I just figured I’d revisit this topic since
Deer and Deer Hunting has a feature article on it.
NJ_Bowhntr (1/17/03):
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6ptsika wrote)
The first states to use AR' s were out West for mule deer and elk in I believe Oregon, or maybe Washington years and years ago.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are right here sika, but you either forgot to mention something, or maybe don' t yet know. You see, many, if not all, of those states have since dropped the AR. Most say that they were ineffective, with some states proclaiming antler restrictions were actually detrimental to having mature animals in the herds.
eddie (1/17/03)
What about the other states that have antler restrictions and have had great results?????? I guess some people only want to talk about the negative.
NJ_Bowhntr (1/19/03):
No eddie, just trying to balance the discussion here. When is the last time anyone talked about the fact that antler restrictions haven' t worked, and have actually been proven a failure somewhere? They can work, but it' s still a very controversial idea.
6ptsika(1/20/03):
I don' t believe people talk about it for one reason, it hasn' t happened
If you have information that " proves AR' s have failed" , I' d sure like to see it
NJ_Bowhntr(1/20/03):
The evidence is there, all you have to do is look. Please don' t be so quick to tell us what you " believe" , but take a few minutes to actually examine the data. As for the Western States I was referring to, I don' t know why they considered it a failure, I was just relating the information from the DNR press releases that said they were discontinuing it. Again, instead of trying to insinuate that this was fabricated, just look it up for yourself.
6ptsika(1/20/03):
Which state claims they failed, and has data supporting this fact? I' d like to see this, I try to keep an open mind on deer management, and any facts would be appreciated. Up until this point, I haven' t read one shred of fact saying ARs could be detrimental to the deer herd. Not one little fact. You would think with all the people saying it' s a bad practice, and people like Alt are the devil, those same poeple would bringg forth one single shred of evidence supporting their claim. Not so far… I' m asking for just one study, one statistic from a state, anything, showing that scientific evidence supports the fact that ARs lowered the overall buck age structure…I' m not saying it' s easy to do, I' m not even saying it' s possible… I was pointing out there were no " facts" to dispute ARs not working… I' m not expecting you to find any facts NJ
The last line of this quoted section tells me you already had you mind made up, which means no amount of evidence I put in my posts would be accepted by you.
6ptsika(1/21/03):
In truth, you haven' t pointed out any FACTS supporting ARs don' t work, not a one … I have to wonder, with all the research going on, naysayers would be able to point out one shred of PROOF. What you wrote isn' t PROOF,
6ptsika(1/22/03):
… NJ, you were the one who volunteered that you could provide facts supporting ARs don' t work.
You never did.
I say again, with the number of biologists across our country studying the whitetail, I would of thought you could find one study supporting your statement.
You shouldn' t claim to have something you don' t.
Basically, I told you where you could find it, but you were either too lazy to look it up, or are afraid to know the truth.
6ptsika(1/21/03):
… yes, I' m going to believe a direct quote from a state biologist, where he quotes facts and figures, over some guy with personal experience, and nothing else, to back him up. Every time.
Good, then you should check out the studies from the western states, or pick up the September 1998 issue of
Deer and Deer Hunting, or the June 2003 issue of the same magazine. Lots of Biologists said AR’s don’t work, it’s all there for the reading. Here are some quotes from Charles Alsheimer from June of 2003.
“Some biologists believe that overharvesting bucks leads to unhealthy herds. Although some scientists
suggest (emphasis added) negative sociobiological effects when bucks are overharvested, there is no published scientific data to prove such claims”.
and
“The jury is still out on whether antler restrictions are a biologically sound management tool”.
Charles Alsheimer, June 2003
Deer and Deer Hunting.
Also:
“The primary argument for antler restrictions is they let more yearling bucks survive to the next age class. In short, it makes for good biology when older bucks comprise a larger portion of the whitetail population. However, mere survival isn’t necessarily a good thing. In heavily hunted herds, the smallest antlered yearlings might end up doing most of the breeding, and hunting for older bucks—mainly 2 ½ year-olds becomes more intense. This is especially true in states with large hunting populations”.
Charles Alsheimer, June 2003
Deer and Deer Hunting
And:
“Ken Mayer examined results from these western experiments in the September 1998 issue of
D&DH. Hunters often view antler point restrictions as a solution to declining herds and maintaining big bucks. But such restrictions have no effect on deer herd sizes and hurt production and maintenance of mature bucks. The common method required hunters to shoot bucks with at least 3 points on one side. The theory behind the 3-point rule is that more immature spike bucks and forkhorns would reach maturity and become trophies. While the theory seems logical, it’s reality has been a disappointment everywhere it has been used. In 1992, biologists across the West were surveyed and asked if antler restrictions were effective. With the exception of Colorado, Washington and Wyoming, the answer was a resounding “no”.”
Ken Mayer on the results of studies conducted over decades of antler restrictions in Western States, as quoted by Charles Alsheimer in June 2003
D&DH.
There’s plenty more there sika, check out the new issue of
Deer and Deer Hunting. Charles Alsheimer, an admitted fan of QDM and AR' s, talks more about the studies and results from western states that I referenced. He admits that the jury is still out on AR’s, and it' s an unproven management strategy, again referencing those studies. It is a very balanced article, which is all I was trying to achieve with my posts here. As a matter of fact, if you read the entire thread, I was making the same points as Mr. Alsheimer, so I guess you could direct all of your comments at him as well.
Pick up the magazine and read it for yourself. Then go and look up those studies from the western states. Maybe you' ll learn something. I never said AR' s never work, and in fact stated I practice them where I hunt and like the idea, but you seem convinced they always work. You' re wrong. There are two sides to everything, and you have to learn to take the bad with the good. AR' s can work very well, but they don' t work in all situations. The facts ARE there, you just have to have an open mind to see them.
6ptsika(1/21/03):
I' m just wondering why supporters of ARs, for example Dr Alt, can show dozens of studies and state statistics showing ARs work, but those against them can' t produce even one single instance.
It seems you are at odds with many of the leading whitetail biologists in the country on this one. They admit there is no scientific proof that AR’s work to do what you say, and they add it’s “unproven whether antler restrictions are a biologically sound management tool”, and “there’s no published scientific data to prove such claims”. Maybe you have more knowledge and information than all the wildlife biologist in the country.
BTBowhunter(1/22/03)
Congrats, 6ptsika, For having the patience and intelligence to get this far.
BT, if you accredited the intelligence to 6ptsika by his posts, you may want to hit the books yourself. Like I said, the facts ARE out there. It’s just some of you guy’s are so brainwashed that you can’t accept that, even though AR’s can work, they don’t always work, and have been proven to fail.
6ptsika(1/21/03):
With the thousands of state workers and researchers studying the results of ARs every year, you' d think you could find one, just one, example of AR not improving the buck age strucure. Just one example supported by facts, I' d be happy with that, and consider it an eye opener, and a reason to more closely scrutinize what' s happening in our area. But theere' s not one instance being shown
Consider your eyes opened, isn’t great to see the light!
Have a happy Easter.