Thoughts on culling bucks with poor genetic potential.

[omicron1792]

Um.... It's kinda exactly what you said...

The longer Bill lets people like you on the board the worse it will be. Didn’t you get enough of a lesson last thread you tried to run roughshod through.

You literally posted a thread complaining of your neighbors hunting techniques. Then you blasted people for worrying about others hunting technique.

I have never seen you post one thing constructive on this board. Must be sad.

 

[roymunson]

I agree that what you can control is age and to some degree nutrition. I think someone hit on it earlier that the DOE's nutrition from conception plays a huge role until the fawn drops.

I listened to a podcast where they took southern deer and midwest deer and penned them and within 2 generations of the same feed, the deer were indistinguishable from each other. Corn and beans grow better bucks than mountain browse in virginia. They mentioned something about the does with marginal nutrition genetically passing to their offspring to put all their energy into body size for survival. Where as when nutrition is there for a few generations, there is a genetic switch that is flipped and the fawns are genetically told "there's enough food to sustain you, go ahead and put energy into antlers"

I think MeatEater had that podcast years back.

 

[Turkish]

I agree that what you can control is age and to some degree nutrition. I think someone hit on it earlier that the DOE's nutrition from conception plays a huge role until the fawn drops.

I listened to a podcast where they took southern deer and midwest deer and penned them and within 2 generations of the same feed, the deer were indistinguishable from each other. Corn and beans grow better bucks than mountain browse in virginia. They mentioned something about the does with marginal nutrition genetically passing to their offspring to put all their energy into body size for survival. Where as when nutrition is there for a few generations, there is a genetic switch that is flipped and the fawns are genetically told "there's enough food to sustain you, go ahead and put energy into antlers"

I think MeatEater had that podcast years back.

You describe a pretty influential study that MSU deer lab did a number of years back. But they used deer from distinctly different areas of the state of MS. It was what stopped me from caring, worrying, thinking about genetics at all, other than epigenetics.

 

[Tree Spud]

I think there are so many variables in a wild free ranging deer herd that attempting to control and manage the herd, is a bit like thinking you have a system to win at the Powerball lottery. Below are a number of things that impact health of deer, both does & bucks.
- Genetics
- Nutrition
- Soil & nutrients
- Weather & impact on natural vegetation
- Rut mortality & recovery
- Predation
- Hunting pressure (culture of what gets shot)
- Buck dispersal/herd dispersal
- Buck rut roaming beyond normal range
- Disease & stress
- Ag Tags (farmland damage tags where deer are shot in spring)
- Whitetail species in your region (there are 7 in North America)

Give some thought to this ... if you want to selectively shoot 8 pointers that are 2.5 & 3.5 years old to manage for better antler size, but 10-15 neighbors around you are shooting young basket 9 & 10 pointers, spikes, etc., who is having a greater impact?

Personally I think genetics come first as you have to have potential for large racks.. Nutrition & age then helps to exploit that potential.

 

[omicron1792]

I think there are so many variables in a wild free ranging deer herd that attempting to control and manage the herd, is a bit like thinking you have a system to win at the Powerball lottery. elow are a number of things that impact health of deer, both does & bucks.
- Genetics
- Nutrition
- Soil & nutrients
- Weather & impact on natural vegetation
- Rut mortality & recovery
- Predation
- Hunting pressure (culture of what gets shot)
- Buck dispersal/herd dispersal
- Buck rut roaming beyond normal range
- Disease & stress
- Ag Tags (farmland damage tags where deer are shot in spring)
- Whitetail species in your region (there are 7 in North America)

Give some thought to this ... if you want to selectively shoot 8 pointers that are 2.5 & 3.5 years old to manage for better antler size, but 10-15 neighbors around you are shooting young basket 9 & 10 pointers, spikes, etc., who is having a greater impact?

Personally I think genetics come first as you have to have potential for large racks.. Nutrition & age then helps to exploit that potential.

Best bet for me is to not shoot the ones with good potential, and keep a great habitat to keep them and the does around and happy. If one makes it through rut then I’ve done good.

Also notice I haven’t taken the smaller less gifted bucks. It was just a question!

 

[SwampCat]

I personally think trigger control and age - comes first. You will get bigger bucks, quicker, doing this than anything else. It goes without saying, getting the neighbors to buy in might be a problem. Nutrition would be next. But as someone on this forum once questioned to me - when feeding protein on 350 acres - do you want to supply bigger bucks for you neighbors to shoot? He is 100% right - you just have to hope you get a piece of your own pie. I have gradually seen an increase in both the number of quality bucks - and while this is directly related to putting age on them - I also mean the average size of a quality buck is larger than is was 15 years ago. I think this relates more to numbers of folks feeding deer than it does to improving genetics.

 

[Telemark]

Except if the 10 pointers pass on more of their genes then the next generation will have genetics for larger antlers. It may be small but there is 100 percent chance what I say is true.

Go to any high fence and you will see breeding for larger antlers is very real. Even large open areas like baker show this. It’s not just he feeds them well. He watches and keeps large bucks in the population, and the more they pass on their genes the larger the next generation has the potential to be.

That's the difference. Enclosures vs. free ranging deer. You can't control where the deer move, so you can't control the gene pool on your property. If you had an enclosed population, you would be able to manipulate the gene pool.

You can cull individual deer to affect which individuals are on your property, but you can't affect the genetic makeup of a free ranging population.

 

[H20fwler]

With the size farms most of us have there is no way to try and truly manage a wild deer.
We can plant a huge variety of things to keep them fed well especially through winter, we can supplemental feed them year round if legal.
Passing on smaller bucks is a good thing and will most definitely let them grow to their potential, but neighbors or road hunters usually mess that up.
I don’t think the culling what we think are inferior deer really makes a difference in the big picture.
Having kids shoot what look like inferior deer is fine but I enjoy seeing kids shoot dandies too, I just want them to have fun.

The only deer I ever “cull” are deer that come by that are already wounded.

Shoot what you like, enjoy the whole experience.

 

[omicron1792]

Next thing yall are gonna try to convince me is aggressive doe harvest doesn’t help increase antler size.

 

[Brian662]

This is one thing I agree with Don Higgins on 100% and I believe he probably has a great background for since he ran a deer farm at one point -
Free range, you have little to zero effect and little likely means .1% impact. However, there is only room for so many deer on your farm, no matter the size. Shooting an inferior buck, especially when mature, should keep a spot available for a nice up and coming buck who may have gotten cast off with that inferior mature buck still around. Also, nutrients, browse, social stress, etc.

I don't think shooting an "inferior" buck when he's young is a wise decision. You never know what they can do with age behind them.

Overall Omi, I believe you're spinning your wheels on this one but that's the beauty of America and the beauty of owning your own ground, you can do whatever your heart desires.

 

[Brian662]

I listened to a podcast with Bronson Strickland a few months ago and he stated their science shows you need two full generations of deer to positively or negatively effect their genetics. I believe he said that would take about 7 years to come to fruition. Something to keep in mind when considering these topics.

 

[Brian662]

Next thing yall are gonna try to convince me is aggressive doe harvest doesn’t help increase antler size.

Winke shot every doe he could at one point on his Iowa farm and he said the years that followed were the best he'd ever had.

Years later he sold the farm stating it was in a state of decline. I don't think those two actions were related, I think they had multiple EHD outbreaks in a 5 year period.

 

[Tree Spud]

What i am taking away from this discussion, along with the folks who have real experience with controlled deer mgmt, is that you cannot predict future potential of antlers. This strongly suggests that culling is really guess work and may have adverse effects to producing large racked bucks.

This study done by Texas A&M has some interesting conclusions regarding genetics and predicting future antler size.
Texas deer Mgmt Study

 

[MN Slick]

Check out this book by the MSU Deer Lab guys, Strategic Harvest System: How to Break Through the Buck Management Glass Ceiling.

Cliff Notes: 33% of the bucks in a herd have below average antler potential, 33% have average, and 33% have above average. Do you best to identify those in the bottom 2/3rds as early as possible and kill them so your top end bucks have "room" to come up through the ranks. You are NOT taking them out to improve genetics.

 

[omicron1792]

All good points I believe.

I do think harvesting does to keep your ratio in balance can help. There seems to good evidence that the earlier born fawns do better long-term. also, your bucks will run themselves ragged if they have to breed too many does putting them behind in the next year’s antler development.

 

[Brian662]

All good points I believe.

I do think harvesting does to keep your ratio in balance can help. There seems to good evidence that the earlier born fawns do better long-term. also, your bucks will run themselves ragged if they have to breed too many does putting them behind in the next year’s antler development.

I've always been from the camp that less does creates a more intense rut because the bucks have to look harder to find estrous does. This would, in theory, cause the bucks to run themselves ragged. It also gives us as hunters more of that tongue dragging daylight movement we are looking for, which should make them easier to hunt.

IMO, less does equates to a balanced herd, which means more growth potential for antlers because nutrition isn't limited.

I've noticed on TV that some of these personalities don't do (or show) much doe harvest, especially in Iowa. You'll see them hunting a field with 100-200 deer in them. IMO that's why you rarely see them hunting the timber for the rut, they shoot most of their animals over food because during the rut the bucks can hop from one doe to the next without searching too hard. Who knows if that's what's actually going on, but it makes sense in my head.

 

[omicron1792]

I've always been from the camp that less does creates a more intense rut because the bucks have to look harder to find estrous does. This would, in theory, cause the bucks to run themselves ragged. It also gives us as hunters more of that tongue dragging daylight movement we are looking for, which should make them easier to hunt.

IMO, less does equates to a balanced herd, which means more growth potential for antlers because nutrition isn't limited.

I've noticed on TV that some of these personalities don't do (or show) much doe harvest, especially in Iowa. You'll see them hunting a field with 100-200 deer in them. IMO that's why you rarely see them hunting the timber for the rut, they shoot most of their animals over food because during the rut the bucks can hop from one doe to the next without searching too hard. Who knows if that's what's actually going on, but it makes sense in my head.

Science seems to be pretty clear on the doe harvest and time of gestation. My state wildlife biologist said first thing I should do is harvest as many does as I could.

I think it’s a mix of a lot of things. I think the simplest thing most people could do to help is harvest does or young deer for meat instead of a yearling buck. Meat tastes better too.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

I've always been from the camp that less does creates a more intense rut because the bucks have to look harder to find estrous does. This would, in theory, cause the bucks to run themselves ragged. It also gives us as hunters more of that tongue dragging daylight movement we are looking for, which should make them easier to hunt.

IMO, less does equates to a balanced herd, which means more growth potential for antlers because nutrition isn't limited.

I've noticed on TV that some of these personalities don't do (or show) much doe harvest, especially in Iowa. You'll see them hunting a field with 100-200 deer in them. IMO that's why you rarely see them hunting the timber for the rut, they shoot most of their animals over food because during the rut the bucks can hop from one doe to the next without searching too hard. Who knows if that's what's actually going on, but it makes sense in my head.

As a manager I’m on board with intense doe management. But…my neighbors can’t be bothered with actually managing so they don’t. Two things can happen when I do and they don’t POTENTIALLY.
I get immigration to fill the void of space and abundance of food. And the bucks using our properties spend more of the running over there since they have the does.
I don’t have all the answers to these and will continue to defer to properly manage using the science over just worrying about the hunt.

 

[omicron1792]

As a manager I’m on board with intense doe management. But…my neighbors can’t be bothered with actually managing so they don’t. Two things can happen when I do and they don’t POTENTIALLY.
I get immigration to fill the void of space and abundance of food. And the bucks using our properties spend more of the running over there since they have the does.
I don’t have all the answers to these and will continue to defer to properly manage using the science over just worrying about the hunt.

Why I harvest early or late. Of course you want does during rut. My bucks hate being around does until rut. I often see them running does off

 

[SwampCat]

My experience with shooting does. Our g&f professed the benefits of balancing the herd and I bought in. We shot our does down to a 1:1 buck doe ratio. Short Intense rut? It was so short, you might sleep through it. The bucks bred the does and were gone - looking for areas with higher doe density. It was pretty dramatic the drop off in buck pictures and sightings during the rut. They did come back a month later.

But that wasnt even near about the biggest effect. We ran out of deer after a couple of years. We still had some bucks - because they would move in - but doe and fawn sightings were really dropping. Our fawn recruitment numbers hover around .4 to .5 fawns per doe. We usually have about 15 to 18 bucks on my Sept camera survey. Even when we shot the does down. But most left during the rut. 15 to 18 does will not raise enough fawns to keep up with all annual mortality, at .4 fawns per doe, on my property. Our doe/fawn population continued to decline - even when we stopped shooting them.

I then concentrated my management activities on fawn production. I have to thank Sturgis - I read his “dont create a doe factory” and tried to do just the opposite. Typically, I planted my plots in wheat and maybe mowed them a couple times in summer. After reading about a doe factory, I started planting clover in all my plots - and spring time trapping and no doe killing. During this time, I had a few years of .6 fawns per doe. I now have a family doe herd living around each of these 1 or 2 acre summer clover plots. It worked.

It took a lot longer to get the does back than shoot them down. I now have more bucks on the property during the rut than any other time - I used to have fewer. I now have an average of 40 does instead of 15 or 18. Those 40 does produce 15 to 20 fawns instead of 6 or 8 like years past.

It turns out, a 1:1 buck:doe ratio does not necessarily relate to a balanced herd. I now look at a “balanced herd” differently than I used to. I now believe a balanced herd is very specific to any given area - and is more dependent on fawn recruitment numbers than probably anything else. The higher the fawn recruitment, the lower the number of does necessary to maintain the population - and vice versa. For my ground - and the way we hunt - and by we, I mean my hunters and the adjacent landowners - a 1 buck to 2.5 does is about right. We will generally kill a couple bucks and a doe or two - and that - combined with the higher rate of harvest by the neighbors, keeps the population fairly static now. For my purposes, I consider a balanced herd to be the numbers of bucks, does, and fawns a specific property needs to maintain a static deer population at realistic harvest levels without becoming over populated.