You got it, it's all about age.

Our DNR manages for $$$ not for a balanced herd.

 

I think you mean the NRC manages by majority opinion, even if that majority only hunts one day a year and knows next to nothing about deer management.
Most Michigan deer hunters wrongly think MDNR's role is to provide them with as many live deer targets as possible and that there's no such thing as "too many deer."

 

I think you mean the NRC manages by majority opinion, even if that majority only hunts one day a year and knows next to nothing about deer management.
Most Michigan deer hunters wrongly think MDNR's role is to provide them with as many live deer targets as possible and that there's no such thing as "too many deer."

Yes, that's what I meant. Thanks for portraying it accurately.

 

Age has a lot to do with it, but it is not all about age. The woodlands of Alpena County by comparison produce much smaller racks than the nearby county of Presque Isle. Odds are that a 4.5 year old woodland deer from the NLP would have significantly less antler production than his genetically inferior 4.5 year old cousin in the SLP.
Age, spring diet, winter severity, and winter food source type and availability ALL play major roles in antler development.
<----<<<

 

You say big bucks, are you talking about antlers? Bergmann's rule states that individuals within a species will be larger in colder climates. I would expect deer to be bigger in the Northern regions of our state.

 

I think the "AGE" argument says it all!!!
Posted via Mobile Device

 

Its all a myth. It all comes down to age. age. age.
That's all

So I guess that you have reviewed the 50 years or so of DNR biometric data, based on literally hundreds of thousands of harvested deer, comparing bucks within the same age classes, from the three different zones and determined that when the data clearly indicates zone specific differences, that they are just making things up? Because two MS members happen to have harvested bucks that happen to be big? :lol::lol::lol:

 

Yes MI can grow big bucks. But if you think MI is comparable to Ohio or Kansas in the number and size of trophy deer....there is no comparison.

 

Maybe you forgot that Jeff stated it's the biggest deer he's shot in MI since the early 90's. He's a heck of a hunter, yet it took him 20+ years to accomplish this feat.

So, to say age is everything, come on up and try it. Maybe you'll shoot one with some age in the next 25 years or so.....maybe longer.

Personally, I'd rather shoot something with some age every 1, 2, 3 or 4 years...which ain't gonna happen here.

 

What's different is the relative term of "big buck".

In prime soiled Ohio, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year old, 220lb dressed, 160" plus buck. In the sandy soils of much of NLP, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year, 180lb dressed, 125" buck.

Either way, the latter is a great representation of a mature northern herd buck.

Frankly, I think most NLP hunters, myself included, would be tickled just to have a reasonably larger number of 2.5 year old, 140lb dressed, 100" class bucks.

 

1. 3.5 year old + deer will be larger than younger deer. If you shoot every buck that you see, you will shoot a lot of "smaller" bucks. Since often times the environment they live will have a lower carrying capacity (less food, more predators, harder winters), people will see less deer (because there are less deer there) and are more inclined to shoot whatever walks past (i.e. a dumb 1.5 year old spike).

2. Food. There are not as many great expanses of Corn/soy fields in these areas...much more cedar/hemlock in the diet. This will produce lower weights in deer to a certain extent, but it has more to do with carrying capacity and total weight than deer size.

3. Genetics. Some areas just have bad genetics plain and simple, but to say "the whole UP has small antlers" is not true. Some gene pools (10-20 mile radius) will not be as gifted as others.

Why are Kansas deer big? They lived in/near a corn field their entire 5.5 year life and are harvested during bow season.

The farther north you go, the bigger deer you get. A 3.5 year old deer in Kansas might dress at 165# in October, but a 3.5 in Sask might weigh 205# in October.

 

Pinefarm:

What's different is the relative term of "big buck".

"In prime soiled Ohio, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year old, 220lb dressed, 160" plus buck. In the sandy soils of much of NLP, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year, 180lb dressed, 125" buck.

Either way, the latter is a great representation of a mature northern herd buck.

Frankly, I think most NLP hunters, myself included, would be tickled just to have a reasonably larger number of 2.5 year old, 140lb dressed, 100" class bucks"

I know I would!

 

What's different is the relative term of "big buck".

In prime soiled Ohio, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year old, 220lb dressed, 160" plus buck. In the sandy soils of much of NLP, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year, 180lb dressed, 125" buck.

Either way, the latter is a great representation of a mature northern herd buck.

Frankly, I think most NLP hunters, myself included, would be tickled just to have a reasonably larger number of 2.5 year old, 140lb dressed, 100" class bucks.

X2 on the bold, I think it could be reality in only a few years if a law was introduce, minimum 4+ on one side like the restricted part of the the combo license.

 

So I guess that you have reviewed the 50 years or so of DNR biometric data, based on literally hundreds of thousands of harvested deer, comparing bucks within the same age classes, from the three different zones and determined that when the data clearly indicates zone specific differences, that they are just making things up? Because two MS members happen to have harvested bucks that happen to be big? :lol::lol::lol:

No

There is whole lot more where these came from and i havent even dug up pics from the past when we were a obr state

 

What's different is the relative term of "big buck".

In prime soiled Ohio, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year old, 220lb dressed, 160" plus buck. In the sandy soils of much of NLP, a "big buck" may mean a 4.5 year, 180lb dressed, 125" buck.
Either way, the latter is a great representation of a mature northern herd buck.

Frankly, I think most NLP hunters, myself included, would be tickled just to have a reasonably larger number of 2.5 year old, 140lb dressed, 100" class bucks.

Thats a bit of a stretch for some areas of the NLP. 4.5 year old 100 inch deer are common in the woodland areas up there. A 2.5 year old 100 inch is never gonna happen in my area. Even in the NLP you have HUGE variation between ag sections and woodland sections. We can get decent body size, but antler production aint gonna magically start to happen in the woodland sections of the NLP.
<----<<<

 

Age has a lot to do with it, but it is not all about age. The woodlands of Alpena County by comparison produce much smaller racks than the nearby county of Presque Isle. Odds are that a 4.5 year old woodland deer from the NLP would have significantly less antler production than his genetically inferior 4.5 year old cousin in the SLP.
Age, spring diet, winter severity, and winter food source type and availability ALL play major roles in antler development.
<----<<<

Finally someone that gets it!! We shot a 3 1/2 year old buck in west branch this year (Determined by two different check stations) and the rack was a skinny 5 point with a 9 inch spread. We have no agriculture and we have seen many deer with inferior racks aged out at 3 1/2 and 4 1/2! years old! IT IS NOT JUST AGE!!

 

No

There is whole lot more where these came from and i havent even dug up pics from the past when we were a obr state

Ask any of these guys if they consistantly pull this off every year though......let alone every 10-20 years.

 

In my area of the NWLP, the majority of the 2.5 year old's are 135-140lbs dressed and 90"-100". They're so uniform, they're almost like cookie cutter deer.

We put every deer on the scale and the last 4-5 of the 2.5 year olds all came in within a pound of 135lb dressed.

We shot a 3.5 year old that was 160lbs dressed and that's a BIG deer for my area.

We also got a 52lb dressed fawn this bow season.
That's called a "one hand special".

 

Ask any of these guys if they consistantly pull this off every year though......let alone every 10-20 years.

ask these guys if it was food warm climates and soil:lol::lol:

 

No

[/quote]

I'm laughing my tail off at the young lady in the background. :lol:

 

Oh looky theres more naysayers

 

It's certainly not just age. Deer need proper nutrition. If all the nutrients go to muscle, bone, hide growth, etc, there's nothing left for antlers.

Small racked bucks like mentioned above in the NELP can also be a red flag of long term prefered browse damage mixed with the long term results of too many deer for too many years.

There are parts of the NLP that will have a long climb back, habitat wise. I've read where deer herds can double in numbers every 3 years or so, damaged habitat from those high numbers can take 20-50 years of low deer numbers to recover, unless lots of timbering occurs.

That's where food plots can be a great help, along with native habitat improvements.

 

 

Nay say all you want bottom line is let em go and they grow. No matter if its the nlp or the u.p. all these bucks have one thing in common and its not warm climate soil or ag food its age.
I havent even got started on the pics of old these are just last years

 

Reductio ad absurdem

I don't think myself or anyone else has said "You can't grow big bucks" in the NLP or UP.

What I've said is that there are significant physical differences in the development of deer in the UP & NLP when compared to deer in the SLP and those from other midwestern states that are considered to be "trophy" deer states and because of those physical differences, that simply taking regulations from those other states and implementing them in the NLP & UP is not going to magically create a herd similar to what is found in those states.

That's based on many years of physical data gathered by the DNR. Deer in the SLP and other states have a significant head start due to the availability of food and lack of winter stress.

Just to give you an example, two of the biometric measurements tracked by many DNR's are yearling antler beam diameter and average number of measurable points.

Data from Michigan (1977) and Ohio (1981), here are the differences. Keep in mind these are all deer from the same age class, so age is not an influencing factor.

Avg. Beam Dia.

UP - 17.7
NLP - 19.2
SLP - 22
OHIO - 24.6

Avg. num. pts.

UP - 3.5
NLP - 4.2
SLP - 5.5
OHIO - 6.4

As you can see, there is a significant difference in antler development, within the same yearling age class, as you move into areas with increased amount of agricultural production. Those differences have not changed much over the last 50 years or so.

You are picking out a few individual deer that are at the extreme end of the curve for the areas that they come from and suggesting that they would be the norm, I'm talking about deer management on the macro scale and the reality of what could be expected, given the existing differences in physical development in different areas.

You can look at science and facts or you can ignore it and base your opinions on emotion. Your choice.