Culling doesn’t work

[EastTexasMan]

The squirrel brought me, I can’t help with culling or skimming bc our trophies are what y’all call culls so carry on.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Encinal]

You know good and well that the term "culling" in this subject matter refers to to the removal of young to middle aged bucks. If someone kills a 4 yr old 8 pt, it's commonly referred to as a cull. Stop pretending you don't know that. Also, stop dodging the scientific and real-world evidence that I present, and attempt to present a counter argument that is equally supported.

The whole point of killing doe is to reduce fawn production for the purpose of maintaining herd numbers that ensure high quality natural forage. Yes, that means fewer bucks produced, but the bucks that are produced will have quality forage and thus grow better antlers.The majority of Texas is still low fence without supplemental feed, and doesn't have the luxury of artificially carrying more animals than the range can naturally support while still growing giant bucks via that high fence and unlimited resources to feed multiple tons of protein pellets. Big deer can be grown in the Walmart parking lot.

Scientific evidence clearly shows that whitetail doe breed at 1.5 years, typically can produce 1 fawn at 2 years old, then twins there after. Not having fawns until 3 years is an inaccurate statement.

In South Texas They aren’t meaningful contributors to fawn crops until year 3. Which means when they are bred at 2. They can be bred as fawns, but they don’t recruit fawns significantly until their third year.

I’ve hunted a lot of South Texas country non fed, and I don’t care how many deer you kill, you can’t kill enough for bucks to consistently grow big antlers in bad years.

I’m not trying to figure out what everyone else means about culling. I’m just talking about deer. Go search my post history and you’ll see I’ve been saying you can’t make a genetic shift in a wild population since I got here.

Saying killing a buck has no effect on population is just mathematically wrong. There’s no getting around it. 100 -1 = 99. Too many deer is also one of the easiest things to fix, You can do it really fast. It’s way harder to build a herd up,.. which in a skewed ratio is what you are trying to do.

It’s a much better strategy to use your high doe numbers as leverage, lay off the bucks... and put buck fawns on the ground and come down more slowly, exactly because of the doe age problem, but what do I know.

[SaltwaterSlick]

You know good and well that the term "culling" in this subject matter refers to to the removal of young to middle aged bucks. If someone kills a 4 yr old 8 pt, it's commonly referred to as a cull. Stop pretending you don't know that. Also, stop dodging the scientific and real-world evidence that I present, and attempt to present a counter argument that is equally supported.

The whole point of killing doe is to reduce fawn production for the purpose of maintaining herd numbers that ensure high quality natural forage. Yes, that means fewer bucks produced, but the bucks that are produced will have quality forage and thus grow better antlers.The majority of Texas is still low fence without supplemental feed, and doesn't have the luxury of artificially carrying more animals than the range can naturally support while still growing giant bucks via that high fence and unlimited resources to feed multiple tons of protein pellets. Big deer can be grown in the Walmart parking lot.

Scientific evidence clearly shows that whitetail doe breed at 1.5 years, typically can produce 1 fawn at 2 years old, then twins there after. Not having fawns until 3 years is an inaccurate statement.

Wow, you must be a real joy around a real campfire! Good grief son, you seem to have the tact of a sledge hammer...

[doghouse]

Being an old fart in central Texas, this thread cracks me up! Carry on people!

[Mexico]

.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[Dale Moser]

STFU Donny![emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bobcat13]

....................skimming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stuck]

I shoot the ones I want, try to keep some good ones alive for next year to hopefully be better and let Mother Nature take care of the rest.

[Chance Love]

.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

You mean like this...

"A few more pics before the season gets kicked off. A mixture of LF and HF ( 100 percent native) deer. We really should be doing a better job at skimming but we're a work in progress. Enjoy!"




Just keeping hope (and SKIM) alive, brother!

[Mexico]

You mean like this...



"A few more pics before the season gets kicked off. A mixture of LF and HF ( 100 percent native) deer. We really should be doing a better job at skimming but we're a work in progress. Enjoy!"









Just keeping hope (and SKIM) alive, brother!

Yes sir yes sir, that's the word. Y'all rubbing off on me dang it!

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[No-Tox]

You all are worried about culling and skimming, when I'm trying to build up a good deer herd. I need numbers in order to cull.

[Top Of Texas]

In South Texas They aren’t meaningful contributors to fawn crops until year 3. Which means when they are bred at 2. They can be bred as fawns, but they don’t recruit fawns significantly until their third year.

Now I'm with you.

[Top Of Texas]

I’ve hunted a lot of South Texas country non fed, and I don’t care how many deer you kill, you can’t kill enough for bucks to consistently grow big antlers in bad years.

Agreed. And I didn't say keeping numbers below carrying capacity would grow big antlers "in bad years". A herd below carrying capacity will grow better deer than a herd over carrying capacity. The herd is kept below carrying capacity through the harvest of doe, not middle aged cull bucks.That was the point. And yes I know you savvy that concept.

I was attempting to address the killing of middle aged cull bucks in the name of habitat management. The "mouth off the range" concept. I'll try to make time to generate some numbers and possibly start a different thread.

Also, Saltwater Slick is right. I apologize for my punchy attitude in yesterday's reply.

[SaltwaterSlick]

Agreed. And I didn't say keeping numbers below carrying capacity would grow big antlers "in bad years". A herd below carrying capacity will grow better deer than a herd over carrying capacity. The herd is kept below carrying capacity through the harvest of doe, not middle aged cull bucks.That was the point. And yes I know you savvy that concept.

I was attempting to address the killing of middle aged cull bucks in the name of habitat management. The "mouth off the range" concept. I'll try to make time to generate some numbers and possibly start a different thread.

Also, Saltwater Slick is right. I apologize for my punchy attitude in yesterday's reply.

If you was in the Panhandle yesterday, it was cold and snowin' enuf to make anybody punchy!

[Top Of Texas]

If you was in the Panhandle yesterday, it was cold and snowin' enuf to make anybody punchy!

Mm-hmm!