|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 28, 2007 15:29:06 GMT -5
Lee's latest...
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier Hunter on Nov 28, 2007 15:39:59 GMT -5
The neck on thing is the size of a 55 gallon drum!
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Nov 28, 2007 15:51:55 GMT -5
that's what they look like with decent genetics and nutrition once they reach 5+years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2007 17:52:58 GMT -5
Does anyone believe that Indiana could have a better deer herd if the hunters themselves would pass on smaller bucks and try to manage the herd? Why does the DNR have to be the one to take on the responsiblity of creating bigger bucks for the hunters? I am still waiting on someone to explain to me how taking a young buck reduces the amount of big, old, mature bucks. This QDM stuff has a lot of holes in it if you ask me. If everyone takes mature bucks, that means there will be LESS mature bucks next year. It only stands to reason. Reverse the logic and think about this... If everyone agreed to shoot a 1.5 or 2.5 year old buck for a year or two and let the big ones pass, then the state would be crawling with mature bucks. I think the best thing is taking a mixture of age classes which leaves a natural mixture of buck ages.
|
|
|
Post by beehunter on Nov 28, 2007 18:05:15 GMT -5
Does anyone believe that Indiana could have a better deer herd if the hunters themselves would pass on smaller bucks and try to manage the herd? Why does the DNR have to be the one to take on the responsiblity of creating bigger bucks for the hunters? I am still waiting on someone to explain to me how taking a young buck reduces the amount of big, old, mature bucks. This QDM stuff has a lot of holes in it if you ask me. If everyone takes mature bucks, that means there will be LESS mature bucks next year. It only stands to reason. Reverse the logic and think about this... If everyone agreed to shoot a 1.5 or 2.5 year old buck for a year or two and let the big ones pass, then the state would be crawling with mature bucks. I think the best thing is taking a mixture of age classes which leaves a natural mixture of buck ages. That makes perfect sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by varmint101 on Nov 28, 2007 18:55:59 GMT -5
That doesn't make sense to me lol. If we all take young bucks how exactly does a buck get old again? Anyway that's not to the original post maybe you should start a new one.
Good job to Tiff and Lee again! Freakin awesome bucks! Hard work pays off. That ground doesn't plant itself and you've still got to be good enough to make the shot on a buck like that. That's hard enough on it's own!
|
|
|
Post by duff on Nov 28, 2007 19:50:50 GMT -5
Yea that is the same concept of a size limit on bass. It is set to allow the fish to reach a certain age before it is harvested. Protect the young until they reach a certain age class. Ever been to a lake where you can only catch 10-13" bass? If you raised the limit to 16" you would catch more 14-15" fish and smaller.
Anyways several factors other then hunters dictate survival of a deer year to year. Protecting older deer for a few years will only hurt your recruitment of older deer in years to come.
Since when have we worried about running on a different tangent then the original post?
|
|
|
Post by gobblerstopper on Nov 28, 2007 19:53:40 GMT -5
I see your point. Somewhat.
The percentage of bucks in most herds decreases as you increase age. Usually there are more 1.5's than 2.5 than 3.5's and so on. If you take mostly older bucks, won't there be more bucks of the same age class the following year?
|
|
|
Post by duff on Nov 28, 2007 20:36:18 GMT -5
That is exactly right.
In fish you can see a big flux in population dynamics year to year due to floods or other types of disturbance during breeding season that virtually destroy one year class. Doesn't hurt fishing that year, but in a few years it hurts the quality of fishing and recruitment for future.
All populations generally respond the same.
|
|