drought and antler growth

[ironhead22]

I was watching a hunting show and the outfitter mentioned that because of last years drought that he believed the elk had lost 30" of antler. I have tried to find more info but so far have come up empty. My question is if the drought ends how long will it take for the elk to recover? Is it a year or two?

[otcWill]

I don't think it takes that long to "recover". Usuallly these types of observations are in AR and NM. I have heard that even a short drought during the antler growing season can result in short seconds or thirds, but if the moisture picks up the rest of the rack will be "normal" in terms of growth. I have read a good bit about this but have never noticed any real significant lack of antler growht in drought years here in CO.

[Swede]

I too have heard of the affect of drought on antler growth. Like otcWill said it was always related to Az or NM. From what I read it appears that it was based on the situation for the years(s) of the drought only. When you have good forage you get good antler growth. When the forage is poor, the altler growth is less.

[Freebird134]

I don't think there have been a lot of formal studies on the effects of drought on antler growth. The ones I know of have been done in red deer, the close relative of elk (same genus; Cervus elephas and Cervus canadensis, respectively). Indeed, drought can reduce antler size (also body size) and these effects are particularly pronounced when population densities are high. However, the cause and effect are unclear. Drought probably does not directly affect antler size (eg, thirsty deer have smaller antlers); it's probably reduced forage and higher competition for food (when densities are high) that result in less antler. It's something that game managers are thinking about and mitigate in the face of climate change (some places are going to see more droughts in the future).

But, yes, less precip = less vegetation = smaller antlers

[Freebird134]

As far as recovery, I bet it's pretty instantaneous. If there is more rain and better food the next year during antler growth, I think they would jump right back to full potential. My concern would be that droughts are likely to get more common.

[buglmin]

We see the drought effects in both NM and here in SW Colorado. On a drought year, you'll have bulls with good bottoms but weak tops and short main beams. They wont have the mass either.
The major problem with a drought year is the bulls getting enough feed to last them through the winter. Drought means no grass growth and when they find grass it doesnt contain the nutrients. Colorado F&G used to feed elk during drought years, but stopped that years ago. Thats why we have bad winter kill some years...

[Jaquomo]

Winter snowpack and the resultant early vegetation growth matters to antler growth. Summer drought does not (aside from winter range deterioration affecting the overall stress on the herd, which buglemin points out). A good snowpack will deliver enough soil moisture to produce nutrients needed for antler growth during the short time antlers grow. Some of our biggest bulls, on average, have appeared during bad summer droughts after an above-average snowpack.

I've hunted elk in the same area for 38 years, during wet years, dry years, big snow, sparse snow. I've kept journals over a good portion of that time. Yes, sparse snowpack on the spring/early summer range does appear to affect antler growth. But as Freebird speculates, the next season is an entirely different situation. The next year can show great antler growth. I'm not a biologist, but am a former park naturalist with a degree in Environmental Interpretation and a strong biology background, so I do know a smidge. "Drought" is so subjective. Where I live in the mountains, we've had a snow "drought" this winter. But just over the Divide, they're getting hammered. Before that it was just the opposite for several years in a row, and we were hammered on our side. Over there, they'll likely have great antler growth. On our side, unless we get big March snow, it should be affected.

But I must respectfully disagree, and at the same time agree with Freebird about so-called "climate change" causing more droughts in the future. Natural climate change has always occurred, and there have always been regional droughts around the world. This is nowhere near the worst North American drought cycle during the past 150 years. The 1880s, 1930s, and 1950s were worse. And as dramatically - and embarrassingly - incorrect as the models produced by the IPCC and other so-called grant-funded "climate scientists" have been during the past 35 years, there's really no plausible evidence that droughts will be any worse or any less common than the cyclical droughts which have occurred throughout history.

[Freebird134]

But I must respectfully disagree, and at the same time agree with Freebird about so-called "climate change" causing more droughts in the future. Natural climate change has always occurred, and there have always been regional droughts around the world. This is nowhere near the worst North American drought cycle during the past 150 years. The 1880s, 1930s, and 1950s were worse. And as dramatically - and embarrassingly - incorrect as the models produced by the IPCC and other so-called grant-funded "climate scientists" have been during the past 35 years, there's really no plausible evidence that droughts will be any worse or any less common than the cyclical droughts which have occurred throughout history.

This isn't the place to debate this, but this is entirely incorrect.

[Jaquomo]

I agree with Freebird that some places are going to see more droughts in the future, which will negatively affect antler growth. And some places are going to see fewer droughts in the future, which will positively influence antler growth.

[ElkNut1]

iornhead, bottom line short of being scientific, antler growth will vary year to year depending on moisture content. A good year with plenty of moisture during the right stages or a lack of moisture at the wrong stages can effect their growth. If you have several low moisture years in a row then yes this too can effect growth if you have several years of good moisture this can be a positive. Personally I'm not worried about any of it, I just love elk hunting! (grin)

ElkNut1

[cnelk]

Will anyone actually NOT hunt their typical area if it's in a drought?.....

............

.....................



That's what I thought....


Moot point

[Freebird134]

Will anyone actually NOT hunt their typical area if it's in a drought?.....

That's what I thought....

Moot point

Just hunt the last remaining water you can find, and you should be able to find a critter or 2!

[Jaquomo]

Elknut, you expressed my thoughts exactly - In those years when we had less than optimum antler growth due to various conditions, those smaller-racked herd bulls provided the exact same challenge as if they had bigger racks. It was elk hunting!

[Swede]

To Paul and/or Lou or anyone else so inclined: In the case of a four year old bull, that has lived through three years of drought, will his antler growth still be stunted on the next year, even though there is then good moisture and forage available? I guess what I am asking if there is a carry over effect of long term drought and poor forage?
I have noticed smaller herd bulls in my hunting area for the last 10 plus years. I attributed it to hunting pressure, but is it possible that it is due to over grazing by cattle combined with persistent drought?

[Freebird134]

Swede, I think the short answer is “depends on how bad those three years were.” If you are inclined to believe in science, the single best predictor of antler size is body size. Antler size scales with body size. If three years of droughts had a lasting affect on a bulls body size (say, stunted growth) then indeed you would expect him to NOT fully recover. However, if the drought simply reduced his body fat, and in the 4th year he was able to fully recover, you would expect little if any effect of the previous drought.

I’d love to hear a response from a deer or elk farmer. As a biologist, I find this question actually really interesting. I think we often what antlers really are: honest signals of a male’s “fitness.” It is actually in a male’s best interest to grow smaller antlers if resources are sparse during a drought year. First, he doesn’t have the extra nutrients/energy to devote to antler growth—he’s just trying to survive and make it to a better year. Second, if he is in a weakened condition, he certainly doesn’t want to advertise as a bada$$ to bigger bulls that could easily kick his butt. It’s really an interesting question of evolutionary theory and behavioral ecology…. Sorry for nerding out.

[Swede]

Freebird134: I believe you nailed it with your response. I have noticed short stout altlers on some herd bulls lately. I killed one like that about three years ago. He was fat and heavy. The 5x5 I killed last August had better antlers, and was as large and fat as any I have ever shot, but his antlers were nothing to write home about. It was too early in the season to know if he would have been a herd bull. Thanks for your insight.

[Jaquomo]

I'd also be interested in learning more about how fitness, drought, winter range affect timing of antler shedding. Obviously there are many variables which affect this. Many biologists maintain that older bulls shed earlier than younger bulls, which would make sense for a variety of reasons.

However, in one park system where I was a naturalist for a winter, we observed just the opposite - younger bulls shed earlier, and the biggest of the bulls, three hanging together all winter, didn't shed until the end of April. This was in the winter of 79-80, which followed a summer of normal precipitation after a multi-year drought. The antler growth in 1979 appeared "normal" as well, (purely from empirical observation in the area where I worked), and the elk went into the winter in good condition, with good overall winter range.

So Swede, to your question, and again, this is empirical, the antler growth returned after a multi-year drought, and the winter range in our area improved significantly with just one season of good moisture - though we didn't have cattle overgrazing as a contributing factor to winter range health.

[Freebird134]

I'd also be interested in learning more about how fitness, drought, winter range affect timing of antler shedding. Obviously there are many variables which affect this. Many biologists maintain that older bulls shed earlier than younger bulls, which would make sense for a variety of reasons.

However, in one park system where I was a naturalist for a winter, we observed just the opposite - younger bulls shed earlier, and the biggest of the bulls, three hanging together all winter, didn't shed until the end of April. This was in the winter of 79-80, which followed a summer of normal precipitation after a multi-year drought. The antler growth in 1979 appeared "normal" as well, (purely from empirical observation in the area where I worked), and the elk went into the winter in good condition, with good overall winter range.

People have hypothesized that animals with bigger antlers should shed first because 1) why waste energy carrying around that weight and 2) the heat loss if the antler acted like a radiator. We did some experiments about 10 years ago near the Elk Refuge in wyoming to see if bigger antlers lost more heat than smaller antlers. It was kind of a simple, small study that never got published or anything, but I think we concluded that bigger antlers don't really lose any more heat than smaller antlers, so that isn't a big cost. Animals like elk that winter in big groups probably have incentives to keep their big antlers (status) to help get more food during lean winter months.

[FemoralArchery]

There are some amazing answers up here already, but I thought I would weigh in with a thought:

Every year, a bull (or buck or whatever) MAY grow to 100% of his potential, based on their overall condition and the amount of nutrition they get during the growing season. The majority of bulls are in good health at the beginning of growing season, save for their body fat lost during the winter. So I would assume that any bull that was in good condition and on a good year will achieve X % of antler growth. On an average year, that may be 70-80-90%, who can really tell what an animals true potential is? On a great year, they may gain that extra 10-20-whatever percent. On a bad year, they may only grow to 30-40-50% of their true potential.

So my guess would be, as long as a bull is healthy, they will fully recover, even after several years of drought (provided they weren't "stunted" as Freebird alluded to). Every year, the animal will grow to the highest % they can achieve based on all factors during growing season.

I would also venture to guess that no animal in the wild, will ever achieve 100% of its true potential. An animal in the wild must always be concerned with surviving. Animals in captivity may achieve 100%, but only through supplemental feeding and calm, stress free environment.

[Swede]

Good information guys. Thanks. I too would be very surprised if antler size affected heat loss in a bull as all of the heat transfer would go through a pedicel that varies little in size from year to year. I know the pedicel shortens as the bull loses antlers each year, but I too doubt it has much effect. Again thanks.