Another Age?

TX300mag

TX300mag

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2002
Messages
12,747
Location
Crosby, TX
4f31d0028d3b188e2f026dce71bdcb9d.jpg
34575e54dcdd26c2da189913b062758b.jpg
a20f0dca37091e2c492bbd338251b73b.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
M

megalomaniac

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
11,574
Location
Mississippi
textbook answer and most biologists would age this deer at 3.5;

That being said, having pulled numerous jawbones from deer on my farms that I knew the ages of from successive years of trail camera photos, I would age that deer as 4.5 on my farms. For whatever reason, my local deer just don't show as much wear for age as other locales (prob diet related). If there is any significant wear on M2 (not necessarily dentine classically wider than the enamel), the deer is 4.5. This is where knowing your local hunting area comes in handy.
 
T

TheLBLman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2002
Messages
31,986
Location
Knoxville-Dover-Union City, TN
megalomaniac":2hhqbr2z said:
textbook answer and most biologists would age this deer at 3.5;

That being said, having pulled numerous jawbones from deer on my farms that I knew the ages of from successive years of trail camera photos, I would age that deer as 4.5 on my farms. For whatever reason, my local deer just don't show as much wear for age as other locales (prob diet related). If there is any significant wear on M2 (not necessarily dentine classically wider than the enamel), the deer is 4.5. This is where knowing your local hunting area comes in handy.

Agree and relate to everything Megalomaniac just said.

However, sometimes it boils down to whether the goal is to achieve good trend data or absolute age data.
Knowing a particular buck is 4 1/2, but the method of aging says 3 1/2, to maintain the integrity of the trend data, 3 1/2 should be recorded.
But that doesn't mean a hunter should be penalized for shooting a 3 1/2 yr-old buck when the buck in question is absolutely known to be 4 1/2.
 
Andy S.

Andy S.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 1999
Messages
21,668
Location
Atoka, TN
TheLBLman":100y04ze said:
Knowing a particular buck is 4 1/2, but the method of aging says 3 1/2, to maintain the integrity of the trend data, 3 1/2 should be recorded.
You are going to have to explain this one to me. For the life of me, I cannot wrap my head around recording an age that you KNOW is incorrect.

Wouldn't all ages after 3.5 require a "+" after it? If so, isn't recording 3.5+ about the same as 4.5+ for trend data for most fair chase hunting clubs, especially in TN?

I would say study the wear of the jawbone a little better and learn to more accurately age the jawbones for your area. What say you?
 
Andy S.

Andy S.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 1999
Messages
21,668
Location
Atoka, TN
megalomaniac":1w108zvs said:
For whatever reason, my local deer just don't show as much wear for age as other locales ........
I've seen this hold true for SEVERAL bucks at Ames over the year, thus why I am fairly quick to go a year older than most on TR&W method. Also, if you take the time to research the Severinghaus method and the accuracy of a lot of biologists over the last 50 years, you will see that most of those "in the know" consistently underage deer 4.5+ by the TR&W method. There you have it, my basis for going 4.5 on this one jawbone. :tu:
 
T

TheLBLman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2002
Messages
31,986
Location
Knoxville-Dover-Union City, TN
Andy S.":2rxp0buf said:
TheLBLman":2rxp0buf said:
Knowing a particular buck is 4 1/2, but the method of aging says 3 1/2, to maintain the integrity of the trend data, 3 1/2 should be recorded.
You are going to have to explain this one to me. For the life of me, I cannot wrap my head around recording an age that you KNOW is incorrect.

Wouldn't all ages after 3.5 require a "+" after it? If so, isn't recording 3.5+ about the same as 4.5+ for trend data for most fair chase hunting clubs, especially in TN?

I would say study the wear of the jawbone a little better and learn to more accurately age the jawbones for your area. What say you?
I agree we should have an "or older" after any estimated age,
as the guessed age should be the minimum age of very high probability --- and that is how it's usually done.

What I was talking about particularly applied to Ames.
They need to maintain the integrity of their aging method(s).
Habitually seeing that they are under-estimating the ages is reason to work on fine-tuning the process (not sure we're disagreeing on much if anything).

But if that Ames aging process labels a particular buck in the category of "3 1/2 or older",
they should not change that to "4 1/2 or older" because a hunter presents proof via some other process that the buck has high probability of being 4 1/2 or older.

However, I also don't think that hunter should be fined for shooting an under-aged buck either.
This could be easily resolved by a note in the data stating why the buck was recorded as a 3 1/2 or older, even though evidence was presented he was 4 1/2 or older, and that was the reason the hunter's fine was waived.
 
TX300mag

TX300mag

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2002
Messages
12,747
Location
Crosby, TX
Thanks for the discussion, I always learn a lot from you guys.

The crests on molars were worn just BARELY enough IMO, but the visible dentine was definitely indicative of 4.5 to me. The back molar showed enough slope to go 4.5. The landowner also aged at 4.5 so that's what he submitted to the state.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Similar threads

RobbyW
Replies
1
Views
284
Andy S.
Andy S.
H
Replies
11
Views
830
in the dog house
I
myboomisdoom
Replies
2
Views
234
B
T
Replies
13
Views
342
gary66
G
R
Replies
9
Views
262
Winchester
W
Top