managing for larger and/or trophy males. Our data, like 

 findings of many other studies, indicated that males and 

 females used habitat differently, and to some extent used 

 different areas. This partitioning of habitat and location 

 appeared to have its basis in parturition territoriality of 

 females. It suggested a hypothesis that potential male: female 

 ratios were at least partially determined by the relative 

 proportions of reproductive and non-reproductive habitat 

 within an area. The difference between potential ratios and 

 actual ratios were primarily determined by hunter harvests and 

 recruitment rates. Some population-habitat units, composed 

 primarily of reproductive habitat, may not have the potential 

 to support high numbers of males. In such areas, "trophy" 

 management would likely be unsuccessful. Habitat security 

 will also affect the potential of an area for "trophy" 

 management. Areas with low habitat security will not produce 

 older males with even moderate hunting pressure. 



The extensive emigration and immigration by yearling 

 males on our study area indicated that attempts to "carry 

 over" males within a single, small hunting unit may be 

 unsuccessful beyond certain limits. The level of carry-over 

 will vary with population and habitat, but beyond that the 

 "saved" males may disperse to adjacent hunting units. 



In addition to age of the animal, antler size was clearly 

 influenced by forage conditions. Drought and low quality 

 forage resulted in smaller antlers for all age classes. Thus, 

 results of "trophy" management in variable environments will 

 be variable. During some years, antlers will be relatively 

 smaller even when older males are present. 



Male: female ratios could be increased in populations 

 which historically had higher ratios than currently observed. 

 For this to occur, however, substantially fewer males must be 

 shot than now occurs. Whether this is accomplished by limited 

 permits or other means, relatively few hunters can harvest 

 males if significant numbers of older males are to be 

 maintained. Even when "trophy" management is implemented, 

 there is no guarantee of improvement beyond a certain point. 

 Dispersal and varying nutritional conditions will also play 

 important roles in reducing the degree of success of "trophy" 

 management. A clear portrayal of what is lost versus what is 

 gained should be made for all potential management actions in 

 each population/habitat unit. 



Finally, our data provide for comment about aspects of 

 harvest strategy relevant to game damage problems . Many 

 short-term solutions have been applied toward game depredation 

 problems including various types of fencing, repellents, 

 scareguns, and damage hunts. Stack yards for hay and certain 

 types of fencing have been used for longer-term solutions, but 



343 



