|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264 |
Here's what I believe. If your going to call a 4+ yr old buck with undesirable horn chacteristics a "cull" thats fine by me, I've always just said they were mature deer and am always happy to kill mature deer. However, I believe using the term "cull" on a deer that is relatively young that you have only watched for one year is an incorrect statement. For one, you have no way of knowing what caused the said deer to display a specific horn characteristic for that specific year. I have seen plenty of deer, like others have said, that may have a good side and a single beam on the other or doesn't have browtines or any other undersirable trait, turn into to some really good deer when given time to age. The irregular horns could be from a genetic defect or it could simply be from an injury, you have know way of knowing this from a single citing or from one year of pictures.
Even if you do decide to take the 2 1/2 yr old buck that displays undesirable characteristics, I don't beleive you've done anything to change to genetic make up of your herd. Even if you kill every one that you see like that your not going to kill them all, your not even going to come close to even seeing half of them. Like others have said,the other half of the gene is carried in the doe so I'm not sure your plan to irradicate that. Deer in general can travel a long way and even if you kill a "cull" buck there will be another one right there to take his place. I don't believe you've done a thing to change the gene pool long or short term and your doing nothing but wasting buck tags trying to accomplish an unrealistic goal.
When I say "goal" I'm assuming your trying to kill big bucks since your "culling" the undesirable young bucks. I just think that there's a lot better ways to improve the quality of a deer herd besides culling bucks. Instead of spending your time "culling" bucks, why not spend it improving the quality of the habitat that your hunting. Doing that and letting deer age to maturity will provide way better results in the long run in my opinion. That is 1 BRAZILLION PERCENT CORRECT... Couldn't have said it better myself. I WISH I had about 3 more in our lease that could explain this to other members besides just myself trying to get them to understand that... Excellent Excellent post... And off topic a little but you are right down the road from me if you're in Pace...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 19,289 Likes: 28
Old Mossy Horns
|
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 19,289 Likes: 28 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264 |
Taking a few immature bucks out of a herd won't hurt it. A "GROUP" of hunters all killing immature bucks will hurt a herd! All "mature" bucks are trophies!! ....sorry, I get off on tangents!!!
Could you share the source of your research with us? I would like to see the scientific studies you base your opinion on. I'm not interested in magazine articles. Most of the deer management studies I've read conclude that having a balanced age structure of male deer is best. Why would you target only the older males if you want a balanced age structure? What would you call a "Balanced" age structure ? I am not going to get in to a pissing match about it but if you are saying you should try to maintain (I'm going to be realistic for Alabama) a 4.5 yr old buck age for your whole property that is never going to happen with new buck fawns being born every year. If you let your 2.5-3.5 yr old bucks live and thrive and shoot 4.5 yr old bucks or older, your younger bucks will graduate in to that age class the following year. Its honestly a pretty simple concept, if you manage your habitat, control predation to ensure good numbers and let the younger deer have a chance to reach that age desired age class, you will always have that age class filled of the bucks you shot that year. Its just like high school grades, you will always have a Senior class even though the previous year Seniors graduated (got shot in the case of bucks). You will always have a Junior class, a Sophomore class as well as a Freshman class. So having a balanced age structure, if I am understanding it correctly as you quoted, isn't a practice you can have if you plan on having quality deer year after year... I may have missed your point of "Balanced age structure" but your statement of "why would you only target the older males if you want a balanced age structure", lead me to the interpretation that I just explained...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 31,681
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 31,681 |
If cull bucks have poor racks , how do you identify cull DOES ?
Since 50% of traits come from the doe. How do you ID a cull doe ?
By killing the buck you have only solved 50% of the problem.See how ridiculous this is ?
The way to effect antlers is age and nourishment, not a trigger finger.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 19,289 Likes: 28
Old Mossy Horns
|
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 19,289 Likes: 28 |
QDMAV8R ,,,, thats a older mature deer here . last years picture also http://bamahunter.com/046.JPG
Last edited by Frankie; 02/02/12 10:41 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264 |
If cull bucks have poor racks , how do you identify cull DOES ?
Since 50% of traits come from the doe. How do you ID a cull doe ?
By killing the buck you have only solved 50% of the problem.See how ridiculous this is ?
The way to effect antlers is age and nourishment, not a trigger finger. Bingo...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 326
4 point
|
|
4 point
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 326 |
This seems like the standard, "Ask ten guys a question, and you get fifteen answers that all seem to contradict themselves in one way or another" scenario....
ROLL TIDE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 326
4 point
|
|
4 point
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 326 |
Oh, and one more thing before I go feet my fat A**.. When a few of you talk about "a doe's genes are equally as important as a bucks genes". Dont you mean to say that a Doe's "carrying capacity" and overall health such as protein/vitamin content is equally important??
ROLL TIDE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 40,062 Likes: 139
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 40,062 Likes: 139 |
If cull bucks have poor racks , how do you identify cull DOES ?
Since 50% of traits come from the doe. How do you ID a cull doe ?
By killing the buck you have only solved 50% of the problem.See how ridiculous this is ?
The way to effect antlers is age and nourishment, not a trigger finger. Wouldn't solving 50% of a problem be better than 0? Any improvement is a good thing. Agreed on age and food.
"Why do you ask"?
Too many people spend money they don't have , on things they don't need, to impress people they don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
If cull bucks have poor racks , how do you identify cull DOES ?
Since 50% of traits come from the doe. How do you ID a cull doe ?
By killing the buck you have only solved 50% of the problem.See how ridiculous this is ?
The way to effect antlers is age and nourishment, not a trigger finger. Bingo... If antler traits are 50% heritable from the doe and 50% from the buck as you suggest, then killing the bucks with an undesirable trait would solve more than 50% of the problem. Those "cull does" you can't identify would have a greater chance of being bred by a buck without the trait (you killed the ones with the trait) so you would have a lower incidence of the trait in the offspring of those does. Do that another gerneration and you have an even lower incidence. Another generation and you have an even lower incidence. Eventually the incidence would be almost undetectable. If your description of 50% from each sex is correct, then it is simple math.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,693
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,693 |
If cull bucks have poor racks , how do you identify cull DOES ?
Since 50% of traits come from the doe. How do you ID a cull doe ?
By killing the buck you have only solved 50% of the problem.See how ridiculous this is ?
The way to effect antlers is age and nourishment, not a trigger finger. Bingo... If antler traits are 50% heritable from the doe and 50% from the buck as you suggest, then killing the bucks with an undesirable trait would solve more than 50% of the problem. Those "cull does" you can't identify would have a greater chance of being bred by a buck without the trait (you killed the ones with the trait) so you would have a lower incidence of the trait in the offspring of those does. Do that another gerneration and you have an even lower incidence. Another generation and you have an even lower incidence. Eventually the incidence would be almost undetectable. If your description of 50% from each sex is correct, then it is simple math. Probablility and genetics are far from simple math.
"Any way you look at it, most of the problems facing baboons can be expressed in two words: other baboons" -
D.L. Cheney and R.M. Seyfarth
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
With his 50% / 50% scenario and selection pressure over time, the outcome of that scenario is not that complicated.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,693
10 point
|
|
10 point
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,693 |
With his 50% / 50% scenario and selection pressure over time, the outcome of that scenario is not that complicated.
. True, not complicated, but more than likely wrong. Without knowing if it a dominant or recessive trait, is the buck a carrier, but not expressing the gene and just hooked up with the right doe, do you kill every buck carrying, if not expressing, the gene for that trait every year, every doe, do bad or good bucks move in to take the place of those killed, same for does, ... If one argues that is purely genetic, than without fully mapping the whitetail genome, and then knowing the DNA-makeup of every deer on your land, than it is probably an excercise in futility to think you can cull the trait out of "your" deer. If it is not purely genetic, but rather influenced by other factors, age, habitat, stress, injury, then one will probably not be able to shoot his way out of the trait either.
"Any way you look at it, most of the problems facing baboons can be expressed in two words: other baboons" -
D.L. Cheney and R.M. Seyfarth
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,539 |
In my opinion culling bucks is absolutely beneficial for your property but not for the reason most of you are debating. No matter how many acres you own, unless its high fenced, a high percentage of the bucks on your property will have home ranges that extend beyond your property lines. Lets say hypothetically you own 300 acres. You put out a few cameras and find that you have three 3.5 yr old bucks spending most of their time on your property. Well the buck with largest antlers is not necessarily the dominant buck of the three. In this scenario the buck with the least desirable rack may very well be the dominant buck when they turn 4.5 the next year and wont tolerate the presence of the other two bucks. By shooting the buck with the smallest rack you increase the odds of keeping the larger racked bucks on your property by reducing the competition for territory among their age class. It doesnt guarantee they will stay on your property but it helps. Think about it how many people have gotten pictures of 2 or 3 year old bucks some with potential and some not so much. a couple of years down the line you get a picture of the one of the "not so much" bucks and the bucks that had potential are never seen again. All bucks that you let reach maturity are going to establish a territory and defend it, why let scraggly poor racked bucks set up shop on your property and potentially run larger racked 3.5 year olds away. Thats why you cull not because you think you can manipulate the gene pool of the entire alabama whitetail population by shooting a buck with short brow tines. Hmmm, interesting theory, but way too many unknowns. How do you know which buck is dominant? What if the buck with the biggest horns is 3.5 and is also the dominant buck? What if the 3.5 year old with 110" horns isn't the dominant buck and what if he could put on another 20" from 3 to 4 making him a 130"? If you let him walk you might then have a 150" 4.5 and a 130" 4.5 year old. The only way to consistently kill good bucks is to hunt property that has a good number of good bucks. Mature deer are too hard to kill to put all your eggs in one basket by eliminating as many "inferior" 3.5 year olds as possible. I'd rather take my chances and likely hold a higher number of mature deer than try to manipulate middle age bucks with the intent of only holding mature bucks with the best genetics. I only see that working in a fenced area. All that being said, the original post was in regards to a 2.5 year old and IMO 99% of 2 year olds should walk.
Last edited by truedouble; 02/02/12 01:41 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
With his 50% / 50% scenario and selection pressure over time, the outcome of that scenario is not that complicated.
. True, not complicated, but more than likely wrong. Without knowing if it a dominant or recessive trait, is the buck a carrier, but not expressing the gene and just hooked up with the right doe, do you kill every buck carrying, if not expressing, the gene for that trait every year, every doe, do bad or good bucks move in to take the place of those killed, same for does, ... If one argues that is purely genetic, than without fully mapping the whitetail genome, and then knowing the DNA-makeup of every deer on your land, than it is probably an excercise in futility to think you can cull the trait out of "your" deer. If it is not purely genetic, but rather influenced by other factors, age, habitat, stress, injury, then one will probably not be able to shoot his way out of the trait either. I am discussing the scenario he presented. No doubt it is more complicated without knowing the particulars of how the trait is inherited. There is also no doubt that if it is a heritable trait, removing one animal expressing the gene will make a difference. It is the degree of difference that is in question.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,997 |
Taking a few immature bucks out of a herd won't hurt it. A "GROUP" of hunters all killing immature bucks will hurt a herd! All "mature" bucks are trophies!! ....sorry, I get off on tangents!!!
Could you share the source of your research with us? I would like to see the scientific studies you base your opinion on. I'm not interested in magazine articles. Most of the deer management studies I've read conclude that having a balanced age structure of male deer is best. Why would you target only the older males if you want a balanced age structure? What would you call a "Balanced" age structure ? I am not going to get in to a pissing match about it but if you are saying you should try to maintain (I'm going to be realistic for Alabama) a 4.5 yr old buck age for your whole property that is never going to happen with new buck fawns being born every year. If you let your 2.5-3.5 yr old bucks live and thrive and shoot 4.5 yr old bucks or older, your younger bucks will graduate in to that age class the following year. Its honestly a pretty simple concept, if you manage your habitat, control predation to ensure good numbers and let the younger deer have a chance to reach that age desired age class, you will always have that age class filled of the bucks you shot that year. Its just like high school grades, you will always have a Senior class even though the previous year Seniors graduated (got shot in the case of bucks). You will always have a Junior class, a Sophomore class as well as a Freshman class. So having a balanced age structure, if I am understanding it correctly as you quoted, isn't a practice you can have if you plan on having quality deer year after year... I may have missed your point of "Balanced age structure" but your statement of "why would you only target the older males if you want a balanced age structure", lead me to the interpretation that I just explained... I didn't ask for another opinion... I asked for scientific evidence supporting bucktrot's opinion that "killing younger (cull) bucks harms the herd". If there is no science to support that opinion, then let's face that fact and accept it as speculation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264 |
If cull bucks have poor racks , how do you identify cull DOES ?
Since 50% of traits come from the doe. How do you ID a cull doe ?
By killing the buck you have only solved 50% of the problem.See how ridiculous this is ?
The way to effect antlers is age and nourishment, not a trigger finger. Wouldn't solving 50% of a problem be better than 0? Any improvement is a good thing. Agreed on age and food. In a perfect "All knowing" world, yes... But how do you know without a shadow of a doubt that the buck you are "culling" is a genetically "inferior" deer, past injury, poor diet or another of the 100 factors that could cause the less than desired antler growth that year ? Imagine trying to get 20 guys in a lease to ALL agree to what a "Cull" buck is. I can GUARANTEE you that unless you had a lease full of Brian Murphy's, Brian Kinkel's, Steve Ditchkoff's or Grant Woods, its NOT gonna happen...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,180 |
It's an odds game. If antler traits are a heritable trait, you can only do your selection based on expression of the traits.
If antler traits are not a heritable trait, why is the semen of a pen raised buck displaying huge antlers worth a pile of money?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 14,587 Likes: 26
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 14,587 Likes: 26 |
In a perfect "All knowing" world, yes... But how do you know without a shadow of a doubt that the buck you are "culling" is a genetically "inferior" deer, past injury, poor diet or another of the 100 factors that could cause the less than desired antler growth that year ? Imagine trying to get 20 guys in a lease to ALL agree to what a "Cull" buck is. I can GUARANTEE you that unless you had a lease full of Brian Murphy's, Brian Kinkel's, Steve Ditchkoff's or Grant Woods, its NOT gonna happen... Agree with this. There is no way to look at a buck one season and tell that he's a cull buck. You need at least two season's worth of data so that injury, drought, etc can be eliminated for a deer's poor rack one year. Bottom line...I'd be willing to bet that 95% or more of what's shot as "cull bucks" should have never been shot under that premise of being a cull buck.
"You think I care? Roll Damn Tide"
Have you tried Google?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,264 |
It's an odds game. If antler traits are a heritable trait, you can only do your selection based on expression of the traits.
If antler traits are not a heritable trait, why is the semen of a pen raised buck displaying huge antlers worth a pile of money?
You answered your own question, it's an odds game... I've never seen a vile from a breeder buck that says guaranteed 300" buck in this specimen...
|
|
|
|
|
