Psst...truth be known they all do

And in some cases you will have to. I read everything that was posted and just never heard that perspective before, makes good sense. Would it work for me, probably not, but I can see how it would work.

I sometimes beat to the drum of a different drummer.
That is why you have to manage each site specifically and not over the internet. But it makes for a fun 4th of July afternoon.

he would have been the king of spikes

eating out of that rusty old all seasons feeder thrice daily

paint flakes in feed keep antler development down

So why does it matter what the overall deer herd "looks like from top to bottom", if the end result for both methods is mature trophy deer??

Dr. Kroll proved in his study that over a period of 8 years, there was absolutely ZERO difference in the average size of mature bucks from each of the two methods. Half of the properties in the study shot all yearling bucks with less than 4 points (spikes and 3 pts). The other half did not shoot any yearling bucks. This was done for 8 years. At the end of the 8 years....the average score of a 5.5 year old buck from each of these methods was in the mid 140's....(ironically the half that did not cull yearlings had a very slightly higher score, by an inch or two). Bottom line is....it did not make a difference.

In a nut shell there comes a time that you will have to shoot more bucks to get under CC. You have two options hammer the worse young deer while it's easy or wait until they are old enough to get a better idea what they will be( which is also when the are harder to kill).


I'm on the harder to kill side due to I'm way below cc in oklahoma, I'd rather give that deer the option to show me what he has a 3.5 or 4.5... Even then he has to be pretty bad to get shot.... We are strick on hard horn to 5.5 or older

You will have more trophies in your overall herd if you cull earlier on. More trophy class deer breeding more trophy class genetics. Less chances of culls breeding more culls.
Would you rather have all your yearlings be 8 point or better or a mixed bag of a lot of spikes and a few fork horns? I prefer them to start life with more points than my culling minimum.
Fawns crops will get you in trouble if you are not culling in all age classes. You have 100 bucks and 100 does with a 70% fawn crop. You need to make room for 35 new bucks next year. Do you have 35 mature bucks to kill from your herd or do you keep them and hope to have an off year sometime in the near future to catch up. If you keep them then you are now over CC. I have seen very few ranches that have less deer than what they think they have. They really get hit hard in the pocket book when you get into a drought run like 3 of the last 4 yrs we have had.

If CC is not a concern and your can afford to feed them then keep them all. With culling early I have found that bucks show you what they have earlier in life. The mature sooner like age 5 instead of 7-8 yrs old. Trying to hold that many bucks to the older age classes to see if they will turn into something is an expensive gamble. With feed cost/food plot costs you take a buck to age 7 or 8 and you might not get the money to shoot him that you have invested in him.

This is what I love about deer management. There is never one right answer there is always multiple right answers. The challenge is to find the answer that everyone involved can agree on and best fits your goals, ability and wallet. Of coarse the most diffecult part is agreeing on the right answer.

Of course, why else do get trash thrown in breeder pens on occasion

I shoot every yearling on my place that isn't a main frame 10 point or better with double drop tines and split g-2s.

Pssst....and they usually don't make back into the breeding herd either.

Until I got on a place with the buck-doe ratio that is absolutely correct, the only culling I would do is does. A ratty looking buck is more likely to become a trophy buck than a does is.

Heck James Kroll now thinks she is as much as 70% of the genetics.

I say 62.875

I don't agree with managing for the "exception"

To me culling on LF is more of a population control tool however if you cull a certain genetic trait long enough eventually you will see less of that trait. Now you can never completely get rid of that trait but you can decrease its frequency.On LF what I have seen with spikes is that the number of spike yearlings depends on rain fall that year. On drought years we see many more spikes than on years with good rain fall and this is on a large property in South Texas with year round supp feeding, great brush and is below CC. Now on HF culling is a tool for pop as well but you see results from culling specific traits faster due to the fact you have control of deer movements. But no matter how hard you cull you can never completely get rid of the undesirable genetic and if you dont have 200" genetics you will never have a 200" deer.

We have been very diligent on our lease in East Texas to remove spikes with at least one, unbranched antler, as well as older deer with thick mass antlers and narrow spreads. Of course we do our best to follow the 13-inch for these older bucks.

We continue to see and harvest some excellent deer with wide racks. But the 13-inch restriction has proven to us that despite what TPWD biologists have told us, there are a lot of deer in East Texas that genetic limitations to the width of their racks.

No question, the 13-inch restriction has been a double edge sword. While it has produced some excellent deer, it has also protected many that should have been consumed sooner than later.

And bingo was his name-o

I believe certain deer need to be removed from the herd. Spikes like the deer shown in the pictures, deer with out brow tines, deer that have either been hurt or have a genetic disorder that messes up their antlers. What I don't like is the term "Culling". To me "Management" is a term that does a lot better job of saying what you are trying to accomplish. Then a person takes one of these "Management Deer" and he is bad mouthed and told he should have waited another year and seen what the deer would have been like then. And yes I think AR's are a 2 edged sword especially if you are starting with deer that may never be wide enough. I think then if you are serious about management you SSS.

I call like to call them genetically challenged deer. Once CC is reached something has to be removed to make room for the new crop each year. Each ranch or lease has to make its own decisions and goals to maintain that. That is what makes Texas hunting so good since you have so much private property to do as you choose.

IMO, culling is the taking of the deer like Don described. Spikes, no brow tines, mature 6 pointers, etc.

Management deer are the ones that are taking that are on the lower quality level of each age class, like a 5 yo eight pointer. Or I have seen some ranches that have implemented a minimum score on each age class. Any deer that falls below that level would be a management deer. Typically, the ones that would be classified as a cull would also fall below that level too.

The difference between the two is very vague, but the intent is the same.

I would also say that culling on most leases does not have a great impact. There are too many other factors that are ignored and many folks use the term "cull" as an excuse to shoot a deer. Without a complete management plan, only minimal effects will be seen, if any.

How PC of you...

Guess that means I am not short, I am vertically challenged

Challenged? Why yes you are, in MANY more ways than that one.