TEmbry

Im betting his definition of mature is derived from antler size, not age though.

Jeff, Im agreeing with you though, culling at 1.5 just doesnt make sense to me. But to each his own, they can do however they please on their land.


Cody- I know Rybo touched on this. I thinkhis point (mine as well)is that this is the only way you have done it...how do you know it is working, and not something else causing your more and more success. Perhaps if you changed to not killing ANY of these younger smaller deer, it would get even BETTER than it currently is, no matter how awesome it is right now.

CodyGuess

true TE embry.. But still i am going by age not rack.. if u have a 2 year old spike which we have had lots of them around here for some reason.. he prob isnt going to amount to much so y let him breed ur does.. when we have mature 4 year olds that are 130 an above.. y let the genetic of the 2 year old spike be carried on

TEmbry

IF you are going by age, and not rack size...then eliminate the rack sizes from above...It now reads..

"if u have a 2 year old which we have had lots of them around here for some reason.. he prob isnt going to amount to much so y let him breed ur does.. when we have mature 4 year olds.. y let the genetic of the 2 year old be carried on "

simple, because if you are going by age, the genetics passed on doesnt matter. More older bucks comes from passing all younger bucks.. I think what you are looking for is BIGGER older bucks, which is rack size..not age.

buttonbuckmaster

I see lots of spikes and 3 pts from my stands. If I started shooting every "inferior" buck that walks by, I'd be tagged out by Columbus Day. Are you guys targeting these bucks or just taking them as the chance arises? I've noticed that if I'm seeing a large amount of runt deer (bucks) I'm usually hunting the wrong areas of the property. I killed a buck in 2006 that everyone told me had "bad genes", despite the fact that his front left hoove was shattered and nearly twice its normal size.



Bad genes? I don't think so.

jackflap

That is a good point about people like myself professing to know more than a trained and experienced Wildlife Biologist. That would be silly at the least if not downright arrogant/stupid.ignorant/etc.

However, having prefaced with that, I think sometimes people (including the biologist with a predetermined bias- afterall he is human too)take what the study results areand conjecture conclusions that are morethan the study actually revealed.

I know and accept the fact that research has been done to PROVE that a spike CAN become a monster if given the chance to mature.

But are there enough studies with enough replications to scientifically and statistically CONCLUDE that there is ZERO CORRELATION between a buck's first year antler gowth and that at 4.5 yeas plus? (in other words has it been scientifically proven that the same percentage of 1.5 yo spikes grow to be xxxx size at xxx mature age as his six point and eight point peers? My GUESS is that while the spikes can and do achieve this benchmark, that a HIGHER PERCENT of the sixes and eights reach it as compared to the spikes.

But GUESS is the keyword. If there is such a study/studies that definitevley concludes that spikes have an EQUAL chance as that of its bigger racked peers,I would appreciate someone directing to those studies as I have an interest in reading the protocol and methodology of the studies.


If one desires to try and grow more and bigger bucks, I 100% agree that they shouldn't shootANY 1.5yo whether they be a spike or an eight. They also shouldn't shoot 2.5's as they are already 1 year closer to reaching the desired outcome than the younger class of bucks.

Yet many people who one hand say they want to grow bigger bucks, one the other hand they also just have to fill their buck tag. If that is the case, I still BELIEVE that the probability of shooting the next BOONER BEFORE HIS TIME, is LESS LIKELY with the spike instead of the 1.5 eight or the 2.5 yo buck. Again, don't shoot any is the best decision, but if just have to fill the buck tag and can't do it with a mature deer.......well I'm being repetitive.

And yes Al, age is certainly one of the predominant factors in growing big racks, but how can you not give Genetics its due? if Genetics don't play any role, wouldn't we all be 6'5" and built like Arnold by the time we reach 22 or 23?

gri22ly

Cody, if you have 4 year olds running around, the 2 year olds will do very little breeding,if any at all.

If I had alot of1 1/2 year oldspikes, I wouldlook at my doe herdfirst. You either have way to many does or the land will not sustain your herd properly. The culprit, yearling does being bread, does being bread late in there 2nd cycle, or strees/nutrition.

Saying2 year oldsthrough me off, now if you have 2 1/2 year old spikes running around, you have some real problems.

Vito1

Oh no...and buttonbuckmaster is already participating in this thread.

CodyGuess

still people didnt understand what i was saying i thought long an hard about this in the doctors office today an well i give up trying to get my point.. guess im saying it wrong but at least i no wats working an how its working an understand wat the hek im talking about

Sliverflicker

Are you sure.

CodyGuess

yea im sure its pointless least i no its workin