Recreating a Deer Woods

[Chainsaw]

It proves that all bucks get to breed at some point. You had many bigger bucks but he still landed a lady.

And I think two more afterwards! And there was one pic of even a button buck getting lucky. Don't know if he connected or even was old enough but he definitely was on top.

And a slight correction on many bigger bucks on the property; there are three or four older and larger bucks on the property but still this one is good for here and I had put him in the top seven group that any one of them should be very nice shooters in the coming fall for this area. Here is what I think to be the buck in the breeding sequence pictured in the more normal way we are used to seeing them. You can see he still has a very large frame and body even at the late date of 12/01 when this pic was taken.

I didn't want to leave the impression that we have unlocked the key and are over run with larger size bucks as we certainly are not. We are thrilled to have the age bucks we are seeing here on this property as it just didn't used to be so very often.

Further I am becoming convinced that a few years back when we used to have as many as eight cams out with only two of them being perfectly reliable and seldom was a buck even 2 1/2 ever photographed let alone the 3 1/2's and up that it did not mean they weren't there or were all nocturnal; Back then the cams mostly only worked half the time and we were putting them in places that older deer did not tend to venture during the daylight hours. And I'd bet if all properties in this area that had such poor hunting this past season had the camera coverage and lower pressure as this property that older deer would have been showing on those properties during the daytime as well.

 

[Chainsaw]

In comparing the number of unique yearling bucks regularly using the property (8) to the number of button bucks(total unique fawns divided by two (84 fawns divided by 2 =42 button bucks), a very glaring statistic has surfaced. That is that the does that spend a lot of time on this property have produced and kept alive at least until now 42 button bucks yet the property has only 8 yearling bucks spending a lot of time on the property. So what could be up with this? Even if 2017 didn't produce as many button bucks as 2018 and even if it produced half as many(a number taken out of thin air) we would still be producing 21 button bucks and ending up with only eight yearlings; it just doesn't seem plausible. Note; the high number of button bucks was reinforced by the fact that in most cases when a doe was being harassed, a button buck was either in the forefront or the background. They were very motivated to do what the big boys were up to.

Some button bucks no doubt fall to coyotes their first winter but it is a total unknown as to how many. We did not get a lot of coyote pics during the survey but they could of course be here heavier in the winter.We really don't know except for the doe groups that we see almost daily from our sun room throughout the winter they seem to remain pretty much intact throughout the winter. A more plausible answer appears to be that most yearling bucks disbursed to other properties and either eight stayed here and did not disburse or some amount up to 7 did not disburse and the balance to make eight are ones that chose to stop their disbursing adventure from other properties when they hit this one. In all the studies checked no one has determined or at least no one has determined AND REPORTED what makes a yearling buck stop his disbursement journey and choose a particular property to live on. There are indications that some yearlings do not disburse and mostly it turns out that they are orphaned yearlings.

A possible answer is that other properties within range of dispersing yearlings do not have adequate recruitment rates for us to see them disbursing to here. At first I thought that was likely but after discussing that with professional deer managers in the area that scenario is not likely. Not knowing what dispersing yearlings are looking for I have made the effort to provide superior food during both spring and fall dispersal periods, superior cover during both periods and plenty of does during both periods and we have achieved all of that. Maybe what we were not counting on was not the number of does was so important but rather the number of available does for breeding. In other words if we have a greater portion of the buck population in higher age brackets which we do (22 aged 2 1/2 plus to 8 yearlings) then the yearling bucks won't be able to get in on much breeding action regardless of the number of does on the property. That of course is a stretch paradigm with zero scientific basis.In any event the cam survey has pointed out that we are creating lot's of deer which are disbursing to other properties and we are getting a zero or poor return.

Most studies have found that some orphaned fawns do not disburse, so for now with the current lack of understanding of what makes a dispersing yearling buck stop there is only one possible way to improve recruitment of yearling bucks into our property's population. That of course would be removing does early while button bucks are still with them to result in more orphan button bucks. For this to give us the desired result the paradigm that orphaned bucks tend not to disperse must be so. This would be a congruent strategy since it is the only way to keep the population under control anyhow. Does anyone see this any differently? The alternative is to remove the majority of mature deer and that isn't on the menu here. If no one sees it differently does anyone agree with these conclusions?

 

[Buckly]

That’s very interesting. I ran camera surveys for years and the proportions were always the same. 85% yearling bucks, so your large number of 2 year olds is at the very least odd and must be having some impact on the yearling numbers you’re getting. During dispersal I would lose almost all yearling bucks but they were always replaced pretty much in the same numbers. Of course most of those newcomers were killed throughout the neighborhood. Just my intuition that the out of proportion buck age class you’re seeing will change next year. All those 2 year olds will seek out other areas. This will show in a greater number of yearlings before and after dispersal. That is only my guess. Anyways, I can’t even fathom going through the number of pictures you declipherd into detail.

 

[Chainsaw]

That’s very interesting. I ran camera surveys for years and the proportions were always the same. 85% yearling bucks, so your large number of 2 year olds is at the very least odd and must be having some impact on the yearling numbers you’re getting. During dispersal I would lose almost all yearling bucks but they were always replaced pretty much in the same numbers. Of course most of those newcomers were killed throughout the neighborhood. Just my intuition that the out of proportion buck age class you’re seeing will change next year. All those 2 year olds will seek out other areas. This will show in a greater number of yearlings before and after dispersal. That is only my guess. Anyways, I can’t even fathom going through the number of pictures you deciphered into detail.

Thanks for your reply Buckly. Per your observation I went back thru my calculations made after adjusting the buck numbers down to eliminate the bucks that had three or less showings in the cameras and found a simple yet extremely meaningful clerical or addition error. The corrected number is 22 unique bucks 2 1/2 and older plus 8 unique yearling bucks for a total of 30 unique adult bucks versus the 38 posted in my summary. The ratio is still unusual but not as unusual for the harvest/trespasser management exercised here. And in the extreme heavy hunting that used to be in your area, I can understand where 85% yearling bucks would have been normal. I haven't been in that area in many years but when I was the harvests observed were along that line or even a higher percentage. I edited post 640 and 642 to correct my clerical/math error. Thank you.

Yes Buckly it was a bear deciphering which deer were unique bucks and aging each one of them. Even telling the does apart from the button bucks was very challenging. And it wasn't until I was only 1/3 done that it became apparent of what a huge task was ahead of me. At that point though there was no turning back so onward it went. By the way there ended being 404 deer sightings that had to be not counted in the survey because even with three pics each sex or age was not discernible for a variety of reasons. A lot of time was used trying to figure those out; doing it again I'd know right away not to battle with the hard ones like that.

 

[George]

That's a lot of cameras. I did my camera surveys in my Iowa yard at the pear tree with one. Others have spoken/written well of the Browning cameras, obviously you must like them. What can you tell us about them that we should know? I prefer black flash and will probably be in the market for some cameras soon.

G

 

[rusty1034]

Chainsaw,

The scope of the project you've undertaken is nothing short of a PhD thesis. Kudos to you, and thanks so much for sharing the results. I'm certain your work will shame some done by professionals, and will probably be used in future deer management decision making by governmental agencies, and/or private deer managers.

Being a data/science hound, I find the disparity in the numbers between the quantity of button bucks in your survey vs. the number of 1.5 year olds to cause a lot of head scratching. I'm guessing you were surprised as well. I don't remember you mentioning "winter kill"- aka starvation- as a factor in reducing the number of buttons that make it through their first winter. Is their any evidence of that in your neck of the woods ? I've heard you get a little bit of snow in that stretch occasionally.

Your suggestion that the buttons disperse because they are not able to partake in the breeding activity seems to be a reasonable conclusion. It also explains why your tract does not attract buttons that are dispersing from other areas. This condition could be the only "down side" to having a well managed deer herd.

If your theory that orphaned buttons stay on the property is correct, then obviously creating more orphaned buttons is a way to keep them from dispersing. I'm sure you've already considered the difficulties in implementing actions which would make this happen.

The way I see a plan like that happening is simply to remove Does that you know have button fawns with them. Successful deer hunting is difficult enough at its basic level. To add the complicating factors of :1) Hunting early in the season, 2) for does, 3) that have a fawn with them 4) that has been positively identified as a button buck- would obviously make the challenge more difficult by a large percentage. However, if there's one deer hunter I know who can be successful at such an undertaking- it's definitely you.

A favor I ask of you- When you get to the point of giving your presentation on the QDM Coop you are working on, please send an invitation to me. Even though I'm not in your neck of the woods, I'd love to see the final project-

Hoping for good commercials during the game tonight- Rusty

 

[Chainsaw]

Buckly, Now that my summary is updated to reflect math/clerical errors found the numbers still remain unusual regarding ages and it is my goal to get these numbers as correct as possible. Aging deer from pictures is of course not science and it may be a bit off here and there but I think any errors there wouldn't change the numbers significantly. The only other chance for high impact errors in the survey that I recognize was my chosen methodology for determining the # of yearling bucks. I chose to print out the pics of all bucks as each possible "new" one showed up on the pictures. My wife and I then took the printed pictures and Placed them all out side by side and whittled them down to thirty regular users of the property. It could be that the yearling bucks with their limited antler characteristics made individual identification impossible. It is possible that there could have been lookalikes that got counted as 1 yearling buck but were in reality two or even three yearling bucks. And for sure it is a lot more difficult to ID different deer using trail-trail cam pictures versus feeder-trail cam pictures where the sizes and backgrounds are the same and the foregrounds are open.

Another way to determine the number of yearling bucks would have been to identify only 2 1/2 years old and up bucks, then determined the number of pics per unique buck of that age and then applied that number to the number of yearling buck total picture events. If we had used that methodology the summary would have looked a lot different. There were 304 pics of 2 1/2 year old bucks and there were 293 pics of 1 1/2 year old bucks. If we assumed that the number of yearling bucks could be determined by using the 2 1/2 and up pic.ratio which was 13.81 pics (304 pics divided by 22 different bucks) and applied 13.81 ratio to the # of yearling buck pics (293 divided by 13.81) for 21.22 yearling bucks.

Honestly I am not sure which methodology is most correct;I will say that the 21 number of yearling bucks makes more logical sense than the 8 number of yearling bucks. What methodology did you use in calculating the number of yearling bucks versus 2 1/2 and up bucks when you did your camera surveys?

 

[Chainsaw]

Thank you Rusty for your kind words and suggestions and absolutely I'd enjoy and benefit from having you at our meetings. Just to clear up about dispersing deer, it is not my idea but rather it is a science based observation resulting from .org type studies involving radio collared fawns. Basically most, (70 to 90% varies from study to study) of yearling bucks will disburse off of the property they were born on. One recent study says they will travel about 10 miles average in heavy AG land before finding a new property to call home, and 5 miles average in heavily wooded terrain to find a new home. Other studies are leaning towards twenty miles average and Paul told me one the collared dispersing deer from Fort Drum showed up in a picture 150 miles away! I find that really surprising but that is what has been found out. Some of these yearling bucks will disburse in the spring and others will disburse in the fall. That is the most defined specifics I've seen on when the dispersal's take place.
Here are excerpts from the PA. study.
https://www.pgc.pa.gov/Wildlife/WildlifeSpecies/White-tailedDeer/Pages/DeerMovements.aspx
It is very interesting data and if we can capitalize on the why's of what actually causes some to not disperse and what causing dispersing ones to choose a new home it certainly would UP our buck populations on our individual properties. As technologies keep advancing more and more is being discovered so the study results are becoming more definitive and helpful.

The same applies to orphaned bucks tending to be the ones that do not disperse. It is not a done deal but the studies do show that among the yearling bucks that do not disperse, a good amount of them were orphaned button bucks. Not every biologist completely agrees with that correlation so it may someday be proven incorrect. And of course the best chance for a button buck to live until 2 1/2 is if he does not disperse from the property he was born on with all else being equal.

As for winter kill of Button bucks, yes you are correct Rusty, in some years winter kill of fawns is huge here ; one year around 2013 or 14 (not sure which bad winter it was) we found 38 dead deer in late March and early April with most of them being fawns so yes that year we lost about 19 button bucks that we know of. Some years winter kill doesn't come in to play. So far this year we are OK although it isn't over until the end of April and actually winter kills usually occur very, very close to spring. I did overlook that for sure.

AS for only shooting does with button bucks yes it is a challenge; we used to accomplish it by hunting early and hunting in small food plots where you could see the button bucks by the size of them as compared to the doe fawns and their mothers.

Again thank you for your confidence in me, I do make lots of mistakes and learn as we go but do keep on pushing thru so we will get ur done.
Looking forward to tonight's ads myself.

 

[Buckly]

Dave, firstly I was on a much smaller scale than your property. I also did not place cameras in bedding or woods areas. It took a number of years of tweaking locations but I really felt that the 4 cameras I had out and placed would capture every deer at some point. I won’t go into more detail on that other than sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do. I will not declare that I am super good at aging deer but there were very few deer that I couldn’t say were definitely yearlings from 2 1/2 year olds. I believe what you have there on your property is a very unique situation. Your factors of being a large well managed property in an area that is not so managed, combined with winter conditions that can swing widely can easily give results that may or may not be the norm. One thing for sure is that right now you have a good number of deer and a good number of bucks. Whatever the statistics or the reason behind is interesting but, your work there seems to have great accomplishment.

 

[Chainsaw]

That's a lot of cameras. I did my camera surveys in my Iowa yard at the pear tree with one. Others have spoken/written well of the Browning cameras, obviously you must like them. What can you tell us about them that we should know? I prefer black flash and will probably be in the market for some cameras soon.

G

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1315025-REG/browning_btc_5hd_850_strike_force_850_trail.html/?ap=y&gclid=CjwKCAiAv9riBRANEiwA9Dqv1XU1-YnRNk6mZP0BHWMYxnJH7pNcLaAM3cZGhb4Ex0PlLx8CEHUNlxoC_wsQAvD_BwE&lsft=BI:514&smp=Y

First I like the price. I had used trail cameras on and off since the film ones first came out. All of them were unreliable and just a waste of time and money until I tried two Reconyx. Reconyx was the only camera that worked well for me and I had resigned myself to the then fact that it was the only one to buy even at the cost of $525 each.

In Dec. 2017, Tap started thread on this forum
http://deerhunterforum.com/index.php?threads/hate-the-cams-i-own-looking-to-buy-a-few-new-ones.3550/

In Tap's thread Swat1018 posted that he had 15 Strike Force Brownings and that they worked perfectly for him. Others also voiced the same opinions. Evidently Swat and others had found that the less expensive trail cams had significantly improved since I had given up on them.So I checked prices, found some sales and started buying them and testing them against the two Reconyx I had. The Brownings passed the tests for performance while giving me 6.66 cameras for the then price of one Reconyx. They were not a Reconyx but they did the job well and since I have had the Brownings only three to fourteen months I can't speak for their longevity as that is an unknown to me at this point. In order for cameras to meet my needs price and performance were key because I wanted a lot of them.

I like that they are small and light 4 1/2 x 3 x 2 1/2, they hide well, they are easy to program and the way they are built/sealed no water gets into them; with the driving rains here that is a big deal. Batteries last the season. Deer do know they are there though, I don't know how the deer are recognizing the cameras; it must be the plastic smell, I can not hear any sound coming from them. If prices were the same I would own more of the the Dark Ops 940 D versus the Strike Force just because of the no visibility to trespassers and for home security. While it seems like a huge amount of cameras, I plan on adding some to the mix each year. Current recommendations for non-baited camera survey studies are for 1 per 30 acres- that brings it to twenty for 600 acres. Further I want to use them some for trespasser control and I like to bunch them up along trails when a huge buck has been discovered to learn as much about him as possible. And as for picture quality, you can see it on this thread; it handles bad lighting, snow and everything the sun throws at it. On the weak side maybe it isn't reaching out too far sensing wise at night time.

With the current style of low impact hunting we do, we don't hunt much before our tag is filled and the cameras really added to the in the woods scouting time and of course helped with the hunting as well. There are many other higher end Browning models but I have no experience with them. Trail Cam Pro is a good source for info with their camera reviews and has two year warranties on their cameras except on certain sales. As of late I've noticed fewer sales pricing on the strike force.

 

[rusty1034]

Sportsman’s Warehouse has one of the Browning cams on sale - no tax, no shipping.

https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...&ved=0ahUKEwjms53jnqDgAhXKhOAKHRH1Cu4QgjYI-AY


Sent from my iPad using Deer Hunter Forum

 

[George]

Thanks Dave, I just ordered 4 dark ops with 16gb cards for $129 per.

 

[Chainsaw]

Sportsman’s Warehouse has one of the Browning cams on sale - no tax, no shipping.

https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...&ved=0ahUKEwjms53jnqDgAhXKhOAKHRH1Cu4QgjYI-AY


Sent from my iPad using Deer Hunter Forum

That is as good a price as I've seen Rusty and don't see any reason for them to go lower as so many people have run out of them. As you know no tax is a big deal in our county.

And George, that price sounds good as well, you've basically bought that camera for $119 and that is pretty low for that model. Good luck with them; I hope they work as well for you as they have for me.

 

[Chummer]

And I think two more afterwards! And there was one pic of even a button buck getting lucky. Don't know if he connected or even was old enough but he definitely was on top.

And a slight correction on many bigger bucks on the property; there are three or four older and larger bucks on the property but still this one is good for here and I had put him in the top seven group that any one of them should be very nice shooters in the coming fall for this area. Here is what I think to be the buck in the breeding sequence pictured in the more normal way we are used to seeing them. You can see he still has a very large frame and body even at the late date of 12/01 when this pic was taken.
View attachment 14705
I didn't want to leave the impression that we have unlocked the key and are over run with larger size bucks as we certainly are not. We are thrilled to have the age bucks we are seeing here on this property as it just didn't used to be so very often.

Further I am becoming convinced that a few years back when we used to have as many as eight cams out with only two of them being perfectly reliable and seldom was a buck even 2 1/2 ever photographed let alone the 3 1/2's and up that it did not mean they weren't there or were all nocturnal; Back then the cams mostly only worked half the time and we were putting them in places that older deer did not tend to venture during the daylight hours. And I'd bet if all properties in this area that had such poor hunting this past season had the camera coverage and lower pressure as this property that older deer would have been showing on those properties during the daytime as well.

That pic does make him look a lot bigger. I thought he was 2.5 before but not in this pic. The amount of info you are processing is off the charts. Is it possible the number of older deer, bucks and does you have, that yearling bucks just can’t find a spot. I am sure the older does don’t want them hanging around in the spring and summer. I have noticed at my place I don’t get yearlings showing up until September/October. That is when your older bucks will have an issue with them showing up. I always thought when you have the best place within miles younger deer have to wait their turn to enter. Unless you are a doe fawn staying with the family unit you won’t be welcome. I think this is what guys experience when they say they shoot an old doe and 3 new ones show up or they take out the dominant buck and new ones take over. No scientific evidence but think your lack of yearlings dispersing in will be replaced by older bucks dispersing in. You can only hold so many bucks, why would an older buck allow a yearling to have a better home? I would bet your neighbors are covered up in yearlings hoping for admittance into your property.

Side note, my 72 acres is on the market. Ordered the sign yesterday. I am willing to finance the sale so hopefully I will get some interest.

 

[Paradise725]

In comparing the number of unique yearling bucks regularly using the property (8) to the number of button bucks(total unique fawns divided by two (84 fawns divided by 2 =42 button bucks), a very glaring statistic has surfaced. That is that the does that spend a lot of time on this property have produced and kept alive at least until now 42 button bucks yet the property has only 8 yearling bucks spending a lot of time on the property. So what could be up with this? Even if 2017 didn't produce as many button bucks as 2018 and even if it produced half as many(a number taken out of thin air) we would still be producing 21 button bucks and ending up with only eight yearlings; it just doesn't seem plausible. Note; the high number of button bucks was reinforced by the fact that in most cases when a doe was being harassed, a button buck was either in the forefront or the background. They were very motivated to do what the big boys were up to.

Some button bucks no doubt fall to coyotes their first winter but it is a total unknown as to how many. We did not get a lot of coyote pics during the survey but they could of course be here heavier in the winter.We really don't know except for the doe groups that we see almost daily from our sun room throughout the winter they seem to remain pretty much intact throughout the winter. A more plausible answer appears to be that most yearling bucks disbursed to other properties and either eight stayed here and did not disburse or some amount up to 7 did not disburse and the balance to make eight are ones that chose to stop their disbursing adventure from other properties when they hit this one. In all the studies checked no one has determined or at least no one has determined AND REPORTED what makes a yearling buck stop his disbursement journey and choose a particular property to live on. There are indications that some yearlings do not disburse and mostly it turns out that they are orphaned yearlings.

A possible answer is that other properties within range of dispersing yearlings do not have adequate recruitment rates for us to see them disbursing to here. At first I thought that was likely but after discussing that with professional deer managers in the area that scenario is not likely. Not knowing what dispersing yearlings are looking for I have made the effort to provide superior food during both spring and fall dispersal periods, superior cover during both periods and plenty of does during both periods and we have achieved all of that. Maybe what we were not counting on was not the number of does was so important but rather the number of available does for breeding. In other words if we have a greater portion of the buck population in higher age brackets which we do (22 aged 2 1/2 plus to 8 yearlings) then the yearling bucks won't be able to get in on much breeding action regardless of the number of does on the property. That of course is a stretch paradigm with zero scientific basis.In any event the cam survey has pointed out that we are creating lot's of deer which are disbursing to other properties and we are getting a zero or poor return.

Most studies have found that some orphaned fawns do not disburse, so for now with the current lack of understanding of what makes a dispersing yearling buck stop there is only one possible way to improve recruitment of yearling bucks into our property's population. That of course would be removing does early while button bucks are still with them to result in more orphan button bucks. For this to give us the desired result the paradigm that orphaned bucks tend not to disperse must be so. This would be a congruent strategy since it is the only way to keep the population under control anyhow. Does anyone see this any differently? The alternative is to remove the majority of mature deer and that isn't on the menu here. If no one sees it differently does anyone agree with these conclusions?

I think you are spot on! Your habitat is essentially a nursery for the neighboring area, and I think that removing does prior to fawn dispersal will help keep some of those yearlings from dispersing. I think ultimately that will improve your buck quality as well since you will eventually get multiple generations that have had the benefit of growing up and living on your property with superior food and low pressure.

Are you pleased with those browning cameras?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Triple C]

Dave - Hope you never lose your enthusiasm for what your are doing with your property. Very informative and always interesting. Yearling buck dispersion is an interesting topic. I've always believed that the reason so many of the 1.5 yr old bucks that get shot in heavily hunted areas is due to the fact that they are wondering around in new territory trying to find their new home and seem to lacking much smarts. Taking out a doe with a button buck still at her side is definitely fine tuning one's strategy in an attempt to keep young bucks from dispersing.

Thx for taking the time to share!

 

[Chainsaw]

Sportsman’s Warehouse has one of the Browning cams on sale - no tax, no shipping.

https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...&ved=0ahUKEwjms53jnqDgAhXKhOAKHRH1Cu4QgjYI-AY


Sent from my iPad using Deer Hunter Forum

Rusty, I just noticed that is the Strike Force Pro in the link you provided and not the Strike Force. It would be a good deal for the Strike Force but it is the best deal by far I have ever seen on the Pro. I don't have any of the Pro yet as it usually sells for $159 and I like to keep them down closer to $100 shipping and all. The Pro is reported to have slightly better pic quality than the Plain Strike Force models I have. And at $109 that is plenty close enough to my price range for that model.

Luke, yes I am fully pleased with the Browning cameras so far. They have added greatly to the hunting fun on the property. Prior to having the Browning cameras once my buck was shot, the season was virtually over other than hunting for the largest doe on the property which was OK but the cameras add yet another dimension to the season. We spend too much effort on the property to end "hunting" after one shot. The Browning cameras extend the "hunting" season where we are hunting for pictures versus the actual deer but it is still very exciting. For example the Browning cameras have given me over 200 pictures taken at 17 different on this property locations throughout the season of the deer pictured in post 625 page 32. The cameras have also given me multiple pics from multiple locations of other bucks using this property. It doesn't mean that I'll find their sheds this spring or have the opportunity to harvest one of them next fall but it sure has expanded the whole hunting experience. And thank you for your feedback on fawn dispersal and doe harvesting and growing even better bucks.

 

[Buckly]

The latch is the weak point on the browning cameras I had. Once I broke a few I learned to be much more careful opening and closing them, however even with the broken latches there was only one out of a dozen that was not useable. I always thought they took great pictures, especially daytime over the bushnells I had previous. The fact they only took 6 batteries was also a big plus instead of 8 or 12.

 

[Chainsaw]

Thanks TripleC, you are right, the yearling bucks are walking around lost and that is just how they look. That of course also makes them vulnerable to vehicle encounters and coyotes as well. The absolute safest option for the buck fawns born here is to stay here. Watch out does!

I can honestly say TripleC, the longer we have owned this land the more we enjoy it. I may have recounted this story before and if so I apologize. A dairy farmer friend owned 900 to 1,000 acres in Connecticut bordering the college there. A couple of big shots from the college visited Cyril, they wanted to buy one acre of his land that bordered the farm directly. Cyril welcomed them in, sat them down at the big old kitchen table and they got right to the point. They offered Cyril a tremendous amount of money for that one acre and Cyril flatly turned it down. They pushed the issue and even raised the offer and suggested they maybe could make him sell. Cyril was offended. He pulled out the knife from the sheath he always wore. It was a Buck General, a very large fix blade knife and he stuck it in the table between himself and his two guests who obviously were not making Cyril's day.Cyril told them they might as well take that knife and cut his heart out as to try and take away even that one acre of land. They quickly left and never came back. I couldn't understand why for what was a huge amount of money then that he didn't even entertain the idea of selling just one acre out of close to the thousand that he had. Eventually My wife and I learned from Cyril how tied to that land he was. And the longer you own it the more ties, happy times, and great memories just keep adding up. It would be a sad day to ever tire of our land or lose enthusiasm for it TripleC. Don't see it happening.

 

[Chainsaw]

The latch is the weak point on the browning cameras I had. Once I broke a few I learned to be much more careful opening and closing them, however even with the broken latches there was only one out of a dozen that was not useable. I always thought they took great pictures, especially daytime over the bushnells I had previous. The fact they only took 6 batteries was also a big plus instead of 8 or 12.

Am with you on the latch Buckly, noticed it depended on that one pin but so far by being careful, they are all working fine. And really we need to keep in mind these cams are really computers, not hammers so they should be handled with some care. I'm with you on the batteries; it sure is nice that 6 takes it through the season with ease.