I want to discuss the idea of shooting only certain deer in order to help the herd have better genetics.
I have heard the idea that you only shoot the very big bucks therefore giving them time to reproduce and pass on their genetics. This sounds like a good idea if it actually works that way.
But it seems to me that if there are bucks running around who are smaller, and will never get big, you are ensuring that all of those "scrawny" bucks will have a chance to breed the does. And you are taking those few big boys out of the gene pool.
In cattle ranching you never cull your best bull, you cull the small ones.

Am I missing it?

Forhttp://www.qdma.com/qdm/
those interested....

quote:

But it seems to me that if there are bucks running around who are smaller, and will never get big, you are ensuring that all of those "scrawny" bucks will have a chance to breed the does. And you are taking those few big boys out of the gene pool.

These are referred to as "management bucks". They are culled just as is done with cattle. A cow-horned spike, or four year old six point would be examples. Outfitters sometimes sell hunts at a reduced rate just for these bucks that they want removed.

Yes and no. Deer have an arguable "prime" age after which their antlers no longer grow larger and actually decrease in size. He has managed to live past his prime. Some noted experts will also tell you that once a buck reaches a certain age/point, that he will no longer participate in the rut. He has then done all he can to pass on his genes.
At the other end of the spectrum you have "jesse", the true pieces of shit of the deer world that will stick anything they can and further ruin the gene pool. Let's be honest, shit produces shit. Unlike in the human world, we try and do kill all the jesses on site. As in the real world, they keep breeding and it's a constant fight.

This is probably a subject too large for just one post. I have some pros and cons to a lot of what is called "deer management".

Who says the bucks are ANY sort of genetic health indicator? I believe the does are a greator indicator, but they can not be tracked or recorded as easily as looking at a set of antlers and saying "man, those are big so that must be genetically superior".

What is genetic superiority? Is it big antlers, which as stated above leaves does totally out of the equasion, or is it ability to withstand diseases and survive which may have NOTHING to do with antlers?

Antler point restrictions, IMHO are cursing herds to smaller animals after a few years. If you have a 4-point on one side restriction, as they do in Missouri, does that not mean that the 6-points and spikes are PROTECTED and will live out their entire lives being able to breed and pass on their genetics at will, while the larger bucks are targets? YES. I have seen this already where I hunt in Mo. We now have a great crop of 6-point deer we can not take out of the herd, ever.

Just some thoughts. Don't get me wrong, I am not necessarily a "if it's brown, it's down" sort of person, unless I am trying to fill the freezer, but I am not a trophy hunter either. I grew out of that a long time ago. I prefer doe meat.

We cull really poor antlered deer, but I'm not sure if it does any real good on low fenced properties such as ours.

In South Texas and areas where they can often see MOST of the smaller deer fairly often, it may be more effective. I know of many ranches in that area, some high fenced, some not, that shoot all mature 8 points, seems to work for them.

One thing I have seen is a type of adverse selection. Say you have nine guys hunting 3000 acres. They can take a buck and a couple of does. Some of these guys will have kids. What happens more times than not, is they end up shooting a really nice young deer. They let the six points with no brow tines, or 3 year old spikes walk cause they want a "trophy. Other thing I see is old timers in the hill country not wanting any does shot.
GWB

As Larrys mentioned, we should never forget that 1/2 the genetic make-up of any deer comes from its mamma doe.

I've talked to game wardens in some of our Antler restriction counties (8 pts/15" wide or better) and asked them about "specific cases" (such as my 4 1/2 year old 6 pt - from outside the antler restriction area or my wife's 12" inside spread 133 gross 8 pt that was also 4 1/2) and they said they wouldn't ticket bucks like those because they were clearly mature and the intent of the antler restriction laws were to increase harvest of mature bucks.

As for shooting to "improve genetics" I'd say that genetics of a deer herd are complicated enought that genetics would be one of the last things I'd worry about. Things I'd concern myself with before genetics are:

1) nutrition & water - make sure that your deer herd is getting plenty of the right stuff to eat. This doesn't just mean supplemental feed and/or food plots, but also means keep deer numbers managed.

2) increase age of bucks - only harvest mature animals. Period. Wait until bucks are 4 1/2 years old before killing them off. Older, if possible. Maximum antler growth occurs at 5 or 6 1/2 years in most cases.

IF I've addressed both of the above, then I'd consider culling to "improve genetics".

Troy Hibbitts

quote:

Originally posted by frank4570:
But it seems to me that if there are bucks running around who are smaller, and will never get big, you are ensuring that all of those "scrawny" bucks will have a chance to breed the does. ... In cattle ranching you never cull your best bull, you cull the small ones. Am I missing it?

Hey Frank, You nailed it exactly. There is no difference in breeding cattle, horses or Deer - all the same tricks are used to get the kind you want.

If you allow Spikes in the Southeast to remain in the herd, you are guaranteed your herd will always have Spikes.

And the Doe population needs to be held down. It is often very difficult to recognize which Does produce smaller Deer. Occasionally they have a slight coloration difference which helps identify them and sometimes you simply have to watch where they primarily live and bed. Much more time consuming and difficult than the Spikes and Bucks that produce "only" a 4-point rack.

There is a Straw Dog that often gets tossed in these discussions - food. If your area produces "ANY" large Trophy Bucks, then they all have access to the same food. To say one could grow into a Whopper with better food is possible, but unless all the Deer have access to it, it is a bunch of Grad Student Fools and Rag Writers bologna.

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot "Spike" Kills.

This is a very interesting thread. I have no credentials to argue genetics of wild life and am not arguing with any post but simply want to raise some questions. Should not these "10-12 pointer" deer be eliminated as soon as possible because they are outside of the norm? Why shouldn't a very small buck ("late fawn" among northern white tails, who was good enough to survive the next winter for which I welcome the genes but nonetheless is still a "runt") should still be eliminated from the gene pool (or should we want his hardiness as a substitute? -or else, over decades, the white tails will get smaller and smaller? I, personally, have seen this in southern NY -and, while, I hasten to say that I don't know why {unless it's overpopulation and less feed for more animals - so we now have them in suburban backyards feeding on the foundation plantings} As I said, an interesting thread. I hope to read many more posts.

I have no credentials that make me qualified to offer much in the way of opinions on the subject, except that on our property we have a self imposed restrictions on what deer we will shoot. The only problem is that the land owners around us will not impose any kind of regulations for their property. Are we just spinning our wheels trying. (We only have 630 acres.) Would really like some of your thoughts.

quote:

I've talked to game wardens in some of our Antler restriction counties (8 pts/15" wide or better) and asked them about "specific cases"

In case you hunt in one of them, the rule is 13 inch inside spread and no point count requirement and now you can shoot one spike as well as the 13 inch plus deer or two spikes with no 13+. The point of these regulations, which seem to be working quite well according to the biologists I've talked to, are to increase the age of the buck population, just as you suggested.

As an aside, prior to the expanding of the 13 inch rule, etc I had a friend who is a biologists for Tx Parks and Wildlife, he had checked literally thousands of buck jawbones in the E Tx Piney Woods and Post Oak Savanna region and, according to him, had NEVER seen a 5 1/2 year old buck. That's not to say they don't exist, but they sure don't exist in any large numbers and get killed less than that.

quote:

Originally posted by Red C.:
I have no credentials that make me qualified to offer much in the way of opinions on the subject, except that on our property we have a self imposed restrictions on what deer we will shoot. The only problem is that the land owners around us will not impose any kind of regulations for their property. Are we just spinning our wheels trying. (We only have 630 acres.) Would really like some of your thoughts.

Red:

While not the ideal situation, you can make it work for you. First, don't put food plots or other attractants (mineral licks) close to your property lines, instead keep them well away from the lines if at all possible. Second, if at all possible leave the deer a fairly substantial shelter area that is not hunted where they can bed and feed without being disturbed and third, do your best to provide really high quality food plots and forage (natural plantings, privet and honey suckle might be an example). Not only will you grow bigger deer, you'll hold them and attract "visitors" from the neighboring properties. Finally, it is not impossible to convert neighboring hunters to a quality deer program, but you have to ask. It can't hurt. The short Ok deer season certainly helps as well.

Where are you in SE Ok? We might be pretty close to each other.

A little west of Wilburton.

Well, we're not real close, I'm about 30mi S of Idabel, just across the river. If you're ever going to cross over to the good side of the river , PM me and come visit and we'll shoot something, if only the bull.

Something to add. Trees.

I went to a forest management seminar a while back. There was a fellow from the state who was a tree expert giving a lecture. He took us out to a patch of woods that was maybe 100 years old. And showed us a few trees. One big healthy tree, and one about half the size, of the same breed. He then asked us how old the trees were and if we were to harvest the trees how we would do it. I said I would take the big tree, and leave the smaller one to get big. Everybody pretty much agreed. That is how it is commonly done here.
So he took out a core tool. It it s drill kind of thing that takes out a plug all the way to the center of the tree.
It turns out the trees were the same age, he already knew this.I asked him why the difference, he said it was simply genetics. And my plan to take the big tree would leave all of the bad genetics in the woods.
We discussed a few alternative ways to harvest. He seemed pretty cagey about giving a straight answer, I think he was concerned people were going to start viciously arguing with him.
But what I have decided to do, and what he seemed to think was an ok idea, is I take smaller chunks of the whole, and clear cut everything. So I may take 1 acre and cut every single tree and stick right down to the ground.And leave the woods around that acre untouched. When the trees come back the strongest and healthiest trees will take over and reach up to the sky for sunlight. If I have some trees I like, oak for example, I'll cut everything around the big ones.

So anyway, the principles are kind of similar. This whole experience got me thinking about deer.

I think if I had the room to do it I would use a slot rule like they do with fish. Really young ones are left alone, and really big ones are left alone, all the medium ones are shootable. And reduce the population until there is plenty of food for the survivors.

Something to add. Trees.

I went to a forest management seminar a while back. There was a fellow from the state who was a tree expert giving a lecture. He took us out to a patch of woods that was maybe 100 years old. And showed us a few trees. One big healthy tree, and one about half the size, of the same breed. He then asked us how old the trees were and if we were to harvest the trees how we would do it. I said I would take the big tree, and leave the smaller one to get big. Everybody pretty much agreed. That is how it is commonly done here.
So he took out a core tool. It it s drill kind of thing that takes out a plug all the way to the center of the tree. Then we counted the rings.
It turns out the trees were the same age, he already knew this.I asked him why the difference, he said it was simply genetics. And my plan to take the big tree would leave all of the bad genetics in the woods.
We discussed a few alternative ways to harvest. He seemed pretty cagey about giving a straight answer, I think he was concerned people were going to start viciously arguing with him.
But what I have decided to do, and what he seemed to think was an ok idea, is I take smaller chunks of the whole, and clear cut everything. So I may take 1 acre and cut every single tree and stick right down to the ground.And leave the woods around that acre untouched. When the trees come back the strongest and healthiest trees will take over and reach up to the sky for sunlight. If I have some trees I like, oak for example, I'll cut everything around the big ones.

So anyway, the principles are kind of similar. This whole experience got me thinking about deer.

I think if I had the room to do it I would use a slot rule like they do with fish. Really young ones are left alone, and really big ones are left alone, all the medium ones are shootable. And reduce the population until there is plenty of food for the survivors.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
While not the ideal situation, you can make it work for you. First, don't put food plots or other attractants (mineral licks) close to your property lines, instead keep them well away from the lines if at all possible. Second, if at all possible leave the deer a fairly substantial shelter area that is not hunted where they can bed and feed without being disturbed and third, do your best to provide really high quality food plots and forage (natural plantings, privet and honey suckle might be an example). Not only will you grow bigger deer, you'll hold them and attract "visitors" from the neighboring properties. Finally, it is not impossible to convert neighboring hunters to a quality deer program, but you have to ask. It can't hurt. The short Ok deer season certainly helps as well.

Excellent post.

The only thing I'd add to the above is what Frank said about leaving some Oaks and having water. The Acorns, especially the White Acorns, are tough to draw Deer away from.

And if you do not have water in the middle of the property, divert some there or add a meandering shaped narrow-long pond. Oh yes, they always seem to love Man-Eating Briers and dense undergrowth for a Bedding area where the land is relatively flat. Probably a bit different out in the Western Cascades, but it works that way nearly everywhere I've been.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerrypeters375:
Should not these "10-12 pointer" deer be eliminated as soon as possible because they are outside of the norm? Why shouldn't a very small buck ("late fawn" among northern white tails, who was good enough to survive the next winter for which I welcome the genes but nonetheless is still a "runt") should still be eliminated from the gene pool (or should we want his hardiness as a substitute? ...

Hey Gerry, I'd suggest your Northern Deer are larger than our Southeastern Deer. Your question is indeed valid for your area and that could be the over-riding trait that you all desire in the Herd. "You all" have to select what you want and then implement whatever methods allow you to retain and spread them through your Herd. Same with cattle and horses, any livestock. Humm, even corn, beans, cotton and even the trees that Frank is not "Hugging".

My Uncle was a Dairy Farmer and as a hobby,raised deer.He never killed a Spike buck,thinking of inferior genes.His thoughts were and he proved them right is that up here a Buck Deer doesnt get full body size untill 3 or 4 years of age.After that all nutrition goes to the antlers.Bucks that were spikes ,forks or 3x3`s would usually by the third or fourth year have a tremendous growth in their antlers,but just like any animal some are going to mature faster or slower.He had one Buck and Doe throw buckfawns that had 5x5`s for the first year of Antler growth(1 1/2 year old deer)She aways had twins.So i say I would not judge a Buck untill they are at least 4 years old.

Hot Core:

I was interested to read that you think our northern white tails are bigger than yours. Up here in southern NY (starting about 90 miles north of NYC) we have a forest area called the Catskill mountains - and they yield most of the deer shot in NY annually -and I think they are about the size of yours (125 -175) - HOWEVER, the largest deer (often twice as large) are usually shot in our Adiroundack mountains -about 180+ miles farther north in the state -but much less frequently -because as you and all hunters know, the bigger they are , the rarer they are. Sure, it's because animals living farther north have to develop bigger body mass (to develop body heat for winter) Is it also perhaps because there are many fewer hunters in the north part of the state? I always argued that it couldn't be how many hunters were involved - because, quite frankly, I always have thought that people raised in country would be natural hunters (and therefore more effective)than city bred hunters out on a one time a year expedition. You are certainly right about what the feed is nowadays for white tails. (When I was a boy and,even as a young man, deer fed in the woods in winter and occasionally came out to grab at spring plantings on farms in other seasons - today they come into a back yard to graze on house foundation plantings in my neck of the woods. Times change, they tell me. I still say that a centerfire of your choice will solve any "deer problem".