"They Walk Until They Die"

[huntingson]

An article in D&DH was titled this. To sum it up it stated that unless you have 1,000 or more acres you have absolutely no hope of holding 4.5 or older deer on your property and that their search for breeding rights will lead them to another hunter somewhere... hence the title. It was a good read, although somewhat depressing. It also stated that if you are in to QDM and habitat management, then your goal had better be fun because it will not be world class bucks. Thoughts???

Hunsuckers "ribcage buck" is a prime example. Killed over 2 miles from where he watched him all summer.

[NEW61375]

I found that article interesting as well. I mentioned it recently in the below thread but not many seemed to notice that one.

RE: Would you shoot a half rack?

[rybohunter]

Ok. But how do you account for guys who watch bucks year after year on the same property?

Unless the article means that during the rut, bucks will roam until they get shot or the rut is over and they return to their core areas?

Did the article relate anything to deer densities and distance a mature buck will travel?

[BobCo19-65]

I think that figure is pretty believable. It would equate to about 1.5 sq miles I believe. I thinkhome range could even be biggerdepending on the type of land we are talking about.

But what do I know. [8D]

[Germ]

Yep I agree, it's why some folks never find any reamains of older bucks.

It also why QDM CO-OPs are springing up in a lot of areas. MI has some real succesful CO-OPs, and all who are in talk about how hunting is great and the realtionship with the neighbors is way better. Being there is no more competion for big bucks, because there are plenty

[GMMAT]

What I found interesting about the article was......it seemed to be indirect conflict with an article in the issuejust before it (the issue just previous to this one).....where it chronicled a buck's home range getting smaller as he aged (mature buck's home range). The age classes cited in the later article seemed to dispel the previous article's claims.

So it makes me wonder.....which is it? I consider myself pretty adept at deciphering info.......and I don't think they did themselves any favors on these two.

[Lanse couche couche]

I would think that it would depend on the particular set of cirmustances. A buck in great habitat with lots of does and minimal breeding competitionwould probably not be inclined to wander beyond 100 acres, let alone travel over 1000 acres.

[130woodman]

I think it can be true for some deer but not all deer. I get to see the same deer year after year on trail camera's. Some disappear for a while but show back up.

A lot depends on the buck to doe ratio. If there's not enough does to go around then I think they will tend to move around more.

[GMMAT]

I would think that it would depend on the particular set of cirmustances. A buck in great habitat with lots of does and minimal breeding competitionwould probably not be inclined to wander beyond 100 acres, let alone travel over 1000 acres.

I agree with this and you can add numerous other circumstances, as well. Deer density being one of them.

That's why I despise deer hunting absolutes. For every "They do this".....somebody can cite a "well this one didn't".

A lot depends on the buck to doe ratio. If there's not enough does to go around then I think they will tend to move around more.

The same can be said if there's too MANY does.

[130woodman]

Good point.But when I was single I don't think there was such a thing as too many females.

ORIGINAL: GMMAT

The same can be said if there's too MANY does.