per sqare mile.

Colorado comes in 1st at 1 B&C entry per 220 square miles

Idaho comes in second at 1 B&C entry per 316 square miles

New Mexico aint even close at 1 B&C entry per 935 square miles, and is way down the list overall.

Makes you realize just how rare a B&C buck really is?

Mike
 
This is a great topic. All I can think about though, is Saskman and BCBoy laughing at us while there scouting more monsters up north.
 
Come on 4000fps we know you shot those bucks , just kidding :) My brother two years back shot a three point that was 33 inches wide. Its hard to pass up bucks like that. Just wandering what does the buck on the right score?
 
>Come on 4000fps we know you
>shot those bucks , just
>kidding :) My brother two
>years back shot a three
>point that was 33 inches
>wide. Its hard to pass
>up bucks like that. Just
>wandering what does the buck
>on the right score?

I didn't score him, but going off memory, and guessing, I would say mid to high 160's. He was weak in the front forks. Still a nice buck in my opinion.
 
He might go 170, but not much more. I think he has a great look to him, and therefore, I am not hung up on score. Like Buckspy said, score is a good reference, but the book means nothing to me personally.
 
Another interesting tid bit about record counties. Coconino county lays claim to more world records then any other including the pope and young- Bison 129 6/8 net. Coues deer non typical 124 net. Typical elk 412 1/8 net. Non typical elk 442 net and the boone and crocket antelope tie at 95 net
 
>Hey NeverStopHuntin thats awesome but was
>the antelope transplanted?

quest, they tried the transplant, but it was too late and he ended up dying... :7


JB
 
You know I thought I read somewhere that they transplanted a antelope in that county and it scored real high in the 90 B.C. Now Ive got to find the article. It might have been in a cd Ive got. Anyway thanks for the info BOW_N_ARROW.
 
B&C scoring is the best tool we have, but I agree many people get too hung up on it.

My 2007 buck, that scored 165, was guessed by MM members to be closer to 195 (it shows how deceiving some racks are). It was 9.5 years old, and had lost much of its mass and eye guards due to old age.

It's not fair to say a 160 deer hasn't reached its full potential and hence isn't a true trophy, it could be on its way down. A trophy truly is in the eye of the beholder.

Grizzly
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom