2022 antelope Island bucks.

[JakeH]

This is the Auction hunter tag. Hunt was given to a army veteran.

And here is the draw hunter guided by mossback.

 

[pauns08]

Must have been slim pickins on the island this year, don't get me wrong these are nice bucks but seems like we're used to seeing much better bucks than that come off of there.

 

[JakeH]

Must have been slim pickins on the island this year, don't get me wrong these are nice bucks but seems like we're used to seeing much better bucks than that come off of there.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[hawkbill]

Yes I agree, the horn growth looks like it carried mass but not much length

 

[LIK2HNT]

Great bucks. Have those of you that visit and watch the deer on AI seen bigger bucks? Would be nice to know the age of the 2 above bucks.

 

[Founder]

So you guys don’t think that the auction tag buck (top 3 pics) is a 245 buck?

My guess based on video from the summer was that it might be 220ish, but I was told they measured it at 245.

Personally, I’d have to tape it myself to see 245.

Don’t get me wrong, both are awesome bucks, but I’d agree that they’re not as impressive as many from the past. I guess it goes to show that even in an area that has 2 tags a year, can diminish in quality over time if the biggest bucks are targeted and usually killed every year.

 

[Gator]

Great Buck Like high racks

 

[LIK2HNT]

Could those bucks be old enough to be regressing?

 

[JakeH]

So you guys don’t think that the auction tag buck (top 3 pics) is a 245 buck?

My guess based on video from the summer was that it might be 220ish, but I was told they measured it at 245.

Personally, I’d have to tape it myself to see 245.

Don’t get me wrong, both are awesome bucks, but I’d agree that they’re not as impressive as many from the past. I guess it goes to show that even in an area that has 2 tags a year, can diminish in quality over time if the biggest bucks are targeted and usually killed every year.

I'm not seeing 245, I could get 230 if I really stretched things out a little bigger then I really thought it was but I would say 220 is close.

And I wouldn't say the hunting pressure is what has caused the decline. You really think 2 tags a year is hurting the quality?

 

[deerlevi]

So you guys don’t think that the auction tag buck (top 3 pics) is a 245 buck?

My guess based on video from the summer was that it might be 220ish, but I was told they measured it at 245.

Personally, I’d have to tape it myself to see 245.

Don’t get me wrong, both are awesome bucks, but I’d agree that they’re not as impressive as many from the past. I guess it goes to show that even in an area that has 2 tags a year, can diminish in quality over time if the biggest bucks are targeted and usually killed every year.

I just don’t see how it would be possible for quality to diminish from harvesting two bucks a year. Every buck harvested has definitely had a chance to spread his genetics. The does that gave birth to them likely had many other offspring. If their genetics are being spread, how would quality go down? Why did they harvest bigger bucks on the oak creeks or even general season units in Utah this year that have many times the harvest selective pressure? Something is going on, but genetics is at the very bottom of that list. If genetics had that strong of an influence, no buck over 150 would ever be killed on any other unit in any state because the big genetics would have been killed out long ago.

 

[Founder]

I'm not seeing 245, I could get 230 if I really stretched things out a little bigger then I really thought it was but I would say 220 is close.

And I wouldn't say the hunting pressure is what has caused the decline. You really think 2 tags a year is hurting the quality?

I do. If ALL bucks had the potential to grow antlers of that 220-240+ caliber, then I’d say no, two tags wouldn’t have an effect. But it’s an extremely small percentage of bucks that would ever grow that much antler if they lived out their life and died of old age.
It’s just too difficult to replenish them every year out there.
Almost every year, the biggest bucks out there are getting killed.
The same thing happens in the majority of hunt units across the west.
I would guess that in addition to hunters killing the biggest bucks on the island every year, that overall herd number is down, which plays into it.

 

[deerlevi]

I do. If ALL bucks had the potential to grow antlers of that 220-240+ caliber, then I’d say no, two tags wouldn’t have an effect. But it’s an extremely small percentage of bucks that would ever grow that much antler if they lived out their life and died of old age.
It’s just too difficult to replenish them every year out there.
Almost every year, the biggest bucks out there are getting killed.
The same thing happens in the majority of hunt units across the west.
I would guess that in addition to hunters killing the biggest bucks on the island every year, that overall herd number is down, which plays into it.

Founder, how do you explain how any buck scoring 220+ could have been harvested in the past 10 years on any hunted unit if harvesting them makes it so they don’t exist in the future? That logic would mean that once they got killed out from the 90’s through the 2000’s those genetics would be gone and no buck would ever get that big.

 

[Founder]

Founder, how do you explain how any buck scoring 220+ could have been harvested in the past 10 years on any hunted unit if harvesting them makes it so they don’t exist in the future? That logic would mean that once they got killed out from the 90’s through the 2000’s those genetics would be gone and no buck would ever get that big.

Not ALL of them are being killed, but most. The more limited an area, or more difficult it is to hunt, the greater the likelihood a buck with just the right genetic make up can reach full potential.

The genetics is never "gone", however, most bucks will never reach the age to reflect the full potential of their genetics in most places. I say "most" because if circumstances are just right, even a buck in the most hunted area could potentially slip through the cracks and survive long enough to show their full potential. But the likelihood is low.

Limiting tag numbers can greatly increase the chance of bucks growing old enough to show their full potential, but even with limited tags, there could still be too many.

As sportmans get better at killing specific animals (trophies), yet the herd size remains the same or even decreases, something has to give, and it does, trophy quality.....both is size and quantity.

I don't know the exact number of deer on Antelope Island, but I believe it has decreased a good amount since they began hunting it a number of years ago. I believe back then I was told there were about 400 deer on the island. With that number, two tags might have been a great balance. But if now there are only 250 deer, then the balance has to change for the worse.
2 per 400 deer vs 2 per 250, quality will go down if the best 2 are killed every year. At 400, they might have been able to be replenished, but at 250 they probably aren't.

What I'm talking about has been happening for a loooong time all across the West. Tags have had to be cut all over in order to maintain buck to doe ratios and some quality. Antelope Island is no different in my opinion.

 

[pauns08]

No way that top buck is 245" from the pictures. Even with the trash he doesn't have the tine length to be 245" maybe 220" and I still feel like that might be a stretch.

 

[mtnrunner260]

Does a buck pass on different genetics as a 175 vs 220?

 

[Founder]

Does a buck pass on different genetics as a 175 vs 220?

If those are top end "potential" of a buck then yes, one passes on genetics with 175 potential and the other 220 potential. But if you're just talking about at the moment they have antlers of those sizes, then not neccasarily. The 175 might not be at its potential at that time, but still have the genetics to reach 220 at some point.

One issue I believe in too is that because bucks with the genetics to grow to 220 often begin showing it earlier in their lives with an extra point or two and that results in many of them being taken at an earlier age, which results in less does being breed by that buck. While a buck with 175 top end potential will probably live longer, therefore passing on its genetics to more offspring.

A buck with 220 potential might breed 10 does for 2 years and then get killed at 3 years old because he has a couple small extra points. He's got 20 offspring.
A buck with 175 potential might also breed 10 does, but for 4 years, then get killed at 5 years old. He's got 40 offspring.
Compound that over 10, 20, 60 years and it does effect a deer herd.
While I'm probably more guilty than most, killing the top end bucks from a unit every year, will effect quality in the long run.

By killing those very top end bucks on Antelope Island every year for 10 years (or since it opened), results in the undesirable bucks breeding more does, more often, overall.

 

[LIK2HNT]

Since AI is a small isolated area, can these deer be over breeding. Like the way dog breeds do. Maybe it’s time for some new blood there to mix things up. Just thinking out loud.

 

[deerlevi]

Not ALL of them are being killed, but most. The more limited an area, or more difficult it is to hunt, the greater the likelihood a buck with just the right genetic make up can reach full potential.

The genetics is never "gone", however, most bucks will never reach the age to reflect the full potential of their genetics in most places. I say "most" because if circumstances are just right, even a buck in the most hunted area could potentially slip through the cracks and survive long enough to show their full potential. But the likelihood is low.

Limiting tag numbers can greatly increase the chance of bucks growing old enough to show their full potential, but even with limited tags, there could still be too many.

As sportmans get better at killing specific animals (trophies), yet the herd size remains the same or even decreases, something has to give, and it does, trophy quality.....both is size and quantity.

I don't know the exact number of deer on Antelope Island, but I believe it has decreased a good amount since they began hunting it a number of years ago. I believe back then I was told there were about 400 deer on the island. With that number, two tags might have been a great balance. But if now there are only 250 deer, then the balance has to change for the worse.
2 per 400 deer vs 2 per 250, quality will go down if the best 2 are killed every year. At 400, they might have been able to be replenished, but at 250 they probably aren't.

What I'm talking about has been happening for a loooong time all across the West. Tags have had to be cut all over in order to maintain buck to doe ratios and some quality. Antelope Island is no different in my opinion.

Thanks for your thoughts. If I'm understanding correctly, you think the diminishing size of harvested animals is due to the fact that the age of harvested bucks is younger because we're over harvesting older age classes of bucks? And not because the genetics are gone? While that's likely true on a lot of units, its probably not true on antelope island. I'd argue on the island environmental factors play a much greater role in why the harvested bucks seem to be smaller than in years past than over harvesting old age class bucks.

 

[Zeke]

Well, if 2 is the wrong number... then there are only a couple more choices and I don't like the number zero!

I'm no biologist but I know there are only 2 viable sexes and that age and the environmental conditions on the island will affect antler growth and development way for than killing 2 deer and pulling their future genes out of the small ecosystem.

Fun topic to discuss about a unit that I'll never hunt?

Zeke

 

[Vanilla]

Two deer per year on the Island is not causing the genetics to go down.

I don't buy that. I've heard people with A LOT of experience out there photographing deer opine that the size of the bucks on AI just aren't what they used to be, and that may very well be true, but it is not due to killing two bucks per year.

I'm not weeping that a $300k tag is "only" going to result in a 220-240 inch deer instead of a 260 inch deer.

 

[BradA]

Great bucks but not what I expected to see.

 

[Founder]

Thanks for your thoughts. If I'm understanding correctly, you think the diminishing size of harvested animals is due to the fact that the age of harvested bucks is younger because we're over harvesting older age classes of bucks? And not because the genetics are gone? While that's likely true on a lot of units, its probably not true on antelope island. I'd argue on the island environmental factors play a much greater role in why the harvested bucks seem to be smaller than in years past than over harvesting old age class bucks.

On Antelope Island, I would agree that diminishing genetic potential probably isn’t much of a problem, but I do believe it does play a role in most places that have been hunted very hard for many years.

If there’s a problem with diminishing quality on AI, I would say it’s both a reduction in overall deer numbers, combined with the harvesting of the best bucks almost every year.
I don’t know a lot about the island, but my understanding is that there are less deer overall than in the past and the bucks being seen and killed are not as large as in the past.

If what I believe isn’t the problem, then what else is there? Vegetation quality? Maybe, but I don’t think that plays as much a role, especially during antler growing season.

I’d love to hear other theories. My theory just reflects my theory on diminishing quality through the rest of the West. Over harvesting of the bucks with the genetic makeup to be huge, and diminishing overall herd numbers.

 

[Founder]

Well, if 2 is the wrong number... then there are only a couple more choices and I don't like the number zero!

I'm no biologist but I know there are only 2 viable sexes and that age and the environmental conditions on the island will affect antler growth and development way for than killing 2 deer and pulling their future genes out of the small ecosystem.

Fun topic to discuss about a unit that I'll never hunt?

Zeke

2 bucks per year isn’t many if we were talking about normal big bucks in that 180/200 range. But we’re talking about a difference in the number of bucks in the 240-250 range. To believe a herd of a few hundred deer should easily produce a couple 250 bucks every year is a stretch.

Bucks with the genetic make up to grow that big are extremely rare, even out there!

How many bucks does it take for one of them to have the genetics to grow antlers of that size?
How many town deer, that never get killed, grow 240 inch antlers. Not many.

 

[Founder]

Two deer per year on the Island is not causing the genetics to go down.

I don't buy that. I've heard people with A LOT of experience out there photographing deer opine that the size of the bucks on AI just aren't what they used to be, and that may very well be true, but it is not due to killing two bucks per year.

I'm not weeping that a $300k tag is "only" going to result in a 220-240 inch deer instead of a 260 inch deer.

If they’re right, and the size of bucks being seen isn’t what it used to be, then what’s the problem in your opinion. What’s changed? What other options do we have? Nutrition?? Maybe, but I don’t believe that’s it.

 

[Nev638]

If they’re right, and the size of bucks being seen isn’t what it used to be, then what’s the problem in your opinion. What’s changed? What other options do we have? Nutrition?? Maybe, but I don’t believe that’s it.

I’ll jump in on this tread. I worked on antelope island for a few years back in early 2000’s. I also live right by the causeway entrance to drive out there and drive out there often. When I worked there they did not have the deer hunts yet. I can say from my observations that the hunt probably didn’t effect the quality of deer very much. I do agree that the numbers of deer and the top quality bucks are not there anymore. I have been going out every night the last few weeks to watch the rutting bucks. It is shocking how much the number of deer has gone down that I would see in the past. I also have seen very few does. The bucks are running around searching for does, but I have only seen one buck that had 3 does with it this year. Those monster bucks are just not there like they used to be. I think the feed conditions are a big factor. I also know that some of the deer that live out the actually travel across the causeway and summer in the fields in town and then would go back to the island in the fall. I have watched deer walking down the middle off the road to walk off the island. Pretty much every field the deer could be seen in around Syracuse and Westpoint is now being developed with homes. I think it probably has affected or reduced the deer numbers by a few. Also with the low water the deer just walk off the island even with the fence they built. They have cameras at the end of the fence and have pictures of the deer just walking out to the end of the fence and going around it to get of the island. They probably find better feed somewhere else and just don’t come back or get run over by cars or poached in the city. My point is there are way less deer out there which equals less bucks to become the monsters people are used to seeing out there. Just my observations.

 

[Gator]

Buck Genetic is important But you Can't rule out what the Doe genetic brings to the table.

 

[elkassassin]

Remember The MM Measuring/Scoring Tape!

 

[JakeH]

I’ll jump in on this tread. I worked on antelope island for a few years back in early 2000’s. I also live right by the causeway entrance to drive out there and drive out there often. When I worked there they did not have the deer hunts yet. I can say from my observations that the hunt probably didn’t effect the quality of deer very much. I do agree that the numbers of deer and the top quality bucks are not there anymore. I have been going out every night the last few weeks to watch the rutting bucks. It is shocking how much the number of deer has gone down that I would see in the past. I also have seen very few does. The bucks are running around searching for does, but I have only seen one buck that had 3 does with it this year. Those monster bucks are just not there like they used to be. I think the feed conditions are a big factor. I also know that some of the deer that live out the actually travel across the causeway and summer in the fields in town and then would go back to the island in the fall. I have watched deer walking down the middle off the road to walk off the island. Pretty much every field the deer could be seen in around Syracuse and Westpoint is now being developed with homes. I think it probably has affected or reduced the deer numbers by a few. Also with the low water the deer just walk off the island even with the fence they built. They have cameras at the end of the fence and have pictures of the deer just walking out to the end of the fence and going around it to get of the island. They probably find better feed somewhere else and just don’t come back or get run over by cars or poached in the city. My point is there are way less deer out there which equals less bucks to become the monsters people are used to seeing out there. Just my observations.

Add Coyotes and predation to that list I bet they have had an impact on the deer herd. I know every time I've been out there i have seen at least one coyote. And there is video of a pack running down and killing a big buck a few years ago.

It's a shame you are not seeing the doe's out there, guaranteed that's a bigger issue then 2 bucks getting killed out there every year.

 

[coloradoman]

Add Coyotes and predation to that list I bet they have had an impact on the deer herd. I know every time I've been out there i have seen at least one coyote. And there is video of a pack running down and killing a big buck a few years ago.

It's a shame you are not seeing the doe's out there, guaranteed that's a bigger issue then 2 bucks getting killed out there every year.

Yep

 

[Vanilla]

If they’re right, and the size of bucks being seen isn’t what it used to be, then what’s the problem in your opinion. What’s changed? What other options do we have? Nutrition?? Maybe, but I don’t believe that’s it.

2 bucks. TWO! Next year there are two more to take their spot in that prime station as the top dog. It’s only TWO bucks. There simply is no way that hunting TWO bucks a year is the limiting factor on genetics.

Founder, you know as well as anyone how many factors on any given year play into antler size. There aren’t many around that put eyes on more big deer year in and year out than you do. There are a hundred different things that go into it. Killing 2 bucks a year that have passed on their genes several times to deer coming behind them and to replace them is not diminishing the quality.

Sounds like one of those people with lots of experience just chimed in too. His hypothesis is way more logical to me than suggesting two bucks a year is taking down the quality.

 

[JakeH]

If they’re right, and the size of bucks being seen isn’t what it used to be, then what’s the problem in your opinion. What’s changed? What other options do we have? Nutrition?? Maybe, but I don’t believe that’s it.

If the overall population is down for the island that is definitely not a cause from 2 bucks being killed each year. You figure out what is causing the population drop and you will likely find a lot of the reson for there being smaller bucks.

Why has the population tanked on the henerys??? Weird that at the same time it has there has been smaller bucks observed the last few years. You think thst there could be a correlation between the two areas?

I will say one thing, I bet a hell of a lot more giant bucks die from old age and fighting than get killed by hunters on that island.

 

[Founder]

2 bucks. TWO! Next year there are two more to take their spot in that prime station as the top dog. It’s only TWO bucks. There simply is no way that hunting TWO bucks a year is the limiting factor on genetics.

Founder, you know as well as anyone how many factors on any given year play into antler size. There aren’t many around that put eyes on more big deer year in and year out than you do. There are a hundred different things that go into it. Killing 2 bucks a year that have passed on their genes several times to deer coming behind them and to replace them is not diminishing the quality.

Sounds like one of those people with lots of experience just chimed in too. His hypothesis is way more logical to me than suggesting two bucks a year is taking down the quality.

Disagree as you may, but like I’ve said, I believe it’s a combination of a diminishing herd and the pressure on the very biggest bucks every year. Go visit some private ground with a deer herd of 250 or so and see how many 250” bucks you see every year. I think you’d be hard pressed to find any, nevermind 2 of them every year.
Yet your belief is that they can be replenished every year in a place where the biggest two are killed every year?

As I’ve said, I believe it’s exactly what’s happening in so many other places, just at a different level.

@JakeH No one is suggesting that killing two bucks has any effect on deer numbers. I’m strictly talking about 2 bucks (the biggest every year) playing a role in the diminishing size of those top bucks being killed each year. They just don’t replenish every year with a herd of just a few hundred deer.

Again, I’d love to hear other suggestions as to why the bucks killed this year are not as large as those killed 10 years ago. ???
Is the feed out there just not what it was 10 years ago so therefore they don’t grow as much antler? That’s the only other possibility I can think of, and I don’t believe that’s it.
I believe it’s the two factors I pointed out, not that grass isn’t as nutritious as it was 10 years ago.

 

[JakeH]

Disagree as you may, but like I’ve said, I believe it’s a combination of a diminishing herd and the pressure on the very biggest bucks every year. Go visit some private ground with a deer herd of 250 or so and see how many 250” bucks you see every year. I think you’d be hard pressed to find any, nevermind 2 of them every year.
Yet your belief is that they can be replenished every year in a place where the biggest two are killed every year?

As I’ve said, I believe it’s exactly what’s happening in so many other places, just at a different level.

@JakeH No one is suggesting that killing two bucks has any effect on deer numbers. I’m strictly talking about 2 bucks (the biggest every year) playing a role in the diminishing size of those top bucks being killed each year. They just don’t replenish every year with a herd of just a few hundred deer.

Again, I’d love to hear other suggestions as to why the bucks killed this year are not as large as those killed 10 years ago. ???
Is the feed out there just not what it was 10 years ago so therefore they don’t grow as much antler? That’s the only other possibility I can think of, and I don’t believe that’s it.
I believe it’s the two factors I pointed out, not that grass isn’t as nutritious as it was 10 years ago.

Well pretty much the majority of the island burned off a few years ago, we may be at a diminished nutritional value for what is left. It very well could be a result of diminished food value. Fire hits, paired with a couple years of record drought and you have a lack of nutritional value, could be a big reason for the lack of fawn recruitment out there too. No where for the poor little guys to hide from the coyotes, or a lot less area anyway.

I know of at least 3 of the top end bucks that died of natural causes just in the last 6 years. And I spend very little time out there.

And you show me a private ranch with 250" deer that they are not killing any deer off of every year with a giant buffer zone around it to keep the deer from wandering away and I will show you exactly what you asked for. Lol. Is there even such a place? Compairing private to the island is like comparing apples to potatoes.

 

[JakeH]

@JakeH No one is suggesting that killing two bucks has any effect on deer numbers. I’m strictly talking about 2 bucks (the biggest every year) playing a role in the diminishing size of those top bucks being killed each year. They just don’t replenish every year with a herd of just a few hundred deer.

Has there always only been 2 extremely large deer out there every year? Pretty sure there have been multiple very large deer in years past.

I know there has been several years the largest deer probably wasn't killed. I suspect this year is one of those years as well.

I just don't see how all of a sudden they quit replenishing the top end unless something else is going on. And the overall downward trend in herd numbers and heath is probably a bigger factor to even the top end then the killing of two bucks each year.

Disagree all you want, but yours is the same mentality I've seen when people talk about the Henerys deer herd quality diminishing when they have given out very few tags for the area and no doe tags. But the overall herd is in a steep decline. What does everyone say??? "THEY ARE GIVING OUT TO MANY TAGS, WE NEED TO CUT THEM" I used to be one of these guys, I don't buy into it anymore.

 

[elkassassin]

HOLY FRICKEN EH!

It Finally Sinks In To Nillers THICK Head!

And I Quote Niller:

There are a hundred different things that go into it.

Did I Just Read That?

I've Said Forever There Are 50+ Reasons Why!

Maybe Niller Could Start HELL-F'N-RIGHT II?

2 bucks. TWO! Next year there are two more to take their spot in that prime station as the top dog. It’s only TWO bucks. There simply is no way that hunting TWO bucks a year is the limiting factor on genetics.

Founder, you know as well as anyone how many factors on any given year play into antler size. There aren’t many around that put eyes on more big deer year in and year out than you do. There are a hundred different things that go into it. Killing 2 bucks a year that have passed on their genes several times to deer coming behind them and to replace them is not diminishing the quality.

Sounds like one of those people with lots of experience just chimed in too. His hypothesis is way more logical to me than suggesting two bucks a year is taking down the quality.

 

[hawkbill]

I think those Bucks antlers would have been bigger and longer tined but Antelope Island had the hottest summer they have ever had. We had almost 100 degree temperatures in southern Idaho for the months of June and July in these conditions with no rain, the feed burns off with no new growth, the Bucks get lazy and hot and the feed dries out and does not have the nutrients for horn growth. The top end of the two Bucks killed looks stunted or stopped growing during July when the heat was at its worst.

 

[Vanilla]

Again, I’d love to hear other suggestions as to why the bucks killed this year are not as large as those killed 10 years ago. ???

People have given them in this thread. Multiple times. And they are much more plausible to me than blaming hunting 2 bucks a year that have passed on their genes at least 5 annual cycles to multiple does each time.

 

[Vanilla]

HOLY FRICKEN EH!

It Finally Sinks In To Nillers THICK Head!

And I Quote Niller:

There are a hundred different things that go into it.

Bessy, goodness! You just don’t get it through your THICK SKULL!

I’VE SAID FOR YEARS TO YOU THAT THERE IS MUCH MORE TO ANY OF THIS THAN HUNTING.

If it was all about hunters, then your 50 principles managing hunters only and never deer might actually work. But since this goes well beyond hunting, you need to do something different than just manage hunters. I’ve said this for years. Probably no less than 100 times. I guess I’ll keep saying it!

JUDAS!!!!

 

[Founder]

Well pretty much the majority of the island burned off a few years ago, we may be at a diminished nutritional value for what is left. It very well could be a result of diminished food value. Fire hits, paired with a couple years of record drought and you have a lack of nutritional value, could be a big reason for the lack of fawn recruitment out there too. No where for the poor little guys to hide from the coyotes, or a lot less area anyway.

I know of at least 3 of the top end bucks that died of natural causes just in the last 6 years. And I spend very little time out there.

And you show me a private ranch with 250" deer that they are not killing any deer off of every year with a giant buffer zone around it to keep the deer from wandering away and I will show you exactly what you asked for. Lol. Is there even such a place? Compairing private to the island is like comparing apples to potatoes.

I suppose it could be a lack of nutrition that’s effecting antler growth, but I just have a more difficult time buying that.
As far as I can see, there aren’t too many things to blame it on.

 

[Founder]

People have given them in this thread. Multiple times. And they are much more plausible to me than blaming hunting 2 bucks a year that have passed on their genes at least 5 annual cycles to multiple does each time.

Like I’ve said, maybe it could be nutrition. That’s the only other possibility in this thread that I’ve read that I’d give any credence.
I’m sticking with my theories until I hear some alternative that convinces me I’m wrong. I’d love to hear something new that I’ve never thought of.
It would be very interesting to have a very mild winter this year followed by a great spring and summer and just see the caliber of bucks next year. Could sure learn a lot.

 

[Founder]

So here are annual rainfall for SLC over the past 11 years. 2022 wasn’t there, but we know it was very low. It has been very low for 4 of the past 5 years for sure. Maybe that lack of precipitation and lesser nutrition is the culprit. ???

23.64 - 2011
11.33 - 2012
13.18 - 2013
15.46 - 2014
14.90 - 2015
13.45 - 2016
18.51 - 2017
10.50 - 2018
21.65 - 2019
10.96 - 2020
10.98 - 2021
???- 2022

 

[JakeH]

So here are annual rainfall for SLC over the past 11 years. 2022 wasn’t there, but we know it was very low. It has been very low for 4 of the past 5 years for sure. Maybe that lack of precipitation and lesser nutrition is the culprit. ???

23.64 - 2011
11.33 - 2012
13.18 - 2013
15.46 - 2014
14.90 - 2015
13.45 - 2016
18.51 - 2017
10.50 - 2018
21.65 - 2019
10.96 - 2020
10.98 - 2021
???- 2022

What year was the big fire out there? The lack of rain mixed with the fact that 80% of the habitat burned off to strait grass very well could be a big driver to a lack of antler growth. I've not been out there for a couple years. So I'm just spit balling as I really don't know. But something changed things pretty damn quick if you ask me. Hell the bucks killed the last couple years didn't look stunted at all like this years bucks do, I kinda agree with hawkbill they do look a little off.

 

[elkassassin]

No Doubt!

Drought Is A Big Factor!

Letting Some Bucks Live Past Age 3.5 Years Old Is Another!

Having Some Bucks With Age/Genetics Left Come Rut Time Would Help Some Too!

Check Out Lumpy's Breeding Stock Video!

Fawn Breeding His Mother!

That'll Produce Some More Utah Quality!

What I'm Preaching is For Statewide Deer Herds & Not Directed At The ALCATRAZ Herd!

 

[Vanilla]

I’m giving ya’ll a research assignment. Someone go find pics of all the bucks killed on the island since the hunt opened, and post them by year in its own thread. (One draw tag is a little more difficult to come by, but it’s floating around out there.)

This is your mission, if you choose to accept it.

 

[daydreamn]

I'm not seeing 245, I could get 230 if I really stretched things out a little bigger then I really thought it was but I would say 220 is close.

And I wouldn't say the hunting pressure is what has caused the decline. You really think 2 tags a year is hurting the quality?

When you’re pulling the best genetics out each year and how many years now have they been hunting it? Yeah, I would expect to start seeing a decline.

 

[JakeH]

When you’re pulling the best genetics out each year and how many years now have they been hunting it? Yeah, I would expect to start seeing a decline.

Genetics haven't gone anywhere they are still in the herd.

 

[Vanilla]

Those genetics were passed on MULTIPLE times before they manifested themselves in the flesh and were “taken out.”

This is the aspect that people making that argument fail to recognize, or at least fail to acknowledge here. The best bucks ever killed on Antelope Island bred dozens and dozens of times over multiple years. And the genes of those deer were EXACTLY the same when they were 3, 4, 5, or 8 years old. They passed the same genes on every time. A deer’s genres don’t change from when it is a small 3 point as a 2 year old deer to when it is a 267 inch buck at 7 years old. They are EXACTLY the same genes, and they’ve been passed on. Numerous times over several years.

This argument is a farce, to be quite frank.

 

[elkassassin]

Well Niller!

You Are Getting Smarter As Time Goes On!

Now Back To Reality of What Really Hurts!

For The Most Part in DRATville The Deer Herd SUCKS!

The Spikes That Are Breeding Their Mothers that come From Their Dad Being an Inbred Spike for Many Generations that are Doing Most of the Breeding is a Disgrace!

Them Type Of Bucks Could Live To Age Ten & What Do You Still Have?

JUNK!

TOTAL TRASH!

We Need Some Decent Genetics Left Come RUT Time!

ShowThemToMe!

Those genetics were passed on MULTIPLE times before they manifested themselves in the flesh and were “taken out.”

This is the aspect that people making that argument fail to recognize, or at least fail to acknowledge here. The best bucks ever killed on Antelope Island bred dozens and dozens of times over multiple years. And the genes of those deer were EXACTLY the same when they were 3, 4, 5, or 8 years old. They passed the same genes on every time. A deer’s genres don’t change from when it is a small 3 point as a 2 year old deer to when it is a 267 inch buck at 7 years old. They are EXACTLY the same genes, and they’ve been passed on. Numerous times over several years.

This argument is a farce, to be quite frank.

 

[Founder]

Those genetics were passed on MULTIPLE times before they manifested themselves in the flesh and were “taken out.”

This is the aspect that people making that argument fail to recognize, or at least fail to acknowledge here. The best bucks ever killed on Antelope Island bred dozens and dozens of times over multiple years. And the genes of those deer were EXACTLY the same when they were 3, 4, 5, or 8 years old. They passed the same genes on every time. A deer’s genres don’t change from when it is a small 3 point as a 2 year old deer to when it is a 267 inch buck at 7 years old. They are EXACTLY the same genes, and they’ve been passed on. Numerous times over several years.

This argument is a farce, to be quite frank.

Don’t you think the bucks with poor antler growth genetics breed does as well? And a buck with poor genetics is likely to breed a lot more does in their 10-12 year life than a buck with great genetics breeds in his 5-6 year life (before being shot).
In addition, in a place where there is an abundance of bucks, it’s not inconceivable that 1-2 year old bucks breed very few does, if any. So that 5 year old buck only breed for 3 years of its life (before being shot because of great antler genetics), where as the 10 year old buck with poor antler genetics breed for 8 years of its life.
Now compound over many years.

Just my thoughts on a possible culprit. Probably much more likely in places other than AI, but AI I don’t believe is immune.

 

[Vanilla]

No, I don’t think the inferior bucks get to breed more does. I’ve watched the rut and see who is ruling the roost. I’m guessing you have too, Founder!

Plus, a buck only gets half its genes from its father. The mothers are carrying the other half, and they aren’t getting shot.

Maybe we can hire the Jurassic Park scientists to genome sequence big antlers, and we only let does that carries those traits live, we kill the rest off?

 

[Founder]

No, I don’t think the inferior bucks get to breed more does. I’ve watched the rut and see who is ruling the roost. I’m guessing you have too, Founder!

Plus, a buck only gets half its genes from its father. The mothers are carrying the other half, and they aren’t getting shot.

Maybe we can hire the Jurassic Park scientists to genome sequence big antlers, and we only let does that carries those traits live, we kill the rest off?

I’ve never seen a doe with a tape measure.

I don’t believe for a moment that a doe is going to know the difference between two mature 5 year old bucks, one being a 27” 3x4 and the other being a 200” 6x7.
Hunters however, do. Between those two bucks, the 200” buck would be shot and the 3x4 left to breed does.

It really is simple math. Of those two bucks mentioned (27” 3x4 and 200” 6x7), one of them is far more likely to be killed than the other, leaving other to continue producing offspring. That 27” 3x4 is going to pass on his genetics to far more offspring (male and female) than the other over their lifetimes.
And again, compound that over many years.

Hunters have selectively been removing the genetics we like (lots of antler) from the herds for many years. If there was data available comparing genetics for extra large antler growth, I believe if you compared today with 1960, there would have been far, far more deer with the genetic makeup to grow extra large antlers in 1960 than today.

With a little Jurassic Park magic we could have some super giants!

 

[JakeH]

I’ve never seen a doe with a tape measure.

I don’t believe for a moment that a doe is going to know the difference between two mature 5 year old bucks, one being a 27” 3x4 and the other being a 200” 6x7.
Hunters however, do. Between those two bucks, the 200” buck would be shot and the 3x4 left to breed does.

It really is simple math. Of those two bucks mentioned (27” 3x4 and 200” 6x7), one of them is far more likely to be killed than the other, leaving other to continue producing offspring. That 27” 3x4 is going to pass on his genetics to far more offspring (male and female) than the other over their lifetimes.
And again, compound that over many years.

Hunters have selectively been removing the genetics we like (lots of antler) from the herds for many years. If there was data available comparing genetics for extra large antler growth, I believe if you compared today with 1960, there would have been far, far more deer with the genetic makeup to grow extra large antlers in 1960 than today.

With a little Jurassic Park magic we could have some super giants!

I actually agree with what you have said. But I just don't agree it's had that kind of impact on the island.

But in general, yes, I agree with this.

 

[elkassassin]

Well Niller!

Once Again You Missed Out On a Good Ride!

We Do The Annual Thanksgiving Ride Every Year!

I Did Not Count Them For An Exact Count Like We Usually Do!

Somewhere in the Neighborhood of 300 Head of Deer!

Not One F'N Mature Buck Anywhere!

Several Small Bunches of Does With Not Even a Little Buck!

Yes,They Are Rutting!

Not a Buck Outa The Bunch That Would Break 2-1/2 years old and If There Was He's JUNK & I Don't care The Age!

Wasn't Even as Many MOTL Bucks as there shoulda been!

Ya!

Ain't DRATvilles Management Great!

 

[Founder]

I actually agree with what you have said. But I just don't agree it's had that kind of impact on the island.

But in general, yes, I agree with this.

If there’s an effect on the island it would be at a much different level. Since it’s only been hunted for about 10 since being closed for many, it probably doesn’t play a role. But, it is possible that it could.

 

[Founder]

While on my hike I was thinking about this from another angle. Most sportsmen believe that because we prefer ridiculously large antlers, that does would prefer to breed with those animals. However, I’ve never seen any data supporting such a theory. Is it possible that ridiculously large antlers are an effect of a genetic defect and does may detect that and prefer not to be breed by that buck? ??????

 

[Redbluff77]

Great buck Tyler and thank you for your service!!

 

[Vanilla]

Founder, the whole problem here is this thread is about Antelope Island. And only Antelope Island. And I’m talking about Antelope Island.

And you keep trying to argue about stuff that’s irrelevant. I expect that from Bessy, I didn’t from you. I’ll adjust expectations going forward.

Goodness…my mind is actually kind of blown right now.

 

[West River]

https://www.boone-crockett.org › consequences-maternal-effects-body-and-antler-size-white-tailed-deer.
This is an interesting read about white tail deer in South Dakota Black Hills white tail vs eastern South Dakota whitetail and generational changes with habit conditions changes its worth the read and may apply to the mule deer on Antelope Island.

 

[JakeH]

So while searching the archive for the public hunter buck from 2013 I came across the AI hunt post from that year. While reading through it I found this post from Yellum very informative.

Those early bucks was not the norm, and the island deer herd quality had fluctuations before the hunts was ever established.

So @Founder why did the quality drop off after the 90s? And then spring back up in the early 2010's?

That's info from one of the most knowledgeable people on the island RIP?

 

[Vanilla]

I miss Yelum’s posts. That guy was something else! A serious mule deer nut and an inspiration, for sure!

I guess there is more to it than killing a couple deer per year after all…

Our memories of how things used to be are never quite what we think. Good find, Jake!

 

[elkassassin]

Come On Niller!

It's Past Time You Pony Up & Buy The ALCATRAZ Tag!

You Could Hang Your ALCATRAZ Buck next to Your Other Buck From Yester-Year!

And Quit Not Liking The Truth Niller!

 

[Gator]

So if a buck with a Huge rack breeds a doe and she has a female baby what genetic will her offspring carry when she has her fawn buck. SHE is carrying the huge rack buck gene pool.
Here is what a GW in Az told us last years that alot of the does carry Forky DNA in12bw
The only way it could change is to take more doe's out the herd and bring does with a bigger rack form of DNA.
He also told us he had all 70 collared bucks locations from Utah herd on his mobile computer.

 

[nripepi]

I miss Yelum’s posts. That guy was something else! A serious mule deer nut and an inspiration, for sure!

I guess there is more to it than killing a couple deer per year after all…

Our memories of how things used to be are never quite what we think. Good find, Jake!

It is likely a combination of feed/habitat and the population of deer on the island. If there is truly only 350 deer on the island right now, then i think that is the main culprit. Just not as many deer to produce the 1-2 monsters that were selectively harvested each year. Back in 2015 there were 700 deer and they captured and moved 100 (14% of the herd!) and with the drought/feed/fire the population has decreased since then.

If there are 350 deer, assume half are bucks (175) and assume an even distribution of age from 0-9 years old. Assume a buck has to be 5-9 to reach its potential then you are down to 50% of those 175 bucks (say 85 bucks).

Of the 85 bucks, what % have the genes to grow 240 plus antlers? 5%? Let's say it is 10%, then we are talking about 8 bucks total would be 240+ at any given time if it was not hunted and all the deer lived to be 9 years old and didn't go down hill at 8 or 9.

If you take out 2 of those 8 deer per year, you would effectively replace each 240+ buck yearly and you wouldn't see a drop. If only 5% of the deer can become 240+ deer, then taking out 2 per year wipes them out. My 2 cents.

 

[Founder]

It is likely a combination of feed/habitat and the population of deer on the island. If there is truly only 350 deer on the island right now, then i think that is the main culprit. Just not as many deer to produce the 1-2 monsters that were selectively harvested each year. Back in 2015 there were 700 deer and they captured and moved 100 (14% of the herd!) and with the drought/feed/fire the population has decreased since then.

If there are 350 deer, assume half are bucks (175) and assume an even distribution of age from 0-9 years old. Assume a buck has to be 5-9 to reach its potential then you are down to 50% of those 175 bucks (say 85 bucks).

Of the 85 bucks, what % have the genes to grow 240 plus antlers? 5%? Let's say it is 10%, then we are talking about 8 bucks total would be 240+ at any given time if it was not hunted and all the deer lived to be 9 years old and didn't go down hill at 8 or 9.

If you take out 2 of those 8 deer per year, you would effectively replace each 240+ buck yearly and you wouldn't see a drop. If only 5% of the deer can become 240+ deer, then taking out 2 per year wipes them out. My 2 cents.

I would agree, but I'd be shocked if 10% of bucks that live out their lives and die of old age would ever grow 240 inches of bone on their head. I think it'd be much closer to 1-2%.

If other theories are correct, then the next time we have a decent water year, there are ought to be a few 240"+ bucks out there. I'm sticking with my theory that they're getting cleaned out, the biggest are being killed every year, and it's unsustainable. We'll see.

 

[nripepi]

I would agree, but I'd be shocked if 10% of bucks that live out their lives and die of old age would ever grow 240 inches of bone on their head. I think it'd be much closer to 1-2%.

If other theories are correct, then the next time we have a decent water year, there are ought to be a few 240"+ bucks out there. I'm sticking with my theory that they're getting cleaned out, the biggest are being killed every year, and it's unsustainable. We'll see.

I agree and I think there just are not enough deer out there. At 2% and no hunting, you are talking about 2 deer at one time that would reach that potential with 350 deer on the island. With 700 deer then you are at 4 deer at one time walking around. Hunting 2 deer per year will wipe those out on an annual basis.

 

[JakeH]

I would agree, but I'd be shocked if 10% of bucks that live out their lives and die of old age would ever grow 240 inches of bone on their head. I think it'd be much closer to 1-2%.

If other theories are correct, then the next time we have a decent water year, there are ought to be a few 240"+ bucks out there. I'm sticking with my theory that they're getting cleaned out, the biggest are being killed every year, and it's unsustainable. We'll see.

The first 5 deer killed were 240+ class bucks, and Yellum said they we're the biggest deer he had seen for a long time. since then there has been maybe 4 that hit 240 just looking at the pictures of all the bucks that would be my guess i couldbe wrong. Plus Lots of 220-240 bucks. Hell even the auction buck this year went over 220. So out of 46 deer there has only been 9 that went over 240, and 2 of those came from 2018, and 2019. If it was as bad as you say we would have shot it out long before 2019 wouldn't we? And the deer from 20, and 21 are absolute slobs too, just not 240.

This is the first year that I looked at the bucks and was like ???? Really ???? that's the best they could turn up ???? And in all reality that is only based on the draw hunters buck. Just not impressed with it in comparison to what historically is killed out there. I suspect that was that girls first deer ever. As a few of the female draw hunters have been. I'm betting the standards just wasn't as high and that deer Is not representative of what else is out there. That's just me speculating though as I really don't know.

And I got to say, that both deer just looked stunted to me this year. I bet nutrition played a very big role in both bucks being smaller then their potential.

 

[Founder]

The first 5 deer killed were 240+ class bucks, and Yellum said they we're the biggest deer he had seen for a long time. since then there has been maybe 4 that hit 240 just looking at the pictures of all the bucks that would be my guess i couldbe wrong. Plus Lots of 220-240 bucks. Hell even the auction buck this year went over 220. So out of 46 deer there has only been 9 that went over 240, and 2 of those came from 2018, and 2019. If it was as bad as you say we would have shot it out long before 2019 wouldn't we? And the deer from 20, and 21 are absolute slobs too, just not 240.

This is the first year that I looked at the bucks and was like ???? Really ???? that's the best they could turn up ???? And in all reality that is only based on the draw hunters buck. Just not impressed with it in comparison to what historically is killed out there. I suspect that was that girls first deer ever. As a few of the female draw hunters have been. I'm betting the standards just wasn't as high and that deer Is not representative of what else is out there. That's just me speculating though as I really don't know.

And I got to say, that both deer just looked stunted to me this year. I bet nutrition played a very big role in both bucks being smaller then their potential.

I don't get out there much, but based on conversations with guys who do, the number of gagger bucks is down compared to years ago. So as I see it, it's going down hill and if the overall number of real big bucks are down, the number of super gagger bucks is also going to be down and probably trend down unless deer population increases.
Time will tell and if we start seeing the super gagger bucks coming back, without a population increase, then I'll admit my theory is wrong and the current population can sustain 2 of the biggest bucks out there being killed every year without an effect on buck size of those top 2.
It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I'll be the first to admit, not all my theories are correct, so maybe over the next 5 years we'll see a couple 240ish bucks killed every year, but I guess not. I think that unless the deer population increases, that when we add pictures of the next 10 bucks killed out there over the next 5 years to the photos we have here, it'll be apparent that size of the biggest bucks goes down. Maybe not a lot, but none-the-less, down. My theory. I don't think they can be replenished with the current deer population.

BTW - With trailcam's on all the water sources, very few trees, and the island not being all that big, I don't believe the guides are not seeing and killing at least 2 of the biggest 3 or 4 out there. Just too easy to scout and hunt to not be able to kill the biggest.

 

[Vanilla]

Founder, you’re moving the goal posts. The discussion started out as killing the two biggest bucks every year. When it was correctly pointed out that the biggest buck has not always even been killed each year, now it is two of the 3-4 biggest bucks.

You REALLY want to be right on this one, it seems.

 

[JakeH]

Founder, you’re moving the goal posts. The discussion started out as killing the two biggest bucks every year. When it was correctly pointed out that the biggest buck has not always even been killed each year, now it is two of the 3-4 biggest bucks.

You REALLY want to be right on this one, it seems.

Also moved it by now claiming with the herd at its current size we won't see as many. When originally it was killing the two biggest bucks every year was negatively effecting the herd quality.

Killing 24 bucks in 12 years hasn't reduced the herd by a few hundred deer. My guess is whatever caused the herd decline is also effecting antler development.

 

[Founder]

Founder, you’re moving the goal posts. The discussion started out as killing the two biggest bucks every year. When it was correctly pointed out that the biggest buck has not always even been killed each year, now it is two of the 3-4 biggest bucks.

You REALLY want to be right on this one, it seems.

Time will tell who’s right. I’m good either way. Of course I think I’m right, or I wouldn’t say it.
My first post on the topic said the biggest are targeted, and usually killed. I still stand by that.

 

[Founder]

Also moved it by now claiming with the herd at its current size we won't see as many. When originally it was killing the two biggest bucks every year was negatively effecting the herd quality.

Killing 24 bucks in 12 years hasn't reduced the herd by a few hundred deer. My guess is whatever caused the herd decline is also effecting antler development.

My 2nd post, posted the same day as my first (3 weeks ago) on the topic specifically referenced a diminishing herd played a role. Reread if needed.

 

[Founder]

You guys are welcome to rub it in when those future 240 bucks hit the dirt every year. I would imagine at least once in the next five years you’ll get the opportunity, but I’m guessing it won’t be too often.
It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[JakeH]

Time will tell who’s right. I’m good either way. Of course I think I’m right, or I wouldn’t say it.
My first post on the topic said the biggest are targeted, and usually killed. I still stand by that.

no you said

Don’t get me wrong, both are awesome bucks, but I’d agree that they’re not as impressive as many from the past. I guess it goes to show that even in an area that has 2 tags a year, can diminish in quality over time if the biggest bucks are targeted and usually killed every yeyear.

So, 2 tags a year can diminish quality over time. You have altered that position a little, but haven't come out and relinquished it, so is it overall population or 2 dead bucks a year that has reduced the quality out there? My stance over this entire post has been that 2 tags a year has not reduced the quality on the island.

You guys are welcome to rub it in when those future 240 bucks hit the dirt every year. I would imagine at least once in the next five years you’ll get the opportunity, but I’m guessing it won’t be too often.
It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.

How many 240+ buck have been taken? I don't know all the scores of all the bucks, but just looking through all the pictures minus the first 5 bucks killed there have only been 2 that to me look over 240 and they was killed in '18 and '19, and the '19 buck might not hit it There are a bunch in that 220-240 range.

Why is 240 the magic number, does the island need to produce a 240 every year to be considered a success?

This post from yellum back in 2013 says the first 5 bucks killed we're all bigger then the average for the 10 years before they started the hunt. He said in 2013 they killed the only 240 on the island.

The '18 buck went over 250 if my memory is correct, I couldn't find anywhere that said a score but thats what i remember which probably puts him at #3 behind both the bucks killed in 2012 that went 271, and 254. how did that buck make it? Why wasn't the 270 buck killed the year before when they killed two 240 bucks?

Any year one of those giant 200-220 bucks could explode and put on 20 to 40 inches. I've herd of that happening several times where a buck that is being watched puts on a tremendous amount of antler in one year, usually the conditions have to be just right, but it happens.

240+ is just really hard to get too apparently. But I bet we see it again when the conditions are right. But hell there has only been 7 of them out of 24 deer in 12 years.

 

[Founder]

Bottomline, I think the size of the bucks killed will go downhill (like this year 200-220 type) unless the herd size increases. We’ll revisit it in a few years and see.

 

[hogg_65]

RIP, YELUM.

 

[JakeH]

Bottomline, I think the size of the bucks killed will go downhill (like this year 200-220 type) unless the herd size increases. We’ll revisit it in a few years and see.

220 has been the top end in more years than not. They hit that this year, and according to you they are claiming it goes 240 (i dont see it either but thats what you said they said)
That draw hunters buck is not in the same class as the rest of the deer that have been killed, but maybe they just wanted the widest deer out there. Some people are like that. He is 37" wide. I doubt Doyle really cares what they kill and was probably glad to let them go after one of the bucks that usually wouldn't get killed if they wanted too. I'm sure Doyle knew of bigger deer I'm not doubting that. But maybe that's the deer they wanted to kill.

You are basically judging your assumption off of one deer, or have a misguided idea of what is to be expected out there.

But if your definition of "downhill" is 220 class bucks you got me there. That's basically what they been killing since year 4.

I think people have a misguided view of how big the bucks that have been killed out there have been. Other then that first 3 years the average has probably only been 220.

 

[SS!]

Holy crap Jake is in denial about the quality slipping on the island. Anyone want to schedule an intervention? It’s obvious to everyone but him. First step is admitting the problem…

 

[elkassassin]

Another bottom line:

ALCATRAZ Ain't Any Different Than Any other Unit in The State!

GUIDES/HUNTERS Will Keep Trying To Kill The Top End Bucks No Matter What The Size Is!

3 Years ago They Were Parading 16"-18" PISSCUTTERS Around In The Book Cliffs Like They Were Trophies!

The Size Has Been Getting Smaller By The Year & Will Continue To Do So On General/Draw Units!

ALCATRAZ Will Be The Only Chance If Some Major Changes Ain't Made Quick!

That Sshiit Ain't Gonna Happen!

WELCOME TO THE F'N FUTURE!

 

[SS!]

TTT so vanilla can point fingers

 

[Vanilla]

TTT so vanilla can point fingers

I didn’t need the thread to be resurrected to know who was eating crow. You might owe JakeH an apology with post #77 above.

Even Founder said we are welcome to rub it in if we were right. He owns the site, so just following his rules!

 

[SS!]

I didn’t need the thread to be resurrected to know who was eating crow. You might owe JakeH an apology with post #77 above.

Even Founder said we are welcome to rub it in if we were right. He owns the site, so just following his rules!

Huh? The quality did slip for a year. Happens to all units from time to time. Just sucks if it’s the year you have a tag. Nothing but respect for JakeH too!

 

[Vanilla]

First step is admitting you were wrong, SS.

I might have a better chance of getting bessy or tristate to admit that!

 

[elkassassin]

I'm Wrong All The Time Niller!

In Fact!

I Don't Ever Remember Me Being Right Around Here!

First step is admitting you were wrong, SS.

I might have a better chance of getting bessy or tristate to admit that!

 

[hossblur]

I'm Wrong All The Time Niller!

In Fact!

I Don't Ever Remember Me Being Right Around Here!

I don't either

 

[elkassassin]

That's A LOW BLOW There Hossy!

I Will Get Even!

I don't either