400-Inch Enclosure Buck

[Goose]

I worked on a deer farm here in WI (mostly feeding and other little stuff) and I gotta say it was an interesting experience. The owner loved them deer just like you love your dog or other pet. I do disagree with hunting in a pen for obvious reasons but I do have to respect alot of deer farmers. Ill betcha Charlie Alshiemer and alot of others will agree with how valuable these enclosures can be. Alot of the every day knowledge we have on deer nowadays is thanks to enclosures. There are bad apples in every bunch to be sure just as with everything.

[danesdad]

Shooting this deer would not be hunting.  It would be farming.  Harvesting something that was grown.  Nothing more.  That said, it is interesting.

[Woods Walker]

ORIGINAL: danesdad

Shooting this deer would not be hunting.  It would be farming.  Harvesting something that was grown.  Nothing more.  That said, it is interesting.

 
That's my point. This site and the magazine it comes from is about deer HUNTING, not livestock farming.

[ranwin33]

ORIGINAL: Woods Walker

ORIGINAL: danesdad

Shooting this deer would not be hunting.  It would be farming.  Harvesting something that was grown.  Nothing more.  That said, it is interesting.

That's my point. This site and the magazine it comes from is about deer HUNTING, not livestock farming.

The site and magazine are about Deer AND Deer Hunting.  Not just hunting. 
 
The deer will probably be used for breeding stock, it's too valuable to these people to kill it.  Interesting article in Bowhunter magazine, about translocating deer, i.e. those that have been raised say from the sperm of this buck then moved to other sites in hopes of improving genetics.  Studies in Texas indicate most don't survive the first year.

[Woods Walker]

ORIGINAL: ranwin33

ORIGINAL: Woods Walker

ORIGINAL: danesdad

Shooting this deer would not be hunting.  It would be farming.  Harvesting something that was grown.  Nothing more.  That said, it is interesting.

That's my point. This site and the magazine it comes from is about deer HUNTING, not livestock farming.

The site and magazine are about Deer AND Deer Hunting.  Not just hunting. 

The deer will probably be used for breeding stock, it's too valuable to these people to kill it.  Interesting article in Bowhunter magazine, about translocating deer, i.e. those that have been raised say from the sperm of this buck then moved to other sites in hopes of improving genetics.  Studies in Texas indicate most don't survive the first year.

 
Yes, and when you start raising "brood stock" to manipulate the gene pool of a WILD herd, then you are now FARMING, and not hunting, whether you have a fenced area or not.
 
Management of a wild resource via selective killing,  habitat improvement, and regulation of hunter numbers? FINE!
 
Playing God with genetics?  NO WAY.
 
What's next? Dipolid gene deer that grow 170 class racks in their first year but can't breed to satisfy the antler addicts, like they do with salmon?
 
Every step we take toward "improving" on nature leads us all that more farther from it, and I want NO PART of it.

[ranwin33]

ORIGINAL: Woods Walker

ORIGINAL: ranwin33

ORIGINAL: Woods Walker

[quote]ORIGINAL: danesdad

Shooting this deer would not be hunting.  It would be farming.  Harvesting something that was grown.  Nothing more.  That said, it is interesting.

That's my point. This site and the magazine it comes from is about deer HUNTING, not livestock farming.

The site and magazine are about Deer AND Deer Hunting.  Not just hunting. 

The deer will probably be used for breeding stock, it's too valuable to these people to kill it.  Interesting article in Bowhunter magazine, about translocating deer, i.e. those that have been raised say from the sperm of this buck then moved to other sites in hopes of improving genetics.  Studies in Texas indicate most don't survive the first year.

Yes, and when you start raising "brood stock" to manipulate the gene pool of a WILD herd, then you are now FARMING, and not hunting, whether you have a fenced area or not.
 
Management of a wild resource via selective killing,  habitat improvement, and regulation of hunter numbers? FINE!
 
Playing God with genetics?  NO WAY.
 
What's next? Dipolid gene deer that grow 170 class racks in their first year but can't breed to satisfy the antler addicts, like they do with salmon?
 
Every step we take toward "improving" on nature leads us all that more farther from it, and I want NO PART of it.
[/quote]
Well I won't argue your point about deer, but I do like my Roundup Ready soybeans and corn. 

[Sailfish]

ORIGINAL: Woods Walker

 
Management of a wild resource via selective killing,  
 
Playing God with genetics?   

 
Aren't these two the same? 
 
No matter how its done, once man starts selecting animals that will pass on their genes (whether in a lab/enclosure or in the field) your playing god. In fact I would venture to guess that management of a wild resource via selective killing could have a more detrimental effect on the gene pool in the long run(based on the shear numbers of individuals doing it).
It would be an interesting study for sure.
 
 
But that above deer is still a freak
 

[Woods Walker]

ORIGINAL: Sailfish

ORIGINAL: Woods Walker


Management of a wild resource via selective killing,  

Playing God with genetics?   

Aren't these two the same? 

No matter how its done, once man starts selecting animals that will pass on their genes (whether in a lab/enclosure or in the field) your playing god. In fact I would venture to guess that management of a wild resource via selective killing could have a more detrimental effect on the gene pool in the long run(based on the shear numbers of individuals doing it).
It would be an interesting study for sure.


But that above deer is still a freak

 
To a point, yes. But when you start getting into the DNA of a creature and manipulating it, then you're going WAAAAY past selective herd management.
 
"It's not nice to fool mother nature, because she can be a real B**** when she's angry!"
 
Besides, I have big issues with trophy deer manangement anyway when it goes beyond balanced kill ratios of bucks to does.

[allthingshunting]

woodswalker...i don't think you are looking at this objectively enough.  It wasn't posted as would you kill this deer in a pen?  Do you agree with enclosure hunting? etc.  It is asking what you think about the deer itself and is it the largest whitetail deer in the world.
 
That said, this may well be the world's largest whitetail, however, it isn't threatening to overtake any hunting records.  Pen raised deer have always been prohibited from the record books.
 
You should be asking what can we learn from this deer?
 
1.  what makes him grow antlers that are so superior?  we know he is getting optimal nutrition, has age and apparently has the genetics, but is there something else?
 
2.  Can it really grow antlers this large and still function / behave normally?  Affect life span?  Interact differently with other deer than other large bucks?
 
3.  Also, there is a lot of research in the growth of antlers themselves.  Some feel this process, when understood properly, may aid in cancer research and other diseases.  It is the fastest growing tissue in the wild.
 
there are tons of other things we can learn ( i am having a hard time coming up with examples this morning, but pen raised deer provide countless research opportunities that we are unable to obtain from wild deer because of access to them and other reasons.

[Woods Walker]

I was looking at it in the context of deer hunting. For that, I say that this has no place in it. Wild animals should be managed for population control in it's relationship to habitat, not just of deer, but for the entire ecosystem.
 
I realize that for many hunters, it's all about ANTLERS. That, IMO, is sad. The more we focus on that, then the farther we get from what hunting is.
 
As far as this deer being a lab rat for cancer research or whatever, FINE. But this animal has no relationship at all to what I engage in every fall, and think about for the rest of the year.