Interesting read
08-09-2008 | 12:01 PM
#21
Thread Starter
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,368
Likes: 0
From: Mont County, Pa
RE: Interesting read
ORIGINAL: Schultzy
I think this would pertain more to the older 3.5 and 4.5 year old. The 2.5's in my neck of the woods I don't think do nearly as much chasing as the 3.5 and 4.5's so I wouldn't think it would affect them nearly as much if any at all. Its said that a mature buck can loose 70% of his body fat during the rut.
Interesting none the less I guess.
ORIGINAL: Germ
It makes sense, he is putting his energy into sex and not antler growth or body growth.
He's called Dr Deer for a reason
It makes sense, he is putting his energy into sex and not antler growth or body growth.
He's called Dr Deer for a reason
Interesting none the less I guess.
would normally be doing. This is where his observations on antler growth came from.
08-09-2008 | 12:09 PM
#23
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,167
Likes: 0
From: PA
RE: Interesting read
ORIGINAL: GMMAT
I'm trying to figure out why this is relevant.
What kills more of your deer, cars or hunters? With no winter mortality I'd bet cars.
You stated that your hunters kill twenty thousand more bucks than does.
Remember.
08-09-2008 | 12:10 PM
#24
Thread Starter
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,368
Likes: 0
From: Mont County, Pa
RE: Interesting read
ORIGINAL: GMMAT
I'm trying to figure out why this is relative.
What kills more of your deer, cars or hunters? With no winter mortality I'd bet cars.
08-09-2008 | 12:13 PM
#25
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,445
Likes: 0
From: Central Minnesota
RE: Interesting read
ORIGINAL: early in
The facts that Kroll came up with were basedon 2.5 year olddeer in an enclosure where there were no mature bucks to influence the study. This forced them to do the breeding that older bucks, 3.5 & 4.5 year olds,
would normally be doing. This is where his observations on antler growth came from.
ORIGINAL: Schultzy
I think this would pertain more to the older 3.5 and 4.5 year old. The 2.5's in my neck of the woods I don't think do nearly as much chasing as the 3.5 and 4.5's so I wouldn't think it would affect them nearly as much if any at all. Its said that a mature buck can loose 70% of his body fat during the rut.
Interesting none the less I guess.
ORIGINAL: Germ
It makes sense, he is putting his energy into sex and not antler growth or body growth.
He's called Dr Deer for a reason
It makes sense, he is putting his energy into sex and not antler growth or body growth.
He's called Dr Deer for a reason
Interesting none the less I guess.
would normally be doing. This is where his observations on antler growth came from.
08-09-2008 | 12:16 PM
#26
Dominant Buck
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 21,043
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Interesting read
Cars aren't as select as trophy hunters they kill bucks and does with equal opportunities.
You stated that your hunters kill twenty thousand more bucks than does.
Remember.
You stated that your hunters kill twenty thousand more bucks than does.
Remember.
I don't.
08-09-2008 | 12:17 PM
#27
Fork Horn
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
From: MO
RE: Interesting read
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
What kills more of your deer, cars or hunters? With no winter mortality I'd bet cars.
ORIGINAL: GMMAT
We have unlimited (for the most part) doe tags in this state on private land.
Still.....we killed over TWENTY THOUSAND MORE male deer than female deer, last year. You're either part of the solution....or you're part of the problem. If you're not killing does, here, you're part of the problem.
And that's (one thing)what makes it tough on the bucks, here. They work their asses off (especially the young ones). The older guys know the ropes a little more. The younger ones don't. They waste a LOT of energy.
And if youdeer haterswould quit killing all the does the bucks would not have to work so hard at getting some.
Still.....we killed over TWENTY THOUSAND MORE male deer than female deer, last year. You're either part of the solution....or you're part of the problem. If you're not killing does, here, you're part of the problem
.And that's (one thing)what makes it tough on the bucks, here. They work their asses off (especially the young ones). The older guys know the ropes a little more. The younger ones don't. They waste a LOT of energy.
08-09-2008 | 12:24 PM
#28
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,167
Likes: 0
From: PA
RE: Interesting read
ORIGINAL: steve25
I think what he is trying to say what is the ratio of buck to does hit by a car. Because a car don't care like someone just looking for a big buck. And if it is similar then thats what ratio you have in the wild most likely. I could be wrong. To me deer car accidents would be a useful tool to see what the Buck to Doe ratio is. If you studied it for several years and a pattern showed up it would be right on because the car has no choose in the matter it just hits whatever jumps in front of it.
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
What kills more of your deer, cars or hunters? With no winter mortality I'd bet cars.
ORIGINAL: GMMAT
We have unlimited (for the most part) doe tags in this state on private land.
Still.....we killed over TWENTY THOUSAND MORE male deer than female deer, last year. You're either part of the solution....or you're part of the problem. If you're not killing does, here, you're part of the problem.
And that's (one thing)what makes it tough on the bucks, here. They work their asses off (especially the young ones). The older guys know the ropes a little more. The younger ones don't. They waste a LOT of energy.
And if youdeer haterswould quit killing all the does the bucks would not have to work so hard at getting some.
Still.....we killed over TWENTY THOUSAND MORE male deer than female deer, last year. You're either part of the solution....or you're part of the problem. If you're not killing does, here, you're part of the problem
.And that's (one thing)what makes it tough on the bucks, here. They work their asses off (especially the young ones). The older guys know the ropes a little more. The younger ones don't. They waste a LOT of energy.