Aldeer.com

How accurate is this?

Posted By: Joe4majors

How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:31 AM

Saw this posted on FB by a processor I've used in the past. I'm certainly still a rookie, but a lot of what I have read elsewhere doesn't support some of the logic mentioned below.

"Here is a good example on why you should shoot cull bucks. This deer weighed in at 180 pounds and is estimated at 4-5 years old. It was never going to amount to a good buck and had all those years to breed does and create several generations of bad genes. If you are trying to manage your deer herd to grow bigger, better deer you have to remove the trash from the heard. Letting bucks walk that are not 8 points or better does not necessarily create bigger deer. There are a few key signs that the buck is a cull... first look at the deers body... a thick chest and neck, a sagging belly and swooped back are signs of a buck that has reached maturity. Now look for signs of bad genetics in the rack. Little or no brow tines, a poorly branched mane frame on one side, a large fork, spike, or deformed frame on the other, (Look for signs of injuries) Good mane beams with short tines, or a twisted and gnarled frame. Remember the biggest buck is not always the dominate buck in the area. One could have have mature trash bucks like the one in the picture staking claim to the land keeping the bigger bucks pushed out. A mature trash buck is just as smart as a mature 10 point with a 150 inch rack. But the buck that claims the area gets the does! And trash creates more trash!"
Posted By: Beadlescomb

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:36 AM

Sounds like bs to me
Posted By: mauvilla

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:40 AM

Club I was in for years the old timers that were in it forever always said the same thing
Posted By: hyco

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:48 AM

Killing that 1 deer will not make any difference. You would have to kill mom and dad too to make sure you got the right bad gene side. Aunts, uncles, cousins, brothers, sisters, half brothers, half sisters, sons and daughters. Plus any thing left from all 4 grandparents. ,in other words. You can not change the genetic makeup of a wild deer herd,.
Posted By: perchjerker

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 01:02 AM

Anyone that can't grasp why there are NO cull bucks needs to attend a deer seminar with a deer biologist. ONE MORE TIME. to end bad traits you'd have to kill all the does too. You don't know who was his mother. A DOE GIVES HER OFFSPRING HALF HIS GENES. The phase CULL BUCK is used to justify killing a poor buck. Kill it, Stop trying to justify it. CULLINg is non existant on free range deer. The STATE isn't going to allow you an extra buck because you are such a wonderful hunter.

http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/deer-scouting/the-facts-and-truth-about-culling-bucks

http://www.gon.com/hunting/the-real-skinny-on-shooting-cull-bucks

If you really want to learn about deer and deer hunting refer to this site. Forget Facebook,idiots posting crap for idiots to read. Grant Woods is a famous Deer biilogist.

http://www.growingdeer.tv/

Posted By: deerman24

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 07:32 AM

not only bucks that determine quality of deer. Doe also determine that, maybe more so than bucks
Posted By: blumsden

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 07:36 AM

It wont change the dynamics of a wild deer herd, but if you want to shoot it because you don't want it eating up your plots, then go ahead. Age is what should be the determining factor, not rack size, if your trying to manage a property.
Posted By: yelkca280

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 07:38 AM

I agree and disagree. If you ever get a gene flowing with a spike on one side and developed rack on the other you are screwed. Anytime you remove a potential breeder from the population it will reduce the possibility of that gene becoming more dominant.

That can be seen in the human genetics just the same. Whole lot of folks with African American,Asian, Hispanic blood coursing through there veins that look like just some old white dude.
Posted By: Squadron77

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 08:30 AM

So injury, food source or sickness will not affect the growth of a rack? There are more things that can cause a bad rack than genetics. If you kill a buck with a bad rack you may be killing the most perfect genetic buck in your herd.
Posted By: jawbone

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:00 AM

Foremost is someone has to have the ability to be able to age them on the hoof. I can do fairly decent at this if the deer is broadside to me and will hold still for a few seconds. They don't often do this.

Remember that genetics are a funny thing. First off there are two parents involved and then there are the dominant and recessive gene traits involved. How many big old men do you know with little children and vice versa? It doesn't always work like we would think it would.

Unless you really know what you are doing, it is best to let him walk if you are looking for a real trophy. If for no other reason, your day is through when you drop a "cull". If he is a trophy to you, and your group rules allow it, drop him if you want. We try to pass on the older deer with lesser racks with the understanding that these are deer we would be pleased if our guests and kids shoot them. Then everyone is happy.

Worrying about this too much kind of makes a person the Hitler of the Deer World trying to create the perfect deer by exterminating the lesser examples. Overdramatic, I know, but y'all get the point.
Posted By: timbercruiser

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:05 AM

I've heard that shooting culls won't help, especially on here, but on my land in Pike county I had a big problem with spike on one side bucks so I started shooting every one I could see about 18 years ago. I havn't seen a SOOS buck in the past three years either in a plot or in the thousands of pictures of deer I get at my feeders. Maybe the SOOS bucks migrated somewhere else. I also shoot all bucks without brow tines.
Posted By: AU338MAG

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:22 AM

I believe most people who argue for culling bucks are just looking for a justification to kill any buck they see. I've seen this in a couple of clubs. When I was a guest at my brothers club last year, someone brought in a 4 point which was maybe 2 years old and claimed it was a cull. We have people in my own club who attempt to put together a hit list of supposed cull bucks they have on camera. Bullschitt.

The majority of hunters in Alabama cannot accurately age deer on the hoof. Once a buck reaches 4-1/2 years, it can be very difficult to differentiate between 4-1/2 and 6-1/2. Any biologist worth a damn will tell you it is impossible to cull undesirable traits from a free-ranging deer herd in Alabama.
Posted By: pcoladoc

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:34 AM

Here is a brief review of antler development factors from MSU biologists.
http://fwrc.msstate.edu/pubs/antler.pdf
Posted By: Reloader79

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:39 AM

You can't manage an open range deer population, to many strays run through and breed all the Momma's too. Pretty much impossible.
Posted By: PapaJ

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:51 AM

Sounds like some folks just want to watch deer instead of killing deer. That's mostly the way that I am now, but I'm an old fart who killed my fair share when I was younger. This "only shoot a monster" has gotten way out of hand,unless you want to have a buck killed on the property maybe every 5 or 6 years in most places in Alabama. Admittedly, there is a challenge to that, which can be satisfying to some people. Lots of money and angst spent chasing pine goats, IMO. It stops being fun when you teach people to be afraid to pull the trigger because they may face the scorn of others and/or imposed fines. That being said, if you want to let deer walk, that's fine with me, because that is what I do. I do not, however, let them walk under the illusion that next year midwest-sized bucks will appear every time I hunt.
Posted By: jlbuc10

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:51 AM

Originally Posted By: Joe4majors
mane beams

I wonder if they are hairy? rofl
Posted By: Ben2

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 10:05 AM

We try to kill 4+ yr old deer regardless of antler size. However we have a 6 pt gene and are seriously considering shooting 6 points at 2 or 3 years old for a few years to see if there is any difference by not letting 6 points live to be 5 or 6 yr olds. If nothing else could killing a 6 pt at 3 keep him from running off a 2 yr old 9 pt when he is 4 or 5?
Posted By: lefthorn

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 10:15 AM

Speaking of spike on one side deer, did anything ever come out of the study Auburn was doing a while back?
Posted By: ikillbux

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 11:29 AM

I have often heard the MOM has "more" to do with it than the father. Have heard deer breeders talk about paying more for a doe than a buck. Just my opinion, but I think the idea of "cull" bucks is one of the worst myths in deer hunting. Even if it has scientific credibility, it has essentially no worth in field practice. It's like peeing in the ocean.

I also happen to like the crazy character on many deer that I see called "culls". One of my better deer was a spike on one side deer. Probably 5-7 yrs old, very heavy mass, just cool as crap!!!
Posted By: ikillbux

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 11:33 AM

Originally Posted By: Squadron77
So injury, food source or sickness will not affect the growth of a rack? There are more things that can cause a bad rack than genetics. If you kill a buck with a bad rack you may be killing the most perfect genetic buck in your herd.


Preach!
Posted By: SouthBamaSlayer

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 11:35 AM

Females contribute around 50.7% of the DNA to an offspring.
Posted By: blumsden

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 11:50 AM

Originally Posted By: timbercruiser
I've heard that shooting culls won't help, especially on here, but on my land in Pike county I had a big problem with spike on one side bucks so I started shooting every one I could see about 18 years ago. I havn't seen a SOOS buck in the past three years either in a plot or in the thousands of pictures of deer I get at my feeders. Maybe the SOOS bucks migrated somewhere else. I also shoot all bucks without brow tines.

From what ive read, SOOS bucks are bucks who have a pedicle injury and can't pass that on genetically to other deer, it comes from bucks fighting and an injury to the pedicle of the skull. That deer will always carry that trait on that side, so if you had 3 deer with that injury and you shot them that would certainly have eliminated you seeing anymore deer like that. Hope that makes sense.
Posted By: Booger

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:00 PM

Shooting a buck and claiming it is a cull buck is just a hunters way of pulling the trigger on a small buck and justifying their lack of trigger restraint. If it's a legal deer and your club allows you to shoot it then shoot it and be happy. If you know your going to have to justify the kill with the "it was a cull buck" excuse then don't shoot it.
Posted By: jawbone

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:11 PM

Originally Posted By: Booger
Shooting a buck and claiming it is a cull buck is just a hunters way of pulling the trigger on a small buck and justifying their lack of trigger restraint. If it's a legal deer and your club allows you to shoot it then shoot it and be happy. If you know your going to have to justify the kill with the "it was a cull buck" excuse then don't shoot it.
Pretty much what I was trying to say, but Booger said it much more succinctly.
Posted By: Booger

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:23 PM

Originally Posted By: jawbone
Originally Posted By: Booger
Shooting a buck and claiming it is a cull buck is just a hunters way of pulling the trigger on a small buck and justifying their lack of trigger restraint. If it's a legal deer and your club allows you to shoot it then shoot it and be happy. If you know your going to have to justify the kill with the "it was a cull buck" excuse then don't shoot it.
Pretty much what I was trying to say, but Booger said it much more succinctly.


That's what she said. smile
Posted By: Booger

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 12:26 PM

Hey Jawbone, I just looked up the definition of succinctly, and that is not what she said. smile
Posted By: Frankie

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 01:14 PM

i pretty much with yall BUUUUUT , a doe don't breed say four/five other does for say two/three years .

so why let a piss poor buck breed ? i can see where it can make a difference by just the numbers .
Posted By: Frankie

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 01:18 PM

let me ask y'all this . what harm does it do to kill a true cull buck ?
Posted By: Joe4majors

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 01:42 PM

Originally Posted By: Frankie
let me ask y'all this . what harm does it do to kill a true cull buck ?


My argument is that killing a "true cull buck" doesn't do a ton of good. The idea that this buck is going around corrupting the gene pool ("owning all the does") is ridiculous. My concern is that this mindset is going to result in folks shooting young "imperfect" racked deer claiming it's a cull, when some high percentage of them would have grown into nice mature buck if they had the chance to mature. How do you accurately define a "true cull buck?" Seems to me you wouldn't know for sure until they are already mature. If you want to shoot a mature buck with a messed up rack, do so by all means, I just don't think any significant improvement to the deer herd has occurred.
Posted By: Frankie

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 02:07 PM

Originally Posted By: Joe4majors
Originally Posted By: Frankie
let me ask y'all this . what harm does it do to kill a true cull buck ?


My argument is that killing a "true cull buck" doesn't do a ton of good. The idea that this buck is going around corrupting the gene pool ("owning all the does") is ridiculous. My concern is that this mindset is going to result in folks shooting young "imperfect" racked deer claiming it's a cull, when some high percentage of them would have grown into nice mature buck if they had the chance to mature. How do you accurately define a "true cull buck?" Seems to me you wouldn't know for sure until they are already mature. If you want to shoot a mature buck with a messed up rack, do so by all means, I just don't think any significant improvement to the deer herd has occurred.


my point ,,, it wont hurt it either . if you have better looking bucks let them breed

this is what i would define as a cull buck .>>>>>>






Posted By: abolt300

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 02:12 PM

We cull all 3 or 3+ year old bucks not exhibiting anything in the way of brow tines. Nothing else is considered for a cull because it is just too hard to determine if an injury caused the antler deformation. IMO if a buck does not have brows by 3, he wont ever have them and whether or not he carries the genetic to pass on or it came from his momma doesnt matter. He's using up food and resources that better deer can consume.
Posted By: jawbone

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 02:12 PM

Originally Posted By: Frankie
let me ask y'all this . what harm does it do to kill a true cull buck ?


"True cull buck". This would have to be an old deer that we know will never get much, if any, better. The problem is not many people are able to discern this, especially in the field. First they have to be able to age him and secondly, they have to know he wasn't just having a bad year through sickness or injury that he can recover from. Now, there is not really any harm in killing him if you know for he meets the criteria for certain, except my point that someone would be proud to kill him. Save him for those people if it means nothing to you to kill him.
Posted By: Joe4majors

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 02:22 PM

Originally Posted By: Frankie
Originally Posted By: Joe4majors
Originally Posted By: Frankie
let me ask y'all this . what harm does it do to kill a true cull buck ?


My argument is that killing a "true cull buck" doesn't do a ton of good. The idea that this buck is going around corrupting the gene pool ("owning all the does") is ridiculous. My concern is that this mindset is going to result in folks shooting young "imperfect" racked deer claiming it's a cull, when some high percentage of them would have grown into nice mature buck if they had the chance to mature. How do you accurately define a "true cull buck?" Seems to me you wouldn't know for sure until they are already mature. If you want to shoot a mature buck with a messed up rack, do so by all means, I just don't think any significant improvement to the deer herd has occurred.


my point ,,, it wont hurt it either . if you have better looking bucks let them breed

this is what i would define as a cull buck .>>>>>>








My point is that 4 out of 5 hunters won't shoot a "true cull buck" because they can't judge off the hoof like jawbone stated. The harm is young deer get shot that would have been "better looking bucks" the next year.
Posted By: ikillbux

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 03:44 PM

We're assuming with certainty that even if that buck in Frankie's picture breeds does that all the fawns will be just like that. I don't know, but when considering genetics, oftentimes recessive genes in one generation become dominant in the next (and flip flop). My dad is 6'-4" / 280#, his father was similar build. My maternal granddad was 6'-2" / 250ish. I am 5'-11" and 175. I have a daughter that is taller and lean, the other is very short and stockier built. And we're all from the same genes.
Posted By: goodman_hunter

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 04:58 PM

Originally Posted By: ikillbux
Originally Posted By: Squadron77
So injury, food source or sickness will not affect the growth of a rack? There are more things that can cause a bad rack than genetics. If you kill a buck with a bad rack you may be killing the most perfect genetic buck in your herd.


Preach!


shouldnt effect the herd though, if its true for one end of the spectrum. Its true for the other, Right? If i kill good bucks when there 2-3 years old. It really has no effect, because I'm not gonna kill all of them. So therfore I would still have mature good genetics bucks to hunt as well. Right?
Posted By: Frankie

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 05:44 PM

Originally Posted By: Joe4majors
Originally Posted By: Frankie
Originally Posted By: Joe4majors
Originally Posted By: Frankie
let me ask y'all this . what harm does it do to kill a true cull buck ?


My argument is that killing a "true cull buck" doesn't do a ton of good. The idea that this buck is going around corrupting the gene pool ("owning all the does") is ridiculous. My concern is that this mindset is going to result in folks shooting young "imperfect" racked deer claiming it's a cull, when some high percentage of them would have grown into nice mature buck if they had the chance to mature. How do you accurately define a "true cull buck?" Seems to me you wouldn't know for sure until they are already mature. If you want to shoot a mature buck with a messed up rack, do so by all means, I just don't think any significant improvement to the deer herd has occurred.


my point ,,, it wont hurt it either . if you have better looking bucks let them breed

this is what i would define as a cull buck .>>>>>>








My point is that 4 out of 5 hunters won't shoot a "true cull buck" because they can't judge off the hoof like jawbone stated. The harm is young deer get shot that would have been "better looking bucks" the next year.


i got you that's true but it would harm nothing if a true cull buck was killed .
Posted By: Beer Belly

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 05:45 PM


I thought that Does had more impact on antler genetics than do bucks.
Posted By: Frankie

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 05:46 PM

Originally Posted By: ikillbux
We're assuming with certainty that even if that buck in Frankie's picture breeds does that all the fawns will be just like that. I don't know, but when considering genetics, oftentimes recessive genes in one generation become dominant in the next (and flip flop). My dad is 6'-4" / 280#, his father was similar build. My maternal granddad was 6'-2" / 250ish. I am 5'-11" and 175. I have a daughter that is taller and lean, the other is very short and stockier built. And we're all from the same genes.


you right but why chance it. if you have better looking buck i'd rather chance it they put out good ones
Posted By: JUSTIN37HUNT

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 05:50 PM

Good comments.

But one thing... a doe passes her genes to 5-10 offspring in a lifetime.
(One to two offspring for 5 reproductive years)

A buck may pass his to many many more. Say 30 offspring.
(3 does per season at two offspring per doe for 5 years)

So that's a pretty significant difference. But that also assumes you catch this "cull" at a young age.

All that said, you do have to give credit to the OP quote concerning home territory etc. If you let a true cull camp out on your property, there's the potential he's running off better bucks with better genetics. He's also consuming some value of your properties best resources. The significance of these two things on your property can vary from person to person, but I think it's still a valid point.
Posted By: Frankie

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 05:52 PM

i tried my damnest to kill this one for two years . lol

Posted By: bloodtrail

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 06:02 PM

I assume that everyone culling these inferior bucks are letting their biggest and best walk? That is your stated objective after all.....
Posted By: timbercruiser

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 06:08 PM

Well, I'm not one of those rocket surgeon deer biologist, but I know that what I did worked. And I have plenty of bucks on the property.
Posted By: Yelp softly

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 06:08 PM

Originally Posted By: lefthorn
Speaking of spike on one side deer, did anything ever come out of the study Auburn was doing a while back?


I think this is the one you're talking about. Yes, in summary, the majority of the SOOS deer studied could be attributed to injury if you make an allowance that previous studies have shown body injuries to result in odd antler development. Remember, this study only looked at the skull plate. The author states that an allowance has to be made for bodily injury which couldn't be seen on the skull plate. Factor those things together and it basically says that SOOS is not a genetic trait. As far as science is concerned there is high probability that all SOOS deer are due to injury.

https://www.qdma.com/spike-one-side-genetics-injury/
Posted By: Frankie

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 06:10 PM

Originally Posted By: bloodtrail
I assume that everyone culling these inferior bucks are letting their biggest and best walk? That is your stated objective after all.....


nope i not implying that at all
Posted By: Yelp softly

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 06:17 PM

Back to Joe's original post, the definition of "cull" is unique to each hunter. As stated by others, if you think you're doing it to control free range genetics, you're pissing in the wind.

However, culling is a real world practice in trophy deer management. It's not necessarily to control the genetics as much as it is to remove the undesirables so they don't continue eat food that could be had by the true trophies. Culling in trophy management is a very difficult practice. That's why most trophy ranches will send a guide with you and tell you which deer can and can't be shot. They want to remove the 3 year old and older bucks that will never make true trophies. Determining a deer's age accurately and assessing whether he has trophy potential or not is not something the average hunter does well.
Posted By: Joe4majors

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 06:52 PM

I meant to post early that there certainly is the component of removing another mouth that is competing for resources, but that certainly depends on the property.
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 06:59 PM

Originally Posted By: jawbone
Originally Posted By: Booger
Shooting a buck and claiming it is a cull buck is just a hunters way of pulling the trigger on a small buck and justifying their lack of trigger restraint. If it's a legal deer and your club allows you to shoot it then shoot it and be happy. If you know your going to have to justify the kill with the "it was a cull buck" excuse then don't shoot it.
Pretty much what I was trying to say, but Booger said it much more succinctly.


YEP..I dont Cull deer...I only hunt for mature bucks that I would put on the wall hopefully.

Im older, and have shot a passel of good uns. We need 1 deer to eat a year now that my sons gone..and Id rather tag one good un...then 5 does and a cull anyday.

That said..to each his own. Im just particular these days.

Again..that said..I was lucky and harvested a few good uns this year between the 1 bow kill in Bama, my one gun kill in Bama and my one out of state hunt...Ive got my freezer stocked for the year..and fed a few families of my friends that dont hunt.

I just needed some good turkey ground now and Ill be happy
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 07:06 PM

Originally Posted By: abolt300
We cull all 3 or 3+ year old bucks not exhibiting anything in the way of brow tines. Nothing else is considered for a cull because it is just too hard to determine if an injury caused the antler deformation. IMO if a buck does not have brows by 3, he wont ever have them and whether or not he carries the genetic to pass on or it came from his momma doesnt matter. He's using up food and resources that better deer can consume.


I shot a rare real 169 5/8 ths inch 14 pt buck in Bama.

He had a TOTAL of 4 inches in brow tines. Brow tines arent a big factor in BC score thats for sure.

Some places have lousy brows...but some have 4-6 inches each side. Wow.. 8 -12 inches total compared to 4 inches my buck had.

But I had MULTIPLE 8 1/2 to 7 inch MASS scores on my buck. Whats 2 lousy brow tines.. when you have 5 mass scores of 8 1/2 to 7 inches? Thats over 40 inches added to the other 3 mass scores.

Some deer just have lousy brows.. but brows are the SMALLEST of all antlers anyway!

and I dont even fully judge a deer until 4 -5 years old. They can BLOW UP after 3...but thats just IMHO.

If it works for yall..have at it! I just dont put much weight in brow tines score at all. Im ALL about MASS.
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 07:07 PM

then again..Im a deer watcher. I just like LOOKIN at em.
Posted By: CNC

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 07:10 PM

In my opinion, buck dispersion is one of the main reasons it does little good to try and manage a gene off of your property. When last year’s buck fawns leave mama as a 1 year old….he may relocate a long ways from where he was born. Many of the older bucks that are on your land were likely not born there. You get an influx of new young bucks every year from the surrounding area. The fact you shot that big 6 makes little difference as to which young bucks randomly move in.

If you had a jam up place with a ton of deer and really wanted to “cull” bucks….then you would take out the inferior 2-3 year old bucks that exhibited weak antler characteristics and leave the young 9 or 10 points, etc to get older…..It’s being done more because of social carrying capacity than it is to try and effect genetic makeup.
Posted By: outdoors1

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:02 PM

Kill all the deer and release breeder deer. Should help some if you could do that.
Posted By: Booger

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:09 PM

Another variable to throw into the equation is the distance bucks range during the rut. I've read studies where collard bucks traveled 10 miles during the rut. So, how are you gonna stop a "cull buck" visiting your does from 5 miles up the road in the middle of the night? It just seems to make sense to just shoot mature bucks, no matter how the racks look.
Posted By: CD

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/11/17 09:33 PM

"Culling" a buck does nothing to the genetic makeup of your deer herd. The only thing culling does is makes the shooter feel better about shooting an ugly duckling or undesirable buck. People that believe they can cull a gene out of the herd fail to recognize the fact that probably every deer on their property carries the gene they want to remove. It's not about what genes are carried, it's about what genes are expressed. Genetics are way too complex to be managed with a bullet.

As mentioned earlier, culling simply to remove undesirables from the herd to leave more resources for the desirables is the only real world reason to cull. This is done in highly controlled Trophy Deer Management situations and it's a very complex application in itself. To do it properly, the individual buck must be allowed to age and be monitored to see what genes he is gonna express. That's why pay ranches allow hunters to come in and take "management " bucks at reduced rates. That's a way for ranches to still make bucks ($$$$$$$$) off undesirable bucks.
Posted By: eclipse829

Re: How accurate is this? - 01/12/17 08:31 AM

Originally Posted By: Booger
Shooting a buck and claiming it is a cull buck is just a hunters way of pulling the trigger on a small buck and justifying their lack of trigger restraint. If it's a legal deer and your club allows you to shoot it then shoot it and be happy. If you know your going to have to justify the kill with the "it was a cull buck" excuse then don't shoot it.


if its killed within the rules of club or law, shouldn't have to justify to anyone?
© 2024 ALDEER.COM