Did ARs Really Produce bigger 2.5+ Buck?
09-25-2009 | 02:15 PM
#61
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Likes: 0
i would have to dis agree with that. Genes develop and breaks down through life. Take an 80 yr old bald crippled wrinkled old man for example. His genetics has broken down and his genes would not be the same as if he was a 22 old young man.
Also if this was the case as you said, why do breeders wait for their bucks to age before they breed them? To get bigger bucks and alter their genes with suppliments.
Also if this was the case as you said, why do breeders wait for their bucks to age before they breed them? To get bigger bucks and alter their genes with suppliments.
09-25-2009 | 02:21 PM
#62
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
I could make the same response to your claim that Alt never said that the bucks produced by ARs would be larger than the pre -AR bucks. Alt did everything he could to convince hunters that dominant breeding by 2.5+ buck would produce bigger racks.
09-25-2009 | 07:34 PM
#63
Spike
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
I would agree that in more advanced age some mutations could occur. Even in humans there have been theories that older parents can contribute to downs syndrome, autism and various other things in their offsprings.
However, I think mighty little will be different in a 1.5 year old buck compared to a 3.5 year old. The point you try to make about breeders waiting for bucks to age does not apply in a wild herd. I don't think too many wild deer are effected by the relatively few food plots out there with any of these deer supplement concoctions some landowners put out in hopes of getting deer to grow bigger antlers.
As others have mentioned, if anything the genetically inferior bucks are given the chance to live and procreate for another year or more with AR's. The small 6 or 8 point 1.5 to 2.5 year old will surely be shot at first sight so his better genetics in actuality will be procreating for a shorter period of time.
However, I think mighty little will be different in a 1.5 year old buck compared to a 3.5 year old. The point you try to make about breeders waiting for bucks to age does not apply in a wild herd. I don't think too many wild deer are effected by the relatively few food plots out there with any of these deer supplement concoctions some landowners put out in hopes of getting deer to grow bigger antlers.
As others have mentioned, if anything the genetically inferior bucks are given the chance to live and procreate for another year or more with AR's. The small 6 or 8 point 1.5 to 2.5 year old will surely be shot at first sight so his better genetics in actuality will be procreating for a shorter period of time.
I also think that if a 2.5 yr old that had only a 6 up on his head would only have a six osprey at 2.5. Now if that 6 could mature to a 4.5 and become a 10 point, his 2.5 osprey would be an 8 and not a 6 I believe.
If your skinny and breed and have a child,that child will most likely be skinny. Now if you worked out and ate alot,that changes your DNA. Now if you had another child,the child would have your new DNA and be more like you are now.Not skinny but more athletic built as he matured faster at a younger age.
That make sense?
09-26-2009 | 03:42 AM
#64
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
Here is the PGC's explanation for why they don't think ARs will negatively effect the genetics of our herd. Also ,note that applying the same reasoning means that ARs will not improve the genetics of the herd, so the reasons Alt gave for implementing ARs were bogus at best.
Antler restrictions are killing our best genetics by harvesting 6 & 8 pointers 1.5 year olds. What do you think?
Antler restrictions have been a positive for Pennsylvania’s deer management program. Since antler restrictions started in 2002, yearling buck survival has increased (from 15% to 52%), harvest of adult bucks has increased (from ~20% to ~50% of total buck harvest), and hunter support has increased (from 57% to 63%). However, there are still criticisms, many of which center around genetics. The argument that we are removing our “best” yearling bucks from the population, which in turn is affecting population genetics, is common. However, when we take a closer look, with the help of new technology and research, the genetics concern is unfounded.
First, deer are wild animals in an uncontrolled environment. Unlike a bull in a pasture full of cows that can’t run away, a buck’s world is full of competition. Bucks compete with each other and must compete for receptive does. Genetics research has shown that yearling males are participating in breeding even in populations with 50% of males being 3.5 years old and older. Since most of Pennsylvania’s bucks are harvested during the gun season and AFTER the breeding season, a yearling buck that is removed has likely already had the opportunity to breed and pass on his genes.
Second, recent research has shown that the amount of growth in the first set of antlers in white-tailed males is a poor predictor of antler growth at maturity. A study conducted over 10 years which followed hundreds of wild, free-ranging white-tailed bucks from their first set of antlers found that by the time bucks reached maturity (4.5 years old), there was no difference in antler measurements between those that had spikes or 3 points as yearlings compared to those that had 4 or more points as yearlings. This suggests that spike and 3-point yearlings can grow the same size antlers as yearling bucks with 4 or more points. All have the capability to produce large antlers at maturity.
Third, let us not forget that all deer receive genes from both their parents. To date, no one has classified the genetic contribution of a doe to her male fawn’s antler growth. And in Pennsylvania, there is no harvest selection on adult does. Their removal is “genetically” random.
Even if we wanted to alter the genetics of Pennsylvania’s deer herd, it would be extremely difficult to do
Also note the PGC said nothing about the effects of high grading or the studies of breeding and genetics on the Kerr Ranch.
Antler restrictions are killing our best genetics by harvesting 6 & 8 pointers 1.5 year olds. What do you think?
Antler restrictions have been a positive for Pennsylvania’s deer management program. Since antler restrictions started in 2002, yearling buck survival has increased (from 15% to 52%), harvest of adult bucks has increased (from ~20% to ~50% of total buck harvest), and hunter support has increased (from 57% to 63%). However, there are still criticisms, many of which center around genetics. The argument that we are removing our “best” yearling bucks from the population, which in turn is affecting population genetics, is common. However, when we take a closer look, with the help of new technology and research, the genetics concern is unfounded.
First, deer are wild animals in an uncontrolled environment. Unlike a bull in a pasture full of cows that can’t run away, a buck’s world is full of competition. Bucks compete with each other and must compete for receptive does. Genetics research has shown that yearling males are participating in breeding even in populations with 50% of males being 3.5 years old and older. Since most of Pennsylvania’s bucks are harvested during the gun season and AFTER the breeding season, a yearling buck that is removed has likely already had the opportunity to breed and pass on his genes.
Second, recent research has shown that the amount of growth in the first set of antlers in white-tailed males is a poor predictor of antler growth at maturity. A study conducted over 10 years which followed hundreds of wild, free-ranging white-tailed bucks from their first set of antlers found that by the time bucks reached maturity (4.5 years old), there was no difference in antler measurements between those that had spikes or 3 points as yearlings compared to those that had 4 or more points as yearlings. This suggests that spike and 3-point yearlings can grow the same size antlers as yearling bucks with 4 or more points. All have the capability to produce large antlers at maturity.
Third, let us not forget that all deer receive genes from both their parents. To date, no one has classified the genetic contribution of a doe to her male fawn’s antler growth. And in Pennsylvania, there is no harvest selection on adult does. Their removal is “genetically” random.
Even if we wanted to alter the genetics of Pennsylvania’s deer herd, it would be extremely difficult to do
09-26-2009 | 07:24 AM
#65
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
I would think there was a perfect age for breeding to produce the best genetics possible.
I also think that if a 2.5 yr old that had only a 6 up on his head would only have a six osprey at 2.5. Now if that 6 could mature to a 4.5 and become a 10 point, his 2.5 osprey would be an 8 and not a 6 I believe.
If your skinny and breed and have a child,that child will most likely be skinny. Now if you worked out and ate alot,that changes your DNA. Now if you had another child,the child would have your new DNA and be more like you are now.Not skinny but more athletic built as he matured faster at a younger age.
That make sense?
I also think that if a 2.5 yr old that had only a 6 up on his head would only have a six osprey at 2.5. Now if that 6 could mature to a 4.5 and become a 10 point, his 2.5 osprey would be an 8 and not a 6 I believe.
If your skinny and breed and have a child,that child will most likely be skinny. Now if you worked out and ate alot,that changes your DNA. Now if you had another child,the child would have your new DNA and be more like you are now.Not skinny but more athletic built as he matured faster at a younger age.
That make sense?
I apologize, it appears there are those out there that are like minded with you!
09-26-2009 | 08:27 AM
#66
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
Wrong again. Razorrat is expressing rather extreme opinions that are in direct conflict with what I have been saying about ARs and I have no idea what ospreys have to do with the genetics of our deer herd.
09-26-2009 | 10:16 AM
#67
Spike
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
09-26-2009 | 10:19 AM
#68
Spike
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Well Bluebird, I guess I have to admit that I was wrong about something. It appears that there is one other person out there who seems to think the way you do about what AR's might to to our bucks after all.
I apologize, it appears there are those out there that are like minded with you!
I apologize, it appears there are those out there that are like minded with you!
Yes, my writting skills are not that great, But I don't care and they are not needed for my job that pays more than mosts on here.
09-26-2009 | 11:53 AM
#69
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
I agree with bluebird about our deer herds and the AR. I also agree with him that you and Douge are illeterate when it came to what alt was saying about bigger bucks as in rack size and not just by ageing.
Yes, my writting skills are not that great, But I don't care and they are not needed for my job that pays more than mosts on here.
Yes, my writting skills are not that great, But I don't care and they are not needed for my job that pays more than mosts on here.
I'm sure we all understand that you can relate to Bluebirds way of thinking
. I could even believe you two could be related.
09-26-2009 | 01:56 PM
#70
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
Then , maybe you are related to Alt since you claim to know what he meant when he said that hunters would likely see"more and larger buck than ever before". Alt has been documented to be a proven liar,so maybe it runs in the family and you are just continuing the tradition.