Montana General Season Structure Proposal

[Jon Boy]

the proposal clearly calls for both of these in some form or fashion. Did you read it, or are you simply arguing against it based on the October MD hunt portion?

No, I’m saying let’s start there and get a base line and make some small changes to get buy in from the general public before you try pushing major season changes. There are many unintended consequences to what is being proposed and I don’t think it’s going to do what is intended. Again my example of all the units that border Montana in Wyoming and Idaho have all very similar shitty mule deer hunting yet have very different season structures.

I’m all for better mule deer hunting. If you want to actually make it better make everything limited entry and eliminate doe hunting and you’ll have that.

 

[Forkyfinder]

No, I’m saying let’s start there and get a base line and make some small changes to get buy in from the general public before you try pushing major season changes. There are many unintended consequences to what is being proposed and I don’t think it’s going to do what is intended. Again my example of all the units that border Montana in Wyoming and Idaho have all very similar shitty mule deer hunting yet have very different season structures.

I’m all for better mule deer hunting. If you want to actually make it better make everything limited entry and eliminate doe hunting and you’ll have that.

LE is a non starter - and not a small change.

The proposed change is much smaller.

 

[rogerthat]

That is an interesting study, tho I think some holes can be poked in the experiment and the practical application of the results. I would be hesitant to use a study on captive deer (it doesn't outright say they were captive, but that is heavily implied given the experimental procedures) and apply it to wild populations also. But still, interesting results.

You think big antlers are just statistically random? I think big antlers are an expression of that bucks viability. Typically they have big bodies and are the dominant buck.(not always but more likely statistically)

 

[Ought Six]

I think that is a stretch, both from a data backed perspective and a logical perspective. The data that I know of suggests that the mother has an outsized effect on genetic phenotype (expressed traits not just genotype) of its offspring. That is, depending on the in-utero condition of the mother, that fawn expresses traits differently. For males, it appears that the "decision" to push excess nutrition into body condition vs antler growth is made in-utero. Logically, it would make sense that a male that uses extra nutrition to increase body size has a higher chance of surviving weather events, droughts, potentially even predation. It is also not necessarily antler size that dictates success against other males during breeding, body size often wins there too, so lifelong fecundity I don't thing you can declare a clear winner between bigger antlers vs bigger body. All the data I know of suggests that fawn survival and future production depends on that fawns mother and her body condition during pregnancy.

I'm not saying that as an argument against the proposal, as you know I am behind it 100%. There are a number of benefits of this proposal from a hunting and hunt experience perspective and I think it is the better option when compared to the status quo of today and other options that remove significant opportunity (LE, etc).

That big, healthy doe got half of her genetics from a big, dominant buck, probably some influence there on the doe’s health based on her dad’s genes, to in turn produce a healthy, big buck offspring

 

[sclancy27]

You think big antlers are just statistically random? I think big antlers are an expression of that bucks viability. Typically they have big bodies and are the dominant buck.(not always but more likely statistically)

That big, healthy doe got half of her genetics from a big, dominant buck, probably some influence there on the doe’s health based on her dad’s genes, to in turn produce a healthy, big buck offspring

Big bucks are generally a function of habitat quality. "Genetics" play a role, but that role is diminished as more research points out "genetics" is really habitat in disguise. At least thats what the best mule deer researchers in the world are concluding.

Now, obviously, those deer need to survive long enough to maximize the potential of habitat/genetics.

 

[Ought Six]

Big bucks are generally a function of habitat quality. "Genetics" play a role, but that role is diminished as more research points out "genetics" is really habitat in disguise. At least thats what the best mule deer researchers in the world are concluding.

Now, obviously, those deer need to survive long enough to maximize the potential of habitat-modulated genetics.

The whole habitat thing sounds good until you see 6 mature, 4.5-7.5 year old 150”-160”’s standing next to a giant in the exact same habitat.

 

[sclancy27]

The whole habitat thing sounds good until you see 6 mature, 4.5-7.5 year old 150”-160”’s standing next to a giant in the exact same habitat.

Obviously there are genetic outliers. All I'm saying is that even tho those traits may be passed on, they are not reliably expressed in the next or subsequent generations. The expression of the genotype is the important part and that seems to be controlled in large part by maternal condition, which in turn is controlled by habitat, drought, etc etc.

 

[cgasner1]

A game warden told one of my brothers a big thing coming in next 5 to 10 days. I figured October mule deer season. Who knows maybe it's something that won't effect public land hunters ability to harvest an elk.

I bet they sell the left over elk tags that didn’t draw

 

[rogerthat]

Obviously there are genetic outliers. All I'm saying is that even tho those traits may be passed on, they are not reliably expressed in the next or subsequent generations. The expression of the genotype is the important part and that seems to be controlled in large part by maternal condition, which in turn is controlled by habitat, drought, etc etc.

Sean, I’m not buying the habitat=big antlers simply because with the right genetics a whitetail(ranch buck) is over 200 as a 2.5 year old. The same thing happens in the wild. The big ones are big when they are young based on my anecdotal experience. That jives with @antlerradar explanation

 

[sclancy27]

Sean, I’m not buying the habitat=big antlers simply because with the right genetics a whitetail(ranch buck) is over 200 as a 2.5 year old. The same thing happens in the wild. The big ones are big when they are young based on my anecdotal experience

You can argue with researchers like Monteith, etc. I realize what you are describing happens, but it is by far the outlier.

 

[rogerthat]

Obviously there are genetic outliers. All I'm saying is that even tho those traits may be passed on, they are not reliably expressed in the next or subsequent generations. The expression of the genotype is the important part and that seems to be controlled in large part by maternal condition, which in turn is controlled by habitat, drought, etc etc.

How can you be sure about that? Can you link a study?

 

[Ought Six]

Obviously there are genetic outliers. All I'm saying is that even tho those traits may be passed on, they are not reliably expressed in the next or subsequent generations. The expression of the genotype is the important part and that seems to be controlled in large part by maternal condition, which in turn is controlled by habitat, drought, etc etc.

It’s a good theory, but to express the phenotype, you first have to have the genotype, and half the genotype comes from the doe which might not have good genetics for large antler growth, meaning that just because a big antlered buck bred a doe, the offspring might not have the same genetics for large antler growth. I don’t fully buy the habitat over genetics talk

 

[cgasner1]

Glad this isnt about growing big antlers so we don’t have to argue about that

 

[Ought Six]

Glad this isnt about growing big antlers so we don’t have to argue about that

Everyone on this thread hopes some big antlers come from the better herd health the proposal creates

 

[sclancy27]

How can you be sure about that? Can you link a study?

It’s a good theory, but to express the phenotype, you first have to have the genotype, and half the genotype comes from the doe which might not have good genetics for large antler growth, meaning that just because a big antlered buck bred a doe, the offspring might not have the same genetics for large antler growth. I don’t fully buy the habitat over genetics talk

I just did a 5 min search, there is obviously more. I would run through citations for more papers. Here's a paper and a Wyofile article that goes over it, along with a second paper that discusses similar research in ID. I'll also attach a video GoHunt did with Dr. Brock Mcmillan, a mule deer researcher out of Utah where they talk about antler size averages, habitat and other cool mule deer stuff. Enjoy.

Study: Deer’s lifelong fate is affected by mother’s health at birth - WyoFile

Multi-generational research shows health of a mule deer mother at time of birth may influence lifelong size of offspring.

wyofile.com

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecy.3953

https://www.uwyo.edu/haub/_files/_docs/about/pubs/monteith/2015-shallow-et-al-mammalogy.pdf

I'll also add that Robby Denning has some excellent podcasts on Rokslide with several heavy hitters in the mule deer research community. They are a very interesting listen as well and I am pretty sure one (maybe both) of you are also members there.

 

[Pagosa]

Habitat is absolutely amazing but devoid of deer

 

[mtmuley]

Everyone on this thread hopes some big antlers come from the better herd health the proposal creates

And more Mule Deer. From fawns to big bucks. mtmuley

 

[xcskier_hunter]

Below is the linked study correlating antler size with the health of the mother. I think this is undoubtedly a major, if not the main, contributor to to the peak antler size a deer achieves. However, I'd still suspect there is some correlation between a buck's antler size and offspring viability just based on the fact that does seem to prefer bucks with larger antlers.

In cases where all the mature deer are 150-160 type deer, I'd suspect that high-grading out the deer with more potential before they can reach maturity is a bigger issue than the gene pool of the yearly fawn crop. Very few top end deer make it past 3 years old in states with rifle season during the rut.

https://www.boone-crockett.org/consequences-maternal-effects-body-and-antler-size-white-tailed-deer

 

[antlerradar]

The whole habitat thing sounds good until you see 6 mature, 4.5-7.5 year old 150”-160”’s standing next to a giant in the exact same habitat.

Antlers from three different bucks, all of them older from the same bachelor group. There was also two other bucks that were also old and small in the same group, I just didn't bother to keep there antlers when I found a few of them. The single set is well over 200, One of the top bucks I have ever seen. The middle buck is pushing 180 in his best year ( the second to last year). He died of natural causes and old age. That happen in the 90's on public land in Montana. Not any more. The other buck is a weak forked buck that will not break 140. These antlers are the best he ever had. I also have antlers from another monster buck that lived a few years later and two miles away that are very similar to the big single set. I wonder if they are half brothers with the same mother or even full brothers.

 

[Ought Six]

I just did a 5 min search, there is obviously more. I would run through citations for more papers. Here's a paper and a Wyofile article that goes over it, along with a second paper that discusses similar research in ID. I'll also attach a video GoHunt did with Dr. Brock Mcmillan, a mule deer researcher out of Utah where they talk about antler size averages, habitat and other cool mule deer stuff. Enjoy.

Study: Deer’s lifelong fate is affected by mother’s health at birth - WyoFile

Multi-generational research shows health of a mule deer mother at time of birth may influence lifelong size of offspring.

wyofile.com

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecy.3953

https://www.uwyo.edu/haub/_files/_docs/about/pubs/monteith/2015-shallow-et-al-mammalogy.pdf

I'll also add that Robby Denning has some excellent podcasts on Rokslide with several heavy hitters in the mule deer research community. They are a very interesting listen as well and I am pretty sure one (maybe both) of you are also members there.

Because it was written, it is so