Interesting read
 

I was reading Part 2 of "At What Age is a Buck Mature?" in the August issue of North American Whitetail. In it, Dr. Deer (Kroll) says that if 2 1/2 year old bucks are doing the bulk of the breeding, even those few that make it to older age-classes will probably never show their true antler potentialbecause they became physiologically mature at too early an age.
I thought this was interesting as well as disheartening, because this seems to be what takes placein the area I hunt. I guess itexplains why I
never see any "big" bucks. Hopefully the AR's will help this situation down the road. I just thought this was interesting and wanted to shareit.

RE: Interesting read
 

What are the AR's in your area, Jeff?

RE: Interesting read
 

So because a buck gets to have sex as a 2.5 year old, that alone will diminish his antler growth? I think it would be a stretch to correlate those two.

I'm calling BS on this one -- if that's the only reason. I haven't read the article yet.

RE: Interesting read
 

The AR's are 3 points to a side inmy area, and in 5 other WMU's they have a 4 point to a side requirement. A point must be at least 1" from base to tip.

RE: Interesting read
 

I don't understand this one either Greg. Maybe were missing something here but I kinda dought it.

RE: Interesting read
 

Greg, these results came from a test with captive deer. I don't know if the results would be the same in the wild, and it would seem to me nutrition would have to play a role in this as well. He's talking about just young bucks doing the breeding. Like I said though, in my area it sounds like this concept could hold some water.

RE: Interesting read
 

in my experience, most yearlings meet the requirements in your WMU .... I justy wonder how effective that will be ..

RE: Interesting read
 

That's the problem, I think. If a deer is a "legal" buck as a yearling then he isn't going to live long enough to become mature. I personally think they should have 4 points to a side state wide to make AR's effective.

RE: Interesting read
 

Tony and Earlyin: I don't know if it's just a regional thing, but near our camp in Clarion PA. Brow tines are not a given and many times even on more mature deer they are missing. So a big "Y" cannot be assumed to be a legal deer.

We are also a 3 point area. I think the # of points have less to do with the effectiveness of AR, than the regulation itself. No longer can you just see 3" of antler flash (like the old days) and start letting lead loose. You physically have to be able to count 3-4 tines judge them for length, and then make a shot. In the hardwoods of PA, by the time you do the above (especially in Gun season) there is not time for the shot. It's like the old 5 M-i-s-s-i-s-s-i-p-p-i rush of your school-yard football days.

RE: Interesting read
 

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;)

RE: Interesting read
 

Antler growth happens before as in the spring,breeding which happens in the fall.

RE: Interesting read
 

Exactly, during his peak growing period, he is physically drained and stressed out. This should occur around 4 1/2 years of age, not between1 1/2and 2 1/2.

RE: Interesting read
 

Exactly and in the spring they are putting energy into gaining weight in this situation.
Kroll states they do not reach their potenial, not that they are not big[:-]

Think about it, if a 2.5 run around a loses 30% of his weight, he spends spring putting that weight back on. We have one that loses 15% of his weight, because he is not doing very much breeding. Who is going to put more energy in antler growth?

RE: Interesting read
 

This pertains to physical and mentalhealth, which in turn, affects antler growth long term.:D:D

RE: Interesting read
 

In either case habitat is the key. Heavy ,early snow and poor feed I can see the correlation, but where there is prime habitat as in shelter and good feed he's talking bunk.;)

RE: Interesting read
 

And if youdeer haterswould quit killing all the does the bucks would not have to work so hard at getting some.

RE: Interesting read
 

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.

RE: Interesting read
 

I agree, but you have to remember they are just putting "fat" back on. There bodies are mature, a 2.5 is still growing. Between 2.5 and 4.5 is when a buck will have the most antler growth.

So 2.5 has to "make up" some gound in this situation.

RE: Interesting read
 

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.

RE: Interesting read
 

What kills more of your deer, cars or hunters? With no winter mortality I'd bet cars.

RE: Interesting read
 

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.

RE: Interesting read
 

I'm trying to figure out why this is relevant.

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.:eek:

RE: Interesting read
 

I don't see the connection either. These were just test results I was sharing from a study that was done by an expert. Nothing more.;)

RE: Interesting read
 

That would make more sense then.;)

RE: Interesting read
 

Jim I'm not trying to make fun of you. I'm seriously trying to get your point.

I don't.

RE: Interesting read
 

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.

RE: Interesting read
 

Thank you ,Steve.

RE: Interesting read
 

Whatever.

I still don't see the relevance.

I'll move on;)

RE: Interesting read
 

Thank you, Jeff :eek:

RE: Interesting read
 

Also Steve, this study was interesting to me because there are very few 3.5-5.5 year old bucks (who should doing the bulk of the breeding) in my specific area. I believe this is a bigplayer in whyI don't see big bucks in my woods. Even a 3.5 year old in my region will have a smaller rack than it should have.:(

RE: Interesting read
 

That makes allot of sense Jeff. I think the author is pretty good with his assessments on this in certain areas.

RE: Interesting read
 

First off 2 .5 year olds are going to do the bulk of the breading simply because there are more of them. While a 4.5 year old is spending time with a specific doe, 2.5 year olds are running around humping anything in heat that will let them get their hooves around. This is one of the reasons when I hade a place I could manage, we used our first tag to kill any 2.5 year old that was lacking brows, spindly racks, and had little or no tines on the beams, would also kill the mother if we knew who she was, 2.5 year olds that had a well balanced rack got a pass and their mothers were off limits.

As far as Dr Krolls statement goes, the lack of food intakeand rutting down period is naturally going to take away from any bone growth during this period which affects the pedicel, but I would have to say no more than any hard winter.

Mostbucks have gained their weight back by the time they start growing a new rack, I would worry more about a drought, where their brouse and mast is effected during their antler growth cycle than I would about how many girlfriends they boinked last season.

RE: Interesting read
 

Tracking the mothers?
Sounds like farming

Steve

RE: Interesting read
 

Yes it was on a farm, Beans, Corn and Cattle!