tracks in the mud?
 

Is there any difference between a doe and a buck track? every artical i read says there is no defference, is this right?

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

I have read articles both pro and con and guess it depends on which you tend to believe.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

Some hunters claim say they are different...:eek:

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

A buck's and a doe's feet are built the same but things to look for are this...Size! A bigger track is made by a bigger deer and bucks tend to be bigger then doe's. Look at all the tracks in your area and you will see an average size. Then look for the bigger tracks. Might be a big doe but is more likely to be a buck. Also the depth of the tracks can tell you if the deer is heavier then the others and again bucks tend to carry more wieght then the doe's. It's not an exact science but if you study the tracks you know were made by a buck in your area you can start to know what to look for. Of course there will always be a giant doe or two to throw you off but thats all part of hunting! Good luck.....Jim

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

I just love when guys say "look at that buck track". What they have grown to believe is when the dew claw is visible behind the track its a buck. I've laughed so many times at these people and most will look at you like your stupid to not know what a buck track looks like. The best you can do is what the previous poster said is to make an educated quess based on the size of the track. There was a nice buck shot on a youth hunt I was on that weighed in at 184. Thats a big deer for our area but he had the feet the size of an average size doe, say 120 lbs. They say that the only way to tell is in about 2 to 3 inches of snow or mud. A buck tends to drag his feet while walking.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

A bucks tracks will typically be wider between the prints. Bucks have a wider chest therefore the track is wider. Of course until the deer is about 2 years old the width will be similar to the does in the area. A great book about tracking is Big Bucks The Benoits Way. They spend a great deal of time showing and talking about track charecteristics.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

A big bucks track is east to tell the diference from a does. Skidmark in his shorts needs to brush up on his scouting. I can tell the difference. Maybe their hoofs are alot alike but let me tell you size matters!

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

I'm with JerseyJim
compare the tracks and hunt the bigger deer, I have hunted in Maine and when you see a big track you know , maybe not the size of the rack but the size of the deer. when you come upon a bruiser it really hits home and you say " now thats gotta be a buck". but the only way to find a big racked buck is to find him in his tracks

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

As NHBuck said, "Big Bucks the Benoit Way" is a good book to start you in the right direction if you are unfamiliar with tracking.

Yes there is a difference between buck and doe tracks, but the difference will vary depending on which region you hunt. There are many variables to consider. Learning to read tracks takes time and commitment, and even the best of trackers are always learning.

If you are reading articles that say there is no difference between a buck and a doe track, you are reading very misleading articles.

I can start you off with some basic tracking tips, but the only way to improve is with experience, which means some serious footwork and the ability to pay close attention to detail. Snow is a huge benefit when it comes to tracking, but that doesn't mean that it is useless on bare ground.

Since you are talking about tracks in the mud, I will focus on that. First of all, you don't want to concentrate on one imprint. If the mud is quite soft, even a small doe might leave dewclaw prints. Is the deer running, walking, or trotting? It makes a huge difference. Therefore, look at where the other tracks are placed in relation to the first. A walking doe will not have much space (width-wise) in between prints. A mature buck will have more "staggered" tracks (if walking). If you see 4 deeply imbedded tracks close together (often overlapping), and then no more tracks until 10 or more feet away, this is obvioulsy a running deer (or, "on the jump" as we call it).

Big, mature bucks will have a much more flat and wide imprint than average deer. Where I'm from, big bucks will dress over 200 pounds,
and a big buck track is not easily overlooked by an experienced hunter (as DelcoJim pointed out). I realize that each region is different, but I also feel that every deer hunter can benefit from identifying and studying tracks more closely.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

i was taught that the does will have one foot imprint within another...they walk llike a lady, one foot in front of another .....the boys are walking side by side like men do....so they leave a single track,side by side... i didnt believe it, but after spending so much time in the woods, i'm tendin' to believe it....but not 100%

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

it is impossible to tell to sex of any animal by the foot print. Like some others have said the bigger and deeper the track the bigger and heavier the deer. Since most bucks are bigger it leads you to believe the bigger tracks are of a buck but not always true. There is no way to tell a 100 lb buck track from a 150 lb doe. If anything you will be thinking the doe is the buck. Seeing any tracks is a good thing. That lets you know there are deer in the area. But never count on a monster buck just because you saw a monster track

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

Good point treehunter we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I,m sure my accuracy rate isn,t even close to 100 % but I feel I can tell the difference alot of the times.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

Well Motown I am obviously not the "expert tracker" that you believe you are. My post suggested that alot of people think a track is a buck's because of the dew claw imprint nothing else. If you can tell the diffenence in a 150 lb. bucks tracks compared to a 150 lb. does tracks you may need to contact the scientist that can't and explain your findings. I spend alot of time in the woods and believe I am a pretty decent hunter. Sometimes there are tracks I see that I am pretty confident were made by a buck. On the other hand I have never seen a track that i would be confident enough to bet money on to quess the sex. If you don't mind why don't you explain to us how you distinguish the difference.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

Don't try telling that to most hunters where I'm from!

Unless a person can't tell the difference between moose and deer tracks, a monster track is a pretty good indication of a monster buck;)

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

Well skid row, many people on here have posted as to clues they use to determain a bucks track. I know my area, and the deer in it after scouting and months of hunting. A mature doe here in Kansas is about 150 to 175 lbs. A mature buck will be about 180 to 250. After i see a buck that I couldn,t shoot I make it a point to look at his tracks when I get down from my stand. I look for depth in the soil, a wider stance, dew claw imprint, a hoof drag, their weight spreads their hoof apart futher. Maybe I just think I know the difference, but it keeps me going back and anticipating that monster comming into range on my next hunt. I once saw 2 big tracks with 4 smaller ones in front of it. Unless their is a 6 legged deer out there I would guess that there was a big boy smacking those suger walls.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

This all reminds me of a guy I met while on a hunt. He swore he could tell the difference between buck and doe droppings?? He was good!!!!:D

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

In general, no. If there is a Deer processor in your area, go into the cooler with a tape measure and check the relative size differences between the does and bucks and the weights of the same deer. There is very little difference in the physical size of an adult deer regardless of the weight. As for the size of a track based on the weight, unless you have "calibrated" eyeballs, the difference between the depth of a track of a 185# buck and a 150# doe in the same soil conditions is indistinguishable. There are exceptions to all rules and a truly huge Buck will without doubt have a larger (deeper) track than the average Doe, but on the other hand his track will also be larger than the average Buck so consider what you are trying to achieve. Soil conditions, weather conditions and the speed at which the animal was moving will change the appearance of the track to the point where it is impossible to make a distinction. Rely more on the location of the track and the proximity of other sign than the size to determine the sex.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

I guess in a nut shell some can tell the difference and some can,t.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

you gotta see to beleive , i am not saying i can always look at a track and say thats a doe, or thats a buck , but when hunting in maine i have see a few ,, just a few that i would have bet the truck were definitely BUCKS, in Pa, where i live i would say i have not seen a track that i could tell the sex , there are so many and the areas where i go are relatively small that i don't take note of tracks as much in Pa.
but in Maine, tracks of any kind get rarer so when i see them i pay closer attention.
the Big Does seem to be a just a lttlte bigger than PA Does , but the Big Bucks , seem to be a good Deal Bigger than Pa Bucks, I am not talking antler size , and there are exceptions to every rule , but if " I" wanted and big Buck , "I" am heading North , plus it feels like real wilderness or as close as you can get without seeing the ROCKY MOUNTAINS, for me

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

That's what it boils down to. Reading tracks is like anything else, it takes practice. It takes a trained eye with an attention to detail. Nobody can claim to be right 100% of the time, but the more practice you get the more accurate you will become. I am no expert tracker, but from the responses here I would guess most haven't had the opportunity or desire to try tracking.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

i think i know him, lol........my friend said that the bucks will leave a clump, does won't.......he's a deer killing machine, so i dont know what to believe.......but if i see nay fresh nuggest, stuck together or not, i know the deer are there and where there are does, the bucks will be nearby......

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

I know I can't tell. In the summer when they come out in the open I can see the bucks and does and where they walk. Then I go over and look at their tracks and for the most part can't tell the difference other than extream size. Had one buck at 200 + lbs and his tracks did stand out so when the pre season scouting came I always thought I could recognize his tracks. In this case I did take him and the jumbo tracks stopped. Have had a new jumbo track for two tears now and can't put a x on him, I do find his size tracke in conjunction with scrapes. I hear a car nearby took a monster this year, hope it wasn't him but the track has been absent for a while now.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

Still say read " Big Bucks The Benoit Way". These guys hunt the Canadian border or northern most woods of Maine, NH and VT. They get on a track and follow it until they get the deer. Often times they will track the same deer for days simply based on the track and it's unique charecteristics. They do a great job of breaking down tracking and all that is involved and they do track on bare ground. Of course they also encounter snow at times during the season due to where they hunt. If you ever get a chance to see one of their tracking seminars it is worth the price of admission. I have yet to take one by their method but I have been flagged by the same deer 4 times in one day and tracked him over 6 miles from where I picked up his track until I lost shooting light. I don't believe as others stated that anyone can be 100% accurate but there are tell tale signs in some areas of the country based on body weight of the deer etc.. that help you narrow it down significantly beyond pure guess work.

RE: tracks in the mud?
 

Like the two Jims say, you look for bigger tracks. Specifically, here in western MT, any unsplayed track that measures more than 2 1/8" wide is about 99.9% likely to be a buck, probably 3 1/2 years old or more.