Darwinisme
09-23-2009, 10:38 AM
#12
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Roanoke, Virginia
Posts: 2,335
This is kind of the theory of QDM though. That big nice mature buck that is 4-5 years old that has very good genetics has bred and produced many offspring that are now 2,3,4 yrs old now and are on there way to becoming nice deer and have also bred and produced offspring. You are almost classifying young to be bad genetics. There is a difference. Where people mess up is by letting that 4-5 yr old 5 pt that is all jacked up walk and shooting the 2-3 yr old 8 pt. I say mess up loosely. I don't know just my opinion, but by taking only mature bucks will make your hunting process harder for a few years and you might not even get to harvest a true mature buck. But, after that there should be lots of mature bucks and a greater likely hood that you get a shot.
09-23-2009, 10:56 AM
#14
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 201
The only questionable one lies in those 3-4 year old jacked up 5pts. Those need to be taken out of the equation. Then you are shooting based on age and not on size. That is where I see most people have a problem distinguishing. I have read so many posts on here where people say "how old is this deer?". The answers that come back are amazing. Some people will say that it is 4 or 5 based only on the size of horns. That is determined by the amount of protein and supplements that deer is getting from its environment or other sources. I feel that you need to harvest what you are happy with and that is it. If you want big bucks you have to manage your doe population and old rag heads period. But taking on older "trophy" buck does not hurt the overall gene pool.
09-28-2009, 06:29 PM
#15
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas, America
Posts: 122
a more fit animal, or herd, or species, they are better than they were because we do manage them bud. and i promise you that we changed the landscape of range lands tremendously from what it was then to what it is now (which would change this so called "basic" diet that was spoke of), and they are still here. that change doesnt happen over night. or else they would still be as low in numbers as they were, think before you speak of ignorance BvrHunter, of coarse us hunters played a major part of them not becoming extinct. we imposed regulations and limits, and the herd grew, we managed for more mature animals with more opportunities to breed. we must be doing something right. we are capable of hunting them every year be it for a huge rack or meat in the freezer, or both.
09-28-2009, 06:51 PM
#16
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,139
The error of this thought process is believing that only the top buck in any area breeds all the does. He can only breed one at a time and during that time all the other does in heat get bred by other bucks. I even read a study that showed 25% of fawn twins had different fathers. Not only that but whos to say that a spike buck doesn't have better genes. I think it's pretty safe to shoot the big ones. Most of the big ones get away anyway. 
09-29-2009, 07:17 AM
#18
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surry County, Va
Posts: 334
a more fit animal, or herd, or species, they are better than they were because we do manage them bud. and i promise you that we changed the landscape of range lands tremendously from what it was then to what it is now (which would change this so called "basic" diet that was spoke of), and they are still here. that change doesnt happen over night. or else they would still be as low in numbers as they were, think before you speak of ignorance BvrHunter, of coarse us hunters played a major part of them not becoming extinct. we imposed regulations and limits, and the herd grew, we managed for more mature animals with more opportunities to breed. we must be doing something right. we are capable of hunting them every year be it for a huge rack or meat in the freezer, or both.
09-29-2009, 07:36 AM
#19
Fork Horn
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Iowa
Posts: 283
Using the above statement, a good argument can be made to cull does so that the strongest bucks breed most of the does. In a lot of areas, doe are so numerous that most every buck gets in on the breeding. A "balanced" herd might have more effect than not shooting "trophies".
09-29-2009, 07:55 AM
#20
Typical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Boalsburg, PA
Posts: 555
boilermaker...being a PA hunter also for 15 some years, i think that Gary Alt must have drank some of this Kool Aid
Magic...QDM = Quality Deer Management
The key to this string is the following, which another individual brought up...it is the hope that we harvest bucks at the "end of the line" and they have bred for a number of years...however, you all know as well as i do, that even the spikers, nub bucks, and the like get in on a bit of the breeding too.
One thing I have often wondered, is the effects of in-breeding within deer populations, especially in subarban settings, how does that affect the genetics of herds? you always seem to see a monster non-typical taken in a housing development, is this the result of the deer getting old and gnarly, or being on the shallow end of the gene pool?
Magic...QDM = Quality Deer Management
The key to this string is the following, which another individual brought up...it is the hope that we harvest bucks at the "end of the line" and they have bred for a number of years...however, you all know as well as i do, that even the spikers, nub bucks, and the like get in on a bit of the breeding too.
One thing I have often wondered, is the effects of in-breeding within deer populations, especially in subarban settings, how does that affect the genetics of herds? you always seem to see a monster non-typical taken in a housing development, is this the result of the deer getting old and gnarly, or being on the shallow end of the gene pool?