the research and studies my uncle did back in early 80's at The Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute are the foundation for my managemet practices.........

Beautiful Buck, amazing how that tag did not fade after 5 years in the south Texas heat?

You should have to leave the tags in for the pictures. Unbelievable.

Its a low fence native deer they netted from helo and tagged and released..

Never thought of that, good point.

I bet if you put a spike in a back yard HF with a pit bull, they would become best friends. Then 6 yrs later when the spike is now a 197" typical the pit bull would snap and eat the face and antlers off of his best friend.

They are tagging all of them at the zoo! Native doe also..

So are you a landowner or long term lessee' who has iimplemented management strategies (whatever they may be) on a property for a number of years?

Projecting the development of a spike at full maturity is like taking a dozen pictures of a 4 year old child, observing him for a half hour and telling me how big his biceps will be when he's 30.


Makes more sense to just wait till he's 30, wouldn't you say?

I would say it is probably closer to predicting his hair color. Big difference between genetics and development

Me too.

You found the miracle buck great for you. Really doesn't prove anything.

Overall those spikes will never average what their multi branched antler siblings will. I and most of Texas have too many deer so I will consistently take the lowest genetics out of each class.

The seriously managed ranches I have ran we didn't had spikes. If you did see one it was something to talk about...of course right after he is on the ground.

Spikes are great for dreamers (and folks that play the lottery) thinking that "just maybe" he grow into a giant.

Can't talk averages when you're managing for the exception. If personally rather have every buck and drive the buck side of the ratio way up. I would lose more to natural mortality and keep bucks broken up, but ill always have decent deer to shoot for etx.

Define serious? Is that like a bc score?

Isn't that what most hunters/landowners want is a high score?

Ok define the serious score

Are you sure about that?

Apparently you did not read the study. Dr. Kroll proves your statement incorrect. See below...(chart taken from the study)



At 5.5 years old, the average B&C score of bucks in the two samples was LESS THAN ONE PERCENT different!! So if these two bucks were standing next to each other.....one scoring 139 3/8" and the other scoring 140 5/8"....are you seriously trying to tell me that you could tell the difference in them?? (not to mention being able to tell which one was the "inferior" spike as a yearling). Give me a break.

The bottom line is that big deer (over 170" B&C) are rare. It doesn't matter what the deer looks like as a yearling. Most of the spike yearlings are going to be 140" deer at maturity....and most of the 6-8 pt. yearlings are going to be 140" deer at maturity. Only a small fraction of any deer population will hit that magic 170" mark.

Dr. Kroll's study proves this, yet many people refuse to believe it because, for the last 30 years, Parks & Wildlife has been preaching about shooting spikes. This study is very simple, logical, and easy to understand....

Any time you start with a marginal sample size, and then REDUCE IT BY 80%, your results are going to be suspect.

Ever seen a few years worth of Kerr studies???

Or do you just go by someone out to make a bucks $$ study?

but it is completely scientific

absolutely correct, except that average is closer to 130. Take all our mature bucks on all the ranches I hunt and you'll come up with an average of about 135"

I think that this thread has become a bunch of armchair quarterback's arguing about managment practices that they haven't implemented in real life.

Lol