"Culling Doesn't Work in Wild Populations"

[kyle1974]

Culling IMO is a slippery slope. When used right and all the variables are taken into consideration it can be effective. But when used incorrectly it can have the opposite effect.



For instance, who would cull this deer....



Mature 9 pt

Hard to say based on a photo with no background. Range conditions look like hell in that pic. Did he go down from the year before that pic was taken?

[bmac]

Culling IMO is a slippery slope. When used right and all the variables are taken into consideration it can be effective. But when used incorrectly it can have the opposite effect.



For instance, who would cull this deer....



Mature 9 pt

Not sure I would shoot that a mature 9 and call it a Cull. It does look like it is missing a brow but that wouldn’t be a shoot on sight trait either as some places have weak to no brows in the genes.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TxAg]

Tagged

[Huntingfool]

I am certainly not a biologist nor an expert. But I am a hunter of well over 50 years.

All I know is this ---- been on a large LF south texas ranch for 12 years. We are very well managed and we have culled heavily for all of those 12 years. We cull does and if a 4-5 year old buck has no potential then we kill him. Right or wrong I cannot imagine why we would do anything different.

We have mostly ten point to 20 point bucks - splits, drops, kickers, wide, basket, mass, and on and on. No reason for us to let an 8 point eat our feed or browse. We kill multiple 170-200 inch bucks on a very regular basis.

I am a results type of person - don't care how you do it if you get the right results then do not try to fix something that does not need fixing IMO

[LivinADream]

I am certainly not a biologist nor an expert. But I am a hunter of well over 50 years.

All I know is this ---- been on a large LF south texas ranch for 12 years. We are very well managed and we have culled heavily for all of those 12 years. We cull does and if a 4-5 year old buck has no potential then we kill him. Right or wrong I cannot imagine why we would do anything different.

We have mostly ten point to 20 point bucks - splits, drops, kickers, wide, basket, mass, and on and on. No reason for us to let an 8 point eat our feed or browse. We kill multiple 170-200 inch bucks on a very regular basis.

I am a results type of person - don't care how you do it if you get the right results then do not try to fix something that does not need fixing IMO

I think this is "proof in the pudding".

If you've "culled heavily" for 12 years, and you still have culls, well I think you see where I'm going.

What you're doing is taking mouths out of the equation, letting the remaining deer have more less competition at the dinner table.

Its not wrong, it's obviously working, but you aren't changing the genetics.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

[Huntingfool]

I think this is "proof in the pudding".

If you've "culled heavily" for 12 years, and you still have culls, well I think you see where I'm going.

What you're doing is taking mouths out of the equation, letting the remaining deer have more less competition at the dinner table.

Its not wrong, it's obviously working, but you aren't changing the genetics.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

never have I said we are “changing genetics”.

We have way fewer culls than we did when we started. But to say culling is worthless is incorrect IMO. As long as we keep producing what we are producing we will keep on doing the same thing

[LivinADream]

never have I said “changing genetics”. But to say culling is worthless is incorrect IMO.

You are correct, my fault. Maybe I just had changing genetics in my head, because that is what culling is mostly associated with.



Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

[DTala]

I own and live on a high fenced place in Alabama. There is no hunting. I see the biggest mortality on fawns, then yearling bucks. Very little mortality on mature bucks past 5. I see the biggest jump in antlers from 5 to six or seven.


I have a 17 year old buck here that has never been over 120" but he had his best antlers at age 14. So much for studies....

[RJH1]

I own and live on a high fenced place in Alabama. There is no hunting. I see the biggest mortality on fawns, then yearling bucks. Very little mortality on mature bucks past 5. I see the biggest jump in antlers from 5 to six or seven.


I have a 17 year old buck here that has never been over 120" but he had his best antlers at age 14. So much for studies....

How are you not overrun with deer? If there's no hunting do you dart them and sell them or?

[Jspradley]

So 100's of thousands of dollars of research, a few dozen guys with Masters and PHD 's in Wildlife Biology and you kill a few spikes one year and see a couple of bigger deer the next year so they're wrong? Gotcha

That kills me man...

"Ain't science man gonna tell me what to do!!!"

[lovemylegacy]

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.

Check the thread title. Wild populations.

[lovemylegacy]

I disagree with this research.
We had 1100 ac to ourselves in blanco county.
Me and my brother hunted exclusively for 3 years shooting no brow 3 year olds and 2 year old spikes.
4th year we had some great bucks showing up - way better than when we started.
Unfortunately my dad allowed his best friend to join us and wiped out the good deer in about 3 months of gun hunting.

Point is it works- if you have good #s pop the 3 year old no brow 6pt standing next to the 3 year old 10pt. You will have better deer with time

The deer yall took out, new deer moved in. Created more space and forage that the better bucks took over.

[happy bowhunter]

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

[happy bowhunter]

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.

All the deer on our place in Mason are native.Nothing brought in.With age and nutrition any deer heard can reach its full potential,our top deer seem to be topping out around 170 .we have been hunting it for twenty years

[Chance Love]

All the deer on our place in Mason are native.Nothing brought in.With age and nutrition any deer heard can reach its full potential,our top deer seem to be topping out around 170 .we have been hunting it for twenty years

At what age are y'all killing the big ones?