I agree 100%. It takes a combination of factors to make an accurate age assessment. Our program bases the age on TRW without pause to hunter evaluation which arouses my concern about the legitimacy of our overall "program".

yes - decisions on if a hunter shot a trophy that was not "mature" is based off tooth wear and CA apparently can be "iffy" - would love to see if there are any other studies on the CA.

I did see a study a few years ago similar to this one but just limited to biologist using tooth wear - top end biologist were used and the results were not good on their ability to age by tooth wear

I don't put all my eggs in one basket either. I like to stack as much as I can to get the best guess I can. The last buck we sent teeth in on for CA came back at 6. We had pictures of him for 4 years and thought he was 5, but it was always a debate between 5-6. Looking at his teeth for wear most would probably say he was 3, I probably would have too if I didn't know better.

I found this info from a study on the Evaluation of the Applicability of Different Age Determination Methods for Estimating Age of the Endangered African Wild Dog (Lycaon Pictus) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5061369/

"A number of methods exist to assign age and age class to individuals based on the examination of teeth. However there is a great need for a reliable age estimation method for wild dogs that employs a simple and easily applied technique. It is also important to remember that any error in age estimation may seriously bias estimates of age-dependent life-history parameters and this may affect our understanding of population dynamics and may result in flawed management strategies [29]. This study has shown that linear equations obtained from the relationship between chronological age and (i) age estimated by counting cementum annuli, (ii) pulp cavity/tooth width ratio and (iii) tooth wear (measured by tooth crown height) can be applied to estimate the chronological age of unknown age wild dogs. Age estimated by counting cementum annuli was the most reliable method for estimating chronological age of wild dogs with a 79% predictive capacity.

Numerous age determination studies across a wide range of species have reported counting cementum annuli as the most accurate age determination method. Earlier studies by Smuts, Anderson [16] found a significant relationship between cementum lines and known age in lions (P. leo) with a very high predictive capacity of 97%. Boertje, Ellis [25] studied the accuracy of moose (Alces alces) age determination from cementum annuli and found a significant relationship between known age and number of cementum annuli, with 74% of 76 canines being assigned a correct age. A strong relationship was also found between number of cementum annuli lines and age of polar bears (Ursus maritimus), with the most experienced cementum annuli reader scoring 75% of the specimens to their correct known age [30]."

BTW that Texas A&M - Kingsville study was from 2010 - I sure hope the margin of error has decreased over the last 10 years.

Some other interesting tidbits from the 2010 study;
https://www.ckwri.tamuk.edu/sites/d...nsidedeerresearchnewsletter-fall2010.pdf
* collected 264 mandibles from 134 deer at least 2 yrs old
* Six biologists, holding at least a Master’s degree in Wildlife Science, aged these jaws while referring to the original scientific paper (Severinghaus 1949) on aging deer using tooth wear and a visual guide to the technique.
* These trained biologists, with references in hand, categorized only 49% of jawbones correctly (Figure 1).
* Biologists tended to under-age deer that were greater than 3 years old, but ages were correct ±1 year for 86% of the jaws.
* All 6 observers agreed on the same age for a jaw only 19% of the time, and average agreement for a particular jawbone was 4.1 observers/jawbone.
* sent 232 known-age incisors to a lab for such an analysis. Cementum-annuli aging resulted in 61% accuracy and was correct ±1 year for 92% of the jaws
* Estimating the age of a deer by tooth wear is inaccurate because of variation in tooth wear patterns among deer. Variability is also added by multiple subjective criteria that can be interpreted differently by different people.

Waiting with baited breath.

I've aged a lot of mule deer in my day. White tails aren't a lot different.

I was on a ranch last year in the lower Panhandle in early Jan. that was MLD and they killed some mule deer. Two of us aged the jaws and then the biologist aged them. All were sent off for CA testing. Two of us aged one MD buck at 5 or 6 on the hoof and by toothwear and the biologist said 3.5 and he came back as a 7.5 yr old via CA. Two of us aged another MD buck at 7+ and the biologist said 4.5 and he came back 10.5 via CA. Another MD buck was aged on the hoof and shot as a 3 yr old 2x2 but his tooth wear looked more 2.5....he came back at 4.5 yrs old via CA. Every MD that was killed on that ranch was older than what the jawbones showed compared to what a WT would age by comparison. I killed a WT that looked 5 or 6 on the hoof and one side of his jaw showed 5 and the other little more 6..CA on him was 6.5. None of the deer looked their age (CA age) except the MD that we aged at 7+. One guys said he has learned that MD generally run 1 yr older if you use the WT age for that toothwear on the MD. I have aged a ton of WT but not many MD. The only ones I have aged have been the ones I have killed. I killed a MD in the Trans Pecos this season that I had seen in 2016 the final morning of the season when I was hunting with a friend. He passed him since he was not what he was looking for and both of us thought he was a 4 or 5 yr old then. I killed him this year in 2019 and his toothwear only shows 5.5 to me. I know it is the same buck due to the unique right antler side tine growth he had in 2016 and 2019 and then where he was killed on the ranch compared to where I seen him in 2015 and 2016(within a section of land). I am sending the teeth off for CA on him to get an age from them. I know the deer has to be older than 5 but toothwear does not show it. The buck looked 7 on the hoof this year. Aging by toothwear or CA is not going to ever be 100%. What I look for is consistency from the person aging them. History on the deer is more accurate IMO than tooth aging.