Antler Restrictions
 

Agree or disagree? I'm against legislating the size of deer we can harvest. Most of us here like to take trophy sized deer, but new hunters and young hunters need a chance to be successful also, or they will become discouraged and find another hobby. Hunter education is the key, and I believe with the amount of info being fed to us through magazines, tv shovs and videos, modern hunters will practice some control when it comes to smaller bucks. I, and most everyone i know will let a young buck walk in hopes of taking a trophy, filling our freezers with doe meat. We have gone antler crazy and I believe it's going to be the death of deer hunting as we know it. Big deer are out there, but they're hard to kill, that's what makes them trophies. During the 1960's, when there were hardly any deer to speak of in MO, my great uncle killed two big deer and no one cared about antler size. His sons had them scored a couple of years ago and they both went in the 180's. What AR's amount to is dumbing down the deer herd so anyone can kill a wallhanger. Letting stupid deer grow to be 5 or 6 years old makes for a lot of stupid offspring. Please post if you are a "trophy hunter" who didn't learn to hunt bucks by killing several 1 and 2 yr old deer. As I said before, hunter ed is the key, killing does in the place of young bucks. So what if your neighbor's kid killed the 6pt you let walk? Be happy for him. Our selfishness will be our ruination.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I couldn't agree more , I've always been a meat hunter and I seriously doubt that it will ever change for me . Trophy hunting has commercialized the sport to the point that it endangers it .

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I'll wade in...I disagree.

The deer herd varies across the country and in some areas is out of control for sheer numbers. That means that harvest will have to be used to maintain, manage, and be a major part of our management efforts by Departments of Conservation.

There is a balance that, once the herd size is where the officials and landowners want it, that should be maintained for good genetics, herd health, and so on. And that may mean that we need to alter the harvest patterns that we have...such as increased Doe harvest, harvesting does earlier in season, reduced buck harvest, selective harvest to manage age classes, etc.

The goals of deer management that were set in the 50s are no longer valid, its time to manage the resource better, not just have population increases as a goal.

Its sort of like slot limits in fish management. When fishermen become indiscriminant in their harvest....all sizes, over limits etc, you need to impose rules that will improve the fishery.

I know in Missouri, I see far too many immature bucks killed, not nearly the population of 3 year old deer and above, and not enough does harvested. It has made the deer population out of balance, increasing numbers, and poorer herd balance and health. Plus the property damage in crops in some areas is becoming a factor as well as highway kills.

When we as hunters learn that to harvest appropriately is the goal, and that the testosterone rush from a buck kill...even spikes and forkies is a thing of the past, we need rules and regs.

My vote is for antler restrictions. Its been proven time and time again to be the right thing for the resource and hunters will adapt after the initial complaints.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Need to adress some other points...since im all fired up...

We would be better served if we teach and demonstrate to new hunters, rules and behaviors that will serve them well in the future.

For example, selective harvest is a management tool that all of us need to embrace. We do it with birds like pheasants, fish, and turkeys. The Young hunter is not dismayed that he cannot kill a hen turkey. Why should deer be different?

Your point that you let a young buck walk and will take a doe for the freezer is preciesly the behavior we need. But left un regulated as it is now, far too many hunters think "Killing a buck" and going to town to talk about it is a better thing than taking a doe...its stupid its foolish...but thats the real world.

We should teach conservation and habitat quality to our new hunters, not just that killing a deer is the goal. And that hunting is the only way we manage or deer resource...and that we all have a responsibilty to help manage it through appropriate and selective harvest.

Thi is not just an "antler only issue" and when we confuse the issue of trophy hunting vs harvest goals, then it gets all confused and emotional.

As to the " I am a meat hunter" statement...thats great Kevin, your ability and freedom to harvest excellent venison will not be impaired one bit. In fact, you could harvest numerous nice fat healty does. So an antler restriction that strengthens the deer herd and heard health is exactly what you are needing as a meat hunter.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I guess I'm one that favors antler size regs. I to see to many younger bucks(spikes,etc) getting taken each year. If ones state is after quality, then antler restriction is the way to go. I'm in Minnesota,unfortunatly IMO, our state manages the deer herd for revenue, and not so much numbers or quality. I hear some folks say they'll stop hunting if restrictions are set, and I think the state is worried about losing that revenue. It's sad to think that some hunters view their hunting experiences good or bad based on the "rack" size, instead of on the quality of the hunt, or the commadrie that occurs. Taz

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Taz, I hear that same thing..."If they set antler restrictions, I'll just quit"....so I get really confused....why would they quit? Is there some reason that they are motivated to kill small bucks and not does? I feel waht these guys are saying is that killing a buck of any size is preferable to any doe....and if its an issue opportunity like "I kill the first deer I see cause I may not see another...well in Missouri, seeing deer for a deer hunter is not an issue, we are covered up in deer.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Sounds like too many of you are eating "bone soup" , kill more does . Need help with that ? :)

I'd never quit hunting just because our DNR set antler restrictions , it really wouldn't impact me anyway , but I look at what's happening in Mississippi and other places that have them and I have to wonder if it's a good idea at all . The average size of racks in MS. is actually shrinking according to what I've read , is that what trophy hunters really want ?

Like Tazimna I like the cameraderie of hunting and the quality of the experience . I don't measure quality of the deer itself other than how much it's likely to dress out , I can't eat antlers and bragging rights have no value to me . I feel strongly enough that trophy hunting will kill hunting for regular folks that I bought a Lifetime hunting license last year , and I'm in the process of buying a home with some acreage so that I'll always have a place to hunt .

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I have to agree whole-heartedly with Wooddust. The trophy hunters should be behind antler restrictions 100%. The county I hunt in back in Missouri is under the antler restriction. I think it's great. In three or four years, we are going to have some nice bucks, instead of the spindly 6-pointers that we have now (that is unless we have another flood).

Also, if I am correct, the youth hunts (at least in MO), do not have antler restrictions.

And finally, deer get smarter with age, so I don't think there are going to be stupid trophy bucks running around.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Tazimna,
I used to hear the same things from the guys I hunted with near Bemidji,MN. It took me a couple of years to talk them into passing on the little bucks and taking a doe. They are now having FUN hunting because there are some nice bucks (can you say 3 bucks over 150 last year) around and the young hunters are taking it all in stride. Isn't fun what it's all about? Many of those same MN boys were shocked to hear that WI has a 15 inch limit on walleyes. Those were the same guys throwing 14 inch perch out on the ice for the crows but keeping 12 inch walleyes. For some people things will never change UNTIL the rules change. I would much rather see people adopt a new attitude rather than have the state come in to change it out of nessessity. Wooddust, I think you hit every point on the nose. Any one arguing against you is showing their ignorance and selfishness toward nature, something that none of us own but we all hope to be a positive part of.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I hate when Mississippi is brought up about AR. The restriction in MS is 2 points to a side....that's a friggin' fork horn yearling buck almost all of the time, almost everywhere in this country. That means you're almost only protecting spikes.

PA has an entirely different set of regs....3 or 4 to a side(depends on the unit you're hunting) and all points have to be 1" or longer. Main beam counts regardless of length. Browtines are considered a point, but still the 1" applies.

It's easy in MS to see a 'Y' and pull the trigger. In PA you have to see a 'Y', make sure it has brow tines and all have to be 1"....not as easy and not as quick. Even tougher in the 4pt areas.

Follow the link to PA's AR explanation. We also attempt to discourage hunters from looking for buttons and passing!

http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/p...strictions.pdf

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I don't know anything about managing the herd to for trophies - really don't. But I do know that the antler restrictions I'm familiar with (moose, not deer) are intended to manage the herd to increase numbers, by protecting prime breeders in their middle years of life, not to improve trophy hunting. The only way to estimate what stage of life (and therefore whether it's in it's prime for breeding) is by antler size. Therefore, whatever size (from small to large) of antlers is typical for a mid-aged, prime breeder, is protected. Everything above that antler size (older) or below (younger) is targeted.

Generally the restrictions for moose are such only two year olds (spikes, but not palms), not yet in the prime of their life, or old bulls who are past their breeding prime are targeted. An example is places where spike bulls, and anything over 50 inches are legal, but anything between palm and 50 are protected. They are the breeding stock. Sometimes the 50 inch criterion will also allow something like 4 brow tines on at least one side - for those of us who are real uncomfortable estimating 50 inches at 250 yards. Same effect.

Nubs, or spikes less than a certain lenght are considered antlerless, just like deer.

For what it's worth, just babbling as I wait three weeks to hunt.

My understanding - and I might be wrong - is that a lot of fish restrictions (e.g. only above a certain length are keepers) is to protect the mid-sized prime breeding stock and harvest the older fish that are near the end of their life and past their breeding prime.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I like voluntary QDM. If you want to pass on any deer, feel free. But not all areas are alike and the generalization that "all parts of the US are overloaded with deer" is a bit of hype and fallacy that gets perpetuated on web site and magazines.

Why wouldn't a person who says he does not like AR "just shoot a fat doe"? Anyone who would ask that question out of irgnorance has not hunted low deer numbers. You are likely sitting in a DMU that is 3 times over its deer density goals, and wondering about people's hunting in DMU's that are below DD goals (based on 65% of biological CC btw).

I as an individual may want to shoot a doe instead of a young buck. I did it some years going back over 20, voluntarily by choice and dependant on evaluating each land area and from year to year. I consider myself to have some QDM traits, since I also work to improve habitat going back 15 years and I have always chosen bucks or does.

BUT I DEPLORE PA's statewide mandatory antler restrictions. You ask a hunter why he doesn't just shoot a doe instead of a young buck.....? For the same reason I could ask you "why do you need a mandated law to just pass on a young buck? Because you cannot regulate what all the other folks do, thats why. When you deer density drops to 5dpsm, you better watch how many does are leaving in ziplock bags, sport. Or you'll be hunting squirrel only the next couple years.

Not everyone uses good judgement, and in areas of PA where the PGC has gone from 67 deer managment units, now to 22 huge bloated WMU's with little control over where tags are used. In my area, (areas with easy access) the new plan allows huge numbers of doe tags to be brought to bear. In just the last two years our sighting of deer went from 3-4 deer a day hunting to maybe one deer in a weeks time. Why? Because In our area of a county size we doubled our doe harvest ( and this in a county where we have ALREADY harvested more antlerless than antlered, for the last DECADE). Thats why we were only seeing 3-4 deer a day, not 50.

So Antler restrictions for the lazy people who could not have the patience to pass on small bucks voluntarily, really messed up our hunting overall and our buck hunting. On the farm and the State forest areas (we move around) we used to take for a party of ten hunters 3 bucks, and usually 3 does. The bucks would be anywhere from 4 points to 8 points. Now after two years of AR and its one size fits all HERD REDUCTION in Pa, we took one buck in two seasons and it was just an average 5point and now we have no taken any doe since we have not seen any to take!

Less deer = less deer
...and if you think by waiting another 6 years you will Saskatchewan booners popping out of the shrubbery, your a potato head. Ain't gonna happen with 900,000 pa hunters.


Our hunting here is not better, the bucks are not booners. (if you show me a nice 15point deer taken in Sproul, Rothrock, Moshannon state forests, then I will agree AR/HR has made a difference ) So far it has done nothing but draw down the herd. We always took a few nice deer in pa every season before AR, and if you are from pa you know that a handfull of fat whitetails waddle out of a Lebanon or Lancaster County cornfield to get wailed ever year for 100 years. nothing new. Now if you told me it happened in Centre county it would perk my ears up!. :)


AR/HR in pa means long term a smaller herd with less opportunity for everyone. The last two years our buck harvests have dropped AND OUR DOE harvest. Tens of thousands of hunters go home without deer of any sort because a few wannabe rack hunters want something for the wall? Puhhhhhlease. is that all that hunting is anymore? A competition?


There is no such thing as a free lunch, in order for one group to benefit another has to lose something. You keep harvesting does for long term in pa and the herd shrinks. This is not Michigan or Arkasas where they were harvesting twice as many bucks as does. PA has taken more antlerless than antlered for TEN YEARS! We are not getting a big pop in recruitment or fecundity as a result of taking more doe. We are gettingone thing, a smaller herd which is what Dr. Alt promised. Remember?

AR/HR in PA has made our area almost unhuntable. We can put 10 hunters in the field for a week and count the number of deer so far in archery on ten fingers. No one has even had an opportunity on a buck as they are few and far between. this is hunting next to 80 acres of clover, 150 acres of corn, eheat, oats, and all the things to run a dairy farm with. Adjacent to a SGL that has skads of acorns, but easy access and plenty of hunters.

Pa puts 900,000 hunters in the woods and has given the large WMU's and 1.04 million doe tags. Not a good recipe for seeing lots of deer. No correct that, not a good recipe in areas of easy access and public lands for even seein DECENT deer numbers.

Statewide AR, is not QDM.

Herd reductions also reduce hunter satisfaction.

Areas that did not have a ton of deer before Penna's mediocre plan now do worse because of the bloated wmu's and LACK of real management. Any QDM plan will involve IMPROVING habitat and mangeing areas individually. Pa does neither.

Some areas of Pa have wonderfull populations, and I suspect the dopey comments about why worry about herd reductions comes from there. YOU experience a few years of hunting in 5 dpm based on pellet counts and sighting surveys and then come back and tell us how wonderfull it is to see a handfull of deer in a weeks time and none of them be a shooter buck and then we can all pass judgment on the statewide deer plan.

You might sluff off any remarks now...... but wait until it comes to your back yard. Then you will sing a different tune.

3 years of dropping harvests under AR.

Have's

...and have nots.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

AR...There are about 10 zillion pages pros and cons on this very issue on another post. Try "northeast". A Pennsylvania deer hunter with the tag deaddeer is firmly on the side of no AR. Head on over there in throw in your two cents worth.:eek:

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Hold on here, before we get into a heated debate, there are a couple issues surrounding antler restrictions that need clarification. There is a biological basis for the racks that bucks will develop as well as population growth and stabilization that needs to be considered before we all go hoopin' 'n hollerin' for what our opinions state.

We know that racks become the way they are as a result of 3 factors.
Age
Nutrition
Genetics

The nature of these relationships is complicated.
I'll address each.
Nutrition: Gotta have it for good antler development. Period. Less nutrition means smaller antlers.

Age: This has been the traditional way of looking at things. We think of it as, animals get bigger as they get older, so antlers must get bigger as the animal gets older. This is a true statement GIVEN some factors, but is not the main correlation. Age is just a number in a formula that governs the antler size. A male deer at 6 months develops tiny nubs of antler. So, at 6 months, they are technically a spike, though are hard to see except for up close. I dont' know of any case where a 6 month old had antlers any longer than the little nubs. At 1.5 years, things get a bit complicated. The age factor will prevent this deer from being humongous in most cases, but there is a wide range of what the rack can be. Deer at this age can be spikes that are anywhere from 3-6 inches long, or they can have small forks, even 8 points. However, one can expect that an 8 point yearling will have a greater 8 pt rack or higher point rack as the years progress, and his nutrition stays constant. Any buck in his younger years will have a smaller rack than he will in later life. The bucks with truly large, impressive antlers is an older fellow. Another possible reason that deer grow larger antlers as they mature is that their bodies quit growing as much. Thus, the nutrients can be used for antler growth by the deer's body rather than bone and tissue growth and development.
Age, however, is not a good factor when comparing deer with each other. As I said, some deer have larger racks than others at the same age. Not every spike is a youngster, and the nice 8s you see aren't always the older deer.

Genetics: This factor has come to light more recently. Deer with genetics favoring good antlers logically pass them along to the offspring when they breed. Genetics will not, however, give you the rack alone. A deer needs to be old enough and well fed enough to maximize its potential. The issue of genetics, however, makes this the most difficult issue to legislate. 3.5-4.5 year old spikes are that way often because they have inferior genes for antler growth. To cut to the chase, there exist 4 groups of bucks: young bucks with superior antlers, young bucks with inferior antlers, older bucks with superior antlers, older bucks with inferior antlers (definite culls). Both groups of older bucks should be shot, as the culls harm the genetic makeup, and the superior bucks are the most desireable. The inferior youngsters should be looked at carefully, as they may have genetic potential to be good, older bucks; though it is given that genetically inferior young bucks are still predisposed to having smaller racks than those of better genetics as both ages increase to the same value. The group that should not be shot, because they are genetically able to become those bucks we'd rather have on our walls, and likely to make more like themselves. This group needs to grow up and eat more, though, so you can't take them when they're young.
Here's the problem: Antler restrictions as they are, do not require one to take into account the girth of the belly and wideness of the face and neck with respect to the width of the antlers to determine if a buck is a legal cull, nor should such laws require advanced field judgement.
As the restrictions are in certain counties Texas, all spikes can be shot as legal bucks, as well as any buck with a spread over 13 inches, a buck with 6 or more points on a side, or a buck with a spike on one side. Pretty much, this is ruling out all bucks that have visible potential, but are just too young. This, in of itself, is not a bad system. The flaw, however, is that an old buck with a tiny rack that is branched on both sides is illegal in such counties.

If you are looking out for your local deer population: Shoot the deer with the longer spikes, shoot the older looking small antlered ones (when legal), shoot the big trophy bucks, and leave those little yearling 6s and 8s alone. Learn to field judge age and leave the young guys with antler potential for another season. Shoot does. All the time. You don't want the ratio to become too tipped. The end result of this should be that if all the deer are getting good nutrition, there'll be PLENTY of good, old bucks walkin' around, and people who can't find one of them can fill freezers with does and spikes.

These things take time and uniform committment. There is also evidence that the genetic information for large antlers is autosomal, meaning NOT on a sex chromosome. This means that does would carry the genes for antlers, just wouldn't use them. However, if one assumes they are autosomal, the does then pass the antler genes on to their offspring. This is also possible if the genes are carried on the X chromosome, which is a sex chromosome, but is carried by both the male and female. This would mean that just because your genetically superior buck breeds a doe, the offspring may not have great antlers depending on the recombination of genes.
This is about where my knowledge of biology ends, so I'll refer anyone interested to a study conducted by Texas Parks and Wildlife on Kerr Wildlife Management Area.

Ok, now that you are armed with the biology, go nuts!
If anyone has a better understanding of the genetic basis of antler inheiritence, please post and clear up whatever I've messed up.

All management restrictions should be made in the context of the nutrition and rack sizes of the deer in the particular area.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Sealgair243 - should I have shot this deer? He looks like an older deer with inferior antlers. I've seen younger looking deer with 8 and 9 point racks on the same property. This guy only has 6, although his frame is pretty decent.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I will not judge what other people "should have" and "should not have" done. My first buck that wasn't a spike was a spindly 6 that I should have let walk; of course, at the time, I didn't know anything about the way management works.
Based on the picture.. well... lets see
You said he was old, this by no means looks like a yearling. The things I don't know (that maybe you do) are the condition of the teeth. Teeth aging is a reasonably reliable, not to mention cool in a CSI kind of way, process. There are plenty of web articles about it, as well as books. I'm guessing you don't happen to have that particular deer's jaw sitting around, so I'll have to look at the picture.
His face looks kind of narrow, though that may just be angle working against me. The neck, however, looks nice and paunchy, a good indicator of good age and good diet. Again, the angle could be making this assessment totally off.
His body looks a bit wider and larger in mass than the typical yearling. I think just based on the photo, I can't judge weight. Was this deer heavier than most deer you've killed in the same area? Comparing the deer on the hoof, was this deer larger in body mass than the young deer with the bigger antlers? I don't know for sure, based on a photograph. Given the context you've provided, I'd say its likely that this is a cull, however, there is a possibility that this was an underdeveloped 2.5 year old. I can't tell any more from the picture. The difficulty with cull bucks is figuring out what are the characteristics of culls for your area.
I would not regret shooting that buck. I would keep in mind in the future, to carefully assess (not always an easy thing when you see horns, its cold, and you have a gun) the target, and think, "Does this look like an older deer with little antlers, or is this a youngster?".
This may sound selfish, but if you're hunting on land where no one else is following good management protocol, your passing on the little bucks won't matter much, and neither will your taking him.
The best antler restrictions are not legal ones, but ones that emerge from a mutual desire to have bigger deer to shoot, and equal willingness to curb one's own desires and delay satisfaction for the better of the population of deer, so that all might have a CHANCE to shoot really good deer. This is, needless to say, easier on private land owned and hunted on by a few people who are in a partnership that is conducive to good management decisions. This is harder on public land.

I hope this has helped. I can't say with certainty that he is a cull, nor can I say that he looks killed before his time. Maybe some additional information about the deer in the particular area will shed some light.

Sealgair243

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

This is probably one of the most informative AR posts I've ever read. Instead of guys just posting BS because they either feel strongly for or against it.....you guys post with complete accuracy and FACTS. For the record....I'm all for AR and think that it is great for a herd, but do also agree with hickory that it can't be a statewide thing. The biologists need to figure out where the "need" counties are and target them.

tazimna,
There have been a couple QDM meetings about AR and such things, but where do you think the DNR held them? On the iron range of all places. What is the % of QDM guys up there? ;) And the DNR knows it! Bad turnouts for meetings or 60-70% of the hunters disagreeing with it....the whole plan gets put on the back burner pretty quick. Now have that meeting down here in the metro area or in the southeastern part of the state....you have far more bowhunters(seems to me they are generally QDM guys) and you will see far more guys for it. Even probably 60-70% in favor of it. I agree that our DNR is sort of putting things into place for overall revenue building, but for what they have done so far....I can't disagree with them one bit at all. Seperating the state into managed, intestive harvest and lottery for doe tags is a step in the right direction. Up until this change, our regulations and deer harvest thoughts and/or goals were those from the 50's and 60's when we didn't have hardly any deer. Those days are long gone! And it's the guys that lived in that era or the kids whose dads that lived in that area(where they learned how to hunt) that have the "if it's brown...it's down" attitude that need to have an open ear when it comes to this. I know some fellas that are far more happy with shooting anything with an antler...doesn't matter how big, 10" or 100"...then they would shooting a doe. I just don't understand it and to be honest...it kind of pees me off. An ego trip cause they shot a "buck"? lol **Disclaimer....this is not a blanket comment to all that are meat hunters. Just those who I just mentioned.**

On a side note,

I love when this discussion comes up and it's the guys against the whole thing that think QDM is designed and ONLY helps out the trophy guys. They don't even take one second to learn about the whole aspect before piping up about it.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Sealgair243 - I’m not worried about whether I shot him or not. He was my first buck with a bow so he’s awesome no matter what. I’m just wondering about his age since his body huge in proportion to his rack. He was about 30lbs heavier than the two 8-points I shot in 2000 and 2002. They were around 100” and 120” (gross) B&C deer. Here are a couple more pictures with different angles.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Nice lookin pics Barnes with your kids. I have a 6 month old boy that's just itchin to be in a deer photo with me. I just have to try and hold up my end of the deal. How's that puttin your deer in the back of that Suv holdin up for you and all that paper? ;) Just kidding. You need a truck my brotha. he, he

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I have a truck;). That's my dad's SUV. We took my wife's car to camp because we can't fit the two of us and two car seats in the pick 'em up truck. My truck will be up for bear and deer camp later in the year. It also pulls the boat.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Chicory...


I'd like to at least have some civility in the debate. Here are some responces to your post...


Voluntery QDM is like a voluntery speed limit. QDM requires harvests that are designed for a given goal and set of circumstances. The simple fact is that the average hunter does not have the technical understanding or data to know what the harvest goals need to be for the population he or she hunts. The Dept of Conservation should know and we need to rely on their help to determine harvest requirements.

I have hunted low numbers having shot a deer in a first year deer season county when I was in 8th grade....so please dont try to inform me of low populations. I remember when seeing a track was cause for excitement. The fact is that in the areas in Missouri where we dont have a high population would be rare. And even id excellent habitat counties, we are seeing signs of stress on the habitat from deer numbers.

My point about those who are anti AR..who claim to be meat hunters....they are like John Kerry!! What is the point? I mean if you are ameat hunter, what do you care about AR's? Granted if you are in a low population area, that may be an issue. But on the other hand, a low population may be low because the habitat cannot support large numbers of deer...or, maybe the harvest of breeding age bucks has been far too high...

If the harvest is that high in your county, then the DNR needs to address that specific need. But the PA experience and the results on balancing habitat/numbers/age classes/sex ratios is pretty darn impressive.

You seem to equate AR/QDM and restrictions as all related to "rack hunters". That ignores an awful lot of science and progress in understanding deer management.

I will have to do some data searches to look at the data in PA. Your perspective is interesting but does not seem that they would continue that program and those tag totals unless they had good reason and statewide data to support that program.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Here is a different view of the PA season last year...http://www.allegheny-online.com/PGCnews001-04.html

sounds like people didnt stay in the timber cause of the weather.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I can answer the meat hunter and carring about AR question.

Last year Fl was thinking of adopting the AR's and sent out a questioner.

I called the game dep. they said if the AR came into efect that they still did not plan to increas the doe harvest.
That would put a big ristriction on meat hunters here in Fl.

Fl is a strange state as far as thedeer heard goes.
we have 4 differnt zones and there is a realy big differance in the heard between zones.

So differnt infact the zone i live in has a spical deer seasion its 2 weeks long and after the normal deer seasions.

Last years figers in this zone was 35 + doe to 1 buck raito.
and 35+ deer per sq mile.
its probly higher this year.

littly you could put 10 days on stand and see no bucks. but you would have sean over 100 doe's.
In one day in our best travil rout stand i watched 51 does and yearling pass.
and it was only a 4 hr hunt.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I feel that AR's can go either way in either hurting or helping the herd. One major factor that I think has a lot to do with how well an AR will work is the population of the deer herd at the time the AR takes effect. If there is a relatively low number of deer, and only younger, low quality bucks are being harvested, then an AR might make sense. However, in place of this, you cannot allow people to shoot does where they might normally shoot a small buck. Now instead of a bunch of small bucks being shot, all the does are going to be shot, and there will be nothing left to breed!! Both sides of the breeding have to be protected. If there are antler restrictions and a limited doe harvest, hunters will have to make a sacrafice for a year or two, until the bucks begin to grow antler size of any sort. In that time though, the deer herd should have some time to increase, and will balance out with time, and allow for the eventual harvest as more does. As for areas where deer herds are higher, I have no idea how it would work. I live in a state where the deer herd is averaged at about 1 deer per square mile. The current management plan of very few doe tags and a conservative buck harvest is working at keeping the herd balanced, but the habitat is in poor shape due to a 5 year drought. Due to this, the deer herd is steadily declining. The bucks that are harvested, do represent a wide range of age classes, so I doubt an AR would be any more effective in increasing the herd size. In a good number of areas, 50% or more of the bucks carry at least 4 pts per side.

In the end, I think it should come down to what each hunter feels like harvesting, unless the deer herd becomes so low that the state MUST instate an AR to increase the deer herd.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

jason, this is the first time i have seen anybody that is on here that lives so close to where i live. i live in tidioute. but anyways, i for one was the first one to start calling the PGC names when they first came out with the antler restrictions in PA, but i actually am quite fond of them now. i have been seeing some HUGE bucks down here and i have also been seeing more bucks since the regulations. i'll be the first to admit that i had to pass on a lot fo bucks that i couldn't tell what they were, but i'm glad. plus the herd looks so much healthier these days!!!

as far as the youth goes, young hunter's (and also seniors) go by the old antler restrictions of 1 point on one side of the head that's atleast 3" long.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

From what I've heard/read, it seems to be a good thing for some states.

I couldn't see Maine adopting this though - it just wouldn't work. Where I hunt in northern Maine, young bucks make up the majority of the deer harvest. The reason behind this is it's bucks only (actually they gave out like 75 doe permits this year, but the chances of drawing one are slim). If they were to put antler restrictions in place, the deer harvest would go WAY down. All of the pressure would be on the mature bucks, making it even more difficult for hunters. This would likely result in lots of frustrated hunters unable to fill their tags, and less people buying licenses in the following years. With deer densities of 2 or less per square mile in places, and does being off limits, it would be absurd to put antler restrictions in place. The southern parts of the state are different, and in some areas it may work but I doubt many people would support the idea. I know I wouldn't!

Just trying to point out that each state - even different counties, are different and what works in one area doesn't/wouldn't work everywhere.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

i am no wildlife biologist but from what i've read and seen on wildlife shows, a two-year old deer can grow antlers that sport a nice 6-8 point rack. the rack basically stays the same year in and year out as far as the shape and grows more points and mass as they grow older. it also depends on genes and diet. those big outfitters that we all see on tv typically only allows 5-year old deer and above to be shot. the difference in body mass is HUGE when you compare a 2-year old to a 4-5 year-old. they say that just like humans, when whitetails reach their "peak" they start going down hill as far as the size of the rack.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Ihave to disagree with this for all of the reasons stated by others and the fact that many hunters, regardless of the liberal quotas on Does, refuse to take a Doe. The Deer population here in Georgia is huge and we are allowed 10 Does and 2 Bucks. This in addition to those you may take on managed hunts. The recent restrictions being enforced here are that one of the bucks must be four points or better on one side. I would like to see the buck regulations set so that you must harvest at least one Doe before you can take a Buck. If hunting is going to survive and we use the reasoning that hunting is a management tool, then we must begin to take the Does we are allowed to control that population. Buck only hunting has its place, but it is not in areas where population control is a factor.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

A healthy 1.5 year old deer can have 6 or 8 points. My buddy shot a whopper 10 pointer a couple of years back in farm country that was only 2.5 years old. Number of points isn't a good indicator of age. Case in point: Basket-rack 8 pointer vs. a Heavy and wide, 130" class buck. Same number of points. One is a yearling and the other is 4.5 years old. It's really tough to age a whitetail on the hoof most hunters, though, (me included) so minimum points is really the only way to save some bucks. Even though you may be just saving the yearlings with lesser genetic potential.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

pretty darn impressive...based on what? And article you read in Outdoor Life? As you said you will have to do some searches to see what Penna is going through. YEP! thats for sure, because you seem to have pre-conceived notions of what we have, and a dose of reality might be very, very good for you.

On paper Pa's plan and QDM methodologies sound like the second coming, but it REALITY that we deal with everyday here, not paper pushing bureacrat plans.

We have 900,000 buck hunters in pa, and 22 bloated oversise wmu's. You do your reading and then come back and we'll have a nice civil discussion about how AR's are for sissy's.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I think that AR is just a start. Ultimately we need to educate ourselves on becomming more proficient at aging deer on the hoof. A deer that is 1 1/2 yrs old can easily have 8 points or better. Setting AR will not ultimately solve the problem, but hopefully it will allow some young bucks to mature a little and bread before they are harvested.

I, myself, am for anything that will improve the quality of the deer I am hunting.

I listen to all these folks saying that they will quit hunting if certian states adopt AR. I think these people are just spouting gas. If you are willing to quit something because of a few added restrictions, then you were never that passionate about it in the first place.

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

I agree, and on some other points i disagree. I would like to see more big bucks.................who wouldnt?:eek: I am not a trophy hunter to the extent that a trophy buck is all i would kill. Last night i let a guest of mine on a evening hunt kill a small doe, for freezer meat. I think we as hunters know what bucks we would or should kill becuase we have killed plenty of deer in the past. As for a new hunter, i tell them shoot the first deer they see as long as its not a fawn, but just a good first deer. Me personally i do not kill small bucks becuase i have killed enough of them when i was younger, and i would like something a lil bigger becuase where i hunt to drag a deer out is quite a chore, so it better be worth the work, not to say no deer is worth the work, i never waste my game. I think if a youngster kills a lil 4or 6pt, then great!! But if a veteran were to kill one where i hunt i would look at him kina funny. I believe in qdm, and have 130 class bucks in my area like its kewl, due to 15yrs of harvesting the right deer and managing the herd from a 8-1 doe to buck ratio to a 5-1 doe to buck ratio. I say kill more does and shoot a buck that is a trophy in your eyes, not someone elses. I would still hunt if they had antler restriction, i do my own antler restriction anyway, wouldnt make a difference in my book!

RE: Antler Restrictions
 

Coastie...that's a great example of why "telling" people what to shoot is a good idea. Having that many deer in your area isn't one bit good. And obviously leaving it up the hunter isn't probably the best way either. Thus guys refusing to shoot doe and shoots buck right off the bat. People never want to have another person tell them what to do and what they can shoot and what they can't shoot, but in this case they do. For areas with an overwhelming deer population "earn-a-buck" is a great way to do it. It's used here in our special draw bow hunting areas for parks and such and it's a great concept. AR obviously can't work everywhere depending on the overall deer herd. But in most states something needs to be done. Hunter numbers are declining and a healthy deer herd just isn't going to evolve into what it needs to be by itself. It's our efferts that need some tweeking. If more and more people refuse to do the right thing for the environment and/or the deer herd....we all are going to be forced to shoot what they tell us to. Either that or watch your taxes go up because sharpshooters have to brought in to take of the buisness we can't seem to do.