MANAGEMENT BUCKS

If a 2.5 yo buck does not have any brow tines would you consider him to be a management buck (take him out of the breeding circle)? If not at 2.5, what age would you consider him a cull? I am on a lease that seems to have a lot of bucks with no brow tines & LO wants them taken out, just not sure of what age class to take. Thanks Daniel

An 8 point frame missing brows(6point) at 2.5 is getting whacked in my book. If it ever grows brows they will likely be short and not do much. If your land owner says shoot, you do what he says, it’s his land.

I'd give him another year , might be a better buck next year with good nutrition.
You won't have any older bucks if you shoot all the young ones . Nutrition can make all the difference.

wytex makes good point

As long as I could keep my buck doe ratio where it needs to be, shoot the weak bastys on sight

Yep working backwards IMO. You start with habitat/nutrition and carrying capacity. Established age classes.......then start culling IMO......

If you want more that look just like them, by all means keep every single of one of them. If you have the tags then shoot everyone of them you can...not for one year but long term. Management is not a one and done, it takes time. So you have to have the tags and "want to" to get it done. Also, do not forget about managing your does and keeping the numbers shot every year. Long term, again not a one and done. Most hunters only worry about what they can see and not why they started a management program in the first place. All programs are long term and most people are not ready for that type of long term commitment to see the end result. I never worry about ratios when I have the tags or permits to manage the herd like it needs to be. They give you MLD permits for a reason...not just to shoot trophy bucks early. It is to manage the herd and the habitat together. Eliminating those type of bucks does a lot of good for the herd...one being more feed for the rest of the herd....which you liked since you did not shoot them for a reason.
My question would be what is the lease/ranch doing on doe numbers? What is the ranch doing on culling? WAG on my part but I bet the lease/ranch is not shooting spikes either. You probably could eliminate a major portion of those 2.5 yr old non-browtine bucks by killing spikes....LONG TERM...not a one and done.

Thanks for your experience. LO has told us on our lease that we will probably get ALL the doe tags we want. He does manage per the MLD limits but I am not sure he actually kills does that need to be taken. He has several big hunts each year but sometimes it is very hard to get hunters to take out does, as you probably very well know. I was on a game ranch for 8 years as a guide & helper when needed but the last 2 RANCH MANAGERS did not want to take does till the TPWD biologist changed their mind. Last Ranch Manger got a nasty gram from him with some directions, long story short, I was given instructions the day before MLD opening to start shooting does & spikes & Ranch Manager would tell me when to stop. The wife and I took 20+ does & 12 spikes the month of Oct that year plus what the clients took in Nov & Dec.

Imo....people save more deer that should be shot than shoot deer they should have saved.


My personal preference was on a high fenced place if it didn't have 10 points as a 3 year old he got whacked.

All the nutrition in the world will not make up for poor genetics but you will never get rid of poor genetics especially in low fence arenas. Thinning will make some difference but as STX has said, it is a long term & constant effort.

When you have a nutritional problem is not due to poor genetics it is due to have to many mouths on the habitat. You need to address the mouth problem first. The mouths your remove are what molds the look of the deer herd over time. Most people throw out the bandaid.....feed to the deer and forget about the mouth problem. Now they have created all sorts of long term problems. If you are going to feed then you are now committed to management and numbers control...unless you have deep pockets. Even then I have seen landowners/hunters scream at the high price/volume of feed they are buying....the feed company only supplies the feed they don't force deer to eat it. Under MLD the permits are issued for a reason....use them wisely but use them all.

one question I have, is where did the line get blurred between "cull" and "management"


We had a 1200 acre high fenced ranch that we shot relentlessly the 7 points and under as well as took the appropriate amount of does but for whatever reason it seemed like if it had 8 or 9 points it had to be protected as if it was gonna magically sprout 2 or 3 extra main beam points.


We had a ton of mature 8's but after awhile rarely saw a 6 or 7 point that was mature as most of them got shot at 7 years old.


I shot a 6 year old 8 point that was about 130" one time and when I brought it back to camp the old timers looked at me like they were gonna string me up, as I was only supposed to shoot "cull bucks"

Cull by definition means to select (or gather) are certain segment of the herd. Definiton of management is directing and controlling a group. Management of deer means to manage more than just the deer. Every time you shoot a deer you are making a management decision by culling that certain deer. Old ranchers used the word, cull when managing their livestock herds in drought times. They did not cull off or sell off the better animals but in turn culled off the lower end of the herd. Those that were older or less productive. They were "managing" their herd to the habitat at that time. While many prefer to manage their herds today for the worst of times in the future.

Ill give this a real long reply later when I have time, but for now im curious how many acres you personally shot the 12 spikes in a month. We have over 10000ac and it would take a few years to even see 12 spikes. We might average seeing one buck thats short a brow tine per year and we might see one buck on average per year that has less than 8 points unless its 2yr or less. We do not cull anything till 4 and usually 5yr and do not feed protein. Every situation is different and that will be the crux of my lengthy reply later.

Possible to see 5 spikes in a hunt at my place and that is just one morning or afternoon at just one blind. Also possible to see 6 ten points in a single hunt.

To quote the resident octogenarian self-proclaimed rockstar on here - "'Bated breath."

I would be willing to bet if you were shooting everyone you see you would be surprised at the total by the end of the year. Most people do not pay attention to spikes until they have more than one in front of them. Why I say this is because of a 5700 acre LF ranch that I now that started a management program after they had been feeding protein for quite a few years. They were not killing a 160 type deer very often even in wetter years and nothing ever over 175 gross. That ranch was part off a much larger ranch that was divided into 3 different lease pasture groups. One of the pastures was killing 160+ deer on a regular basis(with no protein) and even deer up to the low 190's on the better rainfall years. The pasture that was feeding protein had a good buck to doe ratio but they had to many deer for the habitat. They started out by doing some blind count surveys to get an idea on population and then buck to doe/fawn numbers. They got the approval of the LO to start shooting more deer to get the numbers back in line with the habitat. They started shooting spikes, bucks that were 2+ yrs or older with under 8 pts, bucks 4.5 or older with 8 pts or weak 9 pts and then their normal amount of trophy bucks(if they wanted one). They agreed on spikes since they were not seeing many....38 spikes later and all the invited guests that had tags they stopped shooting but felt they had gotten most of them that first year. Before they started shooting I ask them how many spikes they thought they had and they agreed on maybe 101-2 on their 5700 acres. They shot another 12 to 15 of the 2.5 yr or older bucks with less than 8 pts and 4.5 or older 8/9 pts. They also killed around 40 does IIRC that first year. They kept this program in place plus in the 2nd year and after, they started to shoot off the mature bucks(9 or 10pt or more) that would not score over a certain minimum score..ie 140 or less for example. It took them about 4 yrs to see better upper end bucks and then they started killing deer over 160 gross. They even killed a few deer into the 170's and 180+ gross over the next few years.
I managed a ranch in La Salle county that was about the same size as this one. It was LF before I went to work and then HF after I went there. They fed protein(LF for previous 5 yrs) and shot a few does on occasion in most years with one year killing 40. They would shoot a cull or management buck and a few trophies but never any spikes. Deer numbers were very high for that habitat.The first year I went to work the HF was finished that summer and we started removing mouths from herd that had a deer to 7 to 8 acres with almost a 1 to 1 buck to doe ratio. We shot 35 to 40 spikes per year the first 3 years I was there. They continue to shoot spikes today, 17 yrs later. They also shoot cull/management bucks from every age class including 1.5 yr old bucks that have less than 6 pts. At this point in their management it does not matter if that spike was genetic, late born, had a poor mother or injured they have better 1.5 yr old bucks that they are more interested in keeping.
I also know of a very large LF ranch that has been shooting spikes every year since the late 90's now. They also started culling very hard on the 2.5 yr old and older bucks at that same time. They shot the lower end of the 1.5 yr old up to mature bucks and continue with an even more intense program today. If a buck is mature on that ranch he will be or has been a really good deer. IRRC the biggest buck killed priour to the late 90's was a low 190's gross NT buck. Fast forward to today and that top end buck was killed in the past couple of years grossed 257 NT and netted over 246 NT. They kill net book deer on a regular basis, some years multiple bucks now. Long term commitment to their management plan and goals.
Intense management of shooting spikes and management deer is not for everyone.You have to look at what you are wanting to do and the hunters you have to do it with. Some ranches or lease don't have the resources or people to do it consistently every year. It involves a lot more work than most people realize. Shooting deer is just part of the long term plan. A study was done years ago that said most hunters feel they got their monies worth(for lease or paid hunt) if they were seeing at least 7 deer(bucks and does together) every time they went to the blind or hunted. Some hunters don't care what the bucks look like as long at they are seeing some each hunt. Some hunters want to see several quality bucks of all ages. That is where the goals set in the beginning will differ.

We've shot a lot of ugly over the past so many years. I lovey to bring guests and let them see the tantalizing pretty that is left. I feel like a guest every time I am there.

What a great topic and good discussion so far.

Quick question, for the typical Texas hunter, on a lease with say sub 500 acres of land under “their” control, what is the long term management relating to deer? Is the answer simply to reduce mouths, let deer age, and not worry about management killing spikes or no brow time deer? I have to think most Texas hunters/land owners can not shoot enough deer to make a difference and if they could shoot enough deer on a smallish ranchette then 1. Their neighbors will be pissed at them, and 2. They will kill all their deer.

Would be awesome if we all had access to 5000+ acre leases to be able to actually manage deer herds, but I feel for the vast majority of hunters it’s more an issue of increasing age and nutrition and management ends pretty much at that.

So it begs the question, were these ranches just vastly overpopulated and killing was directed at both doe and young bucks? In simply “reducing mouths” would these goals have been met or do you think the goals of bigger deer were somehow related to killing the spikes and that spikes are genetically inferior to branched yearlings? It is sometimes very difficult to separate the true “cause” and the “side effect” benefit. We all know killing doe took a back seat for decades to killing bigger bucks, so we’re these ranches just so over populated they needed to be thinned and the thinning and proper nutritional management was really all that was needed (meaning shooting any buck and not necessarily the spikes up front, just thinning the herd)? Sorry if that is rambling, but I think the point comes across

Obviously over populated

If you have bucks with brow tines and bucks without brow tines, even if from different age groups, it is not a matter of nutrition- it is a matter of genetics. Unfortunately you cannot determine which does are contributing to the problem but culling the bucks with no brow tines would be a start.

IN MY OPINION the only short answer to any culling question is IT DEPENDS IT DEPENDS IT DEPENDS. Because of that I wont comment directly to the OP since I don’t know enough details. STx mentioned in so many words, more than once, that you have to be committed to the long term and not every one is, or the SITUATION DOESN’T MAKE IT PRACTICAL OR FEASIBLE TO DO SO(TxBuck spoke to this). I will use my often used example of Goldilocks in which there are often two extremes and a middle ground to most situations.
>>Intensively Managed property—These are all the ones that STx used as examples but IMO this applies to an extremely small number of Texas hunters. If you are blessed enough to hunt a real high end heavy managed property then you already doing a lot right and you probably don’t even need to keep reading this. Often times these places are HF or really large and the hunters(if any besides family) are paying 5 digits for access and lots more in feed etc. Supplemental feed, habitat management, carry capacity, doe/buck ratio and everything else is being done and done right and the high money that hunters are paying keeps the number of hunters low. And even though MLD is a good first step, it in no way means that you are necessarily intensively managing your property. Like I said, if this is your situation you are in a very small minority and likely you or someone already has all the answers so you don’t need advice (no sarcasm). Also, if you are on this type of place then take STx advise cause he knows 100 times more than me for sure.
>>Low Intensity Managed property—IMO most hunters fall into this extreme and some are by choice and others not. Some guys just want a place to go hunt and don’t really want to put what it takes into managing for Quality or Trophy or anything else and nothing wrong with that. Others really think they want to manage a place but are unable to pull if off for various reasons. Some just don’t have the know how. Others cant put together a group of guys that share the same goals. I think there are two main reasons it cant be pulled off.
1. TOO SMALL A PROPERY and no big and good neighbors. IMO, no matter how good a deer manager you are it just cant be done if too small a property. Whatever you do correctly is likely destroyed by your neighbors and even if they didn’t do that you THINK they will so everybody gives up or doesn’t even try in the first place. Please try to do it but IMO its probably wasted effort to even try to have an elaborate management plan and DEFINITELY NOT PRACTICAL TO CULL in this situation. If you hunt just a few 100 acres and you are killing young supposedly inferior bucks then you are killing the few bucks that you may ever see reach maturity. Sure, anyone can get lucky and kill a big buck and especially depending on neighbors but nothing you can do by culling or a management plan will help sustain any kind of Trophies for the long term. Let EVERY young buck grow up and maybe you will at least have a chance at a mature buck and that is a trophy in itself and especially of small property.
2. TOO MANY HUNTERS on even a large property. IMO if you have too many hunters and are killing too many bucks then you are spinning your wheels with any type management plan much less a culling program. Because deer country has gotten so expensive it is very difficult to keep hunter numbers low without having to pay big money. In the area I hunt there are big ranches around, like 10k to 20k acres. One in particular I feel is kind of the norm and its 20k ac and its divided up into 2000 to 4000 ac per hunting group. They mostly all have about 200 to 300 acres per hunter. In our part of NW TX if all those guys comes anywhere close to killing a buck a year then they will be completely out of ANY older age bucks in a few years. In a situation like that the best management plan ideas will never work and DEFINITELY NOT PRACTICAL TO CULL.
>>Medium Intensity Managed property—IMO to have expectations of having an opportunity at hunting a “Quality Trophy” buck on a sustained basis year in and year out you need a good plan and a good group of guys and landowner committed to the long haul. It does NOT HAVE TO INCLUDE CULLING or supplemental feed. You do need to keep a handle on total deer numbers as it relates to carry capacity and a good doe/buck ratio. The other ingredients are a big enough place or great neighbors and DO NOT kill too many bucks. Not killing too many bucks is best achieved by having a large number of acres per hunters. This acre to hunter ratio can be very difficult to achieve with high lease prices.
I will use our NW Tx place last year as an example. I call it a Trophy lease that is family friendly. We manage for Trophies but we also manage to produce as large a Quality Management Buck as we can. For whatever reason, we rarely see what most would consider a real sorry cull buck so the ones that are inferior we let them get older. When they get to be 5 yr old they are often times in the 120s BC. For the guys Ive put together that is a real nice “extra” buck to get while they hunt for a real Trophy. Our wives and kids often kill these Mgnt Bucks and that keeps everybody happy for the years when a Trophy doesn’t come along. Last year we killed 18 bucks on 10500 acre and normally that would sound like too many for our country but the key is that only 7 of them were Trophies and the rest were Mgmt or Culls. Our Culls are anything 4 yr that scores 110 or less and we had about 3 last year and we made sure that most were killed by kids. A little over a third were Quality Mgmt Bucks which is 110 to 130 BC and a little over a third were Trophies from 130s up to 167.
Considering we don’t try to Intensively manage nor do we pay for supplemental feed nor do we pay 5 digit lease fees, then all things considered that kind of success keeps all our guys pretty happy.
Back to CULLING. If we culled all the young bucks then we would never have the older bucks the guys love to hunt that score in the 120s. And there is no doubt in my mind that some of the bucks that other places would cull end up being in the 130s or 140s sometimes. Culling may have its place in the Intensively Managed places but for the majority of Texas hunters I just don’t think its practical.

Disclaimer—a long post like this does not mean that I know squat about what im saying so take it for what its worth which hopefully to some it will be at least 2 cents and you paid less than that.

I was on a 5000 acre game ranch. Low fence or no fence as the north boundary is the Sulphur River. No Protein feeding only corn and once the hogs made a wallow the deer didn't even look at the corn feeders.

Again, great discussion. Agree with most of what has been said so far. There is the ideal, and there is the pratical, and there is the possible. Every ranch has to make the decisions of what would best for them given their own constraints. I don’t believe there is any correct answer for anyone, and the “correct answer” may shift over time given real life. Still fun to talk about.

You said that with so many fewer words. I just cant do that. Ideal, practical, possible--I like that.

It took reading yours and STX’s posts to get to that. Not sure that is the best way to say it, but it makes sense when using your Goldilocks analogy .

The 5700 acre pasture/ranch hunters had no idea how many deer they had or had they ever done a survey. They were feeding protein using Lamco timered feeders. Regulating how much they fed. They were of the mind set they did not have to many deer but were disappointed in their results after quite a few years of limited harvest and feed. Doing the first blind counts opened their eyes to what part of their issue was...more deer than they thought they had. When they added up their fawn numbers alone and I mentioned that is how many deer they needed to shoot just to keep the current population the same, they about fell over. They had to clear anything with the LO but he was on board after they explained what they wanted to do. Killing spikes was just a way to pull deer numbers down with the tight buck to doe ratio and to many deer. Easy for them to put a friend alone in a blind and tell him to shoot a doe or a spike. You put a guest in a blind and tell him to shoot a 2.5 yr old 7 pt and 99%(back in the late 90's) of the time they will kill the first 7pt 1.5 yr old that steps out. Were deer numbers the issue? Absolutely they were...but in this lease situation the LO would have never agreed to them pulling that many deer off by only killing mature bucks. No one frets over a spike for removing buck numbers when you have the ratio and to many deer.
The second ranch was basically the same but that situation was a bit different. They owned the land and leased the pasture they added to it. They managed all of it the same plus fed protein on it. No survey but just shoot a few deer and feed as much protein as they could(year round). They did not believe the numbers of deer they had till the survey was done. We killed 175 deer the first year, 185 the next year and then 98 IIRC the last year. The first year there were only 2 7+ yr old bucks killed over 150 by guests. There were about 30 bucks killed that were 5+ and scored under 130. The same was done the next 2 yrs. (I left after 3 yrs).That brought the population down dramatically but still not in-line with where they should be for that habitat. It was a step in the right direction. The genetics were there in that herd but it had been top graded for years. Low end bucks were left to die of old age or eventually get shot after being involved in the breeding herd for way to many years. Not nearly enough does were shot for the amount of feed fed...that feed caused high fawn crops even in drought years. They never killed enough deer to cover their recruitment rate. Just add more feeders and feed more.....bandaid type approach. This ranch was part of what was once a very large acre ranch that had produced numbers of high scoring deer by the lease hunters. The lease hunters goals were to kill a 160+ buck each year...in the end they were killed some top end younger bucks when they could not find a mature buck that fit that class. Were deer numbers the issue on this ranch? Absolutely they were a major part of the issue but the top grading was even as bad of an issue. Today with the management they have in place they have more feeders, improved the habitat, culled and pulled a lot of deer off and have one of the top deer herds I have seen. The amount of deer over 160 are amazing and the amount of deer over 180 is overly as impressive. Today they shoot cull/management bucks that most would consider trophies. 99.9% of the 2 yr old bucks will have had 6 points or more as yearling to have lived to see 2.5 yrs old. They cull as many of the bucks they can before the rut so the top end deer of every age class get very little pressure put on them and they get a chance to breed.
The third ranch had a long term management plan in place. They started a new program with the new biologist...he was aggressive and progressive. His survey the first year showed deer per acres numbers ranging from a deer to 9 acres in a pasture to a deer to 35 acres in another pasture...IIRC the average over the whole ranch was a deer to 20 acres. Some of the habitat would not support a deer to 35 acres. This is a very large ranch so they had habitat ranges from one area to another. Some the habitat issues were man made and were going to take time to correct. The biologist had intensively shot spikes and culls/management bucks on the ranch managed prior to this one. The result were impressive back then for the early 90's.
So to answer your question...the short term fix was killing off mouths. They were successful in doing that and it showed quickly. The long term improvements can be attributed to long term goals and sticking to their management plans. Their management practices(culling in particular) are being upgraded every few years. The results have been more impressive the last 3 yrs than you would believe.
For smaller landowners this is not feasible since they do not have the resources to do that and just don't control enough acres to see any kind of improvement. Then you factor in AR restrictions and it now is very difficult to get enough deer off the habitat with a good buck to doe ratio. My little place is an example of this. I have limited my buck harvest to only 7 bucks (all mature) with two yrs killing 2 per year and several years not killing any bucks since 2012. I was the only one shooting does around my place during that same period and the population showed that. With MLD (on does only) I was able to pull off 29 does in that 8 yr period. It would be scary to see how many deer would be on my place if I had not done that. Taking off those does alone tightened the buck to doe ratio up tremendously with it being 1 to 1 or even more bucks than does for a few years in a row now. One year I counted up 49 bucks I had seen on camera or in person from Sept till Jan...41 or 42 those bucks had made the season. With my limited harvest on bucks it created a problem on the overall numbers side. Luckily low fawn numbers the last few years are helping on that end. I am hoping that by shooting does every year and low fawn crops that eventually they the buck numbers will come down to a better level.

The answer is "it depends" IME it is different on every property, even with a fence line separating the places. A lot will depend on the habitat, their rainfall averages, the deer numbers, the age structure of the herd, the hunting pressure around their lease, the length of their lease, will the lease hunters shoot or pass on the deer required, will the lease hunters take chances by letting the right deer walk another year, etc. Culling or shooting management bucks is not really doing much on a smaller place...shooting only mature bucks is a great start as long as it is done at the correct amount based off of the surveys each year. Shooting to many of the wrong deer can be an issue on smaller acreages. Smaller acreage lease are not so much about managing the deer as it is about managing the hunters. Not putting X amount of hunters on Y acreage.....it should be about putting X amount of hunters per Y amount of bucks. Getting X amount of hunters all on the same page with one goal in mind is a feat in itself. Not many leases can do that to attain their goals. More importantly many leases do not want to do that..they just want to shoot deer and have a great time outdoors. Nothing wrong with either lease group. My

Obviously you have not been on any of those 3 ranches.

Yes that makes sense. And I get your strategy for your place too. I wish Oklahoma (where my place is) offered me an option to take more doe, but their DMAPS program requires more land than I currently have access. I have the real possibility of joining a lease in OK that has real trophy potential and will need some doe removed, and that will further limit my ability to take doe off my place. Conundrums. But not great for management unless I can convince my son to actually fire his bow at something this year. I am sure I could get some friends to shoot some doe on my place too...

I can’t help you need cheaters.

You need a thermal drone

IMO, for management on smaller places you need to concentrate on the things you can control. Get a handle on what the deer numbers are on our place/lease and what they county average is for your area. If deer numbers are to high then work on the doe numbers with the tags you have....even if it is 2 does per year it will add up over time. In 5 yrs that is 10 less doe mouths and their fawn(s) crops over that period which can make the number much greater. Fewer does can raise just as many if not more fawns per year. If you can I would address the water issue if you are in an area that is lacking water> This can create more deer activity on your place/lease over time. For me this is a biggie,..in heavily hunted areas address the amount of pressure that you put on the place/lease in all the seasons. Make the best suited area of the ranch a bedding sanctuary that is not traveled into. These are all things I have done on my little place in the last 8 yrs now.

Albeit on a larger place, our problem isn't from hunters taking too many deer, but from hunters not taking their portion and especially the antlerless goal. What is it about horns?

Know of an interesting program where doe numbers were provided and hunters were successful The next year, the number was higher and the hunters were successful. The next year, the antlerless tally included fawns at the rate of 20%. The fourth year, the fawn % was increased to 40%. Numbers, buck/doe ratio and then you can start "sifting" out undesirable characteristics.

Good info as always. There have been numerous discussions and debates on this (and other forums) over the years about leases costing too much, having too many or not enough rules, numbers of guest, etc. I have always stated that hunters need to match their style and wishes with the lease they are joining. If you primarily want meat and the hunting experience for you, family, and friends then that type of lease is common place. If you primarily enjoy the management aspect and want to work to grow bucks to their full potential and your goal is to take a trophy end buck then there those leases are out there. Problems arise when a hunter who wants and expects one thing joins a lease that is set up with different goals than theirs.

Having been in charge of a large, LF ranch for many years, IMO the number one quotient for success is getting the right members to join. You can have rules and management programs in place all day long but if a hunter is not willing to abide by them then it simply will not work.

So in our case our LO and my job is to make sure any potential members are given full information up front as to how the ranch is operated and what is expected of each member. Finding folks who are willing to be patient with what they shoot while paying out lots of $$ is not easy but can be done. Just takes a lot of up front effort.

Again, matching the right hunters with the right lease/ranch is where it begins.

IMO management or "cull bucks" are both very broad terms. What I would consider a buck under those terms on my property would be completely different than what someone else on their property. Some like just seeing a lot of bucks whereas I like seeing the right buck(s). Some areas a goal of 130 class bucks every year is realistic whereas a 150 class buck every year is not realistic. Others places have a goal of multiple 160+ every year and it is very attainable. There are larger ranches across the state that have the genetics to get 160+ deer every year and fall short for a number of reason IMO. How you get a place to your goal is where the major differences begin. Almost everyone's place where they allow bucks to get old will have some of the type of bucks they are looking for. Differences arise in management plans for the bucks but the end goal is the same. One issue then becomes if they get to that goal what do they do to control numbers? That is where the serious management begins and sometimes the arguments start. Like tlk posted you need one good leader that can take input from the masses but has the final say.
Years ago I liked to get the deer population to the correct numbers for the acreage, buck to doe ratio addressed as quickly as I could, work on habitat/nutrition, then start to work on taking the lower end bucks and finally start to take trophy bucks after a 4-5 yrs. What I learned 30 yrs ago was that in some habitats deer numbers have a way of multiplying very rapidly with number reduction. When shooting only does very early you could increase buck numbers rapidly and you filled up your buck numbers with very young age classes. You had your buck to doe ratio where you wanted it and your carrying capacity where you wanted it but lack mature buck numbers. To keep your numbers where you wanted them you had to make room for the new fawn crop numbers every year. To do this there was no choice but to shoot the lower end of those younger age class bucks. This was done just to keep your numbers where you wanted and to try to get the older age classes of bucks filled in. Early on by allowing buck numbers to grow for 3 or 4 yrs I soon learned that if I did not like him at 4 or 5 yrs of age, there was very high chance I did not like him at 1 or 2 yrs of age. Not every deer has the genetics to be the class of deer your are looking for. If I have the tags and resources, now I will shoot the lower end bucks the first year and every year after. In the end it was a deer number and it was a mouth off the habitat. This came from watching 100's of bucks for years on TC or from visual sightings.
Genetics on a ranch and what those genetics can show play a major part of decisions. Those genetics can vary greatly across a county and region. Expectations sometimes have to be adjusted after a few years hunting a place. Record keeping and history play a major role in your decisions on a place if your are serious about deer management. Past history is important if it is available. Looking at deer killed off a place 20, 30 or even 70 yrs ago is important from a genetics and goals/expectations standpoint.
One thing that many do not consider is the amount of hunting pressure you can put on a ranch/lease to attain your management goals. How the pressure, when it is applied and how much hunting pressure is applied will effect the every ranch/lease differently. You go from 0 to 60 in one month of hunting on a place that has not had much hunting pressure and negatively effect it long term. Stress on a deer herd is not good.

We cannot take bucks until 3 1/2 and then they have to have less than 8 points. At 4 1/2, all 8 pointers can be on the table. Even so, we have come to find if ugly when young, likely ugly when older.

WOW!!! All I did was sleep a few hours and I come back and theres more deer management information on this thread than any book ive ever read on the subject. Lots of good contributors on here but STx continues to blow me away. Its remarkable his knowledge but the fact that he is willing to spend so much of his time sharing it is fantastic and very unigue. I hope all yall realize how lucky we are to have that kind of source. Hes not gettting paid nearly enough!!! I dont want to short change any others out there that may know as much as STx, but if you are out there I think its safe to say that you are not sharing your insights at nearly the level he does. At some point I may go back through and try to address some of his points as well as others but theres just too much to get my head around right now.
Back to topic. Even given all of STx information I hope its clear that he still shares some of my thoughts as well as tlk and TxBuck and others that there are many situations that culling should not or cannot be addressed. Deer management is similar to a vehicle that has many parts and it takes a wide assortment of tools to get it going and keep it going.

One thing that studies have shown is taking that one buck doesn’t affect the deer herd anymore than not taking him. Meaning, the genetics of the herd are not negatively or positively affected by taking a single (or couple) buck. When you talk about high grading or low grading the herd, then you are talking modification of the herd, but for the majority simply removing deer means removing mouths. In that case it can be a ugly deer or a good deer, it’s just reducing a mouth. When you talk actually taking numbers, then you have to be selective because you could shoot all the good ones and leave the bad ones (high grading) or just shoot too many and have none left for the next year or two. It is a deliberate act, not just random shooting.

Again, for the vast majority of hunters this is not really applicable, just removing doe and mouths to feed and trying to keep overall numbers down to increase nutrition for the remaining deer

Absolutely great stuff within this entire thread but bolded above to me says it all.
What is a management or even a cull buck on some places could very well be the best buck on other places!
There are LF ranches/pastures where they literally consider up to 170" deer management deer and 140" deer culls. Now granted those kinds of places are far and few between but they do exist.
When we talk about those types of 'upper end' places the shoot/don't shoot standards are going to be quite a bit different than a place that is in it's 2nd or 3rd year of management!

Each place is certainly different and must be managed accordingly with someone very knowledgeable leading that charge....such as stxranchman!

Hell, if I'd have culled every 8 point or less mainframe buck on my little place 8 or 9 years ago we'd have only had one buck left around! lmao

In the hill country, (Comal county) where my FILs lease is, a 2.5 year old with no brows gets shot. No questions. Up here in North central Texas our deer population is lower and we have better nutrition. I'm not interested in just shooting a buck just because I can. I'd probably let him walk.

If your lease has a bunch on them as you say, why not start with shooting the oldest one's first? Try to kill the mature 4.5-5.5 yr olds.

Taking culls and management bucks does not "change the genetics" on any ranch. What is does do, IMO, is limits the number of bucks that show their poor genetics from breeding. Does provide one half of the genetics and of course there is no way to "judge" the genetics of a doe. But the OTHER 50% (bucks breeding those doe) can be limited.

So in our situation we cull a ton of does most years to keep the numbers in line. Then we provide supplemental feed coupled with our natural browse (which is amazingly diverse and plentiful). Then we shoot any buck that does not show potential - if left alone nature will produce straight 8 pointers all day long. Our deer have multiple kickers, splits, wide, narrow, mass, and points that it makes zero sense to let a 3-4 year old basic 8 point walk. All I know to go by is our results over many years - so at the end of the day we ain't changing nothing!

I started a thread about me and a long time commitment to improving my Ibex. It has worked but it has taken quite a few years. First off you have to have the right genetics to start. I did not and had to purchase a male that did. Same would go with WT. Your best Buck you have on the entire place may not have what you are trying to manage for. What do you do then? Every year I remove the oldest Females. If a certain amount of females are born I remove that amount of the oldest females. That way the young ones have more of the traits I am looking for. Again can you do that with WT? You could but chances are you won't. Every 3 years I purchased a new pure bred male and removed the older one. Again it would be hard to do this with WT. So as not to draw this out. Unless you have something to start with. Unless you will be committed to actually working at a plan. Unless you are HF or have a very large LF acreage you may have a tough time meeting you goals. And another thing. And this is just my own beliefs. The AR's that have been started are in the long run going to change the antler type in those areas. You keep letting less than 13" wide antlered bucks breed the does and what do you thing the long term result will be?

To those that cull a bunch - What do you do with all that meat??

I've asked around out here and the area food banks don't do that much. I know Hunters for the Hungry and Woodburys in Kerrville is still a donation site, but at $30.00 a pop, if you need to take off 20+ it adds up real quick. Plus Kerrville is still a ways. I have a walk-in cooler, so that reduces the urgency of the process, but I'm trying to figure out how to help some people and not waste meat. I'm talking to a local pastor, and we may be able to get something going, but I'm curious what others do.

Made five deer into sausage and sent one to Hunters for the Hungry. Recently learned about a church on 3009 that processes deer into hamburger to serve the indigent.

There are many individuals here who will ask for and take gutted does. There ae others who want the meat (buck or doe) for tamales.

The Pitchfork offers doe hunts to youth groups each year......

Game wardens will come get our deer and donate them to needy families. Our rancher also takes some and donates to folks

^^^I think this is fairly common or would/could be if you just make some phone calls and establish some relationships.
I well remember when the MLD program first started. I was on the Executive Committee of TWA in the late 80s early 90s and we had lots of heated discussions about rather to approve the original MLD program. Besides a potential loss of hunter opportunity, one of the concerns was that landowners would pay "hired guns"/ranch hands to just mow down the needed numbers of deer and just have the meat wasted. I dont think that ever happened much if at all but I remember it being a concern. I feel like the type of person that controls a large enough property to need to kill large numbers would be the same type person to do whats right with the meat.

a number of years ago, likely 10+/- ... I hadn't taken much of anything, maybe a doe all season when we hit the extended doe/spike season, I stopped by the processor I had used for years (knew him & wife from HS) on my way out to hunt and told him that if he had any unclaimed deer, I would pay the processing fee as I was very short on meat in the freezer. He said he had a buddy on an MLD place near Brownwood that would be coming in later that day with a load of culls. After my hunt, I swung back by to find a 16' trailer with 30-40 field dressed does his friend brought in, he asked how many you want processed? All clean head/neck shot.

the point to the story, you might swing by some of the local processors and ask if they have anybody wanting to cover the processing fee for the meat. Also might ask if they know a needy family that could use the meat, maybe offer to split processing costs ...

I'm sure you can find someone(s) on here that would love to go on a cull/doe hunt for the meat ... or would pay the processing fee for the meat, some of those new hunters that have all the questions about how to get started, might make for a prime learning opportunity for some of those as well.

^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^

Also, if you set up weekends where your group lines up a bunch of does/culls in the crosshairs you can put the word out in the nearest towns as places like the feed stores and let them know you will be bringing a bunch of field dressed deer in to give away at a certain time. We did this on one ranch and gave away 50-60 deer at the local feed store in a matter of about an hour.
Just make sure to provide whoever is taking the deer with the proper documentation https://tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdforms/media/pwd_980_l2000_wildlife_resource_document.pdf

Lots of really valuable info on here about what to do with extra deer. Great if someone could start a new thread just about that.

....

why does everyone get so uptight about short brow tines? I've seen this alot.. kill all short brow deer. people will let a 12 point with 17" beams and 6" 2's and 3's live until he's 9, but kill anything with short brows at 2-3.

why not kill all short G2 bucks? that's a common trait with STX deer to have 2/s half the length of 3's, but no one culls them.

meh

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

Because very few are actually being honest about what they can actually achieve, and are soley just shooting another buck disguised under the cull methodology.

I’m right there with you, thus why most intense management plans are score, Age Class rank, frame, etc...combination of characteristics. They are managing for exceptions in age classes

Now again, not everyone, but if we took a poll of those that intensely manage with criteria set forth by those that actually intensely manage.... it’s going to be a minute percentage

Shoot the ugly and only the pretty is left

Kyle, I generally agree with your logic. Although, I dont think many want to cull "short" brow bucks but many want to cull "no" brow bucks. The logic would be that everyone would hold out thinking that ANY point will get longer with age but a buck without a brow has a good chance of NEVER growing a brow. In my situation if we cull at all it is based on BC score as compared to his age group and our overall expectations of what our group wants. Myself and others on this thread have stated that to cull at all likely does little if anything to change the future genetics of the herd. Instead, culling should be thought of more as a way of thinning out the numbers of mouths per the available food and should only be used in certain situations where an EFFECTIVE overall management plan is in place.
I had already commented in so much detail earlier in this thread I hesitated to post again but there has been so little activity in the Deer Hunting section on here that I wanted to keep something alive and going.
-edit to concur with Bobo(we typed at same time).

ONLY if you shoot ALL the ugly... EVERY year

yep, sounds like our place out SW of Ozona ... when I first got out there, reviewed game cam pictures from the previous couple of years with the biologist, her comment was "you need to kill all these with ugly horns and no brow tines", as there were a bunch of freaks (1x5, 2x5, 2x6, all weak on the same side like it was passed down). That is basically what we have done going on 8 years and they seem to be thinning a little bit and getting better and more mature other bucks, still not really trophy caliber but better than when we started. The previous hunters only killed "trophys" but the problem was those were 2.5 to 4.5 year old 10 points, maybe 110 b/c at the top, pencil horned minimal mass but with nice form. We have passed on several 9-10 point 130-140+ since they were 4.5 years old and keep on thinning the freaks and no brow tine 3.5+ y/o, while keeping the ratio with does under close check. It takes a lot of time and not fixing the problem within a few years. I fully suspect we will start having some decent quality (if they survived Anthrax) within a few more years.

Well done. I've heard it takes 10 years of hard culling to really see results. 'Hope they made it through the Anthrax. Good hunting.

BOBO is spot on. As long as there uglies to breed there will be uglies.

If you are serious about management and have the resources to shoot them then don't discriminate against the "genetically challenged" deer.....

This has been a great thread so I guess now would be an ok time to gently bend it a little. PMK mentioned 1x5's and similar. Im no expert but I feel strongly that a deer with just a spike on one side and a normal looking 4 or 5 points on the other is not a product of genetics. It is some type of injury and normally it would be caused by not cleanly shedding that side in a prior year. Ive heard it called "dirty shedding" where a part of the antler is left and the regrowth is not allowed to grow normally. I have seen these go on for years and I have seen them grow back normal in the future. I had an Age/Score thread just a few weeks ago on here of a buck that was normal for years and then he was a 1x5 at 4yr and then a normal 6x6(146) the next year. The guy that killed the 6x6 was real glad we protected him as a 1x5 instead of culling him. im not saying you should shoot em or not but just offering some first hand knowledge.

I am not one to cull a buck that I think has had antler damage or freaky looking antlers without knowing past history on them...unless the one good side is bad enough alone to warrant a bullet. I have seen so many different antler damaged bucks or freaking horned bucks that I had history on that got a pass due that that history. Some bucks only stay like that one year, some it takes two years if the pedicle was/is damaged, some never return to normal but still get a pass if that had been above average in their age class. I have heard so many guys talk about killing freaky antler genetics off a place when 99.9% of the time those are velvet or rut antler damaged bucks. Throw in a deer not fatally wounded or hoof rot and you will see a lot of freaky looking deer. The tighter the buck to doe ratio the more "freaky horn" deer will show up. Trail cams have really changed how often we see deer without ever seeing many of them in person. Those cams have saved a lot of deer from being shot when you have years of history of them.

I saw this buck one morning and texted a pic(off my camera) to the ranch manager/biologist to inquire about him since he had not told me about any bucks that were on the save list. I could tell he was very old and could have been a buck they may be saving due to his age. He told me that buck had been estimated to have scored between 200"-210" gross the year before and went downhill for some unknown reason..so don't shoot him. The buck being blind in one eye was the way they had him identified. They wanted to watch him for another year to see if he went back to the way he looked in the past.



This buck was one they new about and had him on TC but rarely seen him in person. I was able to take pics of him 3 yrs before this in the same area I found him when I took these pics. He was the same way a huge framed buck that showed up with damaged antler on one side. It never went back to normal and he had the white/blind eye for years. They called him "Moonshine". They kept him off the shoot list hoping he would go back to a normal rack.


Neither of these bucks had any leg or injuries I could see. Both had matching sides in the past but turned freaky or went downhill due to injury not from genetics. History is what kept them from being shot.

As long as uglies are alive you will SEE uglies.

You are simply eliminating them out of an age class until there are no more in the upper age classes to see, once you stop, Then the frequency will return and every year they will creep back into the age classes as they age

Only way you change genetics is swamping the entire doe herd with a certain buck for years while having an extremely heavy hand on the unglies. In wild it’s hard to gene swamp when most bucks don’t breed more then a die or two.


Atleast that’s my opinion,

You can not do it by simply shooting all those types bucks off every year...you have to have a plan on what to do and how to do it with your doe side of the equation. You can do a lot by just culling the right does....then throw in an aggressive buck program and you will see results. Still a long term commitment that most are not willing to commit to.

Ok here is one to ponder. Saw him for three years. Started out with the same horns but much smaller. We let him ride because we figured he was injured and may recover. We took him the year this picture was taken. Truthfully our concern was he would injure some of our really good bucks if he was to fight them so we shot him. Never recovered him so did not get the opportunity to look him over closely to see if there were injuries. Mother Nature is a funny lady at times

She's no lady.

I agree 100%, doe harvest is baseline in my opinion and every thing is built up from there, including habitat work.

The ones I saw like this that we were able to take almost always ended up having a badly damaged skull/pedicle area. The ones I saw during the season when they injured it would be missing the whole antler on that side after the rut. The next year it grew looking like the one in your photo. I have seen them with just a long spike or mainbeam with a fork on it from the same type of injury during the rut. Then year after year they would break that bad side off from fighting during the rut. Sometimes they would have a great side on one side then not much at all on the other. Seen some that grew a really huge nontypical side with a similar type injury.

For the vast majority of folks managing property (leased or owned) doe management is going to be the best yield due to just reducing mouths.
I am glad you guys touched on the doe side of “ugly bucks” since you just don’t know.

"ONLY if you shoot ALL the ugly... EVERY year" Why wouldn't you? Shouldn't this be a goal? Maybe even a mantra?

Prior to getting on MLD and with limited tags, Klappenbach and myself have done nothing but try to shoot the easiest to identify cull deer and not the trophy "management" ones. Although there are typically one or two easy to ID culls each year, the remainder are getting better and better making the decisions on which pones to live and which to die harder and harder. It's a good thing.

To me the buck management is last step. Thats why I stopped chiming in on most management threads. Lets skip the first 5 steps and focus on how we can justify taking a buck over does by using a genetic excuse, is what the threads should be called.

Only a handful of counties in Texas that don’t need to focus on doe harvest. In other words most leases seldom focus on herd health and doe harvest or they think they can use carrying capacity in a bag to over come it. That’s a very counter productive short term Mind set. If you truly want to manage a property your lease fee isn’t a justification to shoot a trophy ever year. It’s obligation to managing the herd to eventually shoot a trophy.

You walk on to ranch with mega bucks as a large percentage of the age classes it’s because they don’t shoot mega bucks, they shoot bottom Of age classes.... and that’s how you get to the trophy harvest ages in the 8.5 + year mark, that most can’t fathom.


We all hunt for different reasons and an exceptional deer is one of them, getting to an exception is as simple or as complex as you want it to be, just have to be honest with your self on what you are willing to do to get there. A debate over spikes, no brows, short brows etc isn’t even a debate unless you are willing to do everything else that’s more effective as a whole to get there.

I currently stand in the I’ll fill freezer first and then manage accordingly to how my freezer looks. Empty freezer, I’m on doe patrol, full freezer I’m trophy hunting, but Im not hunting a truely managed property. I hunt a normal texas property... that numbers are truely known, ratio is a dart board, and the trophy/cull criteria/view is arbitrary.... but getting better

Would this count as “ugly”?

You wouldnt, if you don’t have the resources to effectively do it, and if you don’t have the same page hunters and landowners.

Once you move to MLD you start actually getting defined restraints on hunters built off a foundation of management, with everyone’s buy in.

Vast majority of leases have some loose arbitrary management plan thats more of a justification to use that second antler tag then actual management, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that

HUD, this discussion is for all comers, so some places just don’t have the tags needed and LO or managers don’t want to go through the “hassle” for MLD.

For my place in OK, I need 1000 contiguous acres to enroll in their DMAPS program which would give me More doe tags and longer gun season. But I don’t have that (yet) and am stuck with my 5 tags and my son’s, but getting friends up to oklahoma, buying a several hundred dollar license for out of state, and taking one or two doe doesn’t make sense for a lot of them.

So to answer you question, tags is the main reason.

Some places are so large the time and effort is too large to take all the uglies and the hunters just don’t want to do the work or have the time. Lots of reasons to not shoot all the uglies

Edit, wrote that without seeing BOBO’s post above. Pretty much on the same page on the question.

What did he look like last year and the year before?

Wow... Im busy for 24 hours and this thread has kept going strong. I feel like this is the BEST THREAD ive seen on this forum. If you are wanting to improve the property you are on for deer hunting i suggest you go back and read everything on the thread and take notes. There are differences of opinion but lots and lots of good ideas/info.
I will catch up and reply to several posts and likely post some pics of lop sided racks but for now I want to address Bobos thread above. His first sentence he basically is saying that hes tired of posting on "culling" threads cause nobody seems to listen. All they want is an excuse to shoot a second buck. I feel the same way and started not to post on this thread cause i knew it would be a battle that no one would win. Insert head banging wall. However, I think the majority of posters are starting to at least imply there is some common ground that all different types of managers/hunters can agree to. Too much to recap so again I suggest if you are serious about some plan to improve your bucks that you reread all this thread.
Bobo doesnt always post a long post but I think he really put some time into this one above and it says a lot that apply to the majority, IMO.....

That is some kinda ugly. Never really seen one close to that. Such straight lines on several it just doesnt make sense. As STx said, its great to have history on bucks like that. He mentioned how the increased use of TC has really changed alot about what we can do management wise. We went from no TCs to a tremendous network of cams that we put pics on an in house website for all our hunters to learn and study and talk about. The history on some of the bucks really helps with management decisions. The Age/Score thread I had the other day on the buck that went from 130s to 167 in one year was an eye opener and the the 1x5 that went to a 6x6 the next year was a lesson for sure. Have a plan(realistic one), stick to it, keep records, have fun.

Agree FR, this is a good thread chock full of good info. Appreciate all the posts everyone has contributed.

Determine the effort you want to put into managing, determine if it’s possible given your resources, come up with a plan, implement and stick with it. Reevaluate annually.

It isn’t overnight, it isn’t a one year plan....and it’s work.

Just my thoughts.

As with anything in life the majority typically is not willing to be patient and take the time to do something the right way. This includes owning a business or running a deer lease or many other things. I was told many years ago that "successful people do the little things other people do not want to do." Lots of truth in that.

Our world today is all about instant gratification which does not jive with the long term approach needed to manage for top end deer. Whether it is hill country or south texas, the only way to grow better deer is to buy in to the program and stay for the long haul. Truthfully most hunters are not willing to do so. And that is ok - to each their own.

The starting line is having hunters/people who are committed to the long term even though it will cost money and time and tons of patience. IF you do not have those kinds of commited hunters then the rest of the managing is worthless. You can feed all you want but if the hunters are killing the wrong deer every year then feed becomes worthless and a waste of money. By the same token - if the ranch owner is not truly committed to a long term program then it is also for naught.

Again my 2 cents which is not worth a penny

Great post tlk 👍

The buck in the bottom photo looks like he may be blind in his left eye....you have any more photos of him where you can see that eye better? The photo where hes looking straighter at the camera that left eye looks odd...may just be a reflection though.

I paid $20 a doe last year to donate at Fischers btw. Usual fee.

Read the red highlighted part above...the white/blind eye is why they nicknamed him "Moonshine". He did not hang around very long that afternoon after sundown and he was out about 300 yards when I took these pics. Best angle I have of it but that eye was snow white looking thru the binos. This photo really shows his age very well...with all the loose saggy skin under the jaw, in the face and in the brisket area.

Rust's deer is over the top ugly. No doubt on that one. Looks mature, maybe post mature, so may have been round too long or just long enuff to get injured, sick or something and could be considered an easy cull decision. That droopy beamed one is interesting. Lots of good aspects to his horns, but no way could you call that a cull. In addition, his raw score has to be at or above 150 and most would consider him to be an "unconventional" trophy.

Meat is meat and we get the opportunity to obtain plenty of it. After doe numbers and a desired buck doe ratio is in place, we have been attempting to manage antler wise with an over simplification of shoot the ugly. We like mass and especially weight on the tines. Long beams, long tines and strong eye guards are pluses. Yes, other you do need space, tags and nearby hunters to be on the same page. Even if nearby hunters are not on the same page, you can only control your actions. Others may benefit or even take advantage of it. Remember, no good deed goes unpunished. If desiring to improve antler characteristics, you have to avoid the notion that you are afraid someone nearby will shoot what you choose to pass on.

Look at this photo and realize all these bucks can be eaten. Looking at the three eights, there are two significantly inferior to the remaining one. If you are gonna be shooting bucks, It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out which ones of these need to considered for the kill list.

Since we are discussing freak/injured bucks here are a few others we have had over the years. First one we never harvested.

I don’t know, that was my first season on that place.

Would this buck be shot based off this one year? Many would shoot based off this one year. He was safe here due to AR under 13" spread rules. I also know what he was the year before this. Antler damage is not a reason to cull unless you have history of the buck or he would still fall in the lower portion of his age class IMO


He is the buck on the right walking away in this pic.

I watched that buck most of the season, til it got whooped by another buck. It moved to another feeder about 1/2 mile away, and got pics on another trail cam. Then the pic went to rancher for kill approval. A teenage son of another hunter took it, I was happy for him.

There are ranches that would shoot 4 of those 5 bucks under their management criteria. The only one they would keep is the one in the left background with multi-pointed rack. For them to keep an 8pt under 4 yrs old he would have to have really long tines and beams. The buck in the left front looks to be an older buck based off of that one pic. He is multi-tined but short tined and shows some age for what I like to see in a South Texas buck. He is more of a cookie cutter type buck, not what you want breeding does. I have friends that will tell you they are not worried about ratios when it comes to starting a management program. If they have the tags then they are getting rid of the bucks they do not like from the get go. They get the doe numbers where they want them and shoot what bucks they do not want or like the looks of.

This is a buck that I have a few years of history with.

That highlighted part to me shows he was as old as he looked in the pics. Most hunters will only look at the current day and not at the past history on a buck like this. If he was a 170+ deer, his look did not change his genetics IMO. He could have been a really great deer or not much at all with no history of him. Nothing wrong with taking post mature bucks that are on the downhill. I am one that likes to look at the history of a buck before I make my decision on shooting or passing on him based off of what the other bucks look like that are on the ranch. If this ranch has better, younger bucks then shoot him...it is still a mouth off the habitat. IMO if you are managing correctly the better genetic potential will always be in your younger deer.

tlk, that post of yours is worth way more than a penny. There is so much SPECIFIC info on this thread, but yours and the thread of Bobos I quoted earlier really speak to almost anyone trying to improve their herd. Lots of info floating around on specifically how to improve a specific situation but yours and Bobos really speaks to the MASSES which is usually the foundational info that I always try to get across.

Now that is ugly..... You gonna give us some history? Hes certainly had enough time to do better than that.

From that one pic...do you think he was always that ugly? Can tell why he is that way....Genetics? Age? Lack of nutrition? Sick? Injured? Wounded? or Combination of some of them all?
Here he is the next summer after the pics above. Notice the small notch or tear in his right ear.

I assume you are setting us up for a teaching point which is great. I do not know whats wrong but assume hes seen better racks and better health. Probably a combination of the factors you listed. I assume you mentioned the notched ear for ID purposes and not a hint to his issues(youre not real big on hints.)

A freaky horned one from a few years ago. He actually had a couple thin points about like pencils coming outa the base on the left. This was in the earlier years before we kept a real good history on TC and we didnt communicate among hunters like we do now so I dont really know the history on him. Im fairly certain that anything like this is not genetic but some type of injury/dirty shedding. Little girl that killed him was really excited rather you called him a cull or a trophy.
,

cannot tell from pics but assume he was just not broken off. Injury most likely

FR great buck for a first time deer hunter.

STX, I believe you have shown that ugly deer in the past, if I remember correct. You posted him on an age thread.
If that is the same one, knowing having history is the lesson for sure.

guessing he had a tag in that ear at one time?

In a couple of the pictures he looked as though he might have been injured as his shoulders look a little strange?

There is no doubt there must be something different about him or I'm pretty sure you would have put him in sausage long before he was as old as he was in that last picture. lol

yes, TC really help to give a longer term history on the area deer, and keeping the history from year to year seems to help identify separation, culling, saving, age, etc.

Here are a few of the culls we had 3-5 years picture history on, slick on one side every year, and varying small points, these are some of the ones the biologist saw earlier pictures of that said need to go. estimates were youngest was 4.5 and the oldest was 6.5 based on TC and visual history. I will look to see if I can find more pictures of some on the non-G1 but not finding them offhand.

I didnt even think that it might look like he just broke off his beam, but I can see that now. We saw him up close and especially after the kill. It was obvious it wasnt a broke beam. That good right side had really good mass for our place and a big base. He was the same way on the bad side with a real big pedicle/base area. He had 3 points coming out of that pedicle area kinda like pencils or cigars and he broke two off. I just dont think anyway that genetics would cause that good a rack on one side and then the big base with trash on the other. Messed up pedicle just did not allow normal growth, IMO.
Ive got more weird horns I can post but ive been waiting for STx to tell us about that real teeny one he posted.

Bucks like this I just call "lopsided". Nothing real freaky about either side but one is just way bigger than the other. Only unusual antler trait would be how his right brow comes off his beam-very low. Hes pushing 150 on one side and 120 at best on the other. Just looks like two totally different deer. This is a few years ago and im showing pics of two different years and hes pretty much the same both years. Never saw him that we know of after the second year but he may of looked way different and we didnt keep as good a track of pics back then. Would of been a real solid deer if he would of matched the good side. He stood up right beside me as I drove by in the one pic(well actually all the pics but he was real close in one.)

The first pic is the LAST year and the other 3 are the year before.

These 3 are the year before. I dont know at all if the velvet pic is him or not but I think so, and yall can offer opinion on that.

Here is this buck a year later. He ran with the same bachelor group during the summer for two years. He disappeared after archery season that year. I thought he was 4 that last year and to narrow to shoot for this county..but someone I guess felt differently. I would loved to have seen him make 2 more years after the nice little jump he made after the damaged year.

Just that you can't really make a "management" call off of one year of antler growth on an unknown buck. This buck was probably never going to be anything special but most thought he was over the hill. I knew why he went downhill like he did..he was wounded during late Dec.

The bucks I have seen that look like this usually had broken an antler out of their skull cap during the rut. That low browtine is probably a 2nd beam that is due to the skull damage. IME bucks like this can go back to looking normal in 2 yrs from the damage. If, if they do not re-damage that side the rut the very next year after the original damage. When I have seen them break it out year after year they never have much more than a mainbeam with a point or two or a mess of points from one base like the first one your posted.
I saw this buck the season before when he had that left side broken into the skull. It was bouncing around loosely when he walked or ran. The only thing holding it was the hide around it so he eventually lost it or shed it later that season. The next year he grew this...notice the second little beam or point like yours above. He had really badly damaged skull, so he was not ever going to look normal again.

As usual Stx blows me away with the knowledge he has gained through all his experience. We are very lucky to have him as a contributor and I hope he continues to post.
How old do you think he was the year that he looked so crummy which I guess was the next year after the injury??
The information you gave about the results of an entire beam being broken out of the skull cap is very important I think. I always felt the lop side racks were NOT genetic but some type of injury but wasnt sure how likely it would be attributed to that type of breakage. Certainly makes sense and i appreciate the info. I hope everyone is getting the idea that a "freak horn" buck is likely not inferior genetically and lots of thought should be given before killing them based on how they look in just one year.

What is amazing to me is these bucks can essentially take a hole of their skull out and still survive, good luck having many humans from this day and era doing that.

One thing to remember, studies have shown that shooting good or bad deer does nothing to dictate future genetics for the herd, if a single “good” buck is taken due to freaky injury related antlers or weak antlers due to sickness or injury, the result will not be deleterious to the herd. Likewise, keeping them around is not likely to make any significant positive trend in the herd for the simple fact they may not be able to successfully breed that year (or in future years).
So while the thoughts are good to know about the potential future for some of these bucks, this is another reason to have a good understanding of your herd and history with bucks. If the injured was a great buck one year and had potential to return to greatness, then keep it around, but if it was never bound for glory, then shoot away (or let someone else) if desired.

Shooting and/or not shooting one messed up buck in a native LF population for the most part is not going to affect anything for future seasons other than acting as one less mouth to feed, and sometimes those sick deer eat a lot to help fight disease/injury.