RemingtonLover

I have the opportunity this year as a senior in HighSchool to write my term paper on any current event. Being a big deer hunter, I chose to write my term paper on AR's. This of course was a big surprise for my teacher, but the subject was approved due to the fact that it is definatly a "current event" in our state.

I want your opinion-backed up with facts. The question I am awnsering in my paper is, "Are Antler Restrictions Really Necessary for Pennsylvania’s Deer herd?" I must choose a side( for or against) and then back it up. I know this subject is rampant and overly written about, but I would appreciate each persons side. Please do not get into debates, just awnser the question... believe me- I know its hard to do. hahaha RemLover

MikeE51848

I suggest you review any of the previous threads for the info you seek. There was plenty of ammo from both sides. I can't imagine anything else being said that already hasn't.

deaddeer

You can get all the pro-AR facts from just reading the articles and studies about AR on the PGC website.


Here are some points that show we did not need AR to improve the age structure and breeding ecology of our herd.

1. The adult breeeding B/D ratio prior to AR was 1:2.1, and a 1 : 2 B/D ratio is an acceptable ratio for a QDM herd.

2. Prior to AR 22% of the buck that were harvested were 2.5+ buck, so we had a class of older age buck that were dominant and there was no need to improve the breeding ecology of the herd.

3. The bucks saved by AR will ,on average, be inferior to the bucks that we will be harvesting and this may have a long term negative impact on the gene pool. The Miss. Study showed that rack sizes declined in the areas with the best soils.

4. AR reduces the number of legal buck available to be harvested. In Miss. buck harvests decline 20 % and in ARK. they declined 40% in 5 years. Our buck harvest declined 30% in just 2 years.

5. In order for AR to produce reasonable buck harvests in PA it is necessary to decrease the harvest of BB. However, since the goal is to reduce the herd by 50% it is impossible to protect BB and still reduce the herd ,since fawns comprise 44% of the anterless harvest.

6. Although the percentage of 2.5+ bucks in the harvest increases with AR , the actual number of 2.5+ buck harvested will continue to decrease as we reduce the herd even more. To date, there is no data available to show that the number of 2.5+ buck harvested increased from the 52.6K harvested in 2002. There also is no data available to support any claims that thr rack size of 2.5+ buck increased in the second year of AR.

7. It is more likely that the average rack size of 2.5 buck will decrease ,since we are harvesting the bucks that show the best potential for antler development as 1.5 buck.

8. The claim that we harvest 85-90% of our buck before they reach 2.5 years ,include the buck that are harvested as BB. If you exclude the BB harvest ,we harvest between 75-80% of our 1.5 buck.

9. Prior to AR ,18% of our 2.5+ buck won't be AR legal in the 3 pt. zone. Due to AR this percentage will increase since we are harvesting the best of our buck as 1.5's. The protected ,inferior 2.5 buck will become the dominant breeds and pass on their inerior genes for antler development.

10. Due to the high anterless harvests we will replace the entire adult doe population in just three years. That will allow for a much faster change in the gene pool and may result in even smaller racks in the future.

.

BTBowhunter

Great Idea for your term paper!
I would suggest that you go all over the PGC website for your facts and figures. Also check out QDM's website.

You'll get lots of material here as far as opinions but be careful using "facts and figures" from these pages. Quite a few of them have some factual basis but been taken out of context to the point that they are not reliable. Some have just been made up. Some are merely the opinion of a particular poster.

be careful with stuff like this:
While the 18% number is taken from the PGC study, other factors need to be considered. For example, Antler size is important in the establishment of breeding dominance. Some of those inferior bucks would still never breed. Another point is that some of those inferior racks wouldn't have been shot anyway due to the fact that small racks are more likely to get by the average hunter than large racks.It is indisputable that AR will allow many bucks to get older. That was the stated goal.


Antler restrictions are not necessary but, I believe, will help the overall health of our deer herd. Gary Alts stated mission was to balance the herd with it's habitat, reduce deer/human conflicts, balance the buck/doe ratio, and better manage the genetics of our deer herd. In the past, 85% to 90% of our bucks were killed by the time they were 1 1/2 years old.Yes that would include button bucks but the point is that 85 to 90% NEVER got past 1 1/2 years. A buck that age is roughly equivalent to a human in his early teens. Capable of breeding but not really ready, these young bucks were virtually all able to breed when the rut came along. Plenty (too many) of does to go around meant that most, if not all, would breed a doe or two.
If the bucks in the deer herd has a more natural mix of age classes and if there are not too many does, breeding becomes the reward to the buck that dominates in the area. I think most would agree that the allowing the best of the species reproduce is good for the long term health of that species.

There are many better ways to manage whitetails on a much smaller basis. Pennsylvania deer management, with over a million hunters, very diverse habitat, a huge deer population, is a huge undertaking. AR, management units, a higher statewide doe kill are all less than perfect fixes but they are getting us started in the right direction. As Gary Alt said, many mistakes will be made along the way. Expect more changes as we go. We have just gotten started.

Some things I think we all know:

AR will still allow some young bucks to die

Button bucks are still being killed in doe season

Some private land areas are still overrun with deer

Some public lands are under carrying capacity

Many AR critics point to these known problems but have produced no realistic ideas to correct them on a statewide basis

Some more facts we all know

There are still way more does than bucks in the woods and even if we assume (not proven yet) that doe kill is roughly 20% BB's that means we are taking out 4 does for every BB. Since there is no realistic way to stop the BB kill as a part of doe season it becomes much more important to protect those that we can reasonably recognize as young deer. As we begin to get the population in line with habitat, the doe kill will need to be reduced and more BB's will then have a chance to grow older as well

Many of our northern tier forests are overbrowsed in spite of the fact that the deer is lower than in past years

We still have areas with WAY too many deer

The buck kill has dropped some but the average quality of those harvested is way up in just two short years

The average age of harvested bucks is up as is the average age of those that still roam the forests

Some bucks with good genetic potential will be killed at 1 1/2 However, antone who has ever studied antler growth will recognize and agreee that the first set of antlers a buck wears is not necessarily an indication of his genetic potential. Many spikes and small Y bucks experience phenomenal antler growth in subsequent years.

Remlover, Butler is not that far from Cook Forest. Take a Saturday afternoon and visit the Double Diamond deer ranch on Rt 36 just south of Cooksburg. They have the sheds in succession from 1 1/2 on through for most of their bucks. A lot of 1 1/2 wimpy bucks grew to become true monsters. Yes it's a captive environment but even with all the right foods, many bucks there had very small antlers their first year only to grow up and prove that age is very important to a deer developing his full potential.

Good luck on your term paper!

Buckshot

You need to check out http://www.huntingpa.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?Cat=

youll find all the info you need, and some you dont. Happy reading

deaddeer

Here is the link to the antler buck survey of 2001. Rememeber ,this is pre-AR data and you can obtain a lot of information from this report by doing some simple calculations. For example,add the total number of 1.5 and 2.5+ buck and then divide the number of 2.5+ buck by the total and you will see that 22.6% of the buck harvested in 2001 were 2.5+ buck. Do the same for each county and you will see 51% of the buck harvested in Pike Co. and 42% in Elk. Co. were 2.5+ buck.

http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/p.../21001-01z.pdf

You can also calculate the percent of 2.5+ buck that will not be AR legal for the entire state( 18%) and for each county.


Also remember that 18% of the buck saved by AR are lost to non-hunting mortality prior to hunting season. Also consider that the 38K buck saved by AR were spread across 40+K SM of land ,so AR increased rhe number of 2.5+ buck ,by less than 1 buck PSM. Would that be enough to improve the breeding ecology of the herd?

juniorpc

There's plenty of research out there. The PGC website is full of information. Do a QDMA search for information from them. Other states have a wealth of information as well. I'd do your own figuring and interpreting of the research though. Being a hunter yourself you can make your own calculations and determinations of the data. Just realize when talking to folks on either side of the arguement you'll get facts supporting there side or bits and pieces of information that don't paint nearly as complete or accurrate a picture as you'll need . So you will need to do your own leg work. Good luck, the topic is certainly current and relevant. Juniorpc.

BTBowhunter

Well said JuniorPC!

juniorpc

Don't mean to bring this nonsense here to your term paper topic, but I do believe DD is intermpreting the data wrong. You can't know what percentage of bucks harvested were 1.5 or 2.5 from the data he refers you to. Why?? because the data (on the bucks) comes from bucks that were brought to a check station or bucks that were checked by WCO's and biologists checking taxidermy shops, some taxidermists were enlistedas well,incidnetal checks etc. So take Pike County for instance where he states that over 50 percent of the bucks harvested were 2.5 years old. Not true because it does not take in other (though smaller percentage age classes) and second becuase it's not a representative sample of the bucks harvested. Of course someone who shoots a bigger buck is curious to know it's age. They stop at a check station, take thier deer to be mounted. A scrubby five point may/may not stop at the check station and will not show up at the taxidermy shop. Any buck taken to a taxidermy shop is of course going to 2.5 or better for the most part. So if it had been stated that 51 percent of the bucks checked at meat plants, check stations, and taxidermy shops were 2.5 years old that would be getting close to accurrate. 51% of the entire buck harvest for Pike County would be a bit scewed. All bucks harvested were not aged so you can't make the assummutions that were stated. The calculations made about % of 2.5's with x amount of points is a much more accurrate, though maybe inherently scewed as well. If you did your paper would not be valid. Good luck, wouldn't have brought this here but you got scewed info that needed clarification

deaddeer

Here are some additional links that may help you with your research.

ttp://www.ardeerhunting.com/editor.html
http://www.cfr.msstate.edu/facultyan...maraispubs.htm
http://www.cfr.msstate.edu/facultyan...maraispubs.htm
http://www.mdwfp.com/
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/conserve...ke_harvest.pdf

http://www.mississippigameandfish.com/ms_aa122902a/


http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/conserve...inferior.phtml


Make sure you at least read the last link to " Spikes are Not Inferior,or Are They"