Pursuing the Exceptional Buck

Without a doubt, most deer hunters daydream about putting their tag on a truly exceptional buck sometime during their hunting career. Some hunters eventually get such a buck by pure luck. Others devote most of their deer hunting time specifically to locating what, in their view, are better-thanaverage bucks. Occasionally they are successful at putting themselves in the right place at the right time, but by and large, the vast majority of the legal bucks tagged in California are young deer of average size. When you think about it, there's really nothing wrong with that. The biggest deer in the state are, of course, Rocky Mountain mule deer, which range throughout the West and inhabit the eastern edge of California roughly from Mono County north to the Oregon border and east to Nevada. It is interesting to note that even in the good old days of few restrictions, California's mule deer have not made much of a splash in the record books. However, that does not mean that there are no large, mature bucks taken in California, only that they don't score well Left: This is the only typical mule deer entry from California in the Boone and Crockett records. It was taken in 1943 by Sulo Lakso in Lassen County. John Higley photo. Below: This magnificent nontypical mule deer was taken in Shasta County in 1987 by Artie McGram. Currently it is #8 in the Boone and Crockett all time records.
according to the Boone & Crockett Club (B&C) or Pope and Young measurement systems. Perhaps the biggest limiting factor, in the availability of high-scoring mule deer bucks in California, is the limited number of Rocky Mountain mule deer present here to begin with. When you consider how many thousands of mule deer bucks are taken throughout the West, and how few actually qualify for the book, you must conclude that very few deer in any herd develop antlers that score well from the standpoint of B&C. Finding one of those mossyhorn monsters is a lot like winning the lottery—you always have high hopes but the odds really aren't very good, are they? In the 1991 edition of the official Records of Elk and Mule Deer (published by B&C), the state of Colorado has 167 entries in the typical mule deer category while Nevada, a state also known for big mule deer bucks, has only 10. Nevada, which has far more Rocky Mountain mule deer than California, obviously produces scads of big once-in-a-lifetime bucks that do not score well for B&C. The difference between Nevada and Colorado, besides a lower buck harvest in Nevada, may be attributed, in part, to the configuration and symmetry of the antlers found in various regions. Meanwhile, California has only one typical mule deer listed, a buck killed by a hunter named Sulo Lakso in Lassen County in 1943. Interestingly, the buck was not recognized as a candidate for the B&C records until 1987! Incidentally, the body size of these record bucks doesn't mean a thing and you'll find that adult mule deer in good condition from California compare favorably with same age bucks from any other western state. That said, it's entirely possible that other potential record-book mule deer bucks were taken occasionally in the old days by hunters who simply tossed the antlers in the barn or discarded them. The obvious question is, have our deer gotten smaller? Probably not. While it's true that there were some absolutely monstrous deer (body-wise) reported in the 1930s, including a confirmed report of a buck from Lassen County that apparently weighed 320 pounds field-dressed, some reports from that time indicate that there were actually fewer deer to begin with. And certainly there was less hunting pressure. To produce really big-bodied and big-antlered mule deer takes a combination of good feed, proper minerals and longevity. A buck's antlers really don't reach their full potential until the animal is between 4 and 7 years of age. One DFG biologist explains it this way, "I've kept track of some of the biggest bucks taken in northern California and I've seen a pattern. Genetics are important, but it appears that genetics dictate the configuration of a buck's antlers while nutrition has a lot to do with size. However, there's more to it. Not only does a buck have to have the right genes and nutrition, but he also has to live long enough to develop fully, and very few California bucks have that opportunity." Surprisingly, California hunters have done a bit better with mule deer bucks in the non-typical category, placing 4 in the B&C book, including a monster buck taken by Artie McGram in Shasta County in 1987. McGram's buck is currently listed as number 8 in the all-time B&C records. Other nontypical bucks include two from Modoc County and one from Mariposa County, which was killed in 1972. The Mariposa buck, taken by Harold Laird, is currently number 4 in the book. All of this is not meant to discourage you from looking for a big buck when you have a tag for one of the areas that might produce such an animal for you. Just remember, “exceptional” is in the eye of the beholder and the truth of the matter is that the vast majority of the large mule deer taken throughout the West simply do not score well enough to be entered in the pages of the B&C records book. That brings up another point. Perhaps there is too much emphasis these days on how well a particular buck scores and too little emphasis on the rewards of an enjoyable, challenging hunting experience, successful or not. When you get right down to it, a big adult of any of the subspecies of mule deer found in California is truly exceptional even if it isn't qualified to enter the book. Bear in mind that the only subspecies of mule deer listed in the records separately from mule deer are Columbian black-tailed deer and they qualify only if they come from an area specified by B&C. Any black-tailed deer outside of the area must be measured as a mule deer because the deer in question is apt to be a hybrid of the two. (See the black-tail deer range description that accompanies this chapter.)