There is always the exception, you manage for the top exception that happens to be the bottom end exception.
But was he always a spike?

Like saying no 8pt goes to a ten and no ten has ever gone down to 8 or 9

Again show me the pictures of high numbers of spikes born on a ranch that turned into 170+ bucks.

Lol

Same circular agruement.. I'm going back to work

Antler size to me is more about the location of the ranch. In my area and the Hill Country a 130's type deer is consider really big. In South Texas that would be a management buck or even a cull on many ranches. Still that same spike on any ranch will never be in that group of bucks either of call "big" in any number. Just won't be there ever.

I am going out to kill that one and only spike I have now

I long enough to revive this.

Typically, a 1.5 yo spike is going to grow bigger antlers.

For the average joe on a lease, it is better to let a spike mature and has a decent chance of being a 125+ deer in the future. A "nice" deer to most people's standards.

However if you are managing for trophy deer, it is probably a good choice to take them out. It is all about standards and management goals. Heck, there are ranches that are killing 150" "culls" with bolt guns after captured with helicopters.

Some TPWD research out of 144 deer:

"In this study, antler production of fork-antlered yearlings and spike-antlered yearlings were compared annually until 4 years of age. Fork-antlered deer produced almost twice the antler mass each year as their spike-antlered counterpart."

https://tpwd.texas.gov/huntwild/hunt/wma/wildlife_management/kerr_wma/research/antlered_yearlings/

Well I certainly opened a can of worms with this one. A few websites suggest that "many" late born spikes can/do pass other branched antler deer of the same fawn crop when tagged research was conducted. I'll happily high fence my property and conduct all the proper research if some wants to pay my salary for the next 5 years

you don't have to leave the spikes to have 125" deer...... they will be there regardless, I lease my ranch and believe me hunters will not stay and pay for 125" deer, at least not for long. 125" deer cause tons of headaches, bellyache'n and hunter turnover ever 3-4 years. This leads to apathy and "screw it I wont be back next year" so down goes your 135" 2.5/3.5 year old and so on............

its just not worth the exception to let them walk and along with the allotment of does to be taken every year ALL spikes must go as well as the junk off the mature end. Its all about protecting the best and the middle aged deer to maturity for our ranch

happy hunting

Bet he killed a few booners in his fighting days

You should the sheriff was his father.

Spike I am your father...

And elk, mountain lions, yotes, grizzly bears and wolves

No doubt

Should of darted him and let him be the security force

I think any spike can grow up to be a basket rack seven or eight point in his prime. I think you need to afford him every opportunity to fulfill his potential and let him have the benefit of all the feed and mineral you can give him to maximize his potential.

Then let him die of old age because you won't want to waste a tag on him.

It's not hard to look at 3-4 yearling bucks standing together and tell if they are the same size or not. It's also not hard to tell which of them already has better headgear. Why should I continue to feed a spike with < 10-20" of antler when I've got other yearlings in the 50-80" range?

We've birthed and raised nearly 3000 sheep in the last 30 years, and about 3000 goats. I know from experience that if an animal gets knocked when young (runt/bad genetics, bad mother, weak twin, got sick, etc.) they almost NEVER catch up to the rest of the group. Does one every now and then? Sure, I'm sure it happens. Just as I'm sure some 8pt yearlings never get past 120". But we're talking odds, and the odds are with the better young example.

This "article" has little to no value. The guy has no clue as to whether those pics are the same deer.

A yearling is a yeaing... It's a deer that has an immature skeleton and muscle system that's still 3 years away to becoming mature and 5 years away from peak maturity. It's a baby and shows you nothing more then if it's a male and ate/suckled well or didn't eat/suckle well first year of its life. Nothing more nothing less

If you can't support extra yearlings to take a chance your doomed from the start.

Those runts never catch up but yet have the same genetic potential as thier siblings that were conceived earlier?

You raise a 100 sheep( 1-40:50 cover ratio--so 1 ram and 40-50 ewes) a year and how many of those 40 lambs do retain to full maturity? What do you hold back 0-5 replacements ewes a year. So not many.. Hardly enough to pit one against the other over the full life cycle




With everything said...Even then the biggest body frame at maturity doesn't equal the biggest rack and vice versa So why would you cull off body frame especially in immature age classes

Seemed pretty confidant being its a game farm with very light densities... So you are calling they guy publishing a liar?

Liar...not sure about that. No way to prove its same deer YES.

The article has made a lot of traction by him saying it is the same deer and received lots of publicity for him. Saying its "possibly" the same deer wouldn't have received as much traction for sure.

You make your own conclusions I guess.

I wouldn't say he is a "liar", he probably thinks he is right

Willing to bet it's the same deer. they are pretty light denisitied up there...very light actually. Question should be is that the largest buck ever seen in the area.

Just like your place you pushed the 200 mark so what's really big to you 140,150,160,170 etc

Even then you can go through this forum and find a tagged spike buck in stx that broke 150 on free range. Just happened to be one of the bucks in the study that actually made it to maturity.

95 percent of the guys on this forum don't have the resources, tag and acerage wise for any kind of culling to be effective via buck or buck numbers... They have better chance at pushing ratio and cc via the shear numbers of doe tags they have. You are like I was in Oklahoma, blessed with light densities... Only two ways to go with light densities make them lighter via culling what you feel is the bottom immediately or let age classes get more established then cull out or do as I did and let them all get to 5.5 or better.

Huge chunk of the guys on this forum have never broke 140, so is it better to advise them to cull into trophies or ease up on the bucks, use their tags on does and only hunt 5.5 or older bucks?

We as hunters are to set on success being measured in antler harvest(any age)....thus most are working backwards on deer management. Want an example look at most leases and hunters per acre... You tell me if those hunter denisities match mature buck denesities... How many are t not going to use one or both buck tags

I'm out on any more spike debate everyone should do research and see what fits their bill.


I'm just saying using that reference set of pictures/article as some type of fact or basis for a management plan is pretty uneducated.