Forums46
Topics537,785
Posts9,729,109
Members87,042
|
Most Online25,604 Feb 12th, 2024
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5864984
08/05/15 11:09 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461
rifleman
Sparkly Pants
|
Sparkly Pants
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461 |
It does some contradicting on genetics and high grading, but a pretty good read.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5864988
08/05/15 11:13 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,032
tlk
OP
THF Trophy Hunter
|
OP
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,032 |
yeah I know the Comanche folks and their operation is the top one in Texas and maybe the country - all first class people as is the ranch so their info is totally legit -
You can't fix stupid
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5865049
08/05/15 11:40 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,773
Big_Ag
Pro Tracker
|
Pro Tracker
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,773 |
The biggest unknown factor in culling is the doe contribution. Our wildlife biologist claims does contribute more than 50% of the genes passed on, but they don't have a set of antlers on their head that show what genes they have. Culling bucks is less than half of the formula. A formula you can never solve because you can't determine what does contribute.So, as the study concludes, culling criteria on bucks takes out the lesser quality bucks in an age class earlier and protects the bucks with the most potential enabling them to reach maturity.The actual impact on the gene pool on free range deer is minimal, but your trophy buck quality will improve because you are allowing the better quality bucks to reach their peak antler producing age.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: Big_Ag]
#5865292
08/06/15 01:48 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,032
tlk
OP
THF Trophy Hunter
|
OP
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,032 |
I agree - to me the "safest" way to cull is does - but they are 50% of the equation. Problem is there is no way to distinguish the good does from the bad.
If left up to me the number one priority would be to eliminate mouths to feed - the less mouths the more food for those deer that are left to eat. You put X amount of food on a table and let 20 guys share it or you let 10 guys share it? If there are only 10 guys sharing it they are going to gain wait and nutrition much more than if there are 20 guys sharing. Not rocket science -
The ranch we are on has had steady improvement in horn size over the past 20 years and we cull heavily on bucks and does. The buck culling may have no more impact than the doe culling but at the end of the day your are eliminating competition for food. Proof is in the pudding - so despite all the studies it is hard to argue with success -
You can't fix stupid
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5865500
08/06/15 03:33 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,685
txbobcat
Veteran Tracker
|
Veteran Tracker
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,685 |
Kroll and the spike buck fans will not like that info...
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5865683
08/06/15 12:14 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296
stxranchman
Obie Juan Kenobi
|
Obie Juan Kenobi
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296 |
I prefer to cull early on and cull a lot. Dead deer don't breed. For does the way I view is this way, if I like the way the bucks look then I keep all the younger does/does without fawns(usually young) and shoot the older does/does with fawns first. That will let the deer related to the mature deer/deer you like continue to breed. If you do not like the way your bucks look then I would shoot all the young does first for a few years. I seen a similar talk on this study given by David Hewitt from CKWRI and have it in a PDF folder he sent to me. He has graphs and statistics to back up his statements.
Are idiots multiplying faster than normal people?
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5865737
08/06/15 01:03 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,534
redchevy
THF Celebrity
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,534 |
The way I look at it on our place is we are low fence, so at best all our culling is doing is population control.
In a controlled environment or hf property both bucks and does cary genetics for antlers, but the only ones that express what they carry are bucks. So manage both bucks and does for the numbers you want to carry and shoot the older does. As time moves on the does that are born will have more and more of the genes that the bucks your seeing have.
It's hell eatin em live
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5865801
08/06/15 01:44 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461
rifleman
Sparkly Pants
|
Sparkly Pants
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461 |
A lot will have to do with CC, if you haven't exceeded it, then culling really isn't doing much. I've seen culling (indiscriminate) on HF do a lot of good bc the place had sit idle for years due to a family feud. On the same note, I've seen it completely decimate a large low fence place with absolutely no improvement on quality and less top tier deer produced. In our area, you will also see better deer on LF properties that sit idle compared to the LF managed MLD3 properties in the same area.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5865812
08/06/15 01:54 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 21,271
SniperRAB
THF Celebrity
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 21,271 |
I agree - to me the "safest" way to cull is does - but they are 50% of the equation. Problem is there is no way to distinguish the good does from the bad.
If left up to me the number one priority would be to eliminate mouths to feed - the less mouths the more food for those deer that are left to eat. You put X amount of food on a table and let 20 guys share it or you let 10 guys share it? If there are only 10 guys sharing it they are going to gain wait and nutrition much more than if there are 20 guys sharing. Not rocket science -
The ranch we are on has had steady improvement in horn size over the past 20 years and we cull heavily on bucks and does. The buck culling may have no more impact than the doe culling but at the end of the day your are eliminating competition for food. Proof is in the pudding - so despite all the studies it is hard to argue with success - Well Said
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: SniperRAB]
#5865926
08/06/15 02:52 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296
stxranchman
Obie Juan Kenobi
|
Obie Juan Kenobi
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296 |
I agree - to me the "safest" way to cull is does - but they are 50% of the equation. Problem is there is no way to distinguish the good does from the bad.
If left up to me the number one priority would be to eliminate mouths to feed - the less mouths the more food for those deer that are left to eat. You put X amount of food on a table and let 20 guys share it or you let 10 guys share it? If there are only 10 guys sharing it they are going to gain wait and nutrition much more than if there are 20 guys sharing. Not rocket science -
The ranch we are on has had steady improvement in horn size over the past 20 years and we cull heavily on bucks and does. The buck culling may have no more impact than the doe culling but at the end of the day your are eliminating competition for food. Proof is in the pudding - so despite all the studies it is hard to argue with success - Well Said There is a way
Are idiots multiplying faster than normal people?
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5865932
08/06/15 02:54 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461
rifleman
Sparkly Pants
|
Sparkly Pants
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461 |
4 legs? Fluffier than normal tail? Doesn't state down stands and spend 90% of their time stomping at stands? Breathing?
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866037
08/06/15 03:59 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,102
Bbear
Pro Tracker
|
Pro Tracker
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,102 |
I agree - to me the "safest" way to cull is does - but they are 50% of the equation. Problem is there is no way to distinguish the good does from the bad.
If left up to me the number one priority would be to eliminate mouths to feed - the less mouths the more food for those deer that are left to eat. You put X amount of food on a table and let 20 guys share it or you let 10 guys share it? If there are only 10 guys sharing it they are going to gain wait and nutrition much more than if there are 20 guys sharing. Not rocket science -
The ranch we are on has had steady improvement in horn size over the past 20 years and we cull heavily on bucks and does. The buck culling may have no more impact than the doe culling but at the end of the day your are eliminating competition for food. Proof is in the pudding - so despite all the studies it is hard to argue with success - Did this on a lease I was on in Llano county - simply reduced the mouths fed and took out the 'longhorn' spikes (took 13 the first year, average age was 5 years old). After 5 years the average 8 point or better went from 110" bucks to 125-135 with an occasional 145 thrown in. Does, on the other hand, average weight dropped from 65 lbs down to 50 as guys on the lease took the biggest does they could find.
[IMG][/IMG]
Pay it forward - Kids are the future.
Rifles are similar to boats and young women...there's no end to how much money you can pour into them without making them any more useful.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: rifleman]
#5866082
08/06/15 04:30 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 15,639
QuitShootinYoungBucks
THF Celebrity
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 15,639 |
The way I look at it on our place is we are low fence, so at best all our culling is doing is population control.
In a controlled environment or hf property both bucks and does cary genetics for antlers, but the only ones that express what they carry are bucks. So manage both bucks and does for the numbers you want to carry and shoot the older does. As time moves on the does that are born will have more and more of the genes that the bucks your seeing have. I disagree. Yes, deer travel, but if you take that spike out before he travels and passes his genes on, you're doing some good. I do like your doe tactics-as you and STX pointed out, over time the younger does should have more of the genetics you're after. A lot will have to do with CC, if you haven't exceeded it, then culling really isn't doing much. If you haven't exceeded CC, then what you're seeing is more a result of genetics than nutrition, and IMO it's more important to cull at that point because you've taken out that part of the equation.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170223065011/http:/www.rrdvegas.com/silencer-cleaning.html
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866095
08/06/15 04:39 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461
rifleman
Sparkly Pants
|
Sparkly Pants
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: rifleman]
#5866119
08/06/15 04:57 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 15,639
QuitShootinYoungBucks
THF Celebrity
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 15,639 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed. Do you have spikes?
https://web.archive.org/web/20170223065011/http:/www.rrdvegas.com/silencer-cleaning.html
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866125
08/06/15 05:00 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 22,252
Texas Dan
THF Celebrity
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 22,252 |
Because of antler restrictions, we are now learning more about the role of genetics in antler growth because we have a lot more bucks living longer. And fortunately, you need not have a degree in Wildlife Biology to recognize many of observations that are now apparent to us.
For example, it has become clear to me that some bucks will never grow a wide rack, and no amount of time or feed is going to change that. While some bucks develop racks that grow wide quickly with little mass, there are others that just add mass or height year after year with little increase in width.
"Some people will never like you because your spirit irritates their demons."
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: rifleman]
#5866145
08/06/15 05:08 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,032
tlk
OP
THF Trophy Hunter
|
OP
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,032 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed. Even with the limited nutrition, there is still natural food the deer eat. So if there are fewer deer does that not leave more food available for the survivors? It has to help the overall health of the herd does it not?
You can't fix stupid
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866152
08/06/15 05:12 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296
stxranchman
Obie Juan Kenobi
|
Obie Juan Kenobi
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed. Even with the limited nutrition, there is still natural food the deer eat. So if there are fewer deer does that not leave more food available for the survivors? It has to help the overall health of the herd does it not? Yes but that would mean he would have to cull and shoot more than he wants to
Are idiots multiplying faster than normal people?
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866156
08/06/15 05:13 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 22,252
Texas Dan
THF Celebrity
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 22,252 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed. Even with the limited nutrition, there is still natural food the deer eat. So if there are fewer deer does that not leave more food available for the survivors? It has to help the overall health of the herd does it not? IMO, the impact of our best efforts to feed bucks and harvest doe is most effective in our minds. The truth is, Mother Nature provides plenty of browse when there is sufficient rainfall. We just enjoy spending our time and money to make us believe our role is much larger than it really is.
"Some people will never like you because your spirit irritates their demons."
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866157
08/06/15 05:15 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461
rifleman
Sparkly Pants
|
Sparkly Pants
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461 |
Maybe 1 or 2 a year. Majority of those will be smaller bodied than their peers that first year when you get several of them out together to get a look at them.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866180
08/06/15 05:22 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,862
HuntnFly67
THF Trophy Hunter
|
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,862 |
This is why the HF/LF debate will never be settled: ...researchers collected 4827 capture records from 3098 individual bucks over a 13-year period. About five percent of the unique bucks captured had a gross Boone and Crockett score above 150, two percent were above 160, and only half a percent scored above 170. Four out of 3098 bucks grossed above 180, two out of 3098 grossed above 190, and only one buck in 13 years involving nearly 5000 capture records gross scored above 200.
“That gives you an idea of how rare those really big native deer are in the wild,” Hellickson told listeners. “In fact, the average gross score of the bucks captured in this study that were 5.5 years or older was 130.” Also tells me I might need to adjust my expectations and quit griping about only seeing 120" 8s.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: tlk]
#5866184
08/06/15 05:23 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461
rifleman
Sparkly Pants
|
Sparkly Pants
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed. Even with the limited nutrition, there is still natural food the deer eat. So if there are fewer deer does that not leave more food available for the survivors? It has to help the overall health of the herd does it not? If there's excess browse, then no. It's like stocking 20 cows on a place that will naturally hold 100 with no supplements, even during bad times. Will those 20 be any healthier than the 100 or did you just waste opportunity to carry more? This state is pretty large and different regions come with their own perks and set of problems.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: stxranchman]
#5866189
08/06/15 05:25 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461
rifleman
Sparkly Pants
|
Sparkly Pants
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 44,461 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed. Even with the limited nutrition, there is still natural food the deer eat. So if there are fewer deer does that not leave more food available for the survivors? It has to help the overall health of the herd does it not? Yes but that would mean he would have to cull and shoot more than he wants to Mr. Pot stirrer...lol, I'm still waiting for another no brow deer to pop up. Don't you have your own Gumby deer to cater to.
|
|
|
Re: very interesting article on culling
[Re: rifleman]
#5866289
08/06/15 06:30 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296
stxranchman
Obie Juan Kenobi
|
Obie Juan Kenobi
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 60,296 |
Our browse isn't protein rich like other areas of the state. You aren't going to magically create a natural habitat that is that way and cutting mouths is not going to free up things that don't exist. It's not a genetics issue, it's a nutritional issue that won't allow genetics to be expressed. Even with the limited nutrition, there is still natural food the deer eat. So if there are fewer deer does that not leave more food available for the survivors? It has to help the overall health of the herd does it not? If there's excess browse, then no. It's like stocking 20 cows on a place that will naturally hold 100 with no supplements, even during bad times. Will those 20 be any healthier than the 100 or did you just waste opportunity to carry more? This state is pretty large and different regions come with their own perks and set of problems. Explain that highlighted part to me then. What are you saying then, that there is a enough browse for the correct CC amount of deer? Browse and forbs continue to grow and reseed with less pressure. You can reshape your habitat over time with less mouths on it. But that would require sacrificing numbers of inferior mouths
Are idiots multiplying faster than normal people?
|
|
|
Moderated by bigbob_ftw, CCBIRDDOGMAN, Chickenman, Derek, DeRico, Duck_Hunter, hetman, jeh7mmmag, JustWingem, kmon11, kry226, kwrhuntinglab, Payne, pertnear, rifleman, sig226fan (Rguns.com), Superduty, TreeBass, txcornhusker
|