Growing Mature Bucks

[TheLBLman]

Since I've not seen this mentioned previously in this thread . . . . . .

"Healthy Fawns".

When you have excellent "herd health" with very healthy fawns (which I believe we're all trying to achieve here), many or most those fawns will come into their 1st estrous when they're only about 7 months old. This is commonly January, often February.

In turn, these very healthy fawns give birth as "yearling" does, but with birthdates about 2 months later than when most fawns are born. This phenomena is what is often behind our seeing "spotted" fawns in September & October (when most fawns have long since lost their spots).

But here's what then happens:

A high percentage of these healthy fawns' fawns, being "born late", totally mislead us with their 1st antler expressions. As 1 1/2-yr-old bucks, many of these will be spikes & little 4-pointers, APPEARING to have below average antler genetics, even when they may have way above average! They usually are still behind a bit even at 2 1/2 & 3 1/2, but can totally "catch up" on genetic expression by 4 1/2 & older.

It's typically counter-productive to "cull" these bucks because we "think" they are sub-par.

Even on intensely trophy managed ranches in Texas, most "culling" is not done until a buck in question reaches the age of 4 1/2, at which point they are often "sold" as "management" bucks.

As far as I'm concerned, the word "cull" shouldn't exist in TN
at least in regard to those outside a high fence and with small acreages.
It's basically just become an excuse word for shooting a buck instead of shooting a doe.

 

[BSK]

What worries me is the results of this year's drought and resulting poor health in many deer. We could see the ramifications from this for many years to come.

 

[TheLBLman]

What worries me is the results of this year's drought and resulting poor health in many deer.

What worries me as much is
the masses reading this thread who start "culling" young bucks because they think they're only "scrub" bucks with poor antler genetics.

 

[BSK]

What worries me as much is
the masses reading this thread who start "culling" young bucks because they think they're only "scrub" bucks with poor antler genetics.

I suspect anyone reading this forum has read the discussions on "culling" enough to realize it does nothing to improve the antler quality of the local population, and if done wrong, can be counterproductive.

However, on large-acreage properties being managed for top-end antlers, "management bucks" serve a purpose. They provide harvest opportunities where target animals may be very few and far between. Some hunters don't mind that kind of challenge - a group of hunters all competing for one or two top-end bucks. But the vast majority of hunters - despite what they think until they've tried it - won't find that kind of hunting appealing for long. Management bucks provide harvest opportunities to keep hunters hunting and give them an opportunity for harvest where few exist. Of course, solid science has to be used to determine what is a local management buck. Management bucks shouldn't make up a significant portion of the middle-aged cohorts. Often it is just 3-5 bucks with very, VERY low odds of ever becoming a true target animal at maturity.

 

[Lost Lake]

A growing number of studies have been conducted on this phenomenon. The basic problem/principle being studied is, when food resources are suddenly increased, why don't deer in the population immediately respond by growing bigger? The answer most likely lies in the little understood process of epigenetics. Epigenetics is the process by which life experiences alter the timing of gene expression during development. What it basically comes down to is life stresses can change how you develop as a fetus and as a young person. And because these stress-induced changes are tied to your chromosomes, they can be heritable (passed down from one generation to the next). They do not involve changes to your DNA, but are bits of amino acid chain "stuck" to your DNA that alter when and for how long genes turn on and off during development, which can have life-long ramifications.

In practical terms, what this means is does that have been nutritionally stressed at some point in their lives can later produce offspring that cannot develop to their genetic potential their entire lives. It may take a generation or two to get rid of this epigenetic limiter. In fact, this is most likely why most management programs don't see explosive results once a property's resources are dramatically improved. What is usually seen is a slow progression of better body and antler size over a decade or more. In reality, the entire generation of deer that lived under the poor resource conditions have to die off and be replaced by fawns born under the good conditions, and then THEY produce a set of offspring that no longer have the epigenetic limiter in their system.

Very interesting!

 

[Ski]

What worries me as much is
the masses reading this thread who start "culling" young bucks because they think they're only "scrub" bucks with poor antler genetics.

Easy there killer. Who are these "masses" you speak of? I would think folks who read this sub forum have enough reading comprehension to make reasonable, thoughtful decisions on how to work and hunt their own property. They're reading this because it's a topic they're interested in, and this thread in this forum is likely not the only resource of information they tap. I think it's safe to assume you can give benefit of doubt to these masses and trust that they'll make informed decisions regarding their ground.

 

[Ski]

I suspect anyone reading this forum has read the discussions on "culling" enough to realize it does nothing to improve the antler quality of the local population, and if done wrong, can be counterproductive.

However, on large-acreage properties being managed for top-end antlers, "management bucks" serve a purpose. They provide harvest opportunities where target animals may be very few and far between. Some hunters don't mind that kind of challenge - a group of hunters all competing for one or two top-end bucks. But the vast majority of hunters - despite what they think until they've tried it - won't find that kind of hunting appealing for long. Management bucks provide harvest opportunities to keep hunters hunting and give them an opportunity for harvest where few exist. Of course, solid science has to be used to determine what is a local management buck. Management bucks shouldn't make up a significant portion of the middle-aged cohorts. Often it is just 3-5 bucks with very, VERY low odds of ever becoming a true target animal at maturity.

Yeah I think there's a broad spectrum of land managers. We're not all the same. We each have different goals and approaches. I purposely target the oldest bucks in the area, preferably 5yr+, but I'm not so singular that I won't shoot a younger buck. If I do not have a buck I'm particularly interested in or don't think I have good odds of getting one I'm interested in, I'll absolutely shoot a younger rack buck. I do avoid bucks I'm excited to see what becomes of, but any other 2, 3,or 4yr old that steps out will get it. Not every buck I shoot is for the purpose of trophy. Many are because I enjoy it and I love eating venison. In my experience it doesn't have any noticeable negative impact on the quality of the hunting nor the quality of the bucks in the area.

I shot a 3yr old last year in TN. The year before I shot a 2yr old in OH. I was happy with both bucks. Although I do my best to work the habitat & enhance the hunting, I'm not about to not enjoy the hunting I currently have.

As for culls, I normally do not see the logic in it. I'm a firm believer that a mature buck can grow some strange, sticker & kicker racks. That stuff usually shows up on older bucks, so even a weird racked smaller buck can eventually grow something interesting. To me a cull is a nasty attitude doe who chases off everything except her offspring. I have shot deer because their attitude seems to disrupt and/or distress the other deer.

 

[Boll Weevil]

This has been good dialogue...thanks all for chiming in.

 

[Ski]

This has been good dialogue...thanks all for chiming in.

Agreed. I've learned some new things that I'll have to chew on and digest for awhile. Thanks yall.

 

[DeerCamp]

I'm fortunate to hunt a nice chunk of private ground that's not heavily pressured. Deer behave pretty normal compared to a TN WMA herd. They also have plenty to eat despite poor soil quality. In now my 3rd season on this piece, there's only been 3 bucks taken (all 2yr old 8 pointers). But there's certainly some mature bucks that live there just not huge racks. Of all the deer I've got on cam, none would break 130, maybe not 120. So what would you say is typical for TN deer, rack wise, once they reach 4? I killed a hefty buck that TWRA said was just 3yr and the rack barely broke 100 green scored. I just assumed it was an old buck with regressing antlers. So what's your thoughts? Should TN bucks average 110 to 120 at 4 year old? Or should we be seeing a P&Y buck annually if we're getting a handful of mature bucks.

QDMA is a good place to start.
The number one indicator of antler size is age. That's it. Period.

And high grading is a huge issue in states like Tennessee. A lot of folks have gotten to where they can pass a 110" 2 year old. But what about a 125" 3 year old?

A 3.5 YO has only reached 75-80% of their antler potential, So a 125 inch 3.5 yo has a very realistic potential of reaching 150" as a fully mature buck.
A 3.5YO buck is NOT a mature buck.

At 4.5 they have reached full body maturity size and now all those nutrients that have been building skeletal structure can now go straight to the antlers.

If you live in the delta region in TN, you've got a pretty good shot at producing high quality buck, but with the new CDW limits, it's going to be very hard.

Here in Henderson County, the average 3.5 year old buck is 100-110", so we can realistically expect that buck might eventually reach 125-140" at full maturity.

The outlier bucks that are 120-125" at 3.5 are maybe 10% (guess) of all bucks - not many people are passing that buck, so the total number of those bucks making it to full maturity is low. And if they do make it to full maturity, it's likely because they are the type of buck to not participate in the rut heavily, and probably don't travel a lot in comparison to other bucks.

In Oklahoma where I was last week, the deer are bigger on average, but the number one indicator is that a lot of deer out there are living to 4 and 5.

 

[DeerCamp]

As TheLBLman mentioned, be very careful about culling yearlings based on antler quality. Because they are so young, yearling buck antler development is based heavily on just one summer's food resources. Normally, we have a spike yearling incidence rate of only around 30% (30% of yearlings are spikes). This year, because of the drought, over 70% of our yearlings are spikes. If you started whacking spike yearlings, you would just about kill off the entire year's crop of young bucks.

Now if hunters want to add "mangement bucks" into the picture, I have no problem with that. For landowners that are managing for maximum antler quality I even recommend it. Bottom-end 2 1/2s and 3 1/2s are far less likely to ever be a top-end mature bucks, hence adding them to the "hit list" gives hunters more bucks to target (as the list of top-end mature bucks is usually quite short).

The below buck is an example. The first picture is a big fork-horn as a 2 1/2 year-old. The second picture is him as a 3 1/2 year-old. He's never going to be a top-end mature buck. Placing him on the "hit list" to give hunters another buck to shoot for makes sense. He's just "taking up space" and will never be what hunters want no matter how old he gets.

We've always operated on the assumption that a bucks antlers are based at least 50% on its mothers genetics, but some of the latest research shows that in some cases up to 90% of a bucks antler size comes from its mother.

It all depends on chromosomal gene placement.

 

[DeerCamp]

I have the opportunity to hunt a property in Madison county that by the nature of its location and restricted surroundings, has a really good chance of letting a buck get to 4.5+.

The first day I hunted it I killed an 11pt (4.5+yo) that went 143"
Two days later the other guy that hunts it killed a 9pt that went 145" (didn't age)

I am never, ever going to be convinced that Tennessee can't get close to resembling Kentucky because of soils or agriculture.

I am however, 100% convinced we will never get there because of the tag and season structure.

And as has been stated here before, it doesn't matter that most people don't kill 3 bucks.

What matters is that 1st buck they kill.

In Kentucky, boom and season is over - makes you really think about pulling the trigger. In Tennessee, boom and wish that antlered wasn't 1/day.

 

[DeerCamp]

I'll add one more to this - I dropped off a head for Euro 2 weeks ago and the guy had about 50 buck heads waiting in line to be done.

There were a couple in there that were pushing the 150s and 160s. They came from Madison county. But the vast majority of them appeared by head size to be 2.5.

The biggies were from guys he knew who have a couple thousand acres to hunt and intensively manage for older bucks.

Tennessee can grow huge bucks - but we can't grow old ones.

 

[BSK]

I am never, ever going to be convinced that Tennessee can't get close to resembling Kentucky because of soils or agriculture.

I am however, 100% convinced we will never get there because of the tag and season structure.

I couldn't disagree more. I've run camera censuses in western KY and I've seen nothing to indicate KY has an older buck age structure than much of western Middle TN. In fact, I would say western Middle TN is better age-wise. However, I have great data showing bucks in western KY grow much larger in body and antler per age-class than TN deer do.

 

[TheLBLman]

I couldn't disagree more. I've run camera censuses in western KY and I've seen nothing to indicate KY has an older buck age structure than much of western Middle TN. In fact, I would say western Middle TN is better age-wise. However, I have great data showing bucks in western KY grow much larger in body and antler per age-class than TN deer do.

My thoughts are somewhere between the two of yours.

BSK is correct about the KY soils allowing KY bucks to "express" more of their genetic potential, and especially do so at an earlier age. An "average" 2 1/2 & 3 1/2-yr-old KY buck is likely carrying @ 10" more antler than an "average" same buck in TN. This is mainly due KY (on a statewide basis) having better soils for growing antlers, than does TN. (Sure, pockets of TN have better soils than certain areas of KY.)

The differences in genetic "expression" may be less if we compare a 5 1/2-yr-old TN buck to a 5 1/2-yr-old KY buck (assuming same genetic antler potential at birth), but, the KY bucks are still going to have @ 5 to 10" of antler above the TN ones, on average, and mainly due to the soil differences.

The other big issue going against TN more is hunters' antler high grading in TN being worse than it is in KY. Even if the buck age structure in TN were about the same as KY's, this makes for a big difference in the size of our antlered bucks that survive to maturity.

Last but not least, our TN gun season is about twice as many days as KY's, and allows for exactly twice as many antlered bucks to be killed per hunter. THIS is the main reason our hunters' antler high-grading is so much worse than KY's.

So, there is a better chance of growing a larger antlered buck in KY than in TN.
But to what extent does an average hunter have to kill that better buck?
It's just a trade-off of pros & cons.
Twice as many gun-hunting days in TN (a benefit to the average hunter).

As to KY's 1-buck limit, it's much more popular with non-resident KY hunters than resident ones, many of whom think the grass is greener on the other side of the line in TN, where residents can kill 2 bucks, and have twice as long to hunt.

Of course, the most avid trophy buck bowhunters, especially those who hunt multiple states, are going to find more fault with TN's deer management (and yes, some of it is deserved).

The best news, is most avid deer hunters here in TN have the opportunity to hunt in KY, as well as other states that grow bigger bucks than TN.

 

[DeerCamp]

I couldn't disagree more. I've run camera censuses in western KY and I've seen nothing to indicate KY has an older buck age structure than much of western Middle TN. In fact, I would say western Middle TN is better age-wise. However, I have great data showing bucks in western KY grow much larger in body and antler per age-class than TN deer do.

I'm probably speaking more in absolutes than I should. Fair enough.

But specifically in some of the areas I hunt in West TN, the soil is pretty good and there are a lot of crops. When those deer hit 4.5 and 5.5 they are sometimes/often right on par with the deer I see come out of KY. Especially when, to LBLs point, that area hasn't been high graded to death by years to 2 and 3 buck limits.

However, one of has run cameras in Kentucky, and one hasn't, so I defer to your data!

 

[TheLBLman]

DeerCamp,
The deer you're seeing in TN are likely in one of the Top 10 (of 95) TN counties for quality soils.

There may be very little difference in the soils of TN's counties bordering the Mississippi River, and KY's counties bordering the Mississippi River. BUT, KY's are still at least marginally better than TNs.

 

[BSK]

There may be very little difference in the soils of TN's counties bordering the Mississippi River, and KY's counties bordering the Mississippi River. BUT, KY's are still at least marginally better than TNs.

The bucks I see in western KY bordering the MS and Ohio Rivers are crazy big. I've seen more than one 3 1/2 year-old approaching 170. I've never seen a 3 1/2 year-old in western Middle TN approaching 170. Body weights are also about 30 lbs heavier per age-class in western KY than western Middle TN.

Of course, there's a VAST difference in soil quality between the river bottoms of Western KY and the ridge-and-hollow hardwoods of western Middle TN.

 

[TheLBLman]

Of course, there's a VAST difference in soil quality between the river bottoms of Western KY and the ridge-and-hollow hardwoods of western Middle TN.

Of course.
There is also a VAST difference in soil quality between the river bottoms of Western KY and mountain hardwoods of East KY.

But I don't believe there's so much difference between the soils on those far West TN counties bordering the Mississippi River vs. West KY river bordering counties.

The bigger difference than soils (between those TN counties vs KY counties bordering the same River) is antler high grading by TN hunters. This is mainly resulting from the differences in deer hunting regulations, and am not saying TN is wrong nor KY correct, just pointing out that hunting regulations do make differences, often trumping the differences in soils.

There is also a difference in hunter "mindset" when comparing hunting in TN vs. KY. The same TN hunter tends to raise his shooter buck standards when he hunts KY. But again, this is in part due to differences in the hunting regs. Those who live & hunt anywhere along the TN-KY state line see this, even in Middle & East TN, not just far West TN.

 

[DeerCamp]

Of course.
There is also a VAST difference in soil quality between the river bottoms of Western KY and mountain hardwoods of East KY.

But I don't believe there's so much difference between the soils on those far West TN counties bordering the Mississippi River vs. West KY river bordering counties.

The bigger difference than soils (between those TN counties vs KY counties bordering the same River) is antler high grading by TN hunters. This is mainly resulting from the differences in deer hunting regulations, and am not saying TN is wrong nor KY correct, just pointing out that hunting regulations do make differences, often trumping the differences in soils.

There is also a difference in hunter "mindset" when comparing hunting in TN vs. KY. The same TN hunter tends to raise his shooter buck standards when he hunts KY. But again, this is in part due to differences in the hunting regs. Those who live & hunt anywhere along the TN-KY state line see this, even in Middle & East TN, not just far West TN.

Yeah, it's a question of causation. Like I said earlier, any time BSK disagrees with something I believe, it gives me serious pause to reconsider.

But I still believe the 3 buck limit and the history of harvests in TN suggests we have probably contributed our fair share to high grading.

Somewhere around 2007 I killed a buck in Benton County that was in the 115-120" range - Now, I'm not going to say that this deer was a yearling, but the deer's live weight was 110 lbs (They weighed it at the corner store there on hwy 70). His pictures look like he is a yearling. He was a tiny, tiny deer.

No telling what that buck would have been in 3-4 years.

But he was running around like a goofball chasing does too early - just like a yearling. No caution at all. I definitely would pass that deer now.