Extreme Animal Weapons

Hunter1

Active Member
Messages
190
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/nature/extreme-animal-weapons.html

Anybody else watch this show that airs on the public television stations?

Towards the end they claimed that overall top end size has diminished in Elephants, Bighorn Sheep and Caribou. They cited the reason that the genes are not being passed down is because of trophy hunters taking the best examples. Is this true?

__________________________
6717815301.jpg
 
Doubtful. To reach trophy size, animals need to live a long time. If they do, then they should have ample opportunity to pass along their genes.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
There is some validity to their assertion. Take out the best and the rest are left to spread their genes.

But to be the best, the elite stud has lived a few years and has been passing his genes.

Kind of a moot point.
 
Just Look at TARDvilles General Deer Herds!

The Way NOT to Manage a Herd!








I know so many people in so many places
They make allot of money but they got sad faces

It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
If my memory serves me correctly the world record bighorn sheep was just killed a year or two ago. Sorta shoots a hole in their Theory.


#livelikezac
 
I have to play devil's advocate here but doesn't todays trophy hunting mentality and marketing lead this to a perceived probability? Bounties, governor's tags, high end outfitters, and more. All seem to lead to shooting nothing but the biggest and most mature animals. Not saying I agree or disagree but I can understand how nonhunters could see this being the case.

"Courage is being scared to death but
saddling up anyway."
 
>I have to play devil's advocate
>here but doesn't todays trophy
>hunting mentality and marketing lead
>this to a perceived probability?
>Bounties, governor's tags, high end
>outfitters, and more. All seem
>to lead to shooting nothing
>but the biggest and most
>mature animals. Not saying I
>agree or disagree but I
>can understand how nonhunters could
>see this being the case.
>
>
>"Courage is being scared to death
>but
>saddling up anyway."

Pretty much...
 
>>I have to play devil's advocate
>>here but doesn't todays trophy
>>hunting mentality and marketing lead
>>this to a perceived probability?
>>Bounties, governor's tags, high end
>>outfitters, and more. All seem
>>to lead to shooting nothing
>>but the biggest and most
>>mature animals. Not saying I
>>agree or disagree but I
>>can understand how nonhunters could
>>see this being the case.
>>
>>
>>"Courage is being scared to death
>>but
>>saddling up anyway."
>
>Pretty much...

Perty Much!

Except NON/ANTI Hunters Hate ALL Types of Hunting!









I know so many people in so many places
They make allot of money but they got sad faces

It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
Well, nobody can accuse me of hurting the gene pool. :(

Yeah, there is a growing tide against trophy hunting and it's building momentum every day.
 
>Well, nobody can accuse me of
>hurting the gene pool. :(
>
>
>Yeah, there is a growing tide
>against trophy hunting and it's
>building momentum every day.

Even within the ranks?
 
There is a pattern among populations of any species inhabiting both cool and warm climates that those living in cooler conditions are larger than those living in warmer conditions. This "Bergman's rule" is well documented in deer, quail, etc. and makes sense given that creatures with larger body size tend to retain heat better than those that are smaller. Hence, we find the whitetails of Minnesota outweigh those of Texas, etc. So, if the climate overall is warming, then we may expect that animals will weigh less.
 
>There is a pattern among populations
>of any species inhabiting both
>cool and warm climates that
>those living in cooler conditions
>are larger than those living
>in warmer conditions. This
>"Bergman's rule" is well documented
>in deer, quail, etc. and
>makes sense given that creatures
>with larger body size tend
>to retain heat better than
>those that are smaller.
>Hence, we find the whitetails
>of Minnesota outweigh those of
>Texas, etc. So, if
>the climate overall is warming,
>then we may expect that
>animals will weigh less.

One of the smarter posts I've read on MM not written by me.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Most of us know about "Bergmans rule", apparently you missed the point. The title and post refers to weapon size not body size. Bergman rule doesn't apply to Tusk, Horns and Antlers.



__________________________
6717815301.jpg
 
It is absolutely true that genetics are being "trophy hunted" out of the gene pool. This is the reason the Paunsagaunt and Henry Mtns. now have management hunts to cull the increasing population of genetically less desirable bucks.

Doctari has done years of research on Cape Buffalo in Africa and the same is true there. Overall horn size has diminished because the animals who have the genes for larger horns are being targeted by trophy hunters.
 
My thought exactly mntrunner. A spike passes on the same genes as a 210. This sounds like the same guy that had the documentary stating the lake trout is the cause of the decline in yellowstone, surely couldn't be the wolf.
 
3.5 yrs compared to 7.5 yrs = 4 more years of does being bred.

"Courage is being scared to death but
saddling up anyway."
 
Lot of guys failed 7th grade biology.

That forky has the exact same genes as his 30" daddy.




From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>Lot of guys failed 7th grade
>biology.
>
>That forky has the exact same
>genes as his 30" daddy.
>
>
>
>
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.


Seamen are seamen.

4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg
 
>Lot of guys failed 7th grade
>biology.
>
>That forky has the exact same
>genes as his 30" daddy.
>
>
>
>
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.


Hey HOSS You Forgot one F'N Thing!

Daddy Ain't a 30"ER anymore!














I know so many people in so many places
They make allot of money but they got sad faces

It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
It's likely not just the high end trophy hunters affecting the gene pool.
For example: Joe Hunter rolls up on a couple of 2.5 year old bucks. One is a 18" 4 point and the other a 14" 3 point - Joe Hunter kills the 4 point. Repeat thousands of times per year on an animal that has a new generation of fawns every year, for the past 50 years.
 
Every year there are more record book animals entered into Boone and Crockett's record book then the year before. And it isn't just because every book animal gets entered.

Wildlife management in the US overall is a tremendous success. We can always whine about the exceptions, but for the animals, again in general, they have never had it so good.


There continue to be, and probably always will be, challenges. Many are rising to the challenge, and improving things for wildlife, but new challenges always arise.

It is easy to get self absorbed, complain about not getting a tag(s) or how all the "good" animals are on private land. The gene pool getting "shot out" just isn't true. Remember the CO buck a teenager shot a few years back, or the elk that was shot in Montana, I think it was last year? Both at the very top of the record book. There are many others scoring well into the book each year, for most species.


I know the truth isn't as much fun as the doom and gloom or playing arm chair biologist, so I will be quiet now and let this thread once again become highly entertaining, but probably not exactly factual.

Bill
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-16-18 AT 08:31PM (MST)[p]>Every year there are more record
>book animals entered into Boone
>and Crockett's record book then
>the year before. And it
>isn't just because every book
>animal gets entered.

Can you back this up? Maybe for elk, not for mule deer...

>Wildlife management in the US overall
>is a tremendous success. We
>can always whine about the
>exceptions, but for the animals,
>again in general, they have
>never had it so good.

Possibly. Not going to change any harvest based genetics with either LQ or general tags. Does & bucks contribute 50% to antler genetics; but an older buck (with inferior antler genetics), can breed several does a year, skewing the percentage.
>
>
>
>There continue to be, and probably
>always will be, challenges. Many
>are rising to the challenge,
>and improving things for wildlife,
>but new challenges always arise.

We're not going to solve it. Hunter's (including myself) will usually pursue larger antlered bucks. Over time, this will slowly reduce antler genetic potential.
Not that I'm a TX fan, but there are several studies to show how harvest selection can influence antler size in a short period of time.
>
>It is easy to get self
>absorbed, complain about not getting
>a tag(s) or how all
>the "good" animals are on
>private land. The gene pool
>getting "shot out" just isn't
>true. Remember the CO buck
>a teenager shot a few
>years back, or the elk
>that was shot in Montana,
>I think it was last
>year? Both at the very
>top of the record book.
>There are many others scoring
>well into the book each
>year, for most species.
>
2 examples out of the hundreds of thousands of animals harvested in the past 5 years kind of sounds like a politician telling individual stories during a debate.
>
>I know the truth isn't as
>much fun as the doom
>and gloom or playing arm
>chair biologist, so I will
>be quiet now and let
>this thread once again become
>highly entertaining, but probably not
>exactly factual.

Not Doom & Gloom, just genetic facts. There's really no solution; but I think the genetic trend will be slowly towards smaller antlers. That being said, antler size most likely has little influence on the overall health of a herd.
>
>Bill
 

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