Contributors to this thread:
Both these are mature does from near Lewistown, MT. The WT had twins, the muley was a dry doe.
Brother is 5-10. Our whitetail are quite small and the muleys about average.
Which one tasted better? That muley doe taste like shoe leather?
Actually the muley was great. I've eaten a lot of both and never had a bad tasting muley.
However, we did end up grinding most of her. Chewy!!!
We have the same small whitetails in parts of Southern Alberta. Pretty sure these deer are the true ochrourus subspecies.
the mulies seem to have shorter legs though.
Bou'bound that was a miggit muly doe:)
A big doe here dresses in the 110-120 range. A really big one goes in the 130 range. The average is about 90 pounds.
Ya mulies are bigger. I've only killed a few, but I preferred every one of them over whitetails for eating.
The whitetails I hunted and ate from the wife's family farm in Michigan are much tastier than Colorado mule deer.
I've killed plenty of both species in Colorado and Kansas, and can attest to Mulies being much bigger. I also agree WT venison is tastier. I've never had a bad tasting WT, but I've killed a few Mulie bucks in the rut that we couldn't even eat chili that was made from them.
I once heard about a whitetail that dressed out at 388 pounds! Supposedly the weight was on a certified scale and the deer was taken somewhere in one of the eastern states in the 1950s. Anyone ever hear of a heavier whitetail?
This was the biggest bodied Mule deer I've ever killed. I didn't weigh him on a scale, but I did measure his chest girth. It was 52". According to charts that calculate weight based on chest girth, he was well over 400 pounds.
I was fit and strong back then, and I had never had a problem loading a gutted buck into my pickup solo. I wrestled with this toad for at least an hour trying to load him up. Finally, I stuck one arm into his chest cavity and bear hugged him with the other arm. Then I literally dove into the bed of my pickup with him in my arms.
Oddly, that buck was still in velvet in mid-October, and he had no testicles.
This Minnesota buck weighed 511 pounds on the hoof and 402 dressed. It was taken in 1926.
That looks like a monster, Kodiak. Or, the dude standing by him is about 4' tall. ;-)
There is no way that Minnesota buck had 109 pounds of guts.
"Oddly, that buck was still in velvet in mid-October, and he had no testicles."
And that is why he was so big in the body.
Actually OneBooner the math works out. Dressed weight times 1.25 equals live weight is the general rule of thumb.
All my WT deer have been from NY and PA. I've killed more than a few and the biggest doe I've killed was 125# FD. Now, have guys killed larger doe...I'm sure they have. But it is what it is. I'm still looking for a 200# FD buck. There are a number of >200# bucks killed every year...but not a heck of a lot.
Kodiak, Thats not the Hinkley buck from Maine? Very similar picture.
You're right, it does look like the same deer? My bad if it is.
Plenty of big ones no one has ever heard about too. I would do the gutless on any that I couldn't move. A couple pics and done with it.... GG, thats a horse, how'd it drag? LOL
The drag nearly killed me, and it was only 75 yards on flat ground. LOL.