Puny horns = Big advantage

B_F_E

Long Time Member
Messages
3,860
Saw 30 different bucks this evening mostly small, but the smallest buck was a puny spike which was sporting, at best about 3 inches of horn.
So, the buck with the worst horns will have the best chance of spreading those weak horns genetics, since bucks with horns shorter than their ears cannot be legally shot.

Whats wrong with this picture ?
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-14-06 AT 00:08AM (MST)[p]Good point. Doesnt seem like theres much to do about it unless the area has doe permits available and these spikes are made legal. Make it doe/spike only. There would be spikes taken instead of does which would help the genetics. The Zone that I hunt here in Ca. doesnt allow any spike to be shot. The antler has to fork.
 
WHATS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE???

YOU'RE ALWAYS KILLING THE BIGGEST SOB ON THE MOUNTAIN & LEAVING OLE PEE-WEE HERMAN FOR DUTIES OF NOVEMBER!!!

THATS WHAT!!!

THE ONLY bobcat BLAMING B_F_E_ FOR THE BIG BUCKS OF UTAH TODAY!!!
 
>Alright Lego, help me understand where
>my reasoning is off ?
>

I will tell you, You are one of those guys who still believe in the "once a spike always a spike" or similar group. Studies on deer show that first year racks mean nothing unless you had all the fawns born on the same date. They found that most spike horned deer are deer that were born late in last years spring and may be as much as 3 months younger than the earlier born fawns that same year because the doe did not get bred inb her first estrus cycle. Usually by the time that spike gets to be 2.5 years old thing even out a lot and that deer may be just as big or bigger than the forks and 3X he was seen with.
Let em go, Let em grow. Its all about age class more than anything else, genetics and, nutrition after that.
 
Good post schmalts! All of those monster bucks were at the least spikes or small fork horns at one point (sans the odd statistical anomoly of course). If they were breeding at that time, they were still passing on the big buck genes that later on would be observed in their rack. Personally I haven't been convinced as to what the best management practices are for mature bucks, though I wonder for areas with a nice population if deer were just managed for a higher buck to doe ratio wether we'd not see more mature bucks.
 
so here's my question. i was out scouting this weekend and i usually hunt in a general deer area in s.e. washington state not at all known for big mule deer. lots of deer, just not big ones. there are muleys and whitetails together. i was wandering around seeing what there was to see and the usual appeared...some smaller bucks, a bunch of does, most with fawns when suddenly i came upon 5 muley bucks bedded under a tree. bearing in mind, please, that my idea of a big mule deer is different than most of yours because i grew up on the east cost, mule deer are all new to me, these guys were huge(by my standards) there was a 4x4 with eye guards that was out to his ears in width, then 3 other 3x3's with eyeguards, then there was this big rack that i kept trying to see from the side. finally i did, and he was a 2x3, no eye guards. noticeably taller than all the others, not as wide as the 4x4 but close. my question is, whats his problem?
there is a creek with year round water 1/4 mile away from where i saw them, they were bedded next to a crp field and otherwise surrounded by wheat fields on all sides. so assuming good food and water source, i think poor genetics?? off base or on base?? or old deer declining? i don't know. what i do know is that in my limited mule deer hunting, i've never seen anything that big.
 
I feel sorry for you boys that think a spike still might have good genetics. In areas with truely Monster Buck genetics that just ain't true. Up here it is very very common to see yearling bucks as basket racked 4's and when you look at a buck like these sheds, you better be passin cause he done have a big daddy. If'n I'm lookin for meat, a young spike suits me just fine. ;)
Apr17012a.jpg


http://sdana.photosite.com/DanasHuntingPics/
 
Thanks for the pity BC. We're grateful, I'm sure.
Others have already posted the facts, and they're well known with tons of supporting documentation and observation. Among those facts is the knowledge that genetics is only one factor in antler growth and the fact that recessive traits can appear that don't reappear in future generations.

But I'll add a little common sense since a little is all I have. First, management for rack size is piss poor management. Some hunters favor rack size - nature doesn't. I want to hunt animals that are hearty, disease resistent, adaptive, predator wise and living in a buck/doe ratio that allows something close to natural breeding. If rack size was all that mattered, bucks wouldn't spar. But they do spar, and it isn't necessarily the buck with the biggest rack that wins. It's what's behind the rack that counts. Make sense?

There's a bigger management issue here, too. When hunting/management practices disrupt the rut as they are currently doing in my state, one result is a delayed rut. That leads to a number of problems and while diminuitive first year racks is one symptom, there are some other symptoms that might be more serious. Specifically, while bucks are still interested in covering does in late December and even January, many of the does are no longer receptive. Late births result that lead to higher fawn mortality and the late rut may also lead to higher winter kill rates for the entire herd.

Go ahead and blast that little spike and tell yourself you're doing a favor for herd management. Hell, it works for Ted Nugent. But I'm going to let him walk. He isn't going to sire any fawns this year even if he does get to cover a doe or two, which isn't likely. And those little spikes on his head are more an indication that since he's still alive after his first winter, he might be one tough little hombre.
 
Nature favors mature, healthy deer with good genes. And correct me if I am wrong, don't these deer have large antler growth. I just haven't seen many sickly mulies packing 30" in racks. If you don't think Antler size goes hand in hand with healthy mature buck you ,don't have a clue. I think we can all tell the difference between an off age young spike and a 2 year old junk buck.
 
So legolas,
Sooo, given the area I live in, which should I shoot for meat, a yearling basket racketed 4 or a spike? I can see a crapload of yearling 4's in a given season. Giving those bucks a little age they will turn out to be real nice bucks. The spike on the other hand, I highly doubt he'll live up to some great potential that you think he may have. For every study in wildlife management that you think favours your thoughts, there are a bunch of studies that favour the shooting of the spikers. If they are late bloomers as you say, then they are like the runt pig. A lot of odds stacked against them to grow old and mature eh?
http://sdana.photosite.com/DanasHuntingPics/
 
BCBOY!!!

YOU'VE GOT TO FIGURE YOU'RE NOT DEALING WITH THE SMARTEST OF GAME MANAGEMENT PEOPLE HERE IN UTARD!!!

THE WAY THEY DO IT HERE,WELL IF THERES ONLY SPIKES LEFT THEY WIPE THEM OUT TOO!!!

IF IT MOVES,SHOOT IT!!!

NOW WE'VE GOT PEOPLE CALLING 2-3 YEAR OLD DEER HERE IN UTARD MATURE,WAFJ!!!

THE ONLY bobcat WONDERING IF ANYBODY IN THIS STATE CAN SEE THE LIGHT???
 
No spikes for me! I don't get alot of chances to hunt here in AZ so I sure as hell ain't killing a spike. Besides there are PLENTY of guys here to take care of those "management" bucks so I'm gonna leave em' to it.

Donnie
 
Good point Schmalts, not sure you & Legolas understand mine.
I think we can agree that surly not all small horned bucks are exclusively late birth animals, surly some of those are horn growth challenged animals, as antler growth variations are expressed in nearly all ungulates.
I was not fixin on waxing any of the spikes I saw the other day, but I know about a half dozen good folks here in the valley that will pop the first legal buck they come across. Because we protect the puny & the non horn growing critters above the rest, they are granted an advantage over the normal or above normal horn producers. This protection which the inferior enjoy over the rest is negatively effecting genetics. Until we stop shooting all spikes it is not helping matters protecting the pygmy antler toting runts.
 
BCBOY, that is an amazing set of sheds. Was it from this year? I can't wait to see his antlers in couple of years.
Thanks, Mike
 
Another thought, I'm sure some late birth first year bucks have above average horn growth & make the above the ears threshold despite being born late in the year, however as a reward for growing better bone they get shot in some cases while their twin with puny bone stots off wondering what happened to his twin brother to make him tip over like that.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-15-06 AT 03:04PM (MST)[p]I think the fact that any yearlings (3" or 8") are being killed is the real problem here in Utah. If they don't make it past their first few years what real difference do genes make?
 
Tracker, many yearling's will make it in both categories, however instead of,
.... survival of the fittest .....
we have adapted..... survival of the punyest.
 
What % of those will make it past their 2nd and 3rd years. I don't completely disagree with what you are saying I just think the fact that so many young bucks are being taken is a bigger problem. I have always said we as hunters take the best genetics out of our herds. I know alot of guys that won't shoot a 20-22" buck but if he has a couple of extras they don't think twice, or say a heavy horned 3 point. I would much rather hunt a bunch of 7 and 8 year old deer with all kinds of genetics than yearling or even 2 and 3 year old deer with above average genetics.
 
>I think we can agree that
>surly not all small horned
>bucks are exclusively late birth
>animals, surly some of those
>are horn growth challenged animals,
>as antler growth variations are
>expressed in nearly all ungulates.

Absolutely. And not to disagree, but variations are not necessarily genetic. Those that are genetic are not necessarily dominant traits.
 

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