_Dan

I'm sorry to say that this is a myth. I thought the same thing for a long time, until I saw it with my own two eyes. I find a lot of wolf kills each year and there are just as many mature bucks as there are does and fawns. Wolves can kill a full grown moose,a mature buck is no match.

Where did I say that we should target mature bucks over does? You're right, I didn't.

The idea is to let the mature bucks do most of the breeding. This can only be achieved when the buck to doe ratio is relatively close. Now I know someone is going to say that we should be shooting the younger bucks so that the mature ones can breed. Please refrain, you only show your naiveness. If the buck to doe ratio was in check the younger bucks have almost zero chance of breeding the does. The more mature bucks would, and do, kick thier arse and prevent them from doing so.

Please remember, we are talking about QDM and not QAM. It's not about antler size, its about the quality of the herd.

Germ

Yes true, but you want to breed them withthe best bucks, so the gene pool gets back to normal for the area. Not perfect, just a start if you are in a really bad over populated area.

A guy who runs a ranch on Oklahoma did this, he bought some land was really over populted. He did this to get his herd back to normal. The easy way would have been to "buy some genes", but he came up with this practice. Not something you pratice every year. He did so until he had a healthy herd again.

Just another way to look a herd management.

_Dan

Let me make one more point about the isolated herd that I am talking about. Most of the bucks have no potential to grow a monster rack. Every year I see lots of 4.5+ yr old bucks that will never amount to anything other than a 100-120" eight point. But, they are the ones who have survived the harsh winters and the predators and have genetically grown the larger bodies. These are the deer (no matter the size of the rack) that are going to be and should be doing the breeding.

I'll say it one last time! We're talking about QDM and not QAM.

Sylvan

I understand what your saying. You contend that natures way is more random. It's not selective. Got it. So like I said.... "It seems inconsistent to me to argue that natures way is not selective and then propose a highly selective hunting strategy to more closely "resemble the natural world". What you propose is selective. You want to target mature buck and females. Isn't that right? That's what I said you saidin my previouspost! So even if I agreed (which I don't) that natures way is not selective, I still wouldn't agree that your proposal is a good thing as far as being "natural" is concerned. Imo a better way to get to what you perceive as "natures way" would be to always shoot the first deer you see that you can legally take.

Where did I say you said that? You're right, I didn't.

Sylvan

Assuming the ratio is out of whack you wouldn't really need to disproportionatly taget doe to return to a more "natural" state. One of the main reasons deer survive as a species is because they are prolific breeders. They survive even where hunting pressure is heavy because they are realy good at replacing themselves. In only a few years from now, nearly all the deer in the woods will be deer that haven't been born yet so even in areas where it is thought that the buck to doe ratio is in bad shape if we were to sudenly institute a strategy that would insure a random kill, it wouldn't be very long before thenatural statewould be reached.

huntingson

"If the buck to doe ratio was in check the younger bucks have almost zero chance of breeding the does." -Dan

I have seen numerous studies that show that is incorrect. The 1.5 year olds breed almost every doe. Now almost every doe has twins and almost every time these twins are from different fathers. The mature bucks will breed the does as well, however, the young ones get their shot too. It is like elk in that way. The herd bull will breed almost all of his cows, but the satellites get in there and breed when the big boy isn't looking or is busy elsewhere.

_Dan

I think I found it.

Sylvan, its pretty black and white. If you want to be one of the few who want to argue with every post of this nature, then go ahead. But at least READ what I am saying.

p.s. I will not turn this into a pissing contest. I have seen it with my own eyes and am giving you my findings. As soon as you you the same, instead of having an idea or a theory, we can discuss this on common ground.

Sylvan

Dan,

I appoligize! ... what I meant to say was

it was a typo.Sorry about that. I didn't go back and check what I typed, I justassumed I said it correctly. My fingers didn't put down what was in my head. The point remains the same though. You are proposing a selective strategy.

I'm not arguing your perception that natures way is not selective. I don't agree but I'm not arguing the point. My point is again...

_Dan

No problem!

Please explain to me why you think its bass ackwards.

I don't belive so.

Take a look at all the agriculture and supplemental feeding there is. In the natural world, the mature bucks have a much greater chance of dying after the rut is over. In today's world, this does not happen nearly as much as it probably should because of the abundance of man made/grown food for them to regain their fat supplies before winter. In addition, the winters are nowhere near what they used to be.

Sylvan

Because imo natures way is to make the easiest kill and the mature buck would be the most difficult. Theoretically the inexperienced 1 1/2 year olds would even be easier than an adult doe. Probably not all doe but many would be older wiser and maybe even a little bigger and stronger.