Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

I picked up the Mar/ Apr 2009 issue of Bowhunter magazine last week, and found a very intersting piece on the new anler restrictions in TX. I wish I could find a link to the article....it outlined some key differences in the way TX went about instituting these changes in comparison to te way it was done and is currently being done in PA. I did find a link to TX Parks and Wildlife Department that specifies the current restictions with a visual aid. Very intersting that TX designed their regs to allow for harvest of spikes, and even deer sporting one unbranched antler. Their restriction is primarily spread based, while allowing for harvest of sub prime animals sporting either mature, yet abnormally narrow racks, and unbranched antlers. Interestingly, these regs are very similar to what I envisioned as being a superior method to our current system. Here are a few exceptf from the article:

"Data from Texas shows that 25% of all yearlings are spikes, while 93% of all spikes ae yearlings. In other words, hunters could take every spike form the yearling age clas, and still leave 75% of yearlings alive and well in the field." - This corresponds roughly to my laymans pespective. I would say in my hunting areas that approx 1/4 of yearlings I observe are spikes, and that 90% or better of spikes that I observe are yearling bucks.

"Additionally, this strategy may have helped reduce any high grading in the 1 1/2 year old age class. High grading means that hunters harvest all the top end bucks and leave the lower quality bucks (spikes) to breed....Allowing the hunters the opportunity to take spikes seemed to make most people happy, and believe it or not, the AR were easier to sell to youth hunters than older hunters." - So, while PA AR proponents vehemently deny the possibility of AR's causing high grading, the TX biologists where aware and concerned of that possibility, and took steps to reduce its effect.The spike slot was well recieved by the public, and wait.....it gets better.

"As Carroll and his biologists predicted, within one year, the toatal number of bucks harvested was the same as it was prior to antler restrictions. Interestingly, after thre years the total number of spikes harvested dropped from 42 % to 19 %. Since the original six counties in the study had one buck limits, it was believed hunters were passing on spikes in hopes of taking mature bucks. The previous ten years of data from those six counties showed that 1.5 AND 2.5 YEAR OLD BUCKS COMPRISED 80 PERCENT OF THE HARVEST. After three years of the new rules, only 29% of bucks harvested were younger than 3.5 years! "Prior to antler restrictions, if the typical hunters did not see a buck in the first three or four hunts, the chance to even see a buck the rest of the hunting season became slim." Carrol said. "Nowadays, it's not uncommon for a hunter to see several bucks every time he goes out. Many hunters are now passing on bucks in the thirteen inch range, in hopes of seeing just how big some of these bucks will get." -So, TX predicted that after the first year their buck harvest would return to normal and it did. Why did PA fail and still fails to accomplish this? Could you imagine if by changing our regs, that we could possibly see results similar to those of TX? 71% of bucks killed age 3.5 and older! Another thing that truly stuck out to me as I read the article was the constant mention of hunter satisfaction. A point that has gone completely by the wayside in PA. Proven by the crossbow vote, continued HR in many areas, and the degrading comments made by RSB and other PGC employees, recently.

Here is the link I did find. It outlines the Texas AR's in detail. I highly reccommend buying the magazine and reading the entire article.
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/game_management/deer/antler_restrictions/

I particularly enjoyed this little excerpt from the link above:

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

The wiser hunters knew this. It's the stupid ones and the younger ones that are being brain washed by the likes of the PGC and associates. This is like breeding RSB with a BTBowhunter genes and getting this. Not avery desirable future of human race.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Thanks for posting this SS!!

I'm going to read the thing before commenting much except to say that I agree wholeheartedly with their idea of a spread measure vs a point count on the high end.

The other end allowing spikes is interesting to say the least. As I said, I havent read it yet (where the heck is my copy!!! i'm a subscriber!!!) but I'm wondering about that idea in light of recent evidence that implies that 1.5 spikes may well not be genetically inferior.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

That is all well and good, but TX hunters are a different breed than PA hunters. The TX hunter is more trophy oriented and easier to sell on complicated AR. Pa hunters would need to take night classes to comprehend it.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

I've only read partway thorugh the link and I don't have the article yet but you are right about that one. Texans have been letting more of their deer grow up for years. Thier percentage of of 3.5+ bucks before they put in any ARwas far bigger than we have after AR. Letting deer mature is simply part of the deer hunting culture down there. TX alsohasonly slightly morehuntersthan Pa has but they are spread out over close to three times as much land

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

TX alsohasonly slightly morehuntersthan Pa has but they are spread out over close to three times as much land

Yeah, but from what I can tell, Texas doesn't have the longtraditionswe've had in getting what is essentially free access to large amounts ofprivate land, nor the millions of acres of public land thatwe havehere?

Be interesting to see how their hunters adapt to these changes.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Absolutely Denny. I have a buddy who moved there from here and he claims that no one hunts unless they own the ground or pay big $$

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Here is an interesting quote from the link.
So why did the PGC implement ARs when they knew it would likely have an adverse effect on antler quality just like it did in Miss.


here is another interesting quote.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

There is one other very important point that makes all of the difference in the world between southern and northern states and there buck management objectives.

In the northern states we have a narrow breeding and fawn birth period as required by nature due to the timing of spring and winter conditions.
Therefore our deer are bred before our hunting seasons remove the bucks.
In the southern states the deer have a much longer breeding period with most of their does not being bred until after their buck hunting seasons.

That makes high grading from antler restrictions in those southern states much more likely then would occur from antler restrictions in the northern states where we don’t harvest our bucks until after they have already pretty much completed their short annual breeding cycle.

When you compare antler restrictions and breeding potential between northern and southern states you are compares apples to pumpkins right from the start.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

That is absolutely not true and shows that you don't understand the concept of high grading. The initial effects of high grading has nothing to do with when the buck are harvested or when the doe are bred. High grading simply refers to harvesting the best buck in each age class which results in an average smaller rack size in the succeeding age class. Kroll's research supports that theory as does the results from Miss.
Are you sure you know the difference between apples and pumpkins?:)

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

You will have many different opinions about this subject amongst different deer biologists. Here is a link on how other biologists feel [/align][/align]http://www.qdma.com/articles/details.asp?id=124[/align]

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

You are correct about what causes high grading but you are also 100% incorrect about the possibility or potential for high grading here in Pennsylvania.

Since Pennsylvania was previously only protecting bucks with antlers less then three inches, before the change to the current antler restrictions, if there was any chance of high grading in this state it already happened a long, long time ago. Now we protect more of our better bucks then what we have EVER protected before, so if anything we have started the steps of reversing the past more significant potential for high grading by only keeping the really short antlered spikes.

In those southern states they would also be much more likely to see degrading of the genetics then would occur in the northern states where harvest our bucks after the rut instead of before.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Could you post the report, by the PGC, on antler restrictions in PA?

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

That simply is not true. The 3" spike rule was designed to protect BB from being harvested as antlered deer, and it was not designed to protect 1.5+ buck. We are now harvesting the best of the buck in each age class while protecting those bucks that are inferior for the rate of antler development. That is the very definition of high grading.

Even with the 3" spike rule there was no protected class of deer, BB and inferior 1.5 buck that didn't have 3" spikes were legal as antlerless deer. Now inferior 1.5 buck and inferior 2.5+ buck are protected from being harvested except by juniors and military.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

You are either just full of bologna or once again intentionally misleading people to advance your misguided agenda.

Button bucks don’t even come close to having three inch antlers and the past antler restrictions had nothing to do with protecting button bucks.

Even if they were legal as antler less deer the vast majority of those 1 ½ year old bucks with antlers shorter then three inches were making it through to the next season to become 2 ½ year old bucks. Those short spike bucks of the past were the 2 ½ year old bucks that wouldn’t make today’s antler restrictions that you keep harping about. Therefore it was more a problem of high grading in the past. Now that we keep more of the larger 1 ½ year old bucks, that would have been harvested before the more restrictive antler restrictions, that old high grading concern has been improved upon instead of being made worse.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Here is a clear example of where your inherent bias prevents from thinking rationally. the 3" spike rule was obviously designed to prevent BB from being harvested as an antlered deer and provided a clear distinction between a legal antlered deer and an antlerless deer.
That is an obviously absurd claim with no basis in fact. If you are claiming the 3" spike rule was more restrictive than the present ARs,we would have carried over more 1.5 buck before ARs than we do now. You really need to take a day or two before responding to my posts so you at least have a chance to avoid looking like a blithering idiot.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Actually it is just that you need a class in reading comprehension so you can understand what has been written.

Between that and obviously not knowing much about antler development of button bucks (those six month old males) and what the old three inch antler restrictions really protected. What those old restrictions protected were the short antlered 1½ year old bucks. Those 1 ½ year old bucks then became the small racked 2 ½ year old bucks that you talk so poorly of. That was the very example of high grading that you now claim you don’t want to see.

When we made antler restrictions more restrictive, and that is what happened with the current restrictions, we made a huge leap in correcting that old high grading problem.

If you can’t understand that then this entire topic is obviously way to far over your head for you to even be in the same universe as those making wise deer management decisions.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

That is what we have allways been told BB. The 3 inch rule was not about AR.
It was about Buttons. Ifthat is BS RSB, Then why was one allowed to shoot that 3 inch or smaller buck as a doe? You are so full of crap and have no clue. People can see you make things up now. It had nothing to do about AR and just a determination for what was considered a buck or doe. You don't know as much as you think you do.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

RSB, that is a blatant crock of crap, and you know it. Claiming our old three inch spike rule could have caused high grading is nonsense. That rule was designed for two purposes only. To protect BUTTON BUCKS with small but visible spikes, and hunters flinging lead and ground checking does, with the odds of perhaps finding a button protruding above the hairline. High grading among the spikes. Gimme a break.

Before or after breeding is irrelevant. The best yearlings get ONE chance to breed before they are legal to be harvested. A sub legal, inferior buck will have atleast two seasons to pass on his genes...the first season he was protected, the second season, breeding before gun season takes place, and then possibly even a third season depending on if his spindly spikes have matured enough to make him legal as a 2.5 year old. Even an old fool like you can see how protecting inferior buck for rate of development allows them to pass on 2 or 3 times the amount of genes as the superiorbucks that are legal for harvest as a yearling.Texas' restrictions are a superior method. Period. Allowing those spikes to be harvested and adapting a spread based restriction could only improve the quality of our bucks. Did you even read the link? And why dd you specifically dodge one glaring question in particular...Why did TX buck harvest return to normal after the first year of AR's while our's has still never returned to pre AR numbers, even five years later? Any fool can see that theirs is clearly a superior method, with superior results. Not to mention that they made clear reference to the possibility of high grading and took specific measures to reduce or eliminate its effect, while PA is still in denial.
You would think that a career WCO would have seen a few deer in his day. I have a skull at home that I have had for a number of years. It is obviously the skull plate of a six month old button buck...The deer was killed as an antlerless deer, in rich farm country in 5A. The deer weighed approx 85 lbs, and his buttons are two inches long. While I have rarely seen buttons of that length, they do exist, and the old three inch rule would have protected this deer from harvest as a legal buck, not during doe season. Because bucks shorter than three inches were legal for harvest as antlerless deer, your claim of the old system causing high grading is a crock of crap as well. While it certainly allowed for a very high percentage yearling buck harves, there was NO possibility of high grading as NO measure of buck was protected, permitting a diverse buck harvest, based on hunter choice. If the PGC wasn't so closed minded, or actually gave a crap about hunter satisaction, they would see that there are ways to increase the age structure of our bucks, while reducing high grading. Imagine...our bucks could actually BE getting bigger within their respective age classes....not just older, and possibly smaller. Oh yeah....when are they going to release some definitive antler data comparing pre AR antler size to current antler data? Cricket, cricket, cricket.......

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

and i thought the 3 inch rule was more for a line over 3 buck under 3 doe seems rsb old ar thing was crap
because you could shoot it either way must be over my head

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

SS some of this would be true if the non-legal AR deer all had inferior genes. But it has been proven by scientific research that an "inferior" antlered deer at 1.5 usually have as good or better genes than the better antlered AR legal 1.5 year old deer.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

very true white

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

No that has not been proven to be true. There has been relatively little if any research where the DNA makeup of 1.5 spikes has been compared larger 1.5 buck. One thing that has been proven is that culling 1.5 spike buck does not improve the genetics of the herd. Another thing that has been proven is that harvesting the best buck in each age class leads to high grading and results in a decrease in rack sizes of 2.5+ buck. It has also been prove n that the average 1.5 spike has a slower rate for antler development than a 1.5 Y or 6 pt.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

The only thing that has been proven is that yearlings sporting small unbranched antlers are inferior per rate of development. Some of the deer in the studies did eventually catch up to their peers, but not until ages 4.5 and older. So, how many deer have you killed in PA older than age 4.5? Our der harvest is so large that even with AR's a very small percentage of our bucks will ever see that age, and my guess is that you and I would be fortunate under these circumstances to ever harvest more than one or two 4.5 or older deer in PA in our lifetimes. The overwhelming majority of our buck harvest is composed of yearling and two and a half year bucks with a smaller percentage of bucks 3.5 and even tinier fraction of the harvest being composed of bucks older than age 4.5. Why would we want bucks possessing slow grow genes to be perpetuating within the herd? If you truly feel this way about deer mgt,I would challenge you that if you claim access to a manageable tract of private land to specifically remove your best yearling bucksevery year. You would have to be an idiot to want to do it, but that is exactly what we are doing. Texas has long been at the forefront of deer mgt, actually decades ahead of the curve, but when their biologists lend credibility to the existence of high grading under point based AR's you and other PGC supporters don't want to give then any due credit. Amazing.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

I just love this. All these new wannabe biologist's and trophy hunters.That's good though, this should make these people more educated? But I will give you wannabe's one tip as for the trophy hunting. First: public hunting should never be managed as or for trophy hunting! But! If this is your wish? Then you think you would want to do it right? Then let's do it right. This means shooting even "MORE" female deer. Scraping the point system and learning how to correctly age a buck. Because to also make our "now"deer management program a trophy program,we want to make sure not to harvest bucks under 51/2 years of age. [/align]

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Isn't that what the AR program was about,Bigger bucks?If you are doing something that is going to reverse the affects of antler size wouldn't you want to know? To me it doesn't matter,I don't eat the antlers. But it does have thecause also of preventing a healthier deer. The weaker ones passing on their genes. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure that out. It would be like a 2$ hooker mating with the milkman and producing blkpowder as an offspring. Not desirable.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

[quote]Isn't that what the AR program was about,Bigger bucks?If you are doing something that is going to reverse the affects of antler size wouldn't you want to know? To me it doesn't matter,I don't eat the antlers. But it does have thecause also of preventing a healthier deer. The weaker ones passing on their genes. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure that out. It would be like a 2$ hooker mating with the milkman and producing blkpowder as an offspring. Not desirable.


AR's number one purpose is to create a balance in the buck to doe ratio. Second: AR's are to establish a "older age structure" in the buck population. AR's soul purpose is not about growing larger racks. Also, keep the insults flying Jack, I can take them. [/align]

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

If it isn't about growing racks,Why the AR program then? Your telling me they have to do the AR to keep the ratio close? How is that done? Doe the does say, Ok, I don't like that small spike and want to breed with an 8 or better? Seriously,How does that make it any better for ratio? Once a doe is pregnant by a buck, There is a good chance another buck won't get her pregnant while she is allready pregnant.
I could be wrong though?

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

No Jack, this is not what "I'M" telling you! This is what QDMA IS TELLING "us!"

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Prior to ARs our B/D ratio met QDMA recommendations. ARs were supposed to increase breeding rates and productivity and shorten the breeding window and none of that happened. ARs were completely unnecessary.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

What other form of wildlife is managed so that 80% of every year classthe male of the speciesis the targeted goal.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

There has been no documented adverse effects from over 50 years of harvesting 80% of the adult male population of deer.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

That is simply not true. You have made that claim repeatedly without any supporting documentation.

Certainly any PA hunter can recognize that our BD ratio was out of line before AR/HR Recent harvests under HR have produced doe kills at a rate approaching 2-1 over buck harvests. We're in line now with our BD because of the emphasis on doe kills over the past few years.

If we had been in line before, bucks would outnumber does now by a wide margin. Of course, with you seeing only three deer this season, I guess your personal observations could indicate otherwise.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

So the lack of documentation legitimizes an activity thats been unchecked for resulting detrimental effects.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Once again you are flat out wrong and are totally misrepresenting what I posted in the past. If you will recall I posted the actula herd estimates for 2001 which showed a B/d of 1:2.1 which is what QDM recommends for a heavily hunted herd. i asle provided a link to data that shows even back in 1984 our B/D ratio was just fine.
That is just plain silly and makes absolutely no sense.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

The evidence that there was no detrimental effects is confirmed by the past high breeding rates, the 5% decrease in current breeding rates and the claims about all the big buck being harvested which are based on the gene pool formed over the past 50 years.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Since we have no idea how many deer we had ,or now have,the percentage of gain or loss in any studies has no actual scientific value.
I know facts to you are variables,but to those who know the difference in statistical values and true values understands that you can't pick and choose when and what numbers you use to calculateyour base conclusion on.

A/R's were needed to protect a higher number of the bucks from a herd that as a wholereduced as plannedby an unknown percentage.

And as an end results the older age class of bucks that have been protected by A/R are giving hunters a greater opportunity at a trophy class buck from a much smaller herd.As Planned.

I know you understand this, though you disagree with the program the facts don't lie.
Do I think H/R has go to far? Yes, as most do. Are lynchings called for? No just some needed adjustments and more hunters with knowledge, not propaganda.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

The PGC estimates the herd every year just like they did in the past ,since that is the only way they can come up with their estimated changes in the deer density.

There was never a biological need to protect more bucks with ARs. It was implemented in order to get hunters to shoot more doe and that is the only phase of ARs that worked.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

Your opinions are no more than that,while hiding anomalously behind a computer screen belittling noted wildlife biologist your opinions sway few. We know who DR Roxenberry and Dr Alt and several other noted wildlife managers are in real life, you on the other handgive no more substance or credence to these discussions than one of the women in the slim fast commercials, which whom you very much could be.

Further more your lack of any kind of apology foryour uncalled for personal attacks leads me to believe that you are morelike Ozthan any of us previously believed. A little man behind a big screen.

RE: Antler Restrictions (What they found in TX)
 

My opinions are support by the facts while Alt's opinions were refuted by the facts. Dr. R. is different story ,since he inherited the mess Alt created and now has to figure out a way to correct Alt's mistakes without loosing more credibility.