Second rut timing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam Menard

I had never heard of Ken Nordberg until a couple of weeks ago and am just starting to review some of his material. Interestingly, I discovered that he isn’t a biologist but a dentist with a passion for deer and deer hunting. Although he claims to have conducted research, I don’t think that any of his work has been peer-reviewed or published in any scientific journals. I’m not saying this to discredit him, but am only pointing out that his findings may only be opinions.

Some of the big gurus of scientific research on deer and deer behaviour include Larry Marchington, James Kroll, Karl Miller, Aaron Moen, Valerius Geist, Harry Jacobson, Mickey Hellickson, and John Ozoga, just to name a few.

James Kroll writes for North American Whitetail magazine and John Ozoga writes for Deer and Deer Hunting magazine. Both write excellent articles and often cite the work carried out by the others. Well worth the read IMO.

---

Im familiar with most the ones you posted particularly Ozoga, Ken has more schooling then just his dentistry I forget what specifically but I believe hes formally trained as an animal researcher. While his methodology can be slightly different then some of the mainstream for some aspects, I find value in comparing different researchers information. Nobody will ever agree and its always subject to change but the continual pursuit for more and better research is what matters. Peer reviewed and empirical research is kind of difficult on mostly observational studies which is what I believe Ken focused more on with his wife. Its hard for peers to agree on observations they may not have dircet experience with whereas biological data like blood samples and measured hormone levels, birth weight of fawns etc would be easier to agree on in absence of similar observations opportunity. Each researcher has something to bring to the table, Ken has a unique style and seems to have captured the bigger picture that ties everything together in my opinion.

Thanks for naming some of the others I have not heard of, always looking for different reasearch to compare and scrutinize lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

My first trail Cam....worth every penny just for the anticipation alone. Set it up and went back in 5 days, saw the film was full and then took it into the Photo shop, paid the premium to get it developed for the next day. The 24 hrs of anticipation was almost to much, picked them up when it opened, tore open the envelop in the store and with shaky hands I flipped thru 32 pics of a weed blowing in front of the camera. HaHa...

Imagine...now the pics are sent to your phone in real time...we've come a long way baby HaHa,

---

Oh boy I totally get the anticipation of what’s on the film and then the big let down of not seeing anything of substance. Reminds me of the first time I tried using deer lure, I expected to be trampled by deer and then not seeing anything. Worst $5 I ever spent lol.

OP-all in all-the season is open,harvesting deer is only possible in the bush.Whoever has a time ,unused tag-just go for it.
Being out is priceless,harvesting deer along the way is a big bonus,do not let theory of right or wrong answers distract You from going at it.

Remember-deer hunt is like soccer:there are certain statistics(not know the exacts,just making it up,to demonstarte)
If you want to score 1 x-you need to create 2 very dangerous shoots-for 2 shoots you need 4 serious attacks-for 4 attacks you have to get over to the opponents side 8 x with the ball-to get over 8 x ,you have to take the ball away from them 16 x........something like this.

Many hunters work hard at scoring,and not taking away from anyone's success,but:
Some hunters get lucky,some hunters use "hunting aids"(baiting comes to my mind)some hunters score several deer due of deer drive etc,so this is NOT a carwed in stone statistics.

However it gets the chances of scoring out there "palatable".


Is it there a second rut scientifically proven ? would be good to know and agree on it ! yes , but if it is (even if it is non proven)the "timing"is about right for it-plus You will loose nothing if you assume there is one,so hunt as there is one,if that is what You want to do...........You can loose absolutely nothing.

Good hunting.

ps-i think there was,and always will be a second rut(and a third as well )the only difference is the magnitude of it,but hey-for the BIG one,there is only 11 more months to go

I think the most compelling evidence for a November start to breeding, with a continuation into December and a fizzle out in January is the deer vehicle collision data from the State of Wisconsin.
They collected data on specifics like bucks hit, does, pregnant does, fawns, yearlings, with dates, etc.
Some of the studies performed on the data illustrate collisions with fawns don't start until May.
I think Ken used some of that data during his research to show other things like pregnant does hit in July to confirm January breeding.
I've liked this theory the best.
I think it best explains the huge ramp up of buck scent marking behavior during the last week of October and those first few days of November, anticipating that first receptive doe.
It would also explain the sharp drop in scrape refreshing as their time is switched into breeding mode.
I remember when I first looked at that data and that point of view, it was a bit of a punch in the gut to be honest. It shook up my whole thought process. To the better in the end I think.