Lack of Significant Growth With Age -- Just A Southern Thing?

[Buckhunter10]

Oh and one more thing - it also graphs our average antler sizes per age cohort, the average antler sizes is fairly remarkable.

Truly makes one realize the rareness of a booner.

I won’t bore y’all but in Ohio I have piles of bucks from 4-6+ that didn’t grow much or were 125inch at 6. I have some that were 170+ at 4. Same farm. Only difference is genetics and individualized stress (I think this has a larger impact as well - just my theory).

AT

 

[buckdeer1]

As pointed out I agree with the subspecies type and genetics. Age also has alot to do with it but every 5.5 year old buck won't score 160 that being said I have seen a couple 170 being tooth aged at 3.5 but not very often.Too bad I think these 3.5 super bucks aren't as smart as a 5.5 and get killed sooner.Much of the larger bucks killed come from areas that most likely genetics and protein caused the improvement much like the areas that produce more NT bucks than other areas.I have seen two NT bucks on my farm in 25 years and know other guys in Kansas that shoot one about every other year.

 

[Brian662]

 

[Baker]

While the above graph may be partially true the exceptions are countless. Certainly the first exception is found when comparing the various sub species. Big difference between them with as a general rule northern deer peaking even a little faster than the graph and south Tx/Mexican deer peaking a little slower than the graph. To some degree may be true for the deer in Ms. But, While the above graph may be a reflection of a bell curve there are plenty of anomalies or outliers. I have found that the very best bucks almost always keep getting bigger ...even giant leaps...later in life....7-10 yrs old. this true in La. as well as Mexico. Let a Deer with the right genetic make up, on a high nutritional plane, grow out of the rutting pool later in life and get a bit more mellow and you can see the second big jump after the jump from 3 to 4. Happens all the time. I wonder how many bucks over 5 were included in the above study?

 

[jsasker007]

While the above graph may be partially true the exceptions are countless. Certainly the first exception is found when comparing the various sub species. Big difference between them with as a general rule northern deer peaking even a little faster than the graph and south Tx/Mexican deer peaking a little slower than the graph. To some degree may be true for the deer in Ms. But, While the above graph may be a reflection of a bell curve there are plenty of anomalies or outliers. I have found that the very best bucks almost always keep getting bigger ...even giant leaps...later in life....7-10 yrs old. this true in La. as well as Mexico. Let a Deer with the right genetic make up, on a high nutritional plane, grow out of the rutting pool later in life and get a bit more mellow and you can see the second big jump after the jump from 3 to 4. Happens all the time. I wonder how many bucks over 5 were included in the above study?

You would know as well as anyone and better than most for sure! I will just have to take other people's word for it.

 

[omicron1792]

While the above graph may be partially true the exceptions are countless. Certainly the first exception is found when comparing the various sub species. Big difference between them with as a general rule northern deer peaking even a little faster than the graph and south Tx/Mexican deer peaking a little slower than the graph. To some degree may be true for the deer in Ms. But, While the above graph may be a reflection of a bell curve there are plenty of anomalies or outliers. I have found that the very best bucks almost always keep getting bigger ...even giant leaps...later in life....7-10 yrs old. this true in La. as well as Mexico. Let a Deer with the right genetic make up, on a high nutritional plane, grow out of the rutting pool later in life and get a bit more mellow and you can see the second big jump after the jump from 3 to 4. Happens all the time. I wonder how many bucks over 5 were included in the above study?

Baker, you are a great resource, thank you.

I will say the things you are saying make sense, and are probably true.

However, most people just don't deal with your situation. You have the "ideal" scenario where you have native deer, but basically managed like non native deer. They get maximum nutrition, maximum habitat, maximum ethics for harvest. I would say it would be rare for anyone else to have a setup like that.

It is awesome to see what you do with your population. I am jealous. I also know mine can move towards yours but will never reach it.

 

[bigbendmarine]

Circling back around to post #56 in this thread where I mentioned I harvested the buck that inspired my original opening post -- with the original post questioning how a handsome young 8 frame didn't show much change over the next few seasons.

In that post, I shared how he definitely had a pronounced limp, and that a review of game camera captures showed the limp had been a long-term issue getting progressively worse and not some short-lived battle wound. The photos in post #56 showed one leg having obvious swelling and with the buck's hooves turned at a fairly dramatic angle.

Soaked the legs in water until they were completely clean... and here's what was revealed. Start with a share of the healthy front leg...



Now for the other leg...



A side-by-side comparison...



The difference in the time it took to cold-water macerate the legs was kind of crazy. The healthy leg finished up at least a week or two before the malformed one. While the joints swiveled freely in the healthy leg, there was not only absolutely ZERO swiveling in the malformed one, but the bone seemed almost fused at the joint with what seemed like additional fibrous tendon-like connections around the impacted joint. There was no apparent cartilage between the malformed joints, and with so many spiny protrusions and zero buffer between the joints I can't even imagine how much it was hurting him... though he still was doing occasional chasing during rut until the end.

Looks like it could be osteosarcoma (bone cancer), but going back in videos he was doing lighter limping even two full years ago and other than the affected joint and limping, he looked and acted relatively healthy though by the end of each rut he looked a bit skinnier than some other bucks. Or maybe severe arthritis caused by a prior injury and / or infection to the joint? He was missing a dew claw on the malformed foot, so possibly could have had an injury that reached the bone and infected it.

Not sharing to say it was the key or only limiting factor (lots of good discussion on soils, genetics, etc in this thread) but did think it worth sharing as something that sure didn't help him reach his full potential.

 

[bigbendmarine]

Any veterinarians and / or bone docs on the forum, sure be VERY interested in what y'all think about the bone pics... and especially in light of the limping being evident for a very long time (at least 2 years).

 

[Brian662]

At times, nothing surprises me more than the resiliency of animals, particularly wild ones.
Great photo illustration, thanks for sharing!

 

[Telemark]

I don't think it was cancer. I'd say an old infection, possibly from an injured dew claw.

 

[Mortenson]

View attachment 48656

Video by Skip Sligh made me think of this post.

 

[Baker]

Video by Skip Sligh made me think of this post.

Great video . I don't know this guy but generally agree with him completely that all in all 7 or 8 tends to be the sweet spot. One thing I notice is that he shows a lot of bucks he's killed that made giant leaps from 6 to 7. We see that also. Big question remains though what would have happened at 8 or older if not shot at 7? Don't blame him though he's growing some studs!

 

[Mortenson]

He owns Iowa Whitetail forums. Think he grew up in MI and sold pharma drugs, moved to IA for the deer, bought smaller farms, flipped them into a big thousand plus acre home farm. Good question, but in IA's climate, wouldn't you assume he's thinking bucks beyond age 8 would generally decline?

 

[SwampCat]

It is interesting that in my area - piney woods of southern Arkansas - I see - in general - antlers starting to go down hill at about age 5. Typically, losing a point or two. Not always the case - but n general. Our Game and Fish biological data also shows this - as 5 year old and older bucks have a very slight decrease in average B&C score from age 4 to 5.

This is not true any any other geographic zone in our state - with the rest of the zones showing antler gains at age 5 and older. I have wondered if it is dependant upon the nutritional quality of the vegetation, soils, etc. Maybe in poor nutritional areas, bucks dont maintain antler improvements as late in life as areas with better quality nutrition available.

 

[BenAllgood]

It is interesting that in my area - piney woods of southern Arkansas - I see - in general - antlers starting to go down hill at about age 5. Typically, losing a point or two. Not always the case - but n general. Our Game and Fish biological data also shows this - as 5 year old and older bucks have a very slight decrease in average B&C score from age 4 to 5.

This is not true any any other geographic zone in our state - with the rest of the zones showing antler gains at age 5 and older. I have wondered if it is dependant upon the nutritional quality of the vegetation, soils, etc. Maybe in poor nutritional areas, bucks dont maintain antler improvements as late in life as areas with better quality nutrition available.

I would imagine stress has a lot to do with lifespans in different areas. Nutritional stress is probably a big one. I know in pens, lifespans tend to be longer. It stands to reason in areas with less stress factors in general, lifespans would be longer. Along with nutritional stress, there's various others that can affect an animal's life and expressed characteristics.

 

[Brian662]

Video by Skip Sligh made me think of this post.

Results may vary, that is for sure. Very impressive wall that Skip has there, wish everywhere was like Southern Iowa.

 

[Mtyhunter]

It seems perfectly logical that a long term wound like that would cause that deer's resources to commit to healing the wound, that stress leaving less resource for antler growth.
I've had discussions with some game managers and biologists, and the way I took what I've been told, dirt does matter in regards to antler growth. Was told that the sandy loam type soils, which is what Oklahoma primarily has, has issues with the nutrients being washed out or filters down thru the porous soil easily, which in turn makes the forage not as nutritious. Good agriculture could offset the loss and turn the soil into something better, hence healthier deer with bigger racks.
I knew that certain areas w/ agriculture had heavier bucks for sure, but some rocky areas with a shallow bed of dirt and no ag was known for big racks. I really wanted to know what mineral supplements the game managers were feeding their bucks to make the antler growth, and how that related to the natural minerals or whatever in the soils, but never got a straight answer other than "the dirt makes a difference". Seemed like it was a trade secret, lol.