Deer are bigger outside Michigan

[Swamp Ghost]

http://www.thenewsherald.com/stories/011506/spo_20060115019.shtml

Deer are bigger outside Michigan

Jim Barta</B>


PUBLISHED: January 15, 2006

In years past, I've had very limited opportunities to hunt deer anywhere except here in Michigan.

I grew up with a gun or bow in my hands jumping from county to county in search of whitetails, but still, all of these locations were in the Great Lakes State.
While hunting here, I've been fortunate enough to harvest quite a few deer, including what I considered to be a few pretty good bucks.
My Michigan-only status changed this year when I managed to check out the hunting quality in a few other states.


Please see the link for the rest of the article -

(ModNote: Until we get some clearification on web sites that post disclaimers like:

© Copyright 2005 Heritage Newspapers, an affiliate of Journal Register Company
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast,
rewritten or redistributed without the written permission of the copyright holder.


Please just post the link to the article and a couple of lines w/by line.

Or if you have or obtain permission to redistribute please include the person/contact that you obtained that persmision from. thanks.

Thanks

ferg....)

[Whit1]

Nice article!

Certainly let's reduce the number of hunters as mentioned in the article about how difficult it is to get a non-resident license in some of the states that are mentioned. That's all we need, less revenue for the MDNR and a restriction on the numbers of those that hunt........PETA will love this!!!

The focus of the article is antlers and their size, somewhat proving the point of those who are against QDM/MARS (the two are NOT synonomous) that QDM/MARS is all about the health of the herd.

One hunters definition of a "trophy" is not universally held.

I just sit and shake my head in dismay over this type of selfish and misguided deer management.

[Belbriette]

Once upon a time, as compared to that occupied by Man, wildlife territory was immense and so was the possibility for the ressource to perpetuate itself
according to the natural best of the herd.

Currently, this whole natural picture is totally and severely upset in many ways.
In order to promote an "Optimal and Durable Conservation" of the wild species, this obvious change obviously impose a different approach of Man predation : the time of hunter-gatherers is far over, it has imperatively to be replaced by hunter-harvesters.

This notion of harvest implies that hunters must, above all, respect wildlife biology, ethology and ecology for the sake of biodiversity and ... of their close - or not - successors ...

Once more, it is possible, and that much more highly rewarding, to find pleasure in hunting while acting for the long lasting best of the hunted species.

In the vast majority of cases, who has an absolute survival need to kill any buck, rather than a doe, or a female fawn, before he has reached the natural breeding age ???

For the same reasons, roughly the same problem concerning european roe or red deers : this is why I post here.

[Swamp Ghost]

Nice article!



I thought so as well

[Linda G.]

I don't know Jim Barta, but I thought most of his expertise was in fishing. I don't know much about deer, but even I know why Michigan is different from the states he mentions, and it has nothing to do with the harvest.

I've hunted in all of the states he mentioned, and seen many a giant buck. I've also hunted in a number of states like Florida, Tennessee, and more southern states, where the climate is milder, and there's also a lot fewer deer than there is in Michigan-should be lots of giant bucks there, too, right?? But the deer there are smaller, and it's rare to hear of any decent racks at all.

All deer in warmer climates are smaller, no matter how perfect the habitat is. Mother Nature makes them bigger so they can survive in cooler climates-that's a biological fact. There's also a number of sub-species of deer, they're not all exactly alike.

But what makes states like Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Illinois different from us is habitat, lots of habitat, and lots of left over agricultural products, most especially corn. They also have mostly private land. Add good habitat, lots of food, private land, and cooler climates, and you get big deer.

Barta needs to talk to a biologist...

[QDMAMAN]

All deer in warmer climates are smaller, no matter how perfect the habitat is. Mother Nature makes them bigger so they can survive in cooler climates-that's a biological fact. There's also a number of sub-species of deer, they're not all exactly alike.

Barta needs to talk to a biologist...

Linda G.

What about Texas? Arkansas? Mississippi? Alabama?
Big T

[Swamp Ghost]

The above mentioned states and province's do it differently that is the point of the article and it has nothing to do with trophy's. It is about BIOLOGY, SOUND SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT, as well as, HUNTER MANAGEMENT.

The have gun seasons after the rut, they issue 1 buck tag and most have pretty liberal antlerless limits.


But what makes states like Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Illinois different from us is habitat, lots of habitat, and lots of left over agricultural products, most especially corn. They also have mostly private land. Add good habitat, lots of food, private land, and cooler climates, and you get big deer.


Does this sound like So. MI? What is different? The way the resource is managed...........


Please see:

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45481

Regardless of Barta's intentions at least the guy is honest.

[Swamp Ghost]

If I here PETA and a reduction in hunter numbers used in the same discussion again, I may puke.

It's to the point of absurdity, is that the best arguement or retort people can come up with?

Guess what people, it's not about quantity as much as quality.

That goes for hunters as well as deer..............

[Tom Morang]

Doesn't Michigan have more deer hunters than any other state or province mentioned?



Those states and provinces that produce lots of big bucks don't have the hunting population that we have in Michigan.

[Swamp Ghost]

Doesn't Michigan have more deer hunters than any other state or province mentioned?



Those states and provinces that produce lots of big bucks don't have the hunting population that we have in Michigan.

Wisconsin? Opener Nov. 20, I believe and only runs 9 days. State with most bucks in the book, says alot.

[Tom Morang]

Does Wisconsin have as many deer hunters as Michigan? Do they have as much state land?

[Sib]

Northern deer are larger than their southern counter part, but their will always be exceptions to any rule.

This thread was not qualified very well, imo, because it appears the topic is really antlers, and not deer size. It's fair to say that deer outside of Michigan may get to realize their antler potential, but as it stands now the subject line is less than accurate, imo.

[Linda G.]

Yes, I've seen a lot of deer in Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, too...

Puny...compared to our deer, if you're talking overall size of the deer. If you're talking antlers, the bucks do tend to grow more points, but the racks aren't really big, like you'd think they would be. But again, most of the deer you hear about from those states are from strictly regulated private lands. Lots of deer, true, but still, not the numbers we have, and not on public lands, what little there are of those in those states.

And Texas deer, for the most part, are only found on those strictly regulated private lands I mentioned, many of them fenced...and fed steriods...LOL

None of these states, except the northern tier, like Wisconsin and Minnesota, have the hunters or the hunter interest we have. Nor do any of them have the public lands the northern tier states have.

Michigan bucks, in southern Michigan, at least, would reach their "potential", no problem, IF we didn't have any where near the hunter interest or hunters we have. Last thing we want to do is reduce that...

[trailsend]

i believe wisconsin opens on the third sat. of november. wich would be the 18th this year, just three days later than michigan.

[Ed Spin04]

Linda G, Yes the temperate zone has a big impact on the body size of the deer, "Bergmans law", but it doesn't control the antler size as much. Southern Texas grows some hugh antlers and some pretty decent body sized deer. In fact they can have bigger and better deer than we do here in Michigan, even with the same age. So what happened to Bergmans law.

The differance is soil type and the natural forage type available. All of southern Texas was under water many years ago and has a natural lime layer near the surface plus the soil is naturally high in major minerals. The dry weather keeps the minerals from leaching down into the soil, thus more is available for the plants deer eat. The natural plants in southern Texas are in large part legumes, mesguite etc. Legumes create their own nitrogen souce. Antlers in the velvet stage are 90% protein. Protein is a form of Nitrogen. So, there you have it, all the ingredients necessary to grow big antlers and deer in an area where it shoudb't happen acording to Bergmans law.

Linda, you say that you do not know much about deer. In fact Linda, very few do know much about the biology of deer and what makes them tick. There are many reasons deer may be small and the temporate zone they reside is just one of them.

We could have enormous deer, (300 lb average brutes) with gigantic antlers throuhout Michigan if they had access to very nutritious forage year round.

[beer and nuts]

Ok Ok ok - I've been doing alot of research into going out to kansas, nebreska, south/north dakota in trying to do a deer/duck/pheasant combo hunt and it is amazing what I find in Kansas especially. One, the deer hunting IS NOT liek it sounds. In a nutshell is this, you got money to lease or use an outfitter its golden, BUT unless you run into the right situation and do lots of homework by going out there 3,4,5 years in a row and knocking on doors etc.. the hunting is very disappointing. I've talked to realtors, locals, looked at forums, everything I can get and they say the same things alot of people complain about here. Over-crowding, leases taking the land they used to hunt on, "the going rate", less deer, lots of complaining about their "DNR", too many doe permits, etc... The lands out there are being gobbled up by huge leases and outfitters at an alarming rate and the locals are complaining too. If you wanna spend $2000 and go out and hunt, yup you can see deer just like ESPN but I for one will not spend that kind of money to shoot a deer! Y

I found KS to be the worst but the others states are not far behind.