Antler size--Deer age

[strawhead]

This thread was started on qdma. I will post 4 pictures of a buck we believe is the same deer from 2012- 2015. We believe in 2012 that he is "minimum" 3.5 years old from our experiences with CA aging and hunting this area for 40 years. Obviously only an opinion. From our experiences, antler size and deer age is highly variable just in our small area. This buck is one example of the quality of bucks in our area. IMHO there are way to many variables to say antler size and deer age are related in full.

 

[bueller]

even if he was 2.5 in 2012 that would've made him 5.5 this year. Big old deer without the rack most would expect him to have at that age.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

I could buy that's the same deer, real easy. The first pic looks younger that 3.5 to me, but that could easily be a deceiving pic.

I agree 180% that rack sizes for specific ages vary tremendously. This whole idea that if you just give deer time and nutrition that they'll be all gagers has no truth to it at all. In my experience, at least 50% of bucks out there will never hit 140" no matter how old they get or how much year round nutrition you plant/feed. No doubt there are pockets where more will achieve 140+, but that are way more pockets where even less could ever achieve that. More than a few areas, age and nutrition couldn't get 50% of bucks to crack 130"

We tend to place way too much stock in racks for aging than we ever should. I believe that all sorts of young bucks with better racks are believed to be older than they are and a ton of older bucks with smaller racks are believed to be younger than they really are.

 

[strawhead]

" The first pic looks younger that 3.5 to me, but that could easily be a deceiving pic."

From past observations and from past CA aging I am confident he is at least 3.5. The 2 bucks together are a yearling and 2.5 year old I think. The two bucks killed were both 3.5 year old determined by CA aging. The deer up here are at least a year behind the norm in my opinion.

 

[chummer]

My buddy shot this deer at my place. I have pictures back to 2012(first year I had cameras). I am almost positive he is 5.5. Had the same rack every year just got slightly bigger each year.

 

[Bill]

I have nothing to add really. But I find it very interesting that a deer lives that long and has his 2 year old rack plus a bit of mass.

Steve B's latest book gets into this. It's got me really rethinking things. I'm in MO and almost hate posting pics of what I consider sub par deer that would score in the 120 range at 3. I've got one I call cheater. He's a 3 1/2 years old. 8 point with no brows. Thus the cheater. I don't think he'll ever amount to anything near what the area could produce.

Should we keep giving him a pass or should we kill him and open up a bed for the nice 2 year old 10 ?

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Bill, on your ground, with what you want to accomplish, in my mind that's a no doubt shooter for the reason you mentioned (opening a hole). I know you realize this, but for others, no, that probably won't impact genetics at all, but it has the very strong tendency to increase the quality of the standing stock of bucks living on his ground....All properties can naturally only hold X number of bucks. Habitat improvements that remodel the area to offer everything bucks could want and need in multiple areas, as opposed to just 1, can raise that to Y, but there's still a cap. When buck numbers begin exceeding Y, they are going to shift core areas to neighboring grounds. Killing a 3.5 with apparently low potential essentially creates a hole for another, hopefully better buck to fill.

With that. I'm hitting the road for a week of playing in the woods....have fun, all.

 

[kabic]

Bill, on your ground, with what you want to accomplish, in my mind that's a no doubt shooter for the reason you mentioned (opening a hole). I know you realize this, but for others, no, that probably won't impact genetics at all, but it has the very strong tendency to increase the quality of the standing stock of bucks living on his ground....All properties can naturally only hold X number of bucks. Habitat improvements that remodel the area to offer everything bucks could want and need in multiple areas, as opposed to just 1, can raise that to Y, but there's still a cap. When buck numbers begin exceeding Y, they are going to shift core areas to neighboring grounds. Killing a 3.5 with apparently low potential essentially creates a hole for another, hopefully better buck to fill.

With that. I'm hitting the road for a week of playing in the woods....have fun, all.

Steve...do you disagree with the article "Whitetail Bucks Are Not Territorial" https://www.qdma.com/articles/whitetail-bucks-are-not-territorial or is more of a matter of limited bedding spots, I.E. more bucks can pile into a same amount of land as long as their is adequate bedding?

 

[gunther89]

I feel blessed to be in an area with great genetics and fully expect the majority of our bucks to hit 140 at some point. I would say from running cameras the last 8 years, 75% of the bucks we had would score over 140 or would if they were able to make it another year.

 

[J B]

I feel blessed to be in an area with great genetics and fully expect the majority of our bucks to hit 140 at some point. I would say from running cameras the last 8 years, 75% of the bucks we had would score over 140 or would if they were able to make it another year.

I agree with the post above for our area. I would say most will hit 140" by 5 yrs old. Lots food and little winter stress along with heavy doe harvest to balance the herd. We always see a couple each year that would not but less than 10% and probably closer to 5% wouldn't. Unfortunately, the neighbors are very good at shooting young bucks with big racks so it's more common for the lower scoring deer to fully mature. Another area that I hunt seems like maybe 50% would have hard time hitting 140, but very few get mature there so the sample size is small and once again the younger bucks with larger racks are dead long before their prime.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Steve...do you disagree with the article "Whitetail Bucks Are Not Territorial" https://www.qdma.com/articles/whitetail-bucks-are-not-territorial or is more of a matter of limited bedding spots, I.E. more bucks can pile into a same amount of land as long as their is adequate bedding?

Sorry it took me so long to circle back to this, Kabic....was playing in the woods for 5 days.

Here is where every single study on this falls apart, IMO/E. Those bucks they were discussing sharing core areas and bedding next to each other, what types of personalities did they have? Were they leaning more towards an aggressive, dominant personality or passive and submissive? What were their ages? what was the density of each age class of bucks in the area? IMO/E there are sooooooooooo many factors that play into this that must be accounted for or the study is flat out meaningless. I actually had a very long debate about this with the author (LT) 3ish years back. The lack of critical data is an absolute deal buster for me, and, despite doing my best to have an open mind, he was able to tell me nothing that even nudged my opinion on this a smidge.

Yes, I firmly believe that mature, dominant bucks are territorial. I see it very much like street gangs in the inner cities, here the dominant bucks do their very best to flat out own specific areas, but not necessarily their entire home ranges. That doesn't mean that other bucks and even other mature bucks can't and don't reside in that area. It means that if they don't submit to him, both through offering him a submissive posture and behavior, they are at extremely high risk of fighting.

This becomes a problem in 2 common scenarios. The first is when you have 2 evenly matched bucks that are both aggressive and driven to be dominant (just because a buck is "mature" doesn't mean he is or seems to want to be dominant...in areas with a good population dynamics, a decent share of "mature" bucks aren't). After velvet shedding until antler drop, they are going to fight dang near every time they see each other until one of them dies or relocates out of the winners' area. That doesn't mean they abandon their home range, as 2 bucks having the exact same home range is pretty darn rare. They have overlap points. If 2 dominant bucks core areas overlap, nasty things are going to happen, but odds are really good that there is plenty of home range left for the loser to relocate to. Sure, he got pushed out of the other bucks core area and perhaps his hone range all together, but he still had plenty of his own home range left. The problem for us is when that other area of his home range isn't on our ground....Little consolation in knowing he was still on his own home range when he shifts his core area to the neighbors 2 weeks before they kill him.

The other common scenario I see play out again and again and again and again (a lot, every year) is with the not quite ready for prime time players bucks. The bucks that are a year away from being able to challenge for dominance, yet are seemingly desperate to dominate often set out to find a hole they can fill. If you have a hole on your ground, awesome. If not, the neighbors' tend to pile them up like cord wood, resulting in the loss of a bucks you're trying to get another year on.

Really long way of saying, IME the number of bedding sites, how the property is broken up (how many areas offer Mr. Big all he wants and needs) and the personality of mature bucks all factor together to determine the max # of bucks your ground can hold. I have no doubt at all that there is a max cap on how many any and every property can hold.

 

[chummer]

Steve, do you think two dominant bucks can be friends? I had two 5.5 year old bucks, they were together all year up until the last picks I had of them beginning of November. One was shot November 7th. They were always together at some point during the night. They would come and go from the brassicas but had many times when they were there at the same time. I didn't have one picture of them fighting or even paying any attention to each other. The interesting part is if any other buck showed up one of those two would be sparing with it, but never with each other. Almost as if they respected each other and didn't want to ruin a good thing. They are both in vacuum bags now. Hopefully the ones they pushed away will take over.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Chummer, the personality factor makes most anything possible. We try too hard, myself included at times, to come up with cut and dried "rules." There will be exceptions to everything. You observed one. IME, what you describe isn't overly common, but I can think of examples of bucks that buddied up over the entire fall. It's usually two younger deer or a younger and more mature buck, but I have seen equally mature bucks do it a couple times, also. In my case, one of the mature bucks assumed a subordinate role to the other. Just because I haven't seen it doesn't mean that two equally dominant bucks couldn't do the same.