Whitetail no doubt

Whitetail

Very doubtful that you saw “a number” of hybrids anywhere. I live in the heart of muledeer/WT country and ive seen ONE that i would have bet anything of significance on being a hybrid. Ask any biologist and they will tell you how incredibly rare it is.

Per TPWD, it's not as rare as one might think. I believe I've seen many on my own property and have killed at least one.



https://tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_bk_w7000_0303.pdf

It’s a WT based off the glands behind the back knee joint

WT

This guy looks old AF to me, like 7-8 plus. Based on how large his body is I don't think his antlers will ever do much more. Personally I think he's cool and would ground check him. "Giving him another year" is foolish talk, there's more to a trophy than just number of inches, that's a big mature buck that's probably sired several truckloads of offspring. Besides a big bodied buck with antlers like that can kick some serious [censored] in a fight. Which is why high fence operations have cull and management hunts to get bucks like this out, because they will often breed more does than the test tube giants.

WT is my opinion.

This doe in the foreground is probably a hybrid. Note the intermediate-sized metatarsals.

Nothing is impossible, but all traits and glands match WT, he is no more mule deer then this MD is WT

I highly doubt it. We had a very accomplished TPWD biologist hunt sandhills mule deer with us a number of years ago. The only way to positively tell is with hair/tissue/dna samples.

I guess I’m still wondering why anyone would not ID the OPs buck as a whitetail. I saw a buck this year, just North of Amarillo, that had a Muleyish face and ears with WT body and antlers?? And, he was following a mule deer doe everywhere she went for a couple of days. Not sure on him.

Did you read the TPWD study I posted earlier? Cliff's notes is that where WT and MD overlap, West Texas hybridization has been documented as high as 15% and 8% in the Panhandle. Hybrids are not the rare curiosities that most folks would make them out to be.

Also note that I didn't say "positively." I said "probably." While you're correct in that DNA is the only "positive" way to tell, there are several tell-tale signs that enable folks to make pretty accurate "guesses."

I grew up in W TX where muleys and WT's overlap. Hunted that country for decades. No matter what you read, real life hybrids are very rare. The guy who hunted with us that I was referring to was Horace Gore's sidekick biologist, who helped come up with the "Golden Triangle" terminology, and was one of the father's of modern day whitetail deer mgt in TX, along with Gore. I'll take his word for it over "guessing".

On our whitetail lease it's not uncommon to see 40 mule deer on any given day. They are very territorial and have their own habitat and area they stick to. Our whitetails and mule deer don't occupy the same areas. We did have mule deer this year in an area that for the last 17 years mule deer have never been seen. All of a sudden this season mule deer moved into this area which is about 4-5 miles from the area they have and still occupy. We have good #'s of both. Never seen a hybrid. The best question to me is what are the circumstances that would lead to this occurring.

We have overlapped in panhandle at my ranch since as long as I can remember, I nor the biologist have ever “observed” it, not saying 8%-15% is wrong but have not seen any that would be distinct enough to question via observation. Up until a few years ago, all deer in county where physically checked in and documented, and at that time there hadn’t been one. Think we went to online in 2013. Now with that said check in basically consisted of sex, weight, age and metatarsal observation, not DNA so the hybridization would have had to be enough to question.

If DNA is really the only way, I’m betting that vast majority don’t express enough characteristic to be personally observered so only a very very few will actually express enough to be observable

That’s my thoughts but it’s just hypothis

So, if it is a WT/MD hybrid, do you hunt it during whitetail season? Or Mule deer season?

This really isn't about guessing. It's about scientific documentation that hybrids occur at a higher rate that most would care to believe, regardless of whether characteristics are observable, or not. I'm not sure why there's such a resistance to WT/MD hybrids on THF, but it's almost up there with HF/LF and .223 for deer. I guess I just don't get why folks are such naysayers about it. "No matter what you read?" Really? You mean like a scientific study that I posted a link to?

How about another study, which quotes additional studies/confirmations? https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/cjz-2023-0082



Or another article by a wildlife biologist: https://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/...-unique-tail-of-whitetails-and-mule-deer



Or how about a quote from STX? Will that work? https://texashuntingforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2087011/Re:_Mule_Deer_and_Hybrid_White






Take a look at this, from the same article above:


Also, while each species on my place have their own "habits," they haven't shown to be all that territorial. I have lots of pics over the years with both at the same feeder.

If i was to designate either species as “territorial”, it would certainly be the WT and not the mule deer. When i bought my first farm in this area in 2007, muledeer outnumbered WT by a substantial amount. Today, id say we are at 50/50 or quite probably a majority WT. Muledeer are neither as territorial nor adaptable as a WT and are being displaced at an alarming rate IMHO. As to the 8-15% hybridization rate, dont believe it for a second. Im around both species EVERY DAY. id be seeing a whole lot more interspecies chasing were that the case. If you are a scientist studying a specific occurrence and determine it to be negligible or close to ZERO, your study is done and there is no need to continue in the near term. If you can “show” a measurable or sizable occurrence rate, the “study” continues. How many animals were trapped and DNA tested to arrive at this data point?

The studies provide genetic data, probably mostly taken from harvested deer.

Transparently, and as someone who has conducted original scientific research, I'll be the first to comment on the perversion of science for political gain. You manipulate your variables just enough, you can get them to say what you want them to say. However, these studies aren't cholesterol studies funded by the egg industry, or diabetic studies funded by the sugar industry. A huge number of these studies are simply PhD students working on their dissertation in wildlife management or similar field. There really isn't any funding to speak about, and there really are no variables here. These researchers are simply collecting data and presenting to the community for posterity and a grade or degree.

Genetically, either a deer is a hybrid or it isn't. But there sure seems to be a lot of geneticists on here. Man, and they can even discern genetic code without taking DNA samples and certainly know better than the published studies...

kry226, you need to find some ignorant soul in Florida to argue with. You're not doing too well here with people who've been around the block on this subject.

My only experience is limited up Aspermont way but, I love studies. Especially like culling can’t take out genetics. This one may be similar.

And there it is. Ad hominem rears its head...

Ha! What are you talking about? I've done nothing but present studies and articles written by people who actually have credentials in their field and have done research on the topic. Have they not been around the block like the experts posting in this thread? Are they lying? They apparently know nothing about which they speak.

I guess everything else in this thread, which is anecdotal at best, is where the true gospel lies.


Ignorant?

They exist for sure, and I think most would agree, I’m just not sure at high 9-15% prevalence, that’s saying for every 100 deer in a field 9-15 are hybridized. That's a substantial sub set that has an even lower probability of reproduction with in its sub set. I could see .5% maybe. If hybridization rate is 9-15% it must not be physical expressed and only found via DNA sampling. That’s would be the only thing that makes observational sense

Who knows, but cool topic though. A lot better the HF/223

My post was my observation. We're in the same hood, and we have also seen on occasion whitetails and mule deer occupy the same space, but it's rare. When I say they are territorial, I mean the masses of them are in specific areas and once in the heart of these areas you only see one species. Kind of like human demographics?

These studies are interesting and are accurate in the area they were taken. I read them and consider the data to keep my mind open to consider their results as a possibility in my hunting strategy. In the end, I go with is happening in my hunting territory because that is what I see and know what is happening where it is relevant to me. As an example, a study has been referenced here stating a whitetail buck has a home range of 1,000 acres. That may be true some places, but not where I hunt.