In the past I was under the impression that shooting spikes and letting the racked 1.5 yr bucks walk, was good for improving rack size. I thought that the biggest reason for the difference was genetic. After coming to this forum, I learned of the theory that spikes were often born later in the year and just hadn't caught up yet.

Here's an article that adds a little more fuel to the controversy, suggesting that althought both genetics and environment play a role, genetics may play a bigger one.

http://wildlife.tamu.edu/publication...DPUBS/A043.PDF

If this is true, what are the chances of getting hunters to shoot spikes, and letting young basket racks walk? I'd say somewhere between none and less than none, and it's not something you could regulate.

The article you posted being noted.........there are also studies that show spikes growing big racks when allowed to live long enough. I think shooting a small racked big bodied deer makes more sense. Chances are greater that his rack won't develop into a large rack.

I remember being involved in topic a few months ago (I think it was on this site). It went on for a few days and during that time I searched every place I could find for "facts and studies" on the subject. At the end, there was still no conclusive evidence one way or the other. For every article I read that said to shoot spikes, I read another that said don't. Most were written by biologists and "experts". Some of the studies were short and did not take place under normal living conditions for a whitetail (meaning free roaming, un-managed etc). If the experts can't even agree on what to do, I don't know how the hunters are suppose to decide what to do.

--Man who fish in other man's well often catch crabs--

I will continue to let spikes go...they should only get bigger. If it doesn't have a decent rack, I'll pass for one with a good rack, or a doe.
I can get plenty of meat from a doe...bucks are kinda neet to get with a good rack.

Although genetics does play a role in antler development,other factors are involved.The 1st couple of years of a deers life are devoted towards body development and growth.After his body and skeletal system has developed properly,the nutrients he takes in are geared to rack development.So with a good diet and a chance to see 5 1/2 years of age,a spike can(and probably will)develop a nice set of antlers.I read a few studies on this subject-really good reading.

I read an article in Bowhunter about letting spikes grow. The author or his family, I don't remember which, raised deer. One of the deer was a spike, but grew an exceptional rack. So for the QDM conscious guys I guess that leaves biguns and the ladies <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

God bless,
Brandan

The &quot;spike&quot; controversey is really pretty simple.

In most of the US population, anywhere form 60%-90% of the buck
population are 1.5 yrs old. In areas wher its more like 80% (much of the Eastern seabord) a good percentage of the yearling deer are spikes. These deer, while having the potential to be genetically inferior, are not neccessarily so. Lets assume that 1/4 (high assumption) are genetically inferior. If we cull spikes, 75% of them may have been genetically fine. In other words, for every 4 yearling spikes we cull, only 1 genetically inferior buck is removed.

It is the opinion of almost every major deer biologist I'm familiar with that culling of any bucks, should only be considered after they are 2-1/2 years old.

So if you see a 3-1/2 yr old Spikehorn, BY ALL MEANS cull it. In most areas of the country, it could be considered a rare trophy, as its about as likely to occur, as a B&C buck being taken.

Also, its important for the hunter to consider that 50% of the genetic code comes from the female. By &quot;turning the doe population&quot; more fequently, you stand a far better chance of reducing genetically &quot;inferior&quot; bucks. This is true because even in stressed populations, very few spikehorns will have the chance to breed, but nearly every doe gets bred. Do you see my point? With a &quot;young&quot; doe population, you increase the odds that their mother was likely bred by a dominant buck, and not a lowly spikehorn.

Farmhunter,

I agree with what you said, but I think it only works on privately managed lands. It is my opinion that at this point, the general public (the masses) have to be directed with laws. I don't believe there is any evidence that leaving it up to the masses to let 1.5 yr bucks walk, will work. If we put point restrictions on the deer, then the bucks that have the best start, 6 and 8 point 1.5 yr bucks, will be culled. Probably none of these young 6 or 8 pointers are genetically inferior. I don't think selecting them for harvest is a good idea. If we let every buck make it to 2.5 yrs, then all would be fine, but that isn't going to happen voluntarily or with point restrictions. Point restrictions will not only cull the better young bucks, but it will allow many inferior older bucks to continue breeding - another bad.

All these studies and hunter statistics tend to make me believe that the only chance at true quality management will happen on private land that is being managed in the manner you suggest. I'm beginning to believe that programs like the one PA is enacting this year, will allow some deer to get one year older, but may actually decrease the genetic quality of racks. That is not something I could support.

I can't see a really good reason to shoot spikes, especially cause I live in a state where you only get one buck a yr.....theres no way I'm gonna use my only buck tag on a spike...or any small buck for that matter.

I don't think you should shoot yearling spikes. However, a 1 1/2 year old spike that weights 130lbs in my opinion will never be the size buck I'm after. In that case, I would kill &quot;older&quot; spikes.

Hunt the thickets