Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Kingwood, TX
    Posts
    1,633
    Thanks
    51
    Thanked 197 Times in 155 Posts
    Congratulations
    7
    Congratulated 1 Time in 1 Post
    I would agree, except competition contributes to loss of deer habitat/available browse. Since consumption is based on body weight it doesn't take near as many elk to eat up the deers' groceries. It's really hard to try to find a balance in it when you don't know what conditions you'll be dealt (precipitation) until after quotas have been set.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Carlin, NV
    Posts
    679
    Thanks
    95
    Thanked 97 Times in 94 Posts
    Congratulations
    36
    Congratulated 20 Times in 2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigSurArcher View Post
    This is just my opinion, but I think the increased elk abundance puts as much or more pressure on the mule deer as increased mule deer tag quotas....
    I do agree, I have hunted many a mountain full of deer then when the elk moved in, the deer moved out. But as time passed, the deer have started to move back in. I see it as when the elk first move in, deer have never heard or seen such a big animal so they get skittish. Once they get acclimated, they move back in. I do think the elk hurt the populations just in their browsing. Deer are picky eaters, have a set routine based on the time of year. If the elk just eat whatever, they sometimes decimate the forage deer would need.

    I personally put alot of blame on the tag quotas cause I have been seeing herds and buck quality go up in NE NV over the past few years. Then I see the results from this last year with over half of the hunting kill 3 points or less and I fear in a few years the buck quality will be absolutely pitiful.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N. CA
    Posts
    445
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 65 Times in 42 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 53 Times in 9 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by tdub24 View Post
    Then I see the results from this last year with over half of the hunting kill 3 points or less and I fear in a few years the buck quality will be absolutely pitiful.
    No kidding. I really wish more states would implement a minimum antler point harvest restriction for everyone but juniors, even if it were on an every other year basis or annual rotation within select adjacent unit groups. At the same time, I understand that not everyone is a "horn hunter," so there are definitely valid arguments for both sides.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Carlin, NV
    Posts
    679
    Thanks
    95
    Thanked 97 Times in 94 Posts
    Congratulations
    36
    Congratulated 20 Times in 2 Posts
    What I saw over here is the mature bucks obviously went into hiding due to all the road hunters. So all the young bucks with mama got slaughtered. Day after day, trucks would drive by with there little 15" forkie or maybe a 20" three point or multiples proudly displayed in the back of the truck. Then give me s*** for not fullfilling my tag. I truly hope I am significantly wrong and the buck quality will be just fine 3-5 years from now.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Kingwood, TX
    Posts
    1,633
    Thanks
    51
    Thanked 197 Times in 155 Posts
    Congratulations
    7
    Congratulated 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tdub24 View Post
    What I saw over here is the mature bucks obviously went into hiding due to all the road hunters. So all the young bucks with mama got slaughtered. Day after day, trucks would drive by with there little 15" forkie or maybe a 20" three point or multiples proudly displayed in the back of the truck. Then give me s*** for not fullfilling my tag. I truly hope I am significantly wrong and the buck quality will be just fine 3-5 years from now.


    I've seen that happening in the Gunnison Basin units since the winterkill a few years back. The first cpl years anything that was a 4pt was in serious danger, even if they were just 2yo deer.

    In our county here in TX we actually have antler restrictions and it irritates the ever living heck out of me. It promotes high grading of the younger age classes instead of age-based harvest based on what's needed for each age class. But like has been said earlier, not everyone is a horn hunter, but generally the more big horns that are produced the better the place is being managed.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N. CA
    Posts
    445
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 65 Times in 42 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 53 Times in 9 Posts
    I imagine there would be a number of differences between antler restrictions on whitetails vs mule deer. The high grading you talk about is probably more apt to occur in a whitetail hunts, although I could be wrong. It just seems like more young whitetail would have the potential to grow the minimum points required for harvest than a young mule deer.

    Packmule, here is an article you may find interesting that pertains to this subject.

    http://www.boone-crockett.org/news/f...ea=news&ID=152

    tdub24- Sorry this has gotten off topic from your original post, hopefully you don't mind?

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Kingwood, TX
    Posts
    1,633
    Thanks
    51
    Thanked 197 Times in 155 Posts
    Congratulations
    7
    Congratulated 1 Time in 1 Post
    Our restrictions are width related. There's no perfect plan to predict what deer will do or what their offspring will do bc of what's unseen in the doe, and recessive traits in the bucks that could emerge. What I have seen are bucks that start life with more points and more of a frame end up doing better than bucks that don't start out that way. I also see a lot of similarities when comparing younger bucks on our place to that of bucks I've left along until they were 5-7 years old. For our scenario, I'm more interested early on in beam lengths and points instead of width, which is just air space and doesn't add a whole lot to score. The more beam they have the more opportunity there is that they can add on points. Mule deer aren't that different when it comes to what they can grow since age, nutrition & genetics are the driving force behind what they are and what they can be. The MLD properties here are starting to produce some great mule deer and pretty much the same effort being put into those places as far as setting age criterias and culling to free up browse is what has been working for the whitetails for years.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Carlin, NV
    Posts
    679
    Thanks
    95
    Thanked 97 Times in 94 Posts
    Congratulations
    36
    Congratulated 20 Times in 2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigSurArcher View Post
    tdub24- Sorry this has gotten off topic from your original post, hopefully you don't mind?
    No worries, conversations "Back at the Tailgate" bounce from here to there and sometimes back around.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. If you missed the WY Antelope Deadline...
    By Mr_steve in forum Antelope
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-17-2014, 01:41 PM
  2. Nevada needs your help!
    By Drhorsepower in forum Guns, Muzzleloaders and Ammo
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-30-2013, 07:59 PM
  3. Nevada 32,34,35
    By chiefgobbler in forum Antelope
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-16-2013, 11:20 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-16-2013, 05:12 AM
  5. Idaho Fish AND MONEY, I mean GAME
    By MountainMann in forum Idaho
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-29-2011, 08:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •