Deer and Deer Hunting magazine

[BLACKJACK]

Went camping last weekend and caught up on some of my back issues of Deer and Deer Hunting magazine. I highly recommend it for anybody that likes to deer hunt, they go beyond the hunt and shoot story and usually have some good biology related articles written by biologists. The last issue had an article on fawn morality and one on the merits of culling spike bucks. Good reads!!! I highly recommend the magazine!!

[PerchJerker]

I agree, I am a big fan of Deer and Deer Hunting. Lots of good info in there that is not the same old hunting technique or hunting success type stories.

[surewood]

I agree good reading for crazed whitetail hunters.

[Thorn]

You had to read a magazine to tell you the merits of culling a spike buck? Or management buck, or non trophy?

Heck all ya had to do was ask me.

They TASTE GREAT!...LOL

[PerchJerker]

the merits of culling a spike buck?

There are 2 distinct schools of thought on this, both with scientific evidence to "support" their side.

I am firmly of the opinion that in Minnesota you should NOT shot spikes and say that you are improving herd genetics. If you want to shot a spike because you want a deer in the freezer that's fine with me --- but don't do it under the guise of improving genetics.

All bucks need age to grow big antlers, and spikes will grow big antlers if you let them get 2-3 years older. They may not have the same trophy-class antlers as the "perfect" deer, but the way things are in Minnesota ----- lots of small blocks of private land so deer are on several properties throughout their life, no high fences to keep "your" deer at home until they're 4.5 years old, hunting during the rut so young bucks are shot, etc. ---- it's not reasonable to believe that you can improve genetics.

Improving genetics is something that applies to situations like texas, where you have thousands of acres locked up in a high fence, so no deer are leaving, no new deer are coming in, and you can control what deer get shot and which deer do the breeding. But none of that applies to Minnesota.

[B. Amish]

Originally Posted By: Thorn

the merits of culling a spike buck?

There are 2 distinct schools of thought on this, both with scientific evidence to "support" their side.

I am firmly of the opinion that in Minnesota you should NOT shot spikes and say that you are improving herd genetics. If you want to shot a spike because you want a deer in the freezer that's fine with me --- but don't do it under the guise of improving genetics.

All bucks need age to grow big antlers, and spikes will grow big antlers if you let them get 2-3 years older. They may not have the same trophy-class antlers as the "perfect" deer, but the way things are in Minnesota ----- lots of small blocks of private land so deer are on several properties throughout their life, no high fences to keep "your" deer at home until they're 4.5 years old, hunting during the rut so young bucks are shot, etc. ---- it's not reasonable to believe that you can improve genetics.

Improving genetics is something that applies to situations like texas, where you have thousands of acres locked up in a high fence, so no deer are leaving, no new deer are coming in, and you can control what deer get shot and which deer do the breeding. But none of that applies to Minnesota.

Amen, to that.

[Thorn]

A spike will still show very bad genetics at 2-3.

A spike will never be more than 130 class max even at 5.

Tx deer population is over 4 million, so how are they all contained on a high fenced area?...LOL

The public lands are over 1.2 milion acres and other private land is no where near being all high fenced.

Not every place in TX is high fenced, in fact there's more low fenced opportunity than high fenced. Heck they even have free range exotics. But as well, there's high fences all the way around MN, even in Iowa just for Trophy deer hunting. So there's no way it's just a Texas Thang.

I read a trophy buck from Iowa cost one guy $$$45,000 dollars at Timberhhost Ranch..namely this one.

cut and paste........

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee142/mrniceguy61471/IOWABK.jpg

----------

So getting good genetics back into MN deer herds are not feesable? I so,so beg to differ.

Let's see what MN regs have to offer for providing future hunters a buck of a lifetime.

BTW Blackjack, I'm sure the magazine is a darn good read. ANy tips in there would prolly help us all understand a few things since it's factually representing deer biology with sound scientific study and hunting disorders....LOL

[PerchJerker]

Sorry Thorn, but your "facts" are not accurate. There are studies that show that spikes will develop into true trophy class bucks with age and nutrition. Genetics is not as important as age and nutrition when it comes to growing big antlers.

A distinction that needs to be made when judging spikes --- is it a fawn, is it a 1.5 year old, is it older than 1.5 years, and was it subject to an injury or poor nutrition that limited its antler growth.

Another important thing to consider is this --- a lot of guys that are shooting small bucks to "improve genetics" are missing the other half of the equation, which is that you also need to protect the young bucks with the so-called "good" genetics so they can be your future breeders. The only way you can protect young bucks like that is if you have a contained deer herd that is being managed --- either inside a high fence, or on private ground that is thousands of acres so a deer spends it's entire life on that property. That situation doesn't occur in places with lots of small blocks of private land and lots of public land.

Another important point that is often missed when guys are talking about "improving genetics" --- it's not just the buck's genetics, but also the doe's genetics that come into play. In the highly managed herds and the ranches with the high dollar hunts, they are keeping track of the does and which ones produce the fawns that eventually have the biggest racks, and they are managing their herd to keep those doe's bloodlines prominant. In other words, they cull does too.

[Thorn]

Man I could dump facts on you all day like a rock under a waterfall. Would that change your mind?..prolly not, you head would still be hard as a rock....LOL.

Sure this study was done in a pen but what instigated it?

Not only that, they still do research on harvested deer too. You'll see less spikes during good years with adequate rainfall providing good nutrition. But during the years with poor graze including crop stress you'll see the ones that need culling.

---------

Let's examine some of the findings from the twenty seven continuous years of Kerr WMA deer pen data:

Data indicates the best time to harvest spike‑antlered yearlings and make genetic gain in a deer herd is during periods of nutritional stress, such as droughts, or when beginning a habitat management program before the range has had a chance to recover.

Giving priority to removal of spikes during that time will help accelerate genetic gains. All antler growth is genetically based and environmentally influenced. Nutrition is an environmental influence.

In order to grow deer with large antlers, a manager should manage for the best genetic deer possible, and simultaneously manage the habitat for the best nutrition possible. This will insure those deer reach their genetic potential.

At four years of age, deer that were forked‑antlered as yearlings produced three feet more gross Boone and Crockett inches than deer that were spike‑antlered as yearlings.

Of all deer classified as spike‑antlered yearlings, NONE scored higher than 130 gross Boone and Crockett points at maturity. At maturity, spike‑antlered yearlings averaged 17% less live body weight than yearlings with six or more points.

The number of antler points at 1.5 years was closely correlated with the number of antler points at 2.5, 3.5, and 4.5 years of age.

It was demonstrated that spike‑antlered yearlings produced smaller antlers (points, tine length, mass, circumference, beam length and spread) than forked‑antlered yearlings throughout their lifetime.

Future antler quality and body weight can be predicted based on yearling antler characteristics.

Improvement of gross Boone and Crockett scores within a herd could be accomplished by selectively culling spike-antlered yearling bucks.

The degree of success is directly proportional to the intensity of selection placed on the herd.

------------

What has MN done to ensure future hunters a chance for a Trophy Buck?

[SpitnArgueDuckClub*]

Man I could dump facts on you all day like a rock under a waterfall. Would that change your mind?..prolly not, you head would still be hard as a rock....LOL.

What has MN done to ensure future hunters a chance for a Trophy Buck?

Hey Thorn, if you were "the man" over seeing the deer herd for the Mn Dept of Wildlifewhat would you do to ensure future hunters a chance for a Trophy Buck?

[Thorn]

visit a game ranch in TX...LOL

[Boar]

Soooooo... how about that magazine... it's a good one, yep.

[B. Amish]

Man I could dump facts on you all day like a rock under a waterfall. Would that change your mind?..prolly not, you head would still be hard as a rock....LOL.

Sure this study was done in a pen but what instigated it?

Not only that, they still do research on harvested deer too.

i shouldn't even ask... but do you have any other sources for your 'facts' besides the famed kerr wma in texas?

[Thorn]

why? no other facts would even come close to the research there. It's actually been going on since the late 50's. But anyway, does a MN study count?

It is our goal to improve the habitat conditions in order to effectively manage for white-tailed deer. There is a healthy population of white-tailed deer in the surrounding area, but there has been a decline in the management area. Effective management of the land could influence the current population to move on the management area. We want to maintain a healthy population of the current 13-22 deer/sq. mile.

In the late 1980’s, Minnesota regulations changed to the antlerless permit system. Minnesota is broken up into 121 different permit areas that are for the different areas of habitat.

The system that Minnesota uses to get their antlerless permits is similar to the technique Wisconsin uses to manage their populations. One of the main differences is that they do not use carrying capacity because they feel that you cannot theoretically calculate it (Lenarz and McAninch). Minnesota uses an "Accounting" model, where they name the fawn births “interest” and the hunting and non-hunting mortality as the “withdrawal.” When a hunter acquires their license, they get an automatic buck license then can apply for an antlerless permit through a lottery. If there is a permit area where there weren’t enough applicants, then the hunters have an option to buy a Deer Management Permit for antlerless only. There are 121 permit areas in Minnesota and the management area is in number 167. The biological carrying capacity of this area is 30-40 deer/sq. mi., and the pre-fawn density is 13-22 deer/sq. mi. (Minnesota DNR).

--------------

I mean seriously come on now. To get back to what I would do. Shoot more deer.

simple, any hunt is a trophy in itself. Getting a big Bruin is just a bonus. I shoot anything legal, so I'm not biased. I am disapointed in those that think MN should be knmown for Trophy Bucks. It's just what has brought down hunting in states like TX.

Heck everybody thinks TX is all high fenced, it Ain't.

But, try and make every land owner between here and there to abide by QDM and it'll never happen...NEVER.

My question as to what has MN done to ensure a quality buck was to see how much influnce the DNR has had on Minnesota Hunters. I never said they havn't done anything. I have said that MN has been doing it wrong for years though. I believe things are turning around and maybe it's a natural cause due to disease such as TB but the population is above carrying capacity.

Heck there are studies from world known Minnesota Professors that have studied this and are some of the ones I get facts from, so from me it's never a personal idealogical statement.

But for the most part there has to be adequate carrying capcity that will sustain a healthy deer population during feast or famin years {drought, natural disaster, prolonged winter etc.}in all areas for hunting recreation.

The panel is adjusting how the deer herd should be. I do see some good coming from this. Heck you can even input your opinions online to them nowadays.

Knockdown the population and you'll see more improved bucks in most areas spikes included will on the other hand be more noticeable.

PULL,.... CUT 'EM

[Mark Christianson]

Good posts Perchjerker!!!!!!!!!!!!

As always, a very nice factual posts.

[BLACKJACK]

Not sure how to respond, this post has taken off in many directions!!!!

Its obvious that deer hunters are passionate (and vocal) about their sport!!

On a subject that is as heavily studied as whitetail deer, you're bound to find contradictory studies. Different methods, different parts of the country, different time periods. This idea of culling spike bucks is a prime example, I've seen studies for and against it. You have to take the science and apply some common sense.

The three things you need for big bucks is time alive, good genetics, and nutrition. Minnesota deer have good genetics, and except in tough winters, they have good nutrition, time alive is the big problem. In Mn, a generic statement to 'shoot every spike buck to improve genetics' is simply wrong. A small spike was probably a late born fawn to a late bred doe fawn the year before.

Also, in this internet age, its easy to find some small snippet of information that will support your argument, no matter what it is. Until I see the full article, and see who wrote it, I'll be very skeptical. Thats why I like and recommended D&DH magazine, it has good articles writtten by biologists. That combined with some common sense and life experience will hopefully make me (and you) into better deer hunters.

[BLACKJACK]

One more thing, my other post was getting too long.

I personally think the MN DNR is doing a great job!!!!! I've been deer hunting in MN for 30 years and the deer hunting right now is as good as I've ever seen it. I remember the days when a party of four would have only one or no doe permits, it got to be a long season when all you can shoot are bucks!!

Nowadays you can see deer most times out, some parts of the state have high enough populations where you can shoot up to 5 deer, and you have the potential to shoot a big buck any time out. I purposedly didn't use the word 'trophy' buck because to me every deer I shoot is a trophy.

The DNR has been doing surveys, and have responded - thats all I can ask for. I hope that they keep listening to the majority of hunters that just want to see deer and don't let a vocal few push them into big deer management. I don't always agree with what they do, but at least they're doing something.

[Thorn]

But, but, but.....those biologist in Deer and Deer hunting magazines aren't from Texas!!!LOL

Heck that's what people keep saying, don't you have anything that's not TX related? Yepper, I have many researched facts from MN as well. Heck they even did a study in Millacs about over population and it blew their minds as to what will happen without further intervention. I agree that it is a per zone management necessity. It's also an idea thought of opinions that the MN DNR takes into management practices from locals. I see deer running through the town of Isanti and everywhere else. Heck I agree each hunt should be cherished for the memory. That's the real Trophy. I bet the MN NG does some cool stuff too.

As far as a snipit, trust me ya'll wouldn't take kindly to a full blown article much less read it, but I'll try. As for me I can account for each post through facts originating from highly respectable peopole that do thier job daily, and do it very well.

So don't ask me, I'm just a [PoorWordUsage] whiteboy.

Ask the real envirotechs to answer your deer biology delimas.

Farmland Wildlife Population and Research Group

Richard Kimmel, Group Leader

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

Farmland Wildlife Populations and Research

Rte 1, Box 181

Madelia, MN 56062-9744

tel. (507) 642-8478

fax (507) 642-3178

E-mail. [email protected]

Responsibilities

This group is responsible for providing information needed to manage major wildlife species in Minnesota's farmland zone which comprises all or parts of 74 counties and totals almost 49,000 square miles. To accomplish this responsibility, the group (1) coordinates and interprets population surveys; (2) conducts research which provides wildlife management information; (3) develops techniques needed to monitor and manipulate wildlife populations, manage critical wildlife habitats, and reduce or prevent wildlife damage; (4) evaluate management practices and programs; and (5) provides technical assistance and information to other DNR staff and the public.

whos is he?

Dick KIMMEL (AND COMPANY)

From Southcentral Minnesota.

Has played bluegrass music since the 1950's.

Plays mandolin, guitar, and clawhammer banjo. Also a singer and songwriter.

Has written numerous articles and record reviews for Bluegrass Unlimited and other publications. Has written album liner notes for several artists, including Del McCoury.

Has a Ph.D in biology. Works as a wildlife biologist for Minnesota's Department of Natural Resources.

Hobby: wild turkey hunting.

Performs with his band Kimmel and Company and also in a duo with guitarist Adam Granger.

Called "The Ambassador of Bluegrass" because of his international involvements in bluegrass music. He chairs the IBMA's International Committee.

-----

I'm in need of some reading material. Heck I might learn something from that D&D huntin magazine. Since it'll be a shut in this weekend from rain I'll try to check it out.

[USPENAMC]

so if 22 is allowed does that mean you can use a 17hmr too??

[USPENAMC]

by the way dont plan to i have a 30 06 but just wondering

[bigbucks]

It would seem the obvious answer is no since it's less than a .22 caliber to my understanding.