Inferior genetics?

[TX_Hoghunter]

Slice him and dice him... love eating those young deer. OH NO, should have said that on the green screen, here come the comments.

He asked if he had inferior genetics...not if he would taste good.

-john

[super_dave]

This is really a good discussion to have. I guess it's as close to politics as we can get without getting a thread pulled!

My thoughts are this, if you are on a free range low fenced property, why would you chance letting a spike walk? When he very well could have inferior genetics. Not all spikes grow to 150 the next year and not all spikes stay spikes til 3. Heck some deer can go backward into a spike if conditions are right.

But on a high fenced place where you know the genetic possibilities, let him grow to see what he might be.

[TX_Hoghunter]

I know this is a shock but I disagree.....LOL

Most spike grow up to be fine deer, very, very few of them are inferior so simply percentages state that you are much more likely to be killing a future nice deer then a future inferior deer....play the numbers and let him walk.

-john

[Silver 1]

I am on a free range low fence ranch and neighboring ranches are low fence as well. Don't know if any neighboring ranches are protein feeding and it is my guess that they do not. I have always questioned whether to shoot spikes or not. I know some ranches in the area shoot at just about anything but I would like for the young ones to mature. My biggest buck to date is just a small three point and a couple of spikes. I just hope others in the area think like me.

[super_dave]

Well, what else do you have on camera?

[Split Arrow]

This is really a good discussion to have. I guess it's as close to politics as we can get without getting a thread pulled!

My thoughts are this, if you are on a free range low fenced property, why would you chance letting a spike walk? When he very well could have inferior genetics. Not all spikes grow to 150 the next year and not all spikes stay spikes til 3. Heck some deer can go backward into a spike if conditions are right.

But on a high fenced place where you know the genetic possibilities, let him grow to see what he might be.

Couldn't one just as easily ask 'why would you chance shooting a future trophy by removing the spike at 1.5?'

Can you provide one example of a buck going backwards into a spike?

Why does it matter at all if the ranch is high fenced or low fenced? If you truly believe that spikes are genetically inferior, wouldn't make MORE sense to remove them on a high-fence place? Why would high-fence ranch owners want genetically inferior bucks to live on? The logic doesn't make sense. (not trying to be disrespectful)

It doesn't bother me at all if you want to shoot all the spikes on your place. But just keep in mind that you're removing a percentage of an age bracket before ever knowing what you're even culling.

The NFL doesn't draft 1st graders into the league for the same reason you shouldn't shoot spikes (if your goal is to produce big bucks)... How can you know what you have until it's at least approaching maturity?

[BrokenJ]

A: High fence or Low? B: Where are you? C: Current management plan in place? (Culling, protien, and such). Hard to say without a little background...

[afishinman14]

If it looks like a doe's body with antlers he's most likely 1.5yrs old. Also, you can't control what your neighbors do, so just do your part. Because if you shoot him, he definitely won't survive but if you let him walk he's got a chance. At this age odds say he'll be an average deer at least. He COULD be inferior, but most of us like to be more sure of his future before harvesting him. That's all I'm saying!

[justin156bc]

You cant compare high fence and low fence for one and after 25 years of hunting the same low fence ranch. It is my opinion i cant afford to have any deer with less than ideal genetics in my herd we have tried it. I have watch a coupke of different genetic patterns run through our ranch. Had a couple bucks show up one year 2 years later had 5-6 bucks with out brow tines. Also had problem with short tines for a while. Our buck to doe ratio is around 1:3 to 1:5 on any given year so the odds of a less than ideal buck spreading its genes are pretty high. I am glad most of have the luxury of passing on 1.5 year old spikes. Whether the deer was born in june or september he should fork on at least one side for his first set of antlers.

[Split Arrow]

You cant compare high fence and low fence for one and after 25 years of hunting the same low fence ranch. It is my opinion i cant afford to have any deer with less than ideal genetics in my herd we have tried it. I have watch a coupke of different genetic patterns run through our ranch. Had a couple bucks show up one year 2 years later had 5-6 bucks with out brow tines. Also had problem with short tines for a while. Our buck to doe ratio is around 1:3 to 1:5 on any given year so the odds of a less than ideal buck spreading its genes are pretty high. I am glad most of have the luxury of passing on 1.5 year old spikes. Whether the deer was born in june or september he should fork on at least one side for his first set of antlers.

It sounds like you should consider harvesting does before removing spikes.

Having unbranched antlers at 1.5 years old is not necessarily an indication that a deer is genetically inferior. Does the NFL draft first graders into the league? Of course not! Why would they draft kids when they have no idea how they'll turn out? The same principle should apply to deer management. Why shoot babies before you even know what you're shooting?

If you don't care about antler size and producing big bucks, then by all means shoot spikes and any other youngsters that come along... the meat tastes better that way. But if your goal is to produce as many big bucks as possible, then shooting spikes is certainly a mistake.

[Philip-TX]

You logic only works if all of the spike bucks are born at the same time. I hunt in the hill country and we might very well have "yearling" bucks that vary in age as much as 4 of even 5 months. Those that are born late are much more likely to be spikes with their first set of horns and it has nothing to do with genetics. Killing them because they were born late is not vet bright. The TPWD study that said spikes needed to be killed is a deeply flawed study and has been dis-proven by other more up-to date studies. The only reason that they are still on the tag is because they do not want to deal with the public backlash that might happen if they removed them.

-john

X2

After 6~8 years of ARs shouldn't we have a balanced age structure by now?
i.e. fawning dates more consistent, more effective rut/breeding, etc.
Where has the magic gone? How long does it take? How/When will they measure the success of the AR program?

[bowhuntntxn]

X2

After 6~8 years of ARs shouldn't we have a balanced age structure by now?
i.e. fawning dates more consistent, more effective rut/breeding, etc.
Where has the magic gone? How long does it take? How/When will they measure the success of the AR program?

The age structure of the herd is better, but there are still WAY too many does, causing abnormal breeding and birthing cycles. So until people start shooting more does, and slow down shooting the first legal buck seen it will continue to be the way it is now. Hill country is a prime example of what happens when there are way too many does. Breeding cycles can last for 2-3 months literally, and then the birthing cycle will last that long also.

They are measuring the success of the AR program after every hunting season by hunters saying they are seeing more and better deer.

[Split Arrow]

The age structure of the herd is better, but there are still WAY too many does, causing abnormal breeding and birthing cycles. So until people start shooting more does, and slow down shooting the first legal buck seen it will continue to be the way it is now. Hill country is a prime example of what happens when there are way too many does. Breeding cycles can last for 2-3 months literally, and then the birthing cycle will last that long also.

They are measuring the success of the AR program after every hunting season by hunters saying they are seeing more and better deer.

we agree (again!)

[Philip-TX]

The age structure of the herd is better, but there are still WAY too many does, causing abnormal breeding and birthing cycles. So until people start shooting more does, and slow down shooting the first legal buck seen it will continue to be the way it is now. Hill country is a prime example of what happens when there are way too many does. Breeding cycles can last for 2-3 months literally, and then the birthing cycle will last that long also.

They are measuring the success of the AR program after every hunting season by hunters saying they are seeing more and better deer.

Like the one in the OP?
forgot the smilie

[justin156bc]

We grow big bucks just fine while shooting babies as you call them. So what you are saying is i should give that inferior buck a chance to live so at 2.5 he can breed does and is less than 13" and off limits so at 3.5 i could shoot him if he breaks 13" but then i to have used my buck tag on a cull. For the record we shoot 10-20 does a year of 1100 acres and 1:2 to 1:3 is pretty dang good on a low fence ranch.