• Help Support TNDeer:

Field-judge mature bucks

Ski said:
That brings up something I've been pondering since we last talked about this topic. I put a lot of stock in science. For the most part I accept it, especially in subjects like this that don't really have any reason for corruption or bias. But with this subject in particular I cannot wrap my simpleton mind around it. If the deer herd population was so low that reintroduction was necessary, then why did the deer eventually re-assume the traits of the remnant native population? It would seem reasonable that the reintroduced deer would have made up a higher population number than what remained of the local deer, so shouldn't the local herd have been absorbed into the new strain?
Click to expand...
Because there were pockets of remnant deer left, and they spread outwards from those regions. Their MUCH better locally adapted genetics rapidly swamped the imported deer genetics because the imported deer's genetics did very poorly (were not adapted well to the local conditions). Eventually, over 30 to 40 years, Virginia Whitetail genetics had completely washed out the imported genetics (at least those traits that are expressed, which decide whether you live or die, perform well or poor).

I've seen some fascinating studies where non-local deer are imported into the South and kept in pens, side by side with local deer kept in separate pens. All deer are fed the same and treated the same. First, the non-local deer (especially Northern Whitetails) perform very poorly, often displayed sudden declines in antler development below that of the local deer. Second, it doesn't take long before most of the Northern deer are dead from diseases common in the South but non-existent in the North. The Northern deer have no natural immunity to those diseases.
 
BSK said:
Because there were pockets of remnant deer left, and they spread outwards from those regions. Their MUCH better locally adapted genetics rapidly swamped the imported deer genetics because the imported deer's genetics did very poorly (were not adapted well to the local conditions). Eventually, over 30 to 40 years, Virginia Whitetail genetics had completely washed out the imported genetics (at least those traits that are expressed, which decide whether you live or die, perform well or poor).

I've seen some fascinating studies where non-local deer are imported into the South and kept in pens, side by side with local deer kept in separate pens. All deer are fed the same and treated the same. First, the non-local deer (especially Northern Whitetails) perform very poorly, often displayed sudden declines in antler development below that of the local deer. Second, it doesn't take long before most of the Northern deer are dead from diseases common in the South but non-existent in the North. The Northern deer have no natural immunity to those diseases.
Click to expand...

That makes sense. But it sure throws a wrench in the effectiveness of reintroduction. Makes me wonder if the reintroduction helped the herd survive and rebound, or if strict hunting regs helped more.
 
Ski said:
That makes sense. But it sure throws a wrench in the effectiveness of reintroduction. Makes me wonder if the reintroduction helped the herd survive and rebound, or if strict hunting regs helped more.
Click to expand...
I would agree with that. But at least the reintroduction effort gave deer for the few local deer left to breed with. That in itself rapidly increased the population. Plus, in areas where there were literally no deer left before reintroduction, it provided a good deer population for Natural Selection to work from. I would bet back in the 50s through early 70s there were pockets of deer in TN that were basically purebred non-natives. Eventually, the swamping of the non-local genetics eventually took care of any non-adapted genetic traits.

I first started deer hunting in southern KY in the late 70s. I hunted on a farm that had experienced several rounds of Wisconsin deer release in the early 70s. I got to see a couple of the last true WI deer left in the region. They were monsters and looked exactly like a northern WI deer should.
 
AT Hiker said:
If you really want to see a stark difference, I suppose it is genetics, then look to Ft Campbell.
Granted it seems like those differences are specific to certain portions but none the less, within a few miles those deer are might and day different in body composition.
Click to expand...
100%. I have shot multiple deer there ranging from 31/2 to 61/2 (by best guess of the check in station). I have seen countless bucks look to be 150 pounds and then there is a few that I would guess to be in the 250 range. I think the mixing of genetics from releasing texas strain deer is what has caused this i killed one on November 12th that looked like a bull full of testosterone and then the next year killed one November 14th that looked like a doe. Both supporting a 140 in class rack, it makes field judging those deer extremely difficult in that particular place.
 
BSK said:
I would agree with that. But at least the reintroduction effort gave deer for the few local deer left to breed with. That in itself rapidly increased the population. Plus, in areas where there were literally no deer left before reintroduction, it provided a good deer population for Natural Selection to work from. I would bet back in the 50s through early 70s there were pockets of deer in TN that were basically purebred non-natives. Eventually, the swamping of the non-local genetics eventually took care of any non-adapted genetic traits.

I first started deer hunting in southern KY in the late 70s. I hunted on a farm that had experienced several rounds of Wisconsin deer release in the early 70s. I got to see a couple of the last true WI deer left in the region. They were monsters and looked exactly like a northern WI deer should.
Click to expand...

Threads or conversations like this is one of the main reasons I really enjoy TnDeer.... appreciate everyone sharing their experiences and observations.... interesting stuff!
 
Note that in one's own immediate human family, there can be one family member who is very tall, and another who is very short. Deer family's may be similar, some individuals smaller or larger, same area, same sub-species.
 
TheLBLman said:
Note that in one's own immediate human family, there can be one family member who is very tall, and another who is very short. Deer family's may be similar, some individuals smaller or larger, same area, same sub-species.
Click to expand...
Correct.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top