bscofield

I thought this was cool and informative. I' ve heard some of the pro' s give good reasons why they disagree with some of it... but it' s a cool study none-the-less

Hope it benefits someone:

Researchers in Texas rattled 171 times in 3 years and took count on when bucks responded to the sound and how the sound was made. There were 4 distinct ways that they rattled and studied the bucks on.
1- Short and quiet
2- Long and quiet
3- Short and loud
4- Long and loud

The " short and X" routines were 1 minute of rattling (loud or quiet) and 9 minutes of silence and then repeated 3 times. The " loud and X" routines were 3 minutes of rattling followed by 7 minutes of silence.

100% indicates that 1 buck responded per rattle and %200 would mean that 2 bucks responded to the same rattle.

**PRE-RUT:
Short and Quiet == 13% response
Short and Loud == 38% response
Long and Quiet == 13% response
Long and Loud == 57% response

**Rut Peak:
Short and Quiet == 29% response
Short and Loud == 194% response
Long and Quiet == 50% response
Long and Loud == 150% response

**Post-Rut
Short and Quiet == 43% response
Short and Loud == 62% response
Long and Quiet == 67% response
Long and Loud == 58% response

Obviously there' s no sure-fire anything and situations change... but I like the idea of leaning on statistics when I' m confused, which I tend to be frequently [&:]

outdoorsman09

if 100% is one buck and 200% is 2 bucks then is 150% a............... doe?[&:]

loanstarhunter

Just one time I would like to see these studies and hunting shows in my deer woods!

Every thing is easier when the ratio is 1:1 or greater and/or the number of deer per acre is high and the study area is game fenced.

I hunt on public lands where hunting is a true art form. The average hunter is not capable of affording the types of areas that these studies and shows take place.

I think this type of information gives hunters a false sence of hope and disapointment when things don' t work like it did in that controlled environment.

Just my oppinion!

OlMossyHorns

Interesting post. I don' t know if the study would work as well if it was in PA

Rack-attack

Yup - that proves it................................................ ..

Them bucks are just like my girl[][]

bscofield

obviously the numbers don' t apply to many of us... certainly not me. BUT, just because we don' t have the same monster bucks and don' t have a 1:1 buck:doe ratio doesn' t mean we can' t see what worked on the bucks that were there, right? I don' t mean to suggest that you will get 1.5 bucks per rattle in the rut if you use the right sequence, etc. But I think that it' s safe to think that it could be more effective than another type (in general).

jag-mag

You could rattle a buck in with 2 sticks in texas.

DaveC

jag- mag, don' t I wish. Texas on TV and the Texas most Texans get to hunt are two very different things. If I grunt or rattle all I see are white tails waving goodbye!!

Kanga

Dave.
We must be hunting the same woods

The area where I hunt the buck to doe ratio is way out of wack 14 does for every buck.
There is no point in rattleing or grunting cause the bucks have plenty of girls fighting over them they dont have to fight other bucks for the right to breed.

What you see on TV about Texas is not the Texas I hunt.

The shows are filmed on game ranches that have a 1 to 1 ratio.

Public land is a lot different.

loanstarhunter

The Texas hunting you see on T.V. is the highly comercialized version and the cost for this type of hunting in Texas is way more money than I am willing to spend. Those type leases/day hunts run in the 1000' s of dollars. Then they are likely to charge you a kill fee based on the size of your trophy..$$$$$$$$$$

These places have so many deer it could be considered by some to be a " canned hunt"

bscofield it is interesting information. IMO it is not realistic to expect these type of results in the every day hunting world.