Hunting Washington Forum

Community => Photo & Video => Topic started by: bow4elk on August 21, 2009, 04:54:21 PM

Title: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: bow4elk on August 21, 2009, 04:54:21 PM: Somebody recently asked about blacktails having racks configured like a typical whitetail, where mature bucks don't fork in the back and instead have a single row of tines off the main beam. Here's a perfect example of what that looks like on a ~5 1/2 year old buck. I've followed him on trailcams for three summers now. Last year he was a spindly well-framed 3x3, just a tad larger that in 2007. This year he enters the shooter category without hesitation. Got this photo early this morning.
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: bowhunterforever on August 21, 2009, 05:02:11 PM: Nice blacktail! :drool:
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: jason4429 on August 22, 2009, 07:08:37 AM: That is a dandy buck. The second biggest blacktail i have ever seen a live had horns like that.
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: nw_bowhunter on August 22, 2009, 10:29:03 AM: nice bt....the rack does look like a white tail spread... are you going to try for him during the season?
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: bucklucky on August 22, 2009, 10:43:43 AM: Good looking buck Tom!
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: M_ray on August 22, 2009, 10:56:10 AM: I'd say that's maybe Columbia Whitetail??? :dunno: they are in Ore. and there are some in WA most notably around the Long Beach refuge but not a stretch that they could be anywhere in SW WA.

http://www.stateparks.com/columbian_whitetailed_deer.html
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: littlebuf on August 22, 2009, 11:43:00 AM: ive got a black tail that if you just looked at the antlers you would swear it was a white tail, even has a eye guard on one side
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: C-Money on August 22, 2009, 11:50:31 AM: Nice buck! He is a shooter. Have you ever passed on him during hunting season in the passed?
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: Gobble on August 22, 2009, 11:53:35 AM: Nice Buck.

They say BT and Mule deer have exactly the same DNA, but the more I see decent BT the more they look like WT racks (at least in some areas) I guess they could have columbian WT genes :dunno:. I've also seen BT racks the looked just like Mulie racks that were in BT (non benchleg areas) Some experts say that all deer in the US are direct decendants of the orig BT deer.

Who knows :dunno: Nice buck either way
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: batsquatch on August 22, 2009, 02:51:21 PM: this must be that blacktail you where telling me about on my shed antler post. nice buck
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: bow4elk on August 22, 2009, 07:58:01 PM: This is a true-blue blacktail. He's spitting distance from Puget Sound. The reason I posted this is because somebody was asking or commenting on whether it was normal to have antlers like this. It is fairly common. What's odd to me is that this buck has been a 3x3 for the past two growing seasons. Prior to that he was a fork. Some bucks just don't fork in the back and even those that do, many will grow an extra tine of the main beam as they get older.

I have spent some time filming Columbian whitetails over the past 15 years. They are pretty well contained in SW Wa and this is in the Olympia area. I have heard confirmed reports of them in Portland area and on the Vancouver side of the river, but they are certainly not abundant.

I was planning to hunt this buck last fall but didn't because I wanted to see what another year of growth would do. Now there's nothing holding me back!! I've never taken a big mature blacktail in all my years hunting them. I could build a small cabin out of the does and forkies though. The day I am fortunate to harvest a deer of this caliber will be very satisfying indeed. But I know that getting a photo at 3 AM on a trailcam does little to book you a meeting during daylight hours in the woods.

I've never seen this buck in person yet I have literally hundreds of photos of him over the past three years, sometimes a mile or more apart. Don't be too quick to believe all the writings about blacktails living in a tiny home range. Yes, they have smaller core areas than other species but they do travel a lot more than people think. Chuck Bartlett is a pretty well-known photographer here in the NW. He has told me some amazing stories of unique-racked bucks moving upwards of 15 miles throughout the year.
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: Titan-1 on August 22, 2009, 09:10:00 PM: This one is not as big as the one you have pic's of but he has the same basic frame. He's all black tail as well...
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: bow4elk on August 22, 2009, 09:42:13 PM: Exactly - I've seen a lot of lowland blacktails just like him.
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: Ray on August 22, 2009, 09:43:08 PM: He's got a lot to eat! :hello: Nice bucks and good topic
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: Hunter Dug on August 24, 2009, 11:30:13 AM: I shot a blacktail buck few years back on the westside that was a big 5X6. When I took it in to get it mounted the the guy gave me a bunch of crap and said I had poached a whitetail. So I went and got the hide out of the back of the truck and slapped his face with the tail. :chuckle: Always some one out there that knows everything. Your know how a deers antlers grow ? However they grow.
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: grousetracker on August 24, 2009, 06:05:52 PM: i shot a 5x6 buck some years back that had whitetail configuration , tried to get it scored in boone and crocket book. it was instantly disqualified because it doesnt fork in the rear. official book says bt must fork in rear if has more than 4 points on one side. all bucks in book have fork in the back.
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: Wing it on August 25, 2009, 06:16:32 AM: Here a blacktail I got on the trail cam last week.
Title: Re: No, it's not a whitetail
Post by: KimberRich on August 25, 2009, 08:56:42 AM: Nice bucks. I've heard the sam ething about there having to be a fork on the rear tine to be qualified in the book.. Which is a stupid rule. If it can be proven it's a BT than it should qualify no matter what.