"Culling Doesn't Work in Wild Populations"

[Huntingfool]

If we get an exceptional 4 year old 8 point (especially with brows like the one above) we would most likely let him walk to see what happens.

However if we see a basic, nothing special 8 point that is 4-5 he is going to die. We have way too many multi point bucks to give inferior 8 points a free ride. Seems to have worked for our place over the years

[kyle1974]

Yeah, but everyone wants a 160” 8..

[sotx]

The danger of good science is always bad interpretation of it.

This. I've always looked at this issue as a numbers game. Get the numbers in check, take your doe, take your inferior out. Do it early. I hunt on a place that has quite a few older gentlemen that still have the mindset of "don't kill the doe they are the factory" They absolutely will not kill doe. Frustrating. So some of us bring guest to try and do what should be their job.

[MagicBlade]

Thanks for posting this!

Culling isn’t to alter genetics in a herd, but to make more space/food for better deer.

I agree!

[lovemylegacy]

Please attach study, many many deer live to the ripe old age of 10. Especially those who live in no hunting areas such as neighborhoods and state parks. I find this very unrealistic.

I agree.

[Encinal]

I saw a study once that there were 100 bucks collared. from 1-2 there was high mortality rate, from 3-4 very few died, past 5 basically none of the 100 were alive. These were natural mortality rates, not deer killed by hunters. What I took from it was if you think a deer is 5, you better shoot him cause the likelihood being around next year is very close to %0

Whaaa?

[Mexico]

Whaaa?

All I can say Encinal is you better start killing all your deer 5 and older, they're gonna drop over any second.

[Encinal]

All I can say Encinal is you better start killing all your deer 5 and older, they're gonna drop over any second.

Don't think for a second I haven't considered it after having a mortality tragedy every now and then.

Some deer sure are their most impressive at 5.

This must be some kind of old non fed study he's talking about.

The general consensus, at least in the early 90's was that 5 was the max and they went sideways or down from there... which makes sense... because deer have a tendency to lose length and put on frame from from 5-6... and if you arent fed... the mortality risk plus the risk of going downhill is hard to contend with...

We killed a LOT of deer before feed on leases at 5...

Add in a really good wet year to that equation...and LOTS of big 5's hit the ground...

The first real old school people aging were looking specifically at trying to figure out if a deer was 4 or older.

And we could all score deer to within an inch... because everything was a 130" 8 point

I really miss the old days honestly.

I wish I could forget everything I know and learn it all over again with no help. The process was the most fun part.

[RJH1]

I hunted for that study and haven't been able to locate it, and I haven't been able to remember where the heck I read it either. I just remember that basically there were no 6 year old deer in that study. It was interesting though and that is why i remember it. If I happen to stumble across it I will post it up

[Mexico]

Don't think for a second I haven't considered it after having a mortality tragedy every now and then.

Some deer sure are their most impressive at 5.

This must be some kind of old non fed study he's talking about.

The general consensus, at least in the early 90's was that 5 was the max and they went sideways or down from there... which makes sense... because deer have a tendency to lose length and put on frame from from 5-6... and if you arent fed... the mortality risk plus the risk of going downhill is hard to contend with...

We killed a LOT of deer before feed on leases at 5...

Add in a really good wet year to that equation...and LOTS of big 5's hit the ground...

The first real old school people aging were looking specifically at trying to figure out if a deer was 4 or older.

And we could all score deer to within an inch... because everything was a 130" 8 point

I really miss the old days honestly.

I wish I could forget everything I know and learn it all over again with no help. The process was the most fun part.

You got that right. I remember in the mid 90s Bob Zaiglan writing a big article about how they let their deer reach 5 before harvest..... oh how times have changed. We now have ranches trying to get them to 10.

[ultrastealth]

Interesting - I know Donnie from the Comanche and he is good as they get.

Seems to me something not mentioned in this video/study is the fact that culling mouths (doe or sub par bucks) leaves more of the browse/supplemental feed for the remaining deer to consume which in turn enhances their growth.

The question not answered for me is this - if you are on a ranch with superior genetics/management/browse and you have an 8 point buck you have watched for 4 years. He is a basic 8 point and most of your bucks are 10 points up to 20 points. Even though (as the study states) that 8 point could have some better genes in him that what he is showing if you are going to thin your herd to keep the population/mouths down would you not want to cull that 8 point as opposed to culling bigger deer?

This. We are told by the TP&W biologist how many does and bucks to remove, and it only makes sense to remove those bucks that you know have little potential to become something special. You want to save the feed and the browse for those deer who can grow large antlers. This has little to do with genetics, but it effects the other parts of the equation in growing big deer. You also need to take into account other studies on smaller acreage high fenced sites that do show culling of deer 4.5 years of age or more with 8 points or less yields more ten points in the long run. We have 930 acres under high fence, and, in my opinion, this has worked for us.

[TxSon1836]

Nutrition, densities, ratios and predator control can allow for deer to get very old. Also, hunters keeping their booger pickers off the bang button can help too.

hilarious!

[Top Of Texas]

As for us we focus intensely and primarily on nutrition and do everything we can to enhance the nutritional plane 365 days a year then let ALL the bucks fully mature before removing them.

Giddy-up!

Can you imagine the mass quantities of big deer across Texas if all ranchers and hunters upheld that standard?

[RJH1]

Giddy-up!

Can you imagine the mass quantities of big deer across Texas if all ranchers and hunters upheld that standard?

I've seen people do this on high fence places, it doesn't work, you have to have genetics if you want big deer. Yes you'll get bigger deer than killing them when they're two years old, but you cannot grow truly big deer if you don't have the correct genetics. One place I know of after several years of management, the deer topped out at about 140 and 10 points no matter how old they were. He finally ended up killing every deer on his place and restocking with deer with known better genetics.

[SabreKiller]

We can't kill enough to make a difference. The "management" scheme was left up to the landowner and they aren't interested in listening to my thoughts on taking out some numbers of deer. One buck 8 point or better and on "cull" or doe.