Pond Boss Forums GENERAL QUESTIONS Pond Boss Hunting 2015/2016

And no need to shrug off the question, we're all friends here and will remain so irregardless of the subject matter. How do you, RAH, perceive the elimination of the best genetics as beneficial to herd management?

Thanks RAH. One property the shots typically are 30 - 100 yds., but could be 200 if the deer is out in the one CRP field. The other one is completely different. It's a large farm, they don't own much if any into the woods that borders it, but there are a lot of ditches running through the middle of the farm fields that have heavy growth/trees/shrubs from the ditches out about 20-30 yds. on either side of the ditch, and they have an abandoned RR track that also is overgrown and not planted. With the expanse of the fields, the shots are LONG and a 200 yd shot would be considered a close shot. I could use the long range rifle there if it was legal for deer and shoot way further than I've practiced, and I've practiced out to a hair over 3/4 of a mile.

The fields were mostly corn, and they are all harvested, chopped and chiseled now. It's relatively hard to stalk a deer when all you have to hide in is a chiseled mucky corn field.

Taking mature bucks is about maturity, not genetics. As others have already explained, nutrition and age are most important for trophy racks. Keeping the doe to buck ratio low means that only the biggest and healthiest bucks breed. It is the doe to buck ratio that drives herd improvement.

Herd improvement as defined by? Are we talking mature bucks, or trophy bucks? I would imagine that they are not automatically one and the same. I don't know that I hear hunters proclaim "I am a mature buck hunter" very often, but I do hear "I'm after a trophy buck" a lot.

If genetics are third on the list of important attributes necessary for trophy buck production, after food and age, then like fish I'm assuming they are the most difficult to manipulate. We can feed our fish and plant food plots for the deer, and we can release those younger fish with high Wr just like we can pass on those younger deer. But what do we do about genetics? From what I've read on the forum through the years, we breed selectively and cull, repeating as necessary, until we see the results we hoped for. We cull the less desirable fish, not those that show the greatest potential.

Wildlife biologists define herd improvement. If you are interested, see my link to a textbook on the subject. Folks study such things and have careers in this field of study.

Tony, I agree.

But the reality is that when the rut is on, whitetail bucks travel great distances. Without a high fence, or a VERY deep pocket, it's impossible to hold the deer on property that you and only you control or manage. So, unless you have the cooperation of people in a mile or more radius of your hunting ground, letting the buck that you'd like to see as a trophy in a few years walk might not be it's ticket to him surviving this hunting season.

I've given up on setting my sights on taking one large particular buck. I tried that a few years ago with a few different bucks only to 1) never see them again or 2) find it dead, shot and not recovered by somebody on an adjoining property.

I've since switched my thoughts to providing the food and cover that deer need, and if one comes by that I'd shoot on the last day of the season, I'll shoot it.

My focus is on putting a few deer in the freezer anyway, so I am not holding out for a trophy. If one walks by, that's great, but I won't specifically hunt for one. Been there, done that and the tag doesn't make for good soup.

Scott, you've touched on exactly where I was headed next. Wild deer do not live in a static environment, unlike the fish in our ponds. I suppose I could head down to the river and institute a feeding program at a convenient spot on the bank, similar to a food plot for deer, and probably encourage a few catfish to hang around and reap the benefits of that feed I'm throwing. But if those fish travel downstream and get caught on a legal trotline after I've grown them to a larger size, I have no reason to gripe. That's just the way it is.

If I have food plots for the deer and I watch them come and browse on my trail cam, then my neighbors harvest them legally, I still have no gripe coming. That's how it works, why be upset? The fish in my pond belong to me, and only I have a say on how they are harvested. Those deer are a shared resource, and belong to the people of the state. And just like managing fish, not everyone will share in my idea of what constitutes proper management, nor should they be made to abide only by what I feel is acceptable harvest practice.

That's my problem with deer management. Is it really management, or simply a terrestrial equivalent of adding cover and/or attractant to the pond, in order to try and concentrate the fish for easier angling?

I thinking it may be the latter, and it's masked behind management. And if that's your thing, then it's cool with me so long as it's legal. Just step up and own it...."I killed this deer because it was the biggest I've seen." Not so much improving the herd, as improving the space above the fireplace.

Neighbor just texted me, he and a buddy are hunting on my place. No bucks, passed on some does, but two bobcats were seen. Very cool.

To each their own. The wooden beams are 6x6.




Had a pair of bald eagles land late morning (one above me in the same tree and one in a tree 10 yards away). Build it and they will come...

RAH I can't quite make it out, what do I see that's metallic? A scythe or two? I see the single tree, very nice work, and jealous over the eagles!

My wife and I built the porch about 25 years ago. You picked out the decorations pretty well. There is also a hanging blue heron mobile. We need to argue some more next spring over a beer out on that porch! But I need to go light on the beer. Have lost 57 pounds (was 232, now 175) since July. Not sure how I let myself get so fat! Back to the tree if I can find a spot out of the wind.

It's beautiful. Be safe, and good hunting. Very windy down here also.

(and congrats on the weight loss!)

RAH my man, I believe that I go after large antlered deer because I like to get older animals. One can try to age a deer on the hoof but many times you are really kidding yourself/ourselves. If I see a deer that is at or outside the ears, 16", I know I've got at least a 2 year old animal (beam width is a better indicator of age by far then point count). In an area where the hunters are taking deer on 10 to 40 acre parcels, a 2 year old deer is what you hope for. Well, of course you hope for better and I have done better but you get the point.

There is no way to manage an animal for genetics when it is part of the commons. You can have 1.5 year old deer, that most people couldn't age, and they are a 6x6 which is legal to shoot under any government law. You could then have a 5.5 year deer that is a 3x3 and may or may not be able to be shot under some states laws. You should shoot the 5.5 and not the 1.5 if you want better genetics (in the given scenario) but this just can't be legislated. Even a hunter of good faith could be fooled if they are not seasoned and seasoning comes from TIF (Time In Field).

I think Michigan is starting to go in the right direction with many county's requiring that the deer must have 3 points on one side. This saves many of the 1.5 year class (except the best unfortunately) and also makes hunters look over an animal better before they shoot. Of course this is my opinion. Many people just want to point and shoot anything they see, I understand that position especially when people are not blessed with the hunting land some have.

High Fencing might have a place here in the USA but not @ my place. I have hunted high fence places and have been guest at them. Some are so large of an area you would not know it is high fenced. There are +'s and -'s

Tracy

I judge age by mass and minimum spread out past the ears, which certainly is not an exact measure. Number of points is really not a factor. There are certainly regional differences, but I feel pretty confident that a heavy rack out past the ears is at least a 3 1/2 yr old on my place. When you let one walk, you are sure that you are not ending hem early. Nobody can control what others choose to do on their places, as long as its legal. I took a lot of young animals as I was first learning to hunt. Any deer is a trophy when you start out. Saw a different mature buck with very short tines. He would be a cull if I get the chance to take him.

Genetics in a wild herd is a crap shoot. A genetically great buck can breed with a "junk" doe and vice versa.

If you keep the doe to buck ratio low, only bucks that win the fights breed. This increases the proportion of trophy bucks over time. This drives many hunting regulations like Indiana's 1 buck rule. It does take time.

RAH, I used to believe all that stuff but not so much anymore. We are running about 2 to 1 right now doe to buck. Back when I moved here it was about 8 to 1, still not bad. I have seen a button buck running a train on a 7 point on a doe. Then, "switch". I have seen great big monsters run off the sissy buck while another sissy buck takes his babe and breeds her in front of him. I have seen so many button bucks breed during the December rut that I've lost count.

As a general rule do the studs get the lady's? Maybe. As with human's though there are plenty of lesser than's that get the pretty girl.

I agree Dave. So when those good genetics do manage to beat the odds and manifest themselves, why is that the deer for the wall?

Interesting conversation...

To provide an analogy...If you have a pond with LMB. Do you manage it to prevent overpopulation by harvesting the biggest and most spectacular LMB or by harvesting the unspectacular fish?

And yet the results of such strategies have been shown over and over again. Its called science, based on actual documented evidence. Indiana is already seeing the returns. Fortunately, the folks in charge make decisions based on this science, not intuition.

Not taking sides on this one. I see logic on both sides. Just throwing out food for thought.

I could also provide an analogy of human children vs fish. We want our kids to be the perfect weight for their height and are concerned about that little short kindergarten kid that weighs 130 lbs as being unhealthy. In the pond community, Wr/Rw, the consensus seems to be that fish that are overweight for their length are the spectacular ones.

Which train of thought is correct? Are these even valid analogies?

I admit that I lean to the analytical side myself, but acknowledge that science is not infallible, and is often besieged by previously unknown variables that rear their heads at the most inopportune moments. Most embarrassingly whenever I think I have a firm grasp of cause and effect.

If I take great pains to plant food plots and harvest deer as I believe to be correct, all in the name of herd management, I'm liable to point to my efforts as being the cause of any noticeable improvements. But as has already been established, deer are not static and they move. How can I be sure that a neighbor two miles away, who has implemented a management/harvest program at odds with my own, isn't actually responsible for the herd improvements, and I am really reaping the rewards of his efforts, not my own?

With the fish in my pond I'm pretty sure it's all me. Not so with deer, unless I have them fenced in, or have convinced all the adjoining property owners for miles around to throw their lot in with mine and adopt my strategies.

Is this A Modest Proposal?

The same can be said for air pollution. Why should I not burn plastic on my place if the neighbors might anyway? That attitude is why public restrooms look the way they do.