The most familiar form of culling is the practice of removing spikes from the population. The preponderance of evidence from both captive and free-ranging herds indicates spikes do always remain a little behind their forked yearling cousins in the antler department. Nutrition is the most obvious, but all of the obstacles that keep us from harming the gene pool also keep us from trying to improve it. At least three well-designed studies have attempted to improve the genetic potential of a deer population through culling of bucks with below average antlers.
In one study, they captured more than 5, bucks during a year period and culled more than 1, of them because their antlers measured below average for their age. This is much more intensive than any recreational harvest scenario and more than all but the most intensely managed herds. In all cases, researchers found no evidence of a genetic response to their selective removal. This creates a situation where a disproportionate number of older deer are removed compared to hunters taking deer at random.
Antler-based restrictions are usually implemented when managers have a high number of hunters and they want to limit harvest to allow bucks to reach an older age. Although some hunters see all of these restrictions as a trophy management scheme, the purpose was really just to allow the age structure to mature somewhat. In many cases, depending on the criteria used, these restrictions mostly just allow yearlings to survive another year.
In heavily hunted areas, most bucks are removed as soon as they reach the minimum criteria. Some have expressed concern these harvest restrictions could high-grade the bucks and remove the best genes.
In the yearling age class, a large proportion will be spikes and some will have branched antlers. If you establish antler restrictions so that bucks must have forked antlers to be legal, the best yearlings of each fawn crop are removed. This is a much more intensive selection scenario, but is it enough to affect the gene pool?
All of the obstacles listed above make it extremely difficult for hunters to exert selection intensive enough to change the genetic make-up at the population level. If the intensive culling research was not able to make a detectable genetic change it is doubtful antler restrictions on less intensive recreational harvest could degrade the gene pool in any meaningful way.
Hunter harvest is not the only thing removing deer from the population, nor is potential antler size the main criteria for removal. The ideal buck to doe ratio in this situation would be 1 buck for every does, but the ratio could be much closer to even on very large acreages or high fenced properties with more control over deer harvest.
In this situation, there is no doubt that nutrition could be an issue contributing to poor antler mass. In fact, it probably is. Furthermore, poor nutrition would only make the skewed buck to doe ratio example described in the paragraph above even worse for bucks.
Poor nutrition is a result of too many deer for the habitat, or in other words, not enough food for the deer herd. It all boils down to the number of available pounds of deer food per mouth per day.
Of course, an insufficient diet may not necessarily be of a caloric nature, but one related to the availability of minerals. Mineral deficiency is most common on sandy soils or in areas that receive high amounts of precipitation.
If this sounds like you, listen up. If bucks are reaching maturity and still have weak mass measurements, then the deer management strategies on your property should focus on increasing the availability of these potentially limiting factors. The objectives should be to provide more protein, minerals phosphorus and calcium and trace minerals for all deer. Here are few ways to get the job done:. Get new Buck Manager articles by email it's free! Deer feeders will make them suspicious.
I feed pounds of shelled corn and pounds of roasted soybeans every 2 weeks on my farm in upstate Pennsylvania. Definitely see increased antler mass and improved body size in the harvested bucks.
Fields of corn and alfalfa do not hurt. Plant several strips of buckwheat and turnips and sugar beets. The deer and turkeys love the buckwheat. My son and a friend and I hunt on acres and we plant food plots for deer. We take some doe,s no small bucks 6 points or less , but our neighbors will take a spike or another buck but will not take a doe! This is what we face in trying to raise big racks. The Deer love it and go back to the ground scrape. Our cameras show multiple deer feeding each day.
And yes we have noticed a significant size and health of the deer. Turkeys too. So if you only shoot 6 or bigger you are leaving the small spikes to run around and breed does, thus depleting your chance for big racks, I think your neighbors are helping to raise big racks. When you harvest your bucks if you can age them by their teeth to see how old they are, you might be surprised what you find. First year hunting Southeastern Ohio.
The area has great genetics. Each year, they are cast off and the growing process starts all over again. How do they do it? The easiest of those variables a deer manager can control is diet. To help bucks produce bigger racks this summer, provide them with protein and minerals in large quantities.
This not only helps with antler growth during the spring and summer, but it also helps does that are raising fawns and the overall health of the deer herd. There are lesser quantities present of potassium, magnesium, iron and zinc. Providing bucks with high levels of calcium and phosphorous can jumpstart antler growth. These minerals are beneficial for pregnant does, and aid in milk production, metabolism and bone growth.
Providing bucks with nutrition during the off season is vital to antler growth.
0コメント