Management Buck

Ski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
4,515
Location
Coffee County
My thoughts on that term is it shouldnt be used outside of a high fence farm. Ymv

Let's say you own some acreage that you manage for enhanced habitat with the purpose of increasing your odds at killing a big buck. That's a pretty common scenario. No fences. You manage timber, fields, browse areas, water sources, and run a food plot schedule. That's time, effort, and money you're pouring into the place for one purpose, to hopefully kill big bucks.

When does begin to crowd out the bucks to the point that you begin seeing fewer & fewer, and the ones you see are younger & younger, then how do you get the property back on track? You kill does. By killing does you are freeing up space & food, and relieving social pressure. Kill enough does and big mature bucks feel attracted to your property again. Is that not a means of managing?

Now just like the does let's say you have one 5yr old 250lb slob with 115" rack hanging around all the time devouring everything in sight and chasing away any competition. He's not likely to get a bigger rack by letting him stay to 6yrs or 7yrs old. But for that entire time he'll be preventing you from having a big rack buck to hunt. Would you not want to get rid of him? And if you do, are you killing him because he gets you excited or are you doing it because he's wasting your time & money and you want to see other, better bucks on your property again?
 

BSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
80,895
Location
Nashville, TN
My thoughts on that term is it shouldnt be used outside of a high fence farm. Ymv
When it comes to harvest management strategies, everything depends on the size of the property and the hunters' goals. On smaller properties, where hunters are thrilled to kill any buck 3 1/2 or older, I agree, there is no cause for "management" bucks. However, on large properties (even unfenced ones) movement of bucks onto and off the property can be fairly limited, hence bucks may live much of their life primarily on the property. And if top-end antlers are the goal on this property, management bucks can play a role. And if bucks must reach a specific age AND antler criteria to qualify for harvest, management bucks can play a very important role.
 

Ski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
4,515
Location
Coffee County
Nice. Been watching this series myself

There's some interesting stuff for sure. One thing I noticed is that in none of their studies did a 3yr old have a 120" rack. Even in their controlled environment captive deer experiments with optimum nutrition and minimal stress, no 3yr old had a 120" rack. I can't count all the times I've heard people say they let a 130" 8pt walk because he was only 2yrs or 3yrs old. It always made me raise an eyebrow, and apparently MSU feels the same because they can't even create that scenario in a deer lab. I've always suspected a lot of folks either grossly underestimate buck ages or grossly overestimate rack scores, or both. These MSU studies are reinforcing that suspicion.
 

JCDEERMAN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
17,484
Location
NASHVILLE, TN
I've always suspected a lot of folks either grossly underestimate buck ages or grossly overestimate rack scores, or both. These MSU studies are reinforcing that suspicion.
Absolutely they do, on both accounts. Not sure why, other than ego I guess. I know some guys that are spot on with it though. A 130" deer is a big TN deer, especially for an 8pt.
 

Ski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
4,515
Location
Coffee County
Absolutely they do, on both accounts. Not sure why, other than ego I guess. I know some guys that are spot on with it though. A 130" deer is a big TN deer, especially for an 8pt.

@BSK once mentioned soil quality being a driving force behind certain areas having very small deer, both in body and rack. The discussion was about how certain areas of TN had such drastically different deer qualities. Much of what MSU is putting out in these videos really drives his point home. In just a few short miles the deer they're testing can be categorized into three distinct regions, and each region had specifically different characteristics and potentials, all dependent on the soil in their immediate respective area.

A third of the bucks they studied were from the delta region of MS, an area well reputed for big bucks. That sample of bucks taken from a big buck area, born & raised in a controlled environment with everything a deer could need, still didn't hit 120" at 3yrs of age. That makes one wonder just how old a 130"-140" deer in the wild actually is. He's not the 3yr old it seems a lot of people think.
 

BSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
80,895
Location
Nashville, TN
There's some interesting stuff for sure. One thing I noticed is that in none of their studies did a 3yr old have a 120" rack. Even in their controlled environment captive deer experiments with optimum nutrition and minimal stress, no 3yr old had a 120" rack. I can't count all the times I've heard people say they let a 130" 8pt walk because he was only 2yrs or 3yrs old. It always made me raise an eyebrow, and apparently MSU feels the same because they can't even create that scenario in a deer lab. I've always suspected a lot of folks either grossly underestimate buck ages or grossly overestimate rack scores, or both. These MSU studies are reinforcing that suspicion.
@BSK once mentioned soil quality being a driving force behind certain areas having very small deer, both in body and rack. The discussion was about how certain areas of TN had such drastically different deer qualities. Much of what MSU is putting out in these videos really drives his point home. In just a few short miles the deer they're testing can be categorized into three distinct regions, and each region had specifically different characteristics and potentials, all dependent on the soil in their immediate respective area.

A third of the bucks they studied were from the delta region of MS, an area well reputed for big bucks. That sample of bucks taken from a big buck area, born & raised in a controlled environment with everything a deer could need, still didn't hit 120" at 3yrs of age. That makes one wonder just how old a 130"-140" deer in the wild actually is. He's not the 3yr old it seems a lot of people think.
I think it's always a bit dangerous to compare Deep South whitetails to MidSouth and especially Midwestern whitetails. I've seen plenty of bucks field-aged, tooth-wear aged, and cementum annuli aged at 3 1/2 that grossed near 150. Now how accurate are those aging systems? Controlled studies suggest, "not great." But I'll have to see if I can find the raw data from the King Ranch in Texas. Using only known-age deer (ear-tagged as fawns), they found, like in my area of TN, 3 1/2 year-old bucks average only around 105, but they did have known-age individuals that pushed the 150 mark as 3 1/2 year-olds.
 

knightrider

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
10,615
Location
tn
There's some interesting stuff for sure. One thing I noticed is that in none of their studies did a 3yr old have a 120" rack. Even in their controlled environment captive deer experiments with optimum nutrition and minimal stress, no 3yr old had a 120" rack. I can't count all the times I've heard people say they let a 130" 8pt walk because he was only 2yrs or 3yrs old. It always made me raise an eyebrow, and apparently MSU feels the same because they can't even create that scenario in a deer lab. I've always suspected a lot of folks either grossly underestimate buck ages or grossly overestimate rack scores, or both. These MSU studies are reinforcing that suspicion.
Most but not all grossly missjudge score and age that i know, especially when you only get 10-15 seconds to judge a buck in most scenarios where we hunt. There was a time i was hung up on big antlers until i finally realized in my area it could be 10 years before a magical 150 ever came by. If i can kill a 3.5 - 5.5 year old 100 inch deer in these mountains im tickled!
 

Ski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
4,515
Location
Coffee County
I think it's always a bit dangerous to compare Deep South whitetails to MidSouth and especially Midwestern whitetails. I've seen plenty of bucks field-aged, tooth-wear aged, and cementum annuli aged at 3 1/2 that grossed near 150. Now how accurate are those aging systems? Controlled studies suggest, "not great." But I'll have to see if I can find the raw data from the King Ranch in Texas. Using only known-age deer (ear-tagged as fawns), they found, like in my area of TN, 3 1/2 year-old bucks average only around 105, but they did have known-age individuals that pushed the 150 mark as 3 1/2 year-olds.

Any idea how commonly one of the "big" 3yr olds occurred? I don't have the extent of data that you have, and certainly not the King Ranch. But with what limited info I have been able to keep, I don't think I've ever once personally seen or killed a 3yr old buck that would meet the 125" P&Y standard. That's with trail cam monitoring and hunting several OH, WI, and TN properties over roughly 10yrs. I've hunted Ohio my entire life and heard of such bucks but am not convinced I've actually seen any. Here in my area of TN I have been fortunate enough to kill most of the oldest, largest bucks I've been able to monitor. Four of them were for certain 5yrs minimum and only two of them busted 120" but just barely. To be quite honest I find it difficult to judge age age without having some history with the buck to know for sure, especially with these southern deer.
 

Ski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
4,515
Location
Coffee County
Most but not all grossly missjudge score and age that i know, especially when you only get 10-15 seconds to judge a buck in most scenarios where we hunt. There was a time i was hung up on big antlers until i finally realized in my area it could be 10 years before a magical 150 ever came by. If i can kill a 3.5 - 5.5 year old 100 inch deer in these mountains im tickled!

Agreed. And don't feel bad. Seeing a 150" buck around these parts would be as likely as seeing a unicorn, even on well managed ground.
 

BSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
80,895
Location
Nashville, TN
Any idea how commonly one of the "big" 3yr olds occurred?
They were statistical outliers. Just like the bottom-end 3 1/2s that gross 50-60. If I remember correctly, 50% of 3 1/2s fell within +/- 10 inches of 105.

Below is a 3 1/2 year-old buck that the previous year, as a 2 1/2, was passed up by hunters multiple times, including by myself. At 3 1/2 he hadn't added much. What would he score in these pictures as a 3 1/2? 50? 60? Bottom-end statistical outlier.
 

Attachments

  • Buck2223c.jpg
    Buck2223c.jpg
    45.6 KB · Views: 32
  • Buck2223f.jpg
    Buck2223f.jpg
    52 KB · Views: 34

BSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
80,895
Location
Nashville, TN
Using the same field-judging age techniques, here are two bucks I also believe to be 3 1/2 years old. The buck in the first two pictures scored 140 (I know because I killed him). The buck in the 3rd and 4th pictures I believe will score at least mid 140s.
 

Attachments

  • Buck2006k.jpg
    Buck2006k.jpg
    71.8 KB · Views: 44
  • Buck2006c.jpg
    Buck2006c.jpg
    60.7 KB · Views: 49
  • Buck2026d.jpg
    Buck2026d.jpg
    66.5 KB · Views: 40
  • Buck2026f.jpg
    Buck2026f.jpg
    56.9 KB · Views: 44

DoubleRidge

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
9,621
Location
Middle Tennessee
I understand the concept of a management (or cull) buck from a population control standpoint...but when hunter/managers use the term "cull" in an effort to try and control genetics I think they are mistaken....Even MSU deer lab studies say that in a wild deer herd it's practically impossible to influence genetics by killing a particular buck.
But I agree that killing a particular buck because he's a bully or to reduce the number of mouths to feed can have a benefit.
 

BSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
80,895
Location
Nashville, TN
But to agree with a point made by several, do hunters misjudge age and score? Oh heck yes! I'm guilty of it myself. I'll see certain characteristics on a rack and think, "Holy Moly that's a stud!" Until you put a tape on them!

I was chasing the below buck for two years. I really though he was going to seriously score. But what was he when I finally killed him as a 5 1/2 year-old? He grossed just 129. Had to remeasure and add up the score 4 times before I was convinced that's all he scored. But he's still my widest-racked buck at 23". I just thought he would score so much higher than that.
 

Attachments

  • buck1709g.jpg
    buck1709g.jpg
    321.8 KB · Views: 87
  • buck1709i.jpg
    buck1709i.jpg
    424.5 KB · Views: 63
  • buck1709j.jpg
    buck1709j.jpg
    265.7 KB · Views: 85
  • 2017Bryan1.jpg
    2017Bryan1.jpg
    135.3 KB · Views: 79

BSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
80,895
Location
Nashville, TN
I understand the concept of a management (or cull) buck from a population control standpoint...but when hunter/managers use the term "cull" in an effort to try and control genetics I think they are mistaken....Even MSU deer lab studies say that in a wild deer herd it's practically impossible to influence genetics by killing a particular buck.
But I agree that killing a particular buck because he's a bully or to reduce the number of mouths to feed can have a benefit.
And that's how I use the term "management buck." A management buck is a buck that will never be what the hunters want out of their management program. A perfect example is the 3 1/2 year-old buck I posted above as a bottom-end statistical outlier at 3 1/2. Odds are extremely low he's ever going to be a high-scoring buck. And I don't really care about removing a mouth from the environment. When I provide a club/landowner with a list of "management bucks" to add to their "hit list," it's because I'm trying to add harvest opportunities to a trophy management program that has few bucks on the target list. Basically, you've got a bunch of hunters chasing only a couple of mature/top-end bucks. Might as well give them a few more bucks to target, especially ones that would never make the target list otherwise. For me, "management bucks" are simply a way to provide more harvest opportunities in a very limited harvest opportunity setting without harming the results of the over-all management program.
 

Andy S.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 1999
Messages
23,617
Location
Atoka, TN
The buck in the first two pictures scored 140 (I know because I killed him).
As a 3.5 year old 10 point, with all up tines? If so, he had it ALL to really be something at 5.5 ASSUMING he would have lived and flourished, not got sick, not been hit by car, no pedicle injury, not shot by a hunter, etc, etc. Not throwing shade at you, just making the case that MOST of our statistical outliers "on the high side" that we all dream about seeing in the wild, are killed by a hunter as a top end 3.5 year old as they roam the woods in daylight during the rut. I shot a non-typical several years back while hunting on the ground. I could tell he had multiple up tines and some non-typical trash. I could not see his little neck and body. I shot as soon as he presented himself from a sapling thicket. 136" 2.5 year old. :eek: Another buck that had it ALL to really be something, but I ended that before he ever had the opportunity to express his potential.
 

Latest posts

Top