Gumby still existed though

By not taking the 8pts your not affecting breeding because all deer breed until they die.

Only way to control what breeds what 99% of the time...is a dmp pen

Assuming you don't have an infinite number of tags and a thrust for blood

Then you could shoot it down to nothing and have deer that top out a lot quicker than you'd like. But seeing how STX has his very own Gumby Jr, III & a nice dark-horned pale-face 8pt still living, I'm sensing since he couldn't beat me he chose to join me and my line of thinking. :large encore applause: :standing ovation:

. Agree with stxranchman. you will end up with inferior deer. The 8 point gene will take over. Should be the opposite - kill everything under 10 points that is 3 years or older

Not sure I want to venture into your line of thinking or whatever it is up there

No, it won't nor would you be breeding inferior deer any more than if you don't take them.



Only difference is with a heavy culling program is the bucks you perceived to be better make it to 6, 7, 8 years of age. In other words you see them longer and for the most part only deer that you see get that old. you are still going to be culling every year. Year in year out. Day you stop culling you still have same genetics as before.

Biggest difference is now all you $$$ and efforts are now concentrated on the ones you let live. But you still will be culling. ....

Proves you had good genetics to begin with and your allowing them you get to an age to express those genetics. Instead of going through trail cam photos of 20 bucks at 4.5 or older now your just going through photos of 5 bucks to find the top one.

We've had two deer over 200 and several other book deer in last 8 years and we didnt cull. Nor supplemental feed.

You either have the genetics or don't. You're not going to play hand of God and change the genetics...until you can document and control every breeding.

Neither side of the culling debate is wrong or right. ... is the point of my post. Its the common theme between the two that is.

Neither side of the culling debate is wrong or right. ... is the point of my post. Its the common theme between the two that is.

Either side of the culling debate could be right or wrong...should be based on the ranch, geographical location, end goals, etc. One plan doesn't fit all

very light. Heaviest part of the ranch last year i owned it was 1 to 90 acres if I remember correctly. Very rarely did we not have an 8pt break 135-145 as 6.5 year old either though.

We don't cull bucks in TX either ( brady or mason) either just heavy doe harvest.

Technically your right. But no buck will reach is top percetage of potential with out age

Technically your right. But no buck will reach its top percetage of potential with out age first

What is that magical age?

And what are the other factors that let them achieve the max potential? Does population/deer density have anything to do with it?

Some where between 6.5-8.5 depending on rainfall nutrition ect for each of those three years

Of course CC plays big part but that can be a acheived via doe harvest one 99% of ranches

Final answer? Is that for all of Texas or does it extend into the Midwest and Northern states too?

Lower has you head north

If they could keep bobo from shootin the babies they would be golden

So on 99% of ranches, if no bucks were taken and the allotted number of deer needed to maintain proper CC were doe...you would get the best potential out of your herd?