Benbrown

On the ranch that I used to manage here in New Mexico, the average green score for mature (4 1/2 + years of age) was probably a little over 100, say 102 or so. That average would be for 4-7 bucks each year for ten years. If I find the time to dig out my field notebooks that have the measurements, I will run a quick average and post again. It was rare for a buck in that age range to score less than 95 and most were at 100 or a a few inches more. Of course, the sample wasn't random: people were holding out for "big ones". We had one that scored 117+ after the mandatory drying period and another that was in the low 120s...

You will not get the same performance "with much less powder" unless case capacities are approximately equal--at least not with equal pressures. The 6.5 AI doesn't gain that much case capacity over the standard 6.6-06. You will still be lagging 100-150 fps behind the .264 with most bullet weights and you will have to exceed the SAAMI pressure limits for the '06 case to do this. If you want .264 Mag ballistics, you will have to re-barrel your '06 with a barrel chambered for the .264 Mag, have the bolt face opened up to accept a Magnum cartridge rim, and the feed rails will have to be modified, as well. A 6.5-.284 will need a new barrel but the bolt face remains the same. However the feed rails will have to be modified to ensure reliable feeding. That said, the he 6.5-06 AI does not require anything but a new barrel chambered for that cartridge. Cases can be made by necking up .25-06 cases or necking down .270 cases. Fire forming can be accomplished with small charges of relatively fast powders under filler loads of cereal (Cream of Wheat seems to be the cereal of choice) without having to push bullets down the barrel. You can do this in your garage or your basement (if you have one) or on the patio while you are waiting for the brisket to cook. Unless you have an itchy hankering for a wildcat, I would suggest that you look for a used .264 Win Mag in good condition or think about a new Ruger Hawkeye in 6.5 Creedmore.

Summary of another study by the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agences: Analysis examines, makes recommendations regarding federal-state collaboration in mule deer management, energy development, focuses on Green River Basin. WASHINGTON – The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership today released a comprehensive report analyzing the federal government’s policy approach to managing energy development while promoting and conserving mule deer populations in the American West. “Mule Deer and Energy: Federal Policy and Planning in the Greater Green River Basin” examines collaborative efforts in mule deer management between federal land agencies and state wildlife agencies, offering insights into federal management of the species and its habitat during public-lands energy development. The report focuses on the greater Green River Basin, home to some of the most significant mule deer herds in North America as well as many of the nation’s largest energy reserves. It studies the conflicts resulting from the coexistence of these valuable resources and presents specific recommendations for resolving them. “We need more and better coordination for meeting management objectives and better integration of known science in the management of these cornerstone mule deer populations,” said Steve Belinda, director of the TRCP Center for Responsible Energy Development. “This report offers an opportunity to look ahead and do better – both for mule deer herds in the Green River Basin and across the West.” Icons of the western United States, mule deer are related to white-tailed deer but have different habitat requirements and respond differently to human-caused disturbance. While white-tailed deer are highly adaptable, mule deer rely on specific seasonal habitats that enable annual migrations between summer and winter range, the latter being a major limiting factor for the species and typically protected from disturbance. Most winter range is closed to vehicle traffic and human activity to safeguard mule deer populations, and energy leases located within winter range often have restrictions on development. The greater Green River Basin of southwestern Wyoming, northwestern Colorado and northeastern Utah comprises 10.2 million acres of mule deer crucial winter range on Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service lands. Of this total, 2.4 million acres already have been leased for development. The TRCP report notes that, while seasonal restrictions intended to protect mule deer from additional stress are in place, industry often asks for and receives relief from them. In Wyoming, for example, 83 percent of requests for relief from wildlife protections were approved in an 18-month period in 2007-2008. “More than 15,000 wells already have been drilled in mule deer crucial winter range,” said Belinda. “To date, most of this activity has taken place outside of the critical winter season. But how long these protective measures will continue to be applied is unknown. Industry has made no secret of its belief that these measures, which are intended to protect deer and other wildlife, are unnecessary and impediments to development. “In the Pinedale Anticline in southwestern Wyoming,” continued Belinda, “mule deer have declined more than 60 percent in the last 10 years, and the BLM has increasingly authorized development on crucial winter ranges year-round. We can do better for mule deer during energy development, but we must better integrate the science, better plan for mitigation, and formulate an overall plan for managing mule deer habitat. “Overall we found inconsistencies across all jurisdictions regarding how state mule deer plans are incorporated into federal plans and energy projects,” stated Belinda, a former BLM biologist. “We also found that energy development is the dominant priority for BLM policy and planning within the Green River Basin, that mule deer science often is ignored or misinterpreted, and that coordination between habitat managers and state deer managers is weak, if it occurs at all.” “The need for greater coordination is the lesson learned from this report,” said Miles Moretti, president and CEO of the Mule Deer Foundation, which is a member of the TRCP Fish, Wildlife and Energy Working Group, “coordination not just between federal and state entities but among all stakeholders. We have the power to address deficiencies in management that have negatively affected this prized sportsmen’s resource – and to forge a brighter future for mule deer.” Read “Mule Deer and Energy: Federal Policy and Planning in the Greater Green River Basin.” Review a summary of the TRCP report and recommendations.

Here is a study in the real world, not deer pens--lots of studies show that fawn survival (the number of fawns at heel in fall or winter censuses) are higher in areas that were subject to intensive predator control. The rub is that none of these studies even suggest much less document the successful recruitment of these fawns into the adult population. Mortality in deer is compensatory: yearlings are going to die at about the same rate, regardless of increased predation or declines in predation. Wildlife Monograph Demographic response of mule deer to experimental reduction of coyotes and mountain lions in southeastern Idaho Réponse Démographique du Cerf Mulet à la Réduction Expérimentale des Populations de Coyotes et de Pumas dans le Sud de l'Idaho Mark A. Hurley1,*, James W. Unsworth2, Peter Zager3, Mark Hebblewhite4, Edward O. Garton5, Debra M. Montgomery5, John R. Skalski6, Craig L. Maycock7 Article first published online: 2 AUG 2011 DOI: 10.1002/wmon.4 Copyright © 2011 The Wildlife Society. Issue Wildlife Monographs Volume 178, Issue 1, pages 1–33, August 2011 Additional Information(Show All) How to CiteAuthor InformationPublication History Abstract Article References Cited By View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (12865K) Keywords: alternate prey; Canis latrans; climate; coyote; mortality; mountain lion; mule deer; Odocoileus hemionus; predator control; Puma concolor; survival analysis Abstract Manipulating predator populations is often posed as a solution to depressed ungulate populations. However, predator–prey dynamics are complex and the effect on prey populations is often an interaction of predator life history, climate, prey density, and habitat quality. The effect of predator removal on ungulate and, more specifically, mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) populations has not been adequately investigated at a management scale. We tested the efficacy of removing coyotes (Canis latrans) and mountain lions (Puma concolor) for increasing survival and population growth rate of mule deer in southeastern Idaho, USA, during 1997–2003. We assigned 8 game management units (GMUs) to treatments under a 2 × 2 factorial design (treatments of coyote removal and lion removal) with 2 replicates of each treatment or reference area combination. We used methods typically available to wildlife managers to achieve predator removals and a combination of extensive and intensive monitoring in these 8 GMUs to test the hypothesis that predator removal increased vital rates and population growth rate of mule deer. We determined effects of predator removal on survival and causes of mortality in 2 intensive study sites, one with coyote and mountain lion removal and one without. We also considered the effects of other variables on survival including lagomorph abundance and climatic conditions. In these 2 intensive study areas, we monitored with radiotelemetry 250 neonates, 284 6-month-old fawns, and 521 adult females. At the extensive scale, we monitored mule deer population trend and December fawn ratios with helicopter surveys. Coyote removal decreased neonate mortality only when deer were apparently needed as alternate prey, thus removal was more effective when lagomorph populations were reduced. The best mortality model of mule deer captured at 6 months of age included summer precipitation, winter precipitation, fawn mass, and mountain lion removal. Over-winter mortality of adult female mule deer decreased with removal of mountain lions. Precipitation variables were included in most competing mortality models for all age classes of mule deer. Mountain lion removal increased fawn ratios and our models predicted fawn ratios would increase 6% at average removal rates (3.53/1,000 km2) and 27% at maximum removal rates (14.18/1,000 km2). Across our extensive set of 8 GMUs, coyote removal had no effect on December fawn ratios. We also detected no strong effect of coyote or mountain lion removal alone on mule deer population trend; the best population-growth-rate model included previous year's mountain lion removal and winter severity, yet explained only 27% of the variance in population growth rate. Winter severity in the current and previous winter was the most important influence on mule deer population growth. The lack of response in fawn ratio or mule deer abundance to coyote reduction at this extensive (landscape) scale suggests that decreased neonate mortality due to coyote removal is partially compensatory. Annual removal of coyotes was not an effective method to increase mule deer populations in Idaho because coyote removal increased radiocollared neonate fawn survival only under particular combinations of prey densities and weather conditions, and the increase did not result in population growth. Coyote-removal programs targeted in areas where mortality of mule deer fawns is known to be additive and coyote-removal conditions are successful may influence mule deer population vital rates but likely will not change direction of population trend. Although mountain lion removal increased mule-deer survival and fawn ratios, we were unable to demonstrate significant changes in population trend with mountain lion removal. In conclusion, benefits of predator removal appear to be marginal and short term in southeastern Idaho and likely will not appreciably change long-term dynamics of mule deer populations in the intermountain west. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.

How much does it weigh? Thanks!

I believe that the Square Deal is still only for pistols (unless they have changed since I bought mine). The 550 and up will do either rifle or pistol with the proper tool head. I have come to prefer the Forster Co-Ax press for rifle reloading. You don't need a bunch of shell holders (a universal shell holder is built into the press) and dies slip in and out (you don't have to screw them in and out).

Doesn't seem like hunting to me, just shooting.

You can create as many varieties of any one species or subspecies as you like based on minor variations in pelage, skull size and body measurements, antler conformation, etc. This is what taxonomists did in the late 19th and early 20th century to publish or perish. In reality, the "fantail" is simply a young animal that happens to have a rust-colored wash on the dorsal side of the tail. They "occur" from southwestern Arizona to the Chisos Mountains in the Big Bend of Texas and the Sierra del Carmen ranges in northern Mexico. They are not a subspecies nor are they a particular genetic variant. They are what biologists term a "color phase"--a normal variant within the normal range of variation of an ecotype (which is another way to delineate what used to be called subspecies). If you prefer to regard them as unique and you need one to check off your personal "life list" of critters that have fallen to your exploits, I offer my sincere congratulations. It's just one more way of keeping score, but for what purpose?

Pictures? Exactly what is printed on the gold ring on the objective (front) bell? Thanks!

At my advanced age, there are many more of these than I can remember or care to admit to. One that I do recall was hunt in South Texas on a ranch with some really outstanding whitetails. I was a nonpaying guest (friend of the family). I never liked to sit in a deer blind and got permission to hunt a part of the ranch where there were no stands. I took a nice 5x5 that was probably the biggest whitetail I had ever taken up to that time. He dressed out at a few lbs under 200. One of the paying guests was really impressed and insisted that I guide him for a couple of days. As we were heading out to the hunt area right at sunrise the next morning, we glimpsed a deer facing us, standing about half way out of a guajillo thicket. I quickly put the glasses on him and he was a nice square 4x4 with short brown tines, and his spread was quite a little bit beyond his ears. I never lowered the binocular to guesstimate the range. My "dude" asked. "Is he a shooter," and I said, "you bet!" He nailed the deer and, as we walked up to the dead deer (about 40 yards from where he pulled the trigger), I realized that we had shot a midget whitetail buck with a perfect rack that extended quite a bit beyond his ears, but he only weighed about 80 lbs. live weight! His outside spread was about 13 or 14". Fortunately, the ranch owner put that one in the cooler and sent the hunter out with another "guide" who could be expected to tell a dink from a trophy.

Haven't seen any big ones in the last couple of weeks, but did see one around a foot long trying to get warm on the road on Monday (Nov.1). We've had several nights in the 30s now (33 this morning) and I think that we've seen the last of them at this elevation (4,400 ft).

No, it's not a Remington. It's an FN Mauser action--much better if you're a traditionalist like me. However, if you could find one of these in a factory 721, you would have a valuable rifle as I don't think that Remington ever built one chambered for that cartridge. None of my references show one.

Front chains work for sure with mud and 4WD. If you are in bentonite or montmorillonite clay, it helps to have the back chained up too. In snow and/or ice. chain up all four (f you have 4WD).

Most folks camp in the vicinity of Blair Well, just inside the eastern boundary of the National Forest off the Geronimo Trail. Others will camp along the Black Dam CCC road, a spur off of the GTR. There will also be a scattering of camps along the GTR all the way to the state line. The only other access on the New Mexico side is at the end of the county road (old NM Hwy 338) west of Cloverdale. You will need a forest map to stay out of trouble and a good GPS will also help. If you come in from Douglas, you can camp at Miller Spring and drive to the NM/AZ line and start hunting. A stone monument on the north side of the road marks the state line. There is a parking area at Cottonwood Pass (also called Diamond Pass on some maps) at the top of the Peloncillos and there is a trail to the south that will get you in some fair Coues habitat, but you will have to go at least a couple of miles in to get away from other hunters. Basically, all of the public hunting is on the Peloncillo Unit of the Coronado NF, so you will need a forest map, and a BLM land status map is not a bad idea either. Good hunting!

It would be unusual if they both shot to the same point of aim. Just because the 100 grainers shoot better in your buddy's rifle doesn't necessarily mean that they will "shoot better" in yours. The 100 grainers do start faster and you might think that this means that they will always shoot "flatter", but it's not that simple. Without running them through my ballistic program, I am guessing that they might shoot flatter out to 300-325 yards, but the heavier bullet will usually overtake the lighter one's trajectory beyond that. Inside 300 yards, the difference in trajectory height is probably less than the spread between individual bullets in subsequent shots. The heavier bullet will also be deflected less by a cross- wind (assuming that both bullets have about the same ogive on the front end). I would suggest that you try the 100 grain bullets and shoot whichever groups the best in your rifle. I guarantee that the deer won't know the difference.

Good post! Best of luck to you and your hunters this fall!

Virtually all of the of the whitetails are south of NM Hwy 9. There is not a lot of accessible public land in that area. If you are willing to hike and can use a GPS, you can find whitetails around Gillespie Peak, the Cowboy Rim and Cowboy Spring, and in the Little Hatchets. There are a few around Hatchet Peak, but they are sparsely distributed and it is pretty hard hunting. The south side of Hatchet Peak and the Cowboy Ridge are leased to Hurt Cattle Company and they charge access fees to access the public land. They also control access to the Alamo Huecos, but there aren't many deer there (if any, these days). Most of the rest is Diamond A Ranches and they are pretty focused on preventing trespass. Good luck!

Good news, Amanda! Don't overdo it...

Just saw this on the TWS site: THE WILDLIFE SOCIETY VIDEO CONTEST WINNERS The Wildlife Society is pleased to announce its inaugural video competition winners: 1. When Owls Dream, by Amanda Moors 2. Trapping Rio Grande Wild Turkeys in Texas, by Shawn L. Locke 3. Meet a Fisheries and Wildlife Grad, by Marco Sanchez Congratulations to all. To see all the videos entered in our first-ever contest, check out our Youtube Channel.

Pretty heavy rains for the last two weeks on the west and north sides of the Chiricahuas. Several folks that I know who live south and west of Bowie have had their roads washed out. On the east side, most of the big draws have run down to the highway at least a couple of times. There will certainly be water in the tanks and catchments in the Chiricahuas. Farther south, rains have been spotty, but some ranches down south in the Peloncillos have had good rains. A friend over at Hereford reports that they have had several "frog stranglers" in the neighborhood of three inches each...FWIW

For a handgun, investigate Black T coating--I guarantee that it won't get scratched as long as you don't use a chisel on it. The other option is Cerakote which is even harder. If you have the outside Cerakoted and the barrel and action treated with Ultra Bore Coat you can almost forget about cleaning and rust--especially in Arizona!

it looks to me like a little branding corral--a place where the permittee can run a few cows and calves in, cut out the cows and brand the calves. Cows are usually so scattered on forest allotments that rounding up all of them would take several days and you would have to hire a big crew to hold the cut and brand all the calves. Using these little corrals, you can just round up a few each day and get it done with two or three guys over a period of a few weeks.

Not being critical, but when you alter something to fit your unique situation, you exclude a lot of potential buyers from the buying pool. Although the function of the scope is in no way compromised, most folks are looking for a gloss, matte or silver finish scope to match the metal finish on their rifle. The ones that go for $400 on ebay do not have the finish that matches your stock finish. Rifle loonies are funny but that's the way we are. Good luck--I sincerely hope you get what you need for it.

Weller's has done whitetails, mule deer, mountain lions, kudu, waterbuck, oryx and impala for me. I have been sending my business to them for at least 15 years and they have produced super mounts and rugs. Many of our guests have sent them lions, whitetails and mule deer and I have heard nothing but good reports. If you get to Tucson, you should drop by their studio and look at their work. It's really impressive!

If it's a Model 94 Winchester, they were all designed for smokeless powder. Some of the early Marlin Model 1893s were not. If it's a Marlin and the barrel says "Special Smokeless Steel", it will be fine with smokeless powders--these were manufactured from 1907 onward. The early Marlin 93s were marked .25-36 Marlin which is the same cartridge as the .25-35. If you have one of those, I would recommend that you take the rifle to a gunsmith and have a chamber cast made as some of the chambers were oversized for some reason. I had one of the early "Special Smokeless Steel" rifles that had an egg-shaped chamber and I had to have the barrel set back and re-chambered.