Past and Present

[Altjaeger]

Some statitistics extracted from the October 2009 Field and Stream magazine:

The bulk of the harvest has shifted to anterless deer.

-65% of the states shot more anterless than antlered deer in 2005.

-78% average percentage by which the anterless harvest rose in 6 Midwestern states (Ill., In., Iowa, KY., Ohio and Mo.) from 1999 to 2005

The yearling buck harvest has dropped significantly.

-51% of the 1999 national buck harvest were yearlings. 45% was the percentage in 2005.

-82% of the 1999 Pennsylvania buck kill was yearlings. 52% was the percentage for 2005

Hunters are shooting older, bigger bucks.

-4% of the bucks harvested nationally in 1999 were 3 1/2 years or older. In 2005 that had risen to 23%.

-60% of Mississippi bucks taken were 3 1/2 years or older in 2005.

-19,000 more bucks 2 1/2 years or older were killed in Pennsylvania in 2005 than in 1999.

[Laturkeyhtr]

-60% of Mississippi bucks taken were 3 1/2 years or older in 2005.


It seems that I recall a seminar where the possibilty of high grading their buck through an antler resriction came out of Mississippi. But it sure look like their AR's are putting some age on the ones that make it. :D

[Renegade]

Your right LA. Steve DeMarais and Bronson Strickland did a paper on this study into point harvest restrictions as a selective harvest strategy. Here's the link. http://www.mdwfp.com/Level2/Wildlife/Game/Deer/Articles.asp?article=135
Now I'll admit I didn't read this because I'm pretty sure it's the same one I've read before and discussed at length on other sites, so to summarize from memory.
This study was actually a simulation of future herds via a computer program, using a combination of data from both harvests and penned deer in order to get a large sampling.
It found that high grading was possible under certain situations and variables. For example, they did 3 regions of Miss. and found that the nutrient rich delta region showed a long term decrease in antler growth via inches of antler. Whereas the region in the other extreme showed no loss.

Now I must note too that Miss. AR was set by their legislators and not by their wildlife department's biologists, who were opposed to their recommendation if I remember correctly. They have a 4 point restriction but it's a 4 pt. Total, not "per antler". Now if you think about it that doesn't protect many deer other than mostly yearlings and their first set of antlers. Then you have the delta region which contains the most fertile soils and therefore can grow some pretty nutritious habitat. Numerous studies have shown, some TPW / Kerr WMA come to mind, that antler growth is dependent upon nutritional intake, so naturally these deer are growing some decent antlers even as yearlings. Therefore making those yearlings with genetics above average, legal, when combined with exceptional nutrition. And since the missing factor is age, they aren't as wary and are more susceptible to harvest.