npaden

You do realize that the infamous Kerr study is based on deer that have been raised in an research area that is a whopping 16 acres and the breeding pens are less than an acre each. These deer have been under controlled breeding since 1974. If you are after those kind of results you could fence off your backyard and buy a stud buck and a few proven does andshoot your own 200" deer any time you felt like it.

I'm not arguing that in a completely controlled environment that you can't improve the genetics by extensive culling. You most certainly can and the Kerr Study proves that. I'm saying thatculling is not a viable alternative in a free range environment and studies have shown this.

In the King Ranch study they did have a control group where they did not practice culling. Under the same environmental conditions that population actually improved in average antler size during the same 6 years. These are degreed wildlife biologists doing these studies, not random individuals. They might actually know what they are doing.

The bulk of the study was pusblished in an issue of Quality Whitetails Magazine. I can't find it online though. I'll try to find which month it was in.

Here are some online articles that I found on the QDMA site.

Here's the full article that I pulled the quote in my previous post from - http://www.qdma.com/articles/details.asp?id=124

Here's another article on culling - http://www.qdma.com/articles/details.asp?id=84

Here's another article on spikes specifially.It waswritten in part by Dr. James Kroll (sometimes referred to as "Dr. Deer") - http://www.qdma.com/articles/details.asp?id=23

If you are really interested in learning about Whitetail deer you should really consider becoming a member of QDMA. The magazine is worth the membership price alone.

The key in free ranging spikes is that you really don't know why they are a spike as a yearling. They could have the genetics to become a 160" deer at 4 years old and just been born late or born to a young mother with poor lactation or a number of other possibilties. They could have the genetics to be a 120" deer at 4 years old too. In a controlled pen raised environment where you control the timing of the breeding and their entire food supply you can have pretty decent assurance that a 1.5 year old spike is a result of genetics and those studies are valid on pen raised deer. But not on free ranging deer. You could actually make a better argument on culling a 120" 4 year old deer than culling a spike yearling but even then it is not recommended on free ranging deer.

The radio collared deer were actually part of a study on deer movement.

Here's one of the collared deer:


Here's a link to the thread on the QDMA forum showing some of the other radio collared bucks - http://www.qdmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=13582

The spike above was by far the smallest buck collared both in weight and antler size when it was originally captured but had nearly caught up when he was shot a year later. Given another year it would have probably caught up completely.

Here's another set of pictures of a spike that a fellow QDMA member has taken trail camera pictures of over the last several years. He was able to keep track of the deer year to year based on the white socks on his feet.

Here is a picture of him in 2005 as a yearling spike (okay he is technically a 3 point but for all intents and purposes he would have been considered undesirable under the Kerr study):


Here his is3 years later as a mature 4 year old.


P.S. - These aren't the only pictures this guy has of this deer. He has watched it mature over the years and is 100% positive that it is the same deer.

So what do I take from this?

#1 - Shooting spikes in a free ranging deer herd has not been proven to improve antler size of the remaining deer.

#2 - You might be shooting a deer that could end up becoming a monster buck a few years down the road.

That's my 2 cents.

Nathan