I've run & cull shot ranches all over So. Texas...and seen many
landowners who believed a spike buck w/7 to 12" horns hard and
from 1 to 5 yrs old would grow up into a trophy, because they
had a price set in their minds..also, I've seen ranches overun
with doe, and older barron does to the point that the quality of the herd was depleted because of loss of habitat..Yet, I see
many members here who seem to think spikes grow up into great
trophy bucks..and none of them agree with the States own test
station in Kerrville that has isolated and fed same and proven
that "that dog don't hunt":...Your comments appreciated..DD

I think it really depends on the quality of herd if spikes should be shot. Good buck to doe ratio and lots of fork horned 1.5 yo, shoot them. If not, shoot does first.

Kerrville concluded you can line breed trash bucks. I consider a cull something that I'm not wanting to foot the feed bill for any longer....some, that other ppl would shoot young might perk my interest enough to let them live and see what they can turn into.

To many if's in the scenario. Would need to know more about the land, habitat and management goals of the place. Need to know the plan as far selling hunts, family hunts or leasing. HF or LF. Feed, food plots or habitat management all together or none of them.

2.5+ yr old spike, no brow tines, or anything smaller than an 8point 2.5+ older

To me a "cull" is a buck that regardless of how much he's fed and how old he may get, will never reach the definition of trophy as established by the properties management plan.

I think this is the simplest and most effective answer to your question.

All these people (including TPWD) that advocate the shooting of yearling spikes as "culls" should have their asses kicked in my opinion. There are too many variables and unknowns at that stage in a deer's life to make a judgement on whether or not he should be shot. Bottom line is....NO YEARLING BUCK should be shot for ANY reason (unless he is sick or seriously injured).

Now....if you see a spike that is 2.5 or older, fire away!! However, in my experience, 95% or more of the bucks that were spikes at 1.5 are not spikes at 2.5 (and many of them are nice 8's at 2.5)

In nearly 20 years of whitetail hunting....I have seen exactly ONE spike that I know for a fact was older than 1.5 years old. I estimated him at 3.5....and he had 9-10" spikes that were probably 4" at the bases. That would obviously be a great buck to shoot....but unfortunately I saw him the week before season opened, and never saw him again.

Well it's kind of like the definition of porn. You know it when you see it.

Until you have tried it culling yearling then might want to refrain from commenting on something you do not know works or does not work. I have managed both ways and will tell you hands down that culling hard in all age classes works. (HF only for me but have seen it work very well on larger LF ranches)

Ranchman, what do you mean by "culling hard in all age classes"?

Yes. When you have everything in place as far as your management plan and goals. If your ratio of bucks to does is where you want it and you are at CC then you have a fawn crop that needs space to enter the herd. It really depends on the ranch but in many areas as bucks mature they become harder to find. Culling at younger ages works very well if you do it right. Then you still have bucks in every age class for the next couple of years that need to be removed. (again HF or larger LF ranch)

Ranchman,

I agree that culling is necessary in all age classes....EXCEPT the first year (for bucks only, shooting a few yearling does is fine). You may have the best genetic quality fawn born on your entire ranch....and if he has a hard first year, he could very well be a spike at 1.5. For instance, he could have been born sick....maybe his mother was killed by coyotes before he was weaned, so he didn't get the proper "jump start" in life, etc...Therefore, he spends the majority of his first year just trying to stay alive, NOT growing a rack. A deer will only grow a nice set of antlers AFTER his body is taken care of (nutritionally). This deer may be the best buck on your ranch at age 5.5 or 6.5....he just needs a little time to catch up. If you shoot him at 1.5 because he's a "cull spike", you will never know if he was truly a cull or a GREAT genetic deer that just had a hard first year.

Jack Brittingham is, hands down, one of the best whitetail ranchers alive today....and I have had in-depth discussions with Jack about this exact thing. He agreed with me 100% and said himself that "culling" 1.5 year old bucks (no matter what size) is asinine. There are just too many unknowns.

You have told me yourself that you've seen it done successfully both ways (culling spikes and not culling spikes) on various ranches. That statement alone should tell you something right there!!.....that it does not make a significant positive impact to cull spikes!! If it did, then the ranches that cull spikes at 1.5 would all have better deer than the ranches that do not. And that is simply not the case. Jack's ranches have produced countless 200"+ deer, and he does not practice yearling spike culling.

I encourage everyone to read Dr. James Kroll's recent study on spike culling....which is much more scientific and unbiased than the outdated Kerr study (which had its own agenda to begin with). Here is a small piece from the summary of Dr. Kroll's study:

"Our results suggest there is no predictable relationship
between a male’s first set of antlers and those produced at
maturity in a free-living environment. For unexplained
reasons, it appears to take some animals more time to
manifest their antler growth potential. We found no
phenotypic basis for removing young males based on
number of points on their first set of antlers as part of a
genetic improvement strategy. We believe no genetic
improvement or increase in overall antler size of mature
animals would be expected by culling of spikes and other
small-antlered yearlings."

Where did Kroll's study take place?

South Texas

One of the best bucks I have ever seen was a 3 point spike on one side and small fork on the other side at 1.5 years. When he was 5.5 he had over 220 inches of nontypical rack. That deer was under a study at Mississippi State Deer research facility back in the 80s while I was attending school there.

I think it all depends on the mgmt goals of the ranch, but agree with not taking out the 1.5 year olds, 2.5 and above spikes and little spindly racked 4s or 6s should go IMO.

I have done it successfully both ways correct. Now ask me which produced the better deer? Culling spikes/yearling hands down. The ranch I was on spent 13 yrs culling all spikes. They also spent 13 yrs culling every yearling with 5 points or less. 6 yrs ago it still had lots of spikes. 3 yrs ago till present it produced less than 5 spikes per year. Why? My response would be that no spike was allowed to ever breed. So none of the bucks that were involved in the breeding were ever a spike or sired by a spike. By year 11 the quality of the yearling bucks was outstanding. It had turned around to were you could now see 10 point yearlings. 8 points were the norm. Year 12 produced a 6x6 yearling and 5 5x5 yearlings. Why? Culling for that look in the deer herd. All the bucks involved in the rut on the ranch had been culled thru from the beginning. You cull long enough for a specific look you will produce that look much more often. From research I have seen on spikes and personal data I have collected on spikes is that a very small percentage will turn into high scoring deer. If 95% or more turn out to be deer you would shoot as a cull at 4.5 or 5.5 or 6.5 then why wait? In South Texas the rut starts in Dec and with the heat why wait to have to cull and trophy hunt in the same time period? Younger bucks are easier seen than older bucks pre-rut. If you leave spike genetics and bucks with lesser quality antler till they age to give them a chance to finally get their act together they will breed that look. But don't fool yourself into thinking that they won't breed. If that is what you want then go for it. I don't have a problem with it. I have seen the results firsthand to know that when you cull hard it works very well. You just can't cull a couple of years and think you are done. It takes time. From my experience it takes 10 yrs or more. Those who are for keeping spikes in their herds want to wait on those swing deer (deer which are effected by rainfall and late blooming genetics) to get the right age coupled with the right rainfall year to blow up. I choose to not manage for those deer but those that show genetics early on and breed that look forward to the next generation.

If you ever get a chance to see what has happened on the Chaparrosa Ranch 70,000 acres (all LF except for one pasture) with heavy culling and killing all spikes it will set you back on your heals. They have been at 14 or so years now.

I have discussions with James on this very subject. He will also tell that if you are wanting to truly produce high quality trophy you have to cull hard.

In the end a person who leaves all spikes will raise trophy deer. A person who culls all spikes will raise trophy deer. What is the difference? The difference to me is how the overall deer herd looks top to bottom. IME culling spikes will make a huge difference over time. Huge difference. If you had access to the ranch I just left you would understand why culling worked so well. Smaller or LF ranches might have a different management plan to benefit their particular program which may mean keeping spikes due to hunting pressure on bucks.

This

And there is no way you can tell what a deer is gonna do at 1.5 years old

You know that is the same way the guys at All Seasons felt about the paint on their feeders.

Some very good food for thought.

Heck I might even jump the fence and argue from the other side for a while just to

People forget about the wild card......the doe

She has 50% of the genetic

To me culling has always been, it is not what you keep but what you shoot that makes the difference.

She had a father at one point and if she was at my ranch he would not have been a spike

They both have recessive great, great, great, great grand pappy traits hiding......