Aging Jawbones.....frustration

[pass-thru]

Sometimes it can be very frustrating trying to age a deer by the jawbone. I pulled the jawbones off of a couple of bucks taken in the early season and they have me pulling my hair out.

The first one looks like a classic 2 year old at first glance. The last cusp of the back molar is concave. The last 2 molars are sharp with very little wear, however with more wear than some 2 year olds I have seen from early season. However on the first molar the dentine is slightly wider than the enamel?! Giving the entire jawbone as a whole, I lean toward 2.5.

The other jawbone has me stumped. The last cusp of the third molar is worn completely flat. The second and third molars have some wear and are no longer what I would consider sharp, but on the wear is still very light and they are close to sharp....dentine is distinct but considerably narrower than enamel. The stumper is the first molar the dentine is at most as wide as the enamel, maybe even narrower.

Both of the bucks were heavy in body.

Any thoughts on this? Sorry I don't have pics.

 

[BSK]

I would have to have them in hand to help.

 

[JB1230]

I have a measuring tool that gives me exact age..takes about 3 seconds once I have lower jawbone out..my tool goes from 1.5 yrs 8.5yrs. Zero guesswork..it is very precise.

this is one I have.. http://deeragingtool.com/

 

[Baxter83]

I have a measuring tool that gives me exact age..takes about 3 seconds once I have lower jawbone out..my tool goes from 1.5 yrs 8.5yrs. Zero guesswork..it is very precise.

this is one I have.. http://deeragingtool.com/

That's pretty much identical to the ones we use.... Pretty good tool!

 

[dmitchell28]

If you could post some pictures of the jaws, I could age it for your and pretty confidently get it close if not right. Do check in stations every year.

 

[Football Hunter]

Good luck.

 

[BigGameGuy]

I have a measuring tool that gives me exact age..takes about 3 seconds once I have lower jawbone out..my tool goes from 1.5 yrs 8.5yrs. Zero guesswork..it is very precise.

this is one I have.. http://deeragingtool.com/

I don't want to take anything away from your suggestion but I was actually pretty disappointed in that aging tool. I don't think it looks very similar to real jawbones, however, it you find it useful that's great.

There is nothing better than having someone with the skills show you how to age a jawbone in hand. Experience is key.

And don't forget...aging is an art and not a science. Nothing with the Severinghaus method is exact.

 

[BSK]

I have a measuring tool that gives me exact age..takes about 3 seconds once I have lower jawbone out..my tool goes from 1.5 yrs 8.5yrs. Zero guesswork..it is very precise.

this is one I have.. http://deeragingtool.com/

I don't want to take anything away from your suggestion but I was actually pretty disappointed in that aging tool. I don't think it looks very similar to real jawbones, however, it you find it useful that's great.

I agree. I don't think they are realistic at all.

 

[dmitchell28]

I have a measuring tool that gives me exact age..takes about 3 seconds once I have lower jawbone out..my tool goes from 1.5 yrs 8.5yrs. Zero guesswork..it is very precise.

this is one I have.. http://deeragingtool.com/

I don't want to take anything away from your suggestion but I was actually pretty disappointed in that aging tool. I don't think it looks very similar to real jawbones, however, it you find it useful that's great.

There is nothing better than having someone with the skills show you how to age a jawbone in hand. Experience is key.

And don't forget...aging is an art and not a science. Nothing with the Severinghaus method is exact.

I was actually told this, this week to be exact, and Im sure you know by who..and he is right, it is a art. Its more about what you see and interpret than a true science.

 

[dmitchell28]

will be getting some more practice this saturday!

 

[BigGameGuy]

I was actually told this, this week to be exact, and Im sure you know by who..and he is right, it is a art. Its more about what you see and interpret than a true science.

Don't listen to Ben...he's clueless! :D

 

[dmitchell28]

lol...hes a pretty good guy, you missed all the fun, he showed us how to perform the sampling..in the parking lot..LOL

 

[Anonymous]

I like looking at body conformation the best. I've tried it both ways with both deer and various types of livestock. Tooth erosion can be largely dependent on the food, habitat, and the habits of an individual animal. Not saying that either way is fool proof, but I just prefer to hoof age them. Judging livestock is great practice because you can look at the papers to see if you're right or not.
Oh yeah, if you handle them enough, you can learn to break ties between age groups by the thickness of the skins and/or the "A" measurement for taxidermy forms.

 

[BSK]

I was actually told this, this week to be exact, and Im sure you know by who..and he is right, it is a art. Its more about what you see and interpret than a true science.

Don't listen to Ben...he's clueless! :D

I second that! ;)

 

[BSK]

I like looking at body conformation the best. I've tried it both ways with both deer and various types of livestock. Tooth erosion can be largely dependent on the food, habitat, and the habits of an individual animal. Not saying that either way is fool proof, but I just prefer to hoof age them. Judging livestock is great practice because you can look at the papers to see if you're right or not.
Oh yeah, if you handle them enough, you can learn to break ties between age groups by the thickness of the skins and/or the "A" measurement for taxidermy forms.

The only poblem with that is aging a dead buck! For me they lose all normal conformation once they're dead.

 

[BSK]

One of the things Mick Hellickson (head biologist of the King Rnach in TX) found in his tooth-aging study (using known age ear-tagged deer) was that the Severinghaus method rarely over-aged a deer, but often under-aged them, and this under-aging grew worse the older the deer was. If I remember the data correctly, by the time toothwear indicated 3 1/2 years old, 50% of deer were actually a year older than that. At toothwear of 4 1/2, 75% were actually a year old and a few two years older. At 5 1/2 toothwear, all of the deer were actually older and half were two years older.

In my opinion, once you get past yearling age, all toothwear ages should be considered mimimum ages, especially with the oldest deer.

 

[Anonymous]

One of the things Mick Hellickson (head biologist of the King Rnach in TX) found in his tooth-aging study (using known age ear-tagged deer) was that the Severinghaus method rarely over-aged a deer, but often under-aged them, and this under-aging grew worse the older the deer was. If I remember the data correctly, by the time toothwear indicated 3 1/2 years old, 50% of deer were actually a year older than that. At toothwear of 4 1/2, 75% were actually a year old and a few two years older. At 5 1/2 toothwear, all of the deer were actually older and half were two years older.

In my opinion, once you get past yearling age, all toothwear ages should be considered mimimum ages, especially with the oldest deer.

I can agree with that 100%. I once aged a cow that I would have sworn was 7 years old, but the farmer had papers that said she was 14. That happens a lot with stock that has been raised on good pasture. Stock that has had to scrounge for food usually had much more tooth erosion. I've found that the same is true for deer that were killed in similar habitats.

 

[Anonymous]

I like looking at body conformation the best. I've tried it both ways with both deer and various types of livestock. Tooth erosion can be largely dependent on the food, habitat, and the habits of an individual animal. Not saying that either way is fool proof, but I just prefer to hoof age them. Judging livestock is great practice because you can look at the papers to see if you're right or not.
Oh yeah, if you handle them enough, you can learn to break ties between age groups by the thickness of the skins and/or the "A" measurement for taxidermy forms.

The only poblem with that is aging a dead buck! For me they lose all normal conformation once they're dead.

I think they lose some, but there are still key traits that remain. I can personally still do better estimating the age by looking at the body. I'm not knocking anyone who prefers the jawbone method. I think it's more of my personal preference.

 

[BSK]

I like looking at body conformation the best. I've tried it both ways with both deer and various types of livestock. Tooth erosion can be largely dependent on the food, habitat, and the habits of an individual animal. Not saying that either way is fool proof, but I just prefer to hoof age them. Judging livestock is great practice because you can look at the papers to see if you're right or not.
Oh yeah, if you handle them enough, you can learn to break ties between age groups by the thickness of the skins and/or the "A" measurement for taxidermy forms.

The only poblem with that is aging a dead buck! For me they lose all normal conformation once they're dead.

I think they lose some, but there are still key traits that remain. I can personally still do better estimating the age by looking at the body. I'm not knocking anyone who prefers the jawbone method. I think it's more of my personal preference.

I'm OK at aging on the hoof (I run 82% accuracy), but I can't age squat once they're dead.