I don't ear tag anything. I don't have a breeders license. I have a 330 acre pasture with improved genetic deer that were all born here. It's my house pasture so I know these deer well.

That said, the first time I noticed late born fawns was on the first ranches I bought back in the late nineties. Between del rio and Sonora our deer always had fawns in sept.-nov. Not many, but some. Those were all native deer.

I believe you.
Is the 330 acres HFed?

NP I will also say that if you've only really hunted east Texas you are looking at a small and well defined window.

I hunted there in my youth and have never seen any part of Texas that was as predictable about rut as east and even more, southeast Texas. Your rut in east texas typically starts in mid to late Oct depending on how far north or south you are. In southeast Texas it starts and is mostly over in sept. (Brazoria county). In both areas it ends earlier than south, west, and central Texas.

But "rut" as the term that is used by us to define the main breeding session doesn't include the full breeding cycle. That doesn't end until the last doe is bred, and some doe fawns (who most of the time don't cycle until they are yearlings) do in fact cycle in late spring. At least in central, west, and south texas.

Yes it is. I have that pasture, and two 500 acre pastures individually high fenced here.

No. You can't group them by "class". Some deer are born in Oct. Nov. You simply can't group a deer that was born then with deer that were born in June. [/quote]

We dang sure can if we are saying on average they wont score what the forked antlered bucks do later in life. A couple months age difference doesn't matter any at 5 and 6 years of age.

The decision should be based on whether you want to feed a deer 5 years that most likely wont score what a forked antlered buck will at the same age. The answer to that lies in your particular management plan and what you do with your bucks (sell hunts/personal lease etc). [/quote]

You should read before you post. Even your own statements. You are right in your highlighted statement. But you couldn’t be more wrong about what birthdate does to that bucks first two sets of antlers. ALL bucks are nubbins as fawns. What I’ve written and you’ve ignored is the FACT that if born late (late sept to dec), MOST buck fawns will be a short spike the next fall when they are one year old “yearlings”, not the classic 1.5 year old “yearling”.

Those 4-6 months difference in age make what might have been a 4 to 10 point first year buck, a spike.

I live with deer all year long and I’ve seen spikes grow into bucks just as big as any other buck multiple times.

Their genetic potential is impossible to judge if you judge them as spikes, because of how critical that 4-6 month delay in development is.

So yes, at 5 or 6 it won’t make a difference. But it makes a huge difference their first couple of years. And if you use that difference to judge a bucks potential you’re gonna make some big mistakes. [/quote]

You are trying to take the exception and make it the norm. The argument of " I have seen spikes grow into bucks just as big" is just that...the exception.No, it's not the exception. It is the exception that a few of my buck fawns are born late. It is a proven fact that they all mature at trophy status. Im glad you live with deer because I guess you can tell which spikes do what the next year. Being a land baron and all I guess you keep all of your bulls until they are mature to figure out which ones you want to keep as breed bulls? I don't think so. I have no idea what statement you're trying to make by comparing culling bulls and spikes..

You try hard to take genetics out of the equation but it doesn't work that way. Not at all, I'm saying that genetics are everything.Facts are that a spike antlered yearling buck on average wont equal their fork antlered counterparts at maturity.That statement is a steaming pile of bullc$#t Now if your management plan calls for keeping all of those to maturity and hope you get the exception that turns into a buck same size as its class mates that is up to you. You don't hurt a thing on your top end type bucks by shooting spikes each year. Correct, I don't "hurt a thing on the top end by shooting spikes". However, I'd be shooting a deer that will max out somewhere between 160 and 200+". And I prefer to keep that money in my pocket.

I am not currently shooting spikes on my place but I very rarely see one. We are hammering the heck out of them by the time they are 3 for no brows, 3pt or less sides, etc. Everyone's plan and goals are different. On overpopulated areas it can really be very beneficial to get age classes in line with population goals. [/quote]

That tells me your playing with a different deck of cards than low fence Texas genetic deer.

In one pasture I am. But on my other pastures and low fenced native ranches I see late born (late bred) fawns at about the same rate as I do on my improved genetic pastures/ranches.

Not sure what the difference is that could be deduced by any comparison

That Winter born fawn thing is a garbage arguement. Land baron you are really stretching it now trying to be right. Lol

To me the difference is on the native low fence stuff most of the multi tined yearlings born at the perfect time wont make the bottom end of your trophy class of 160 much less the spikes that were timely born. How many of your low fence bucks make it to 160-200 range?

You are absolutely correct. Where I am, the worry about big age windows for fawns is not what it is in many other places. Which can (and does) influence my decisions.

Also, your situation is unique to many on a 330 acre pasture over which you have total control. You are in a much better position to just wait and know for sure if that spike will grow into a biggun - and react accordingly.

That’s not even the issue being discussed. Different areas have different top-ends. No one is disputing that.

Why is it when you have no facts to support your argument you have to name call? I agree with the rancher your spike argument is a steaming pile of

Can you post up facts from your management practices to support you trying to be right? Are you trying to say all fawns are born before October?

He has a genetically superior herd, I think its irrelevant what his spikes turn into in comparison to native LF spikes. By using his deer as a comparison you could make the argument that spikes are genetically superior because if all his grow to 160 they are doing better than the majority of branch antlered wild deer.

Has the ability.... He is more intune with his fawns and deer progress from year to year.

Rut outside normal dates isn’t rare just not Norm. Especially hill country and coastal deer. I killed a doe 6 years ago open week a bow season and she had a 7” fetus, ruffly a 13/14 weeks post conception. That’s a mason hill country deer.

Grand scheme You either want to feed them or not, I highly doubt most lessees have the tags to truly cull bucks, especially when they have way more doe tags.

The whole spike agruement is only applicable to those that have an ability to down size herd by at minimum 33% year over year. I’d say probably higher then that in reality

Yes, these things go down all sorts of misleading rabbit trails. Always do.

The “shoot or not shoot spikes” issue has no real definitive answer - even from a general standpoint. It certainly has no definitive answer considering all the various factors involved on different places (330 acres HF with total control and superior genetics has absolutely no relation to most places - just like November-born fawns don’t).

All one can do is make the best decisions one can make based on one’s own circumstances.

Most of my fawns are born in a narrow window. I have a good number of branch-antlered 1 1/2 year olds. So I don’t mind shooting a spike. Doesn’t mean I’m right or know everything. But it doesn’t make me an idiot either.

I’ve already said it’s not making any difference for the vast majority anyway.

What the top end is in different areas has nothing to do with my point.

We are discussing potential and how you can’t accurately use initial hard antler size to decide that potential unless you relate it back to age.

Period.

I don’t try things I don’t accomplish. Well, not including hover boards.

I’ve explained it sufficiently, you choose to believe I’m wrong. That’s nothing I can fix.

Been watching this thread... Didn't have any input, and really still don't. But i checked game cams the other day and we have a new spike frequenting one of our set ups. He looks to be fresh off the milk, and he'll be easy to spot for years to come (if he makes it), considering hes got one eye and a nasty scar on his face just under where his eye should be. Looks like he may have got to sparring with another buck and it got the best of him. Made me think of this thread when i saw him. Interested to see how he develops.

Give me a break! Where have you ever seen a hunted free range population of whitetail deer where bucks outnumbered does? I’m not saying it’s impossoble, but it’s highly unlikely. Even in unhunted populations, natural mortalities rates are higher for bucks than does, leading to numbers being skewed slightly to more does than bucks. [/quote]

Our place in Stonewall county has far more Bucks than does. At least that's what our cameras and observations while hunting tell us. We agreed not to shoot any does the past two seasons because we've seen so few. Not sure we're doing the right thing, but seems right in our opinion.

Our place in Stonewall county has far more Bucks than does. At least that's what our cameras and observations while hunting tell us. We agreed not to shoot any does the past two seasons because we've seen so few. Not sure we're doing the right thing, but seems right in our opinion. [/quote]

That’s the way it appears, but it’s unlikely the reality.