Culls and Spikes - Long Post

I have seen on this and other forums, numerous discussions utilizing the words culls, inferior, management bucks and genetics. I am of the firm opinion that numerous factors influence antler growth and development, the least of which is the genetic makeup of the deer. I will never understand a hunter’s arbitrary shooting of yearling spikes without having the complete knowledge of what attributed to him being a spike. Additionally, I fail to understand how most average hunters feel they can determine that a particular deer is a genetic cull. Let me say that most hunters that will pull the trigger on yearling spikes and so called culls have never taken the steps needed to ensure that the deer has every opportunity to reach his genetic potential. They shoot the spike or the cull, management buck and think the world is a better place because the deer is out of the herd. What has he actually accomplished? Nothing, absolutely nothing. I know the hunter means well and actually thinks he is doing a good thing, but does this hunter actually think that he is improving the gene pool by removing one or two “inferior deer”? More generations of breeding influence than we can count have determined our present deer herd. Texas, for example, has approximately 4.5 million deer. This herd is the product of “X” number of years of genetic influences. Pick a number; millions, hundreds of millions, a billion, it makes no difference.. Eons of breeding and genetic influence cannot be altered by removing so called inferior deer from the herd. We cannot determine or alter the gene pool of free range deer. Once we arrive at this realization and accept this fact, we can then focus on the factors that will bring out or enhance the deer’s ability to live up to it’s genetic potential.
We all know very well that the combination of age, nutrition and genetics is needed for a deer to grow a large rack. However, there is more to the equation when considering whether a buck is a cull or a spike is inferior. I feel that there are several questions that must be asked and addressed when making the decision to dispatch a cull or shoot a yearling spike. Has the deer had every opportunity to reach his genetic potential? What is the property’s carrying capacity? Is the habitat optimal for deer? What is the buck:doe ratio? What is the fawn:doe ratio? Is there a balanced buck age structure? What is the recruitment rate? Once these issues have been addressed and/or corrected, then the issue of culling management bucks and spikes can be employed, but only within high fenced ranches. This is only my opinion. Take into consideration the factors of yearling buck dispersal throughout open ranges, the unknown genetic influence of does, the varying or nonexistent habitat and population management practices of surrounding landowners and environmental factors such a drought. Factoring the above, I believe that there is no such thing as a cull when it comes to free range deer and I know many of you will disagree with me on this issue.
I have spoken with hunters that told of all the spikes they saw and shot last year, but curiously didn’t see any spikes the year before. The only thing that changed from one year to the next on their particular property was the lack of rainfall which influenced nutrition. The genetics certainly did not change from year to year. The only thing they accomplished was the removal of a majority of the yearling age class in the name of inferior genetics.
Control what you can control and don’t worry about what you can’t. We can control age. Let the young deer walk. We can control nutrition. This is done through supplemental feeding, habitat improvements and addressing population measures. We cannot control genetics, never have, never will in free range conditions. If you want to shoot a buck, then by all means shoot it. You have every right to pull the trigger. Anyone can justify shooting a buck once the deer is on the ground. You don’t owe me or anyone else a reason for doing so. But please don’t shoot a buck and then cite barber shop science and coffee shop chatter by justifying your decision to do so by claiming it is a cull or an inferior spike. It just doesn’t make any sense. Genetics cannot be altered by lead and gun powder. If you want to make a change, start by addressing the habitat and population factors so that they are in the buck’s favor.

we had managed a smaller (1200 acre) for about 10 years. in that time we were able to enormously increase the whitetail population, up the score of the average buck, and up the body weight considerably. top end, we never killed bigger deer than were on it originally, and although numbers increased, we always had a balanced ratio of bucks and does, and also between age classes of bucks.

i've heard both ends of the argument as far as culling goes, but i can tell you this first hand:

we shot a hell of a lot of spikes(1 1/2 year old and older) and other inferior bucks in the 2 1/2 year and up age class.

it was very rare in the later years before we sold the place to see a cull buck or spike,even in down years. The one thing we did have alot of, was 115- 130 class eight pointers.

seems that we lost sight of our goals, and while blasting every infeior buck coupled with our hunters, after taking their trophies, would consistantly kill the biggest eight points they could find, leaving the "cull" eights to breed.

this is proof first hand that culling works, it not a backwards example, we effectively culled out our top end eights and left our crap eights to breed. we would have really nice ten points, small eights and a smattering of younger deer at a feeder.


now I will say this, unless you have a high fence(as we did) and you have a legitimate supplemental feeding program (as we did) and good habitat and a balanced ratio (as we did) then your pissing in the wind if you thing culling out a young buck on your grandaddy's hundred acres is gonna make a difference

If I remember right Dr. James Kroll wrote that. I would lean towards him having more knowledge of genetic make up of whitetail deer than perhaps all members on this fourm combined. Its been his job for 36 years, that and selling " Buck Forage Oats". IMO shoot what you want too. But for me I've shot enough deer over the years I look for mature bucks and culls are distressed deer in bad shape. Now with that being said I don't have any problem at all what so ever with a kid, woman, new hunter, or some one just wanting some back young backstrap shooting a spike. I just wouldn't encourage shooting all the spikes on your place. A spike this year might be a 10 when he's 4.

I don't know if Dr. Kroll wrote it or not. I have never read any of his books, guess I need to. TxTrophy85 showed improvements under his high fence and verified that culling works under high fence conditions along with habitat and population control. However, I don't feel that culling will ever have the desired effects on low fence, free range deer.

I have no problem with anyone shooting a spike or any other buck for that matter. It is supposed to be fun. It just annoys the you know what out of me when someone justifies shooting a buck because of genetic reasons and thinks that herd improvements are being made.

True, but there are exceptions to everything.

I agree that most people would benefit much more by putting their efforts into insuring the deer get proper nutrition and are allowed to grow to a mature age.

That being said, I'll still frequently make a choice on whether or not to pull the trigger based on what I consider to be "genetically undesirable" traits. Like the 3.5 year old with no eye guards I shot last year. In the big scheme of things it might not make much difference in the herd's genetic make up, but it dang sure can't hurt it either. And by shooting that buck, I have less incentive to shoot that 3.5 year old 130 class 10 point.

Tex-Star, best post in regards to management I have read on this forum in my short time here. Everything you posted is what I have been preaching for a number of years. I have a large free ranch ranch that I have been hunting for 14 years. In dry years we have a number of spikes all across the ranch. In wet years you will not find one on the place. I also have a $100 bill on the table at the camp to anyone who brings me a 2 1/2 or older spike. Been sitting there for 4 years now.

Amen.

What principals are you speaking of? Culling solely or culling combined with habitat and population management?

Culling based on deer density and buck doe ratio. We base numbers on carrying capasity of the land less supplementation. One animal unit per 20 acres.

I choose to shoot deer from the ends of the age classes. Mature usally means trophy, at least to someone regardless of score. Typiclly there are not enough bucks at that point or points in between to ballance the numbers.

This brings us to the younger classes and back to the questions I posed, if you have to take one wich one are you going to take.

kt

When I refer to a cull, I am talking about the worst looking (not a baby) deer I get on my cams. All the deer I am seeing have the exact same conditions and feed to grow. If I see one like the ugly 2.5 year old spike I shot last year I will take it. When most of my year old deer are 6 or 8 points I see no reason not to kill a spike that is on its second set of antlers.

or in my case...letting a 2.5 yr old walk that was a spike on one side and had 4 on the other. Figured he may have been injured and should cull based on the good side. Last yr there were 2 more that looked identical to him running around the back yard. Granted a doe could be part of the problem, but have decided with the amt of deer we have that it should be ok to use the better safe than sorry method.

If a culling system does not work....then why do so many state wildlife biologists throughout the country have it implemented within their respective states?

Sorry, but I do strongly disagree with your assumption!

Link to an article about antler development.

Article

If you have to shoot one, I don't think it makes any difference which one it is.


My first guess would be for hunter opportunity. The same presumed reason that spikes are allowed under AR's and extended seasons.


I gave my reasons of why I do not believe culling, including yearling spikes, is a viable management tactic. Please state your reasons of why it should be employed.

I'll show you a 2 1/2 year old spike for $100

Geoff927 posted an excellent article although I don't subscribe with the findings, the research facts are respected.

Here is an additional research article by which I base my management principles.

www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_w7000_0827.pdf

At the end of the day you have to choose one or the other or combine certain principals of both to suit your goals as a game manager.

kt
Thus the debate continues

Since your going to to use the Kerr study....

First find out if the control set of deer where from the same geographic location...

Kerr study started with a stacked deck

In 1973, biologists began gathering deer from throughout the state of Texas and placing them in holding pens. Only Texas deer were used in the research studies.

its in the article

Yes... you are correct.. Every deers location was documented. Kerr has excpetional records.

What your not told in the artical was where their deer that did the higher B/C where from. They give you an average of BC scores for each... yearling Spike vs multi-point. The score was higher for the multi-point, which were from where? and where was the small spike deer from? Multipoint- where from South Texas and Spike from the Hill Country

Would you expect a higher BC average from a group of hill country deer or South TX(probley Kelberg County)

So in a nut shell the only thing they proved was the genetics of their S.TX deer had a higher overall B/C score ability then the hill country deer.

If you wanted a book deer would you have a higher probley of finding one in Mason/LLano or the King ranch/South texas?

The test groups where not equal they where stacked from the get go. They put a fail safe into their study. They line breed bucks to duaghters.

If i see a spike year one, i let it walk. if i see the same deer the following year and its still a spike then it takes a dirt nap.

txtrophy85:

you sold your place in Zavala County? Bet that was hard to do!

Sorry to hijack the thread!

Wow-Another rant on the culling of spikes. This is getting a little old but my 2% of a buck is;

..will never understand a hunter’s arbitrary shooting of yearling spikes without having the complete knowledge of what attributed to him being a spike.
For your knowledge-he is a spike because he is genetically inferior (if you are looking for genetic traits for superior antlers)

They shoot the spike or the cull, management buck and think the world is a better place because the deer is out of the herd.
The world may not be a better place but at least you did something to help improve the quality of deer hunting.

What has he actually accomplished?
See above

We cannot determine or alter the gene pool of free range deer.
Yes, we can alter the gene pool if we all do our part. It may take alot of years to reverse what man has done to create the current situation. Over a period of many years men (and women) went out and found the very best set of antlers and took that deer and allowed inferior deer to reproduce.

This is only my opinion
I can agree with you.

Genetics cannot be altered by lead and gun powder.
See above

If you want to make a change, start by addressing the habitat and population factors so that they are in the buck’s favor.
It is extremely difficult to change the habitat of free range deer. There are too many economic factors on neighboring ranches that will always prevent optimum conditions (unless some sort of economic incentive is put in place). Culling of spikes helps accomplish your "addressing the population factor" along with helping to maintain the highest genetics.

All that said, obviously shooting spikes is only one part of the equation for a better herd. It may not even be as important as getting a better buck/doe ratio. If you can achieve a 1:1 ratio, eventually there will be no need to cull spikes as they will be rare.

Don't shoot the messenger, that's just the way it is (IMHO).

Or he was conceived later in the year, and range conditions may be poor, or mom wasn't the best mother-



Or he is right and you can't control low fence genetics just numbers and age of what you shoot.We cannot determine or alter the gene pool of free range deer.



If the King Ranch can't with unlimited resources how can you.
Only way to change a gene pool is shoot every deer buck and doe and replace them with a documented herd. Then COMPLETELY stop dispersal off and onto the property



Again you assuming you know that that deer is a spike based off genetics and not enviormental. Even if you do know it its genetic, how you going to get his momma and all his kin folk?

IMO habitat falls in line with total herd numbers-



you dangerously close on blaming spike on enviormental factors

Sure, one of the longest running most extensive research programs stacked the books/bucks and spent tons of money to prove a point everyone already knew. Please..............

So "hill country" deer suck and all offspring bucks are spikes? Sorry Central TX ranch owners you shi't out of luck. What about East TX, North TX or West TX? The trends can be applied to any deer herd and will hold true. Fact is, this requires tons more work than weekend warriors and armchair quarterbacks are willing to do.......its easier to say just wait and see

Well its a good thing I'm in South TX and don't have to worry about blasting spikes then worring about if they were the one in a thousand that could a, should a, possibly was a,............

LMAO...Never said hill country deer sux... But tell me how many Book deer come from the Hill Country compared to S.TX. And those that are breaking that threshold are doing it with introduce genetics for the most part, some aren't but most are. Thats book deer not 150-160's

I actually feel that the panhandle has some of the best genetics in the state. Combine that with low density and abundant food.. you got a winner



Look into it. Actually read the Study..then ask them directly.

You take a gene pool that already better the other and then line breed it... the differance between the two will increase. Thats excatly what they did, thats excatly what breeders of just about ever animal out there does. Not rocket science.

Wonder what would of happened if they rotated does every year? Bet you the numbers get a whole lot more even.

Yes your right a very long ran publicly funded study.



Not agrueing that one bit. Thats why I said culling doesn't work on low fence. Even the ones with best resources ($$$/time) can hardly do it effectively.

I give up. I think that everyone has already formed their own opinion on this subject.

But...if you can control "numbers" (get the ratio down to 1:1) then in effect you can control genetics. Only the highest quality bucks would reproduce by natural selection and you wouldn't see many spikes.

What JGILES said - He took the words right out of my mouth.

If you control numbers you are in effect making habitat improvements leading to a more abundant source of nutrition. That would be one reason you wouldn't see many spikes, not because you changed the genetics. You are giving the deer every opportunity to reach it's genetic potential.

"I have no problem with anyone shooting a spike or any other buck for that matter. It is supposed to be fun. It just annoys the you know what out of me when someone justifies shooting a buck because of genetic reasons and thinks that herd improvements are being made."
I just want to ask that if you have a 1.5 year old spike and or 5 pt, fork what ever and other 1.5 yr olds with 8 point racks and they all have the same feed and supplement opportunity why wouldn't you believe they lack the genetics for the larger rack. And especially by the 2.5 yr old time you will see it. I have seen 3.5 yr old fork horns no one wanted to shoot that had 13+" spreads and I'm here to tell you they were big enough body size to win breeding rights.

Personally I'll let first yr spikes walk. Second year with a non branched antler or no brow tine and it's donated to the church pantry.

It can irritate the "you know what" out of you all day. I think you're talking out the side of your neck on 75% of what you're saying. The other 25% while some what agreeable with what I believe I know is still over shadowed by your obvious lack of real time, multi-year, close record kept and very diciplined on what you take off the property managing of a hunting area.

"Eons of breeding and genetic influence cannot be altered by removing so called inferior deer from the herd. We cannot determine or alter the gene pool of free range deer. Once we arrive at this realization and accept this fact, we can then focus on the factors that will bring out or enhance the deer’s ability to live up to it’s genetic potential."

Also crap. No matter how you slice it, you feed up and age up a deer with better genetic potential and he is more likely to grow the rack we who give a darn desire. Does have to be considered too.

You can't expect someone with the genetics of my family history to drop a kid who will grow up to be a lineman for the Dallas Cowboys. If he grows to 5'9" and of average body weight he'll be taller and better in stature than all of his predecessors but not a prime athelete of above average stature that can compete on that level. No matter how I feed the boy he might as well play in the band.

Genetics matters and we can and do make a difference. We make a negative difference taking out too many of the desirable deer as well.

Think what you want, I really don't care. You don't agree with me, I really don't care. You know nothing of my time spent with and around deer, my record keeping practices, my management practices, nor my experience. Keep those comments to yourself.

Because everything does not occur under controlled conditions. We don't know that everything afforded all yearling bucks is equal. What about the buck fawn that was born in September, does he have the same opportunity that one born in April does? Does the buck fawn that was orphaned at two months of age have the same opportunity? What if he was one of a triplett with a marginally milk producing doe? What if his mother raised him with poor milk production due to poor habitat? Everything is not the same.

No kidding. That is what I have been talking about. Control what you can control, age and nutrition. You cannot control genetics. You cannot DNA every deer to determine it's genetic makeup through parentage verification.

So if you were a deer, you would need to be culled. Sorry, couldn't help it.

Got to Love our State

Good luck to all the hunters this season, weather you choose to shoot spikes or not for what ever reason

Personaly I can see more than just an "11"ptr in my near future. Pics will be sure to follow...............

Hope you get a stud

I am going to shoot a free range spike as soon as I see "him" this season.

Just going to shoot him once????

I figured you shoot him at least three times

depends on if he has grown kickers on his spike. There are 2 of them, both 5 pts, but one appears to be slick horned and the other appears to have some trash around the base on the side that is a spike.

On low fence operations that have an abundance of deer and the goal of trophy buck management there is no reason to keep spikes.

If you have a low fence commercial operation and are selling bucks for harvest you may not want to shoot spikes because someone down the line will shoot the inferior buck as their trophy and maximize $$$.

You can't convince me that shooting a spike doesn't increase the quality of the herd. Maybe you guys with big places have the luxury of watching a yearling spike mature into a 5 year old 150 class 10 point. I'm not convinced it even happens as they allready start out with the deck stacked against them by my way of thinking.

And I do think genetics have a role to play. I have a 5 or 6 year old buck on my place with no eye guards - and his progeny run all over the place, again with no eyeguards..I'd rather have a yearling 8pt left in the heard to breed later than a yearling spike as (just my opinion) I think that yearling spike isn't going to have as good an offspring as a yearling 8pt. Otherwise, why would a breeder pay thousands of dollars for a buck that is proven to produce record book class offspring? Hell he might as well save him some money and start with a heard of spikes! I'm sorry, I just don't think it works that way.

I hunt a small place (100 acres) so management is relative but even on it I have a combination of spikes, bucks without brow tines, and what I consider to be nice quality dear (130-140 class mature bucks).

This is my 3rd year on the place. The first 2 there were pretty good rainfalls, forage, acorns, etc. so browse and water didn't fit into the equation - as I had yearling 4's, 6's, and 8's too.

This year fortunately we've still had a fair amount of rain, tank is full, and there is browse everywhere so I expect it to be another good year - but there may be spike backstrap in my freezer's future...

Earl

ROFLMAO

That was good. Prolly true too.

Attitudes like that, on both sides, make it pretty clear that this issue will not soon be resolved.

Agreed. But I do follow the law. If TPWD adopted the stance that all 1 year old spikes needed the chance to live because they genetically are in no way different than any other yearling and will in all cases reach the same potential given the same conditions, circumstances, typical diet (not some protien on steroids), etc. as their forked brethren - I'd follow the law that said "No spikes" happily.

But I've not seen a TPWD study that says that (infact the ones I've seen say the opposite) and so far they haven't adopted that stance. Until then they are fair game.

Granted I understand there is alot of opinion here that TPWD doesn't know what they are doing when it comes to conducting studies and setting game laws but since it is the law it's neither here nor there I abide by it.

Don't get me wrong, it isnt' like I'm clearing out all the spikes I see, in all the years I've hunted I've only taken 2.

Earl

I believe you are either confused or misguided. There is no TPWD law, code or statute that would require you to shoot a spike. It is only department policy and opinion.

I would go where the nutrition was the best in either of the 2 locations. South Texas creates a more condusive environment for deal to grow larger antlers due to the offering of the land. The hill country on the other hand has less to offer from a high protein standpoint. South Texas range is better range that that of the Hill Country. Better nutrition = Better/Healtier Bucks (Larger Antlers)

In the Hill Country on our place, there are plenty of deer. Culling to me means that we are removing deer from the population. I beleive the best way to remove numbers of deer from the population is to kill does and their potential to have twins year after year, just like their offspring will do. We cull does which gives the bucks and other does more to eat and hopefully to reach their potential. In my opinion, a cull buck has more potential of becoming a good buck than a doe does, so consequently we kill does as our culls

If ya got lots of deer and lots of spikes kill em and have some backstraps if not let em live another year and see if they are worth shootin.

Pretty sure those does also have backstraps.

soooooo....neither one of these should be culled?



(one on left)


this one lucked out...

In regards to taking him based on his antlers... I always judge a deer via age and his good side. Single horned spikes are mainly a result of injury to the body, pedicle, and or injury during velvet.

We can all agree that does and buck should be killed each year to keep the population under control while keeping the ratio as close to 1:1 as possible right? If so, than why in the heck would anyone shoot a young 8, when they can take a spike or a messed up rack. No you can not change genetics, but if you are going to kill a buck anyways to keep the ratio where you want it, it is only smart to kill the ugliest rack out there.

I hunt for a particalar buck.. I have a hit list. Hit list includes all mature deer. Some huge some crap. i push for my wife to shoot the crap, or I flip years with her. I try to get all my does in bowseason. That way I can focus on the hit list. If I don't fill the hit list I'm not worried about it b/c i replaced it already with a doe.

Basically the same thing I do. I hunt for usually 1 deer that I have seen on game camera, unless a bigger one stumbles up. All other tags go to does. If I have not killed my buck by the end of the season, I kill another doe during the extended doe season.

felt the same way when the first one showed up...and he is now 5.5 and hard as heck to find once they break up from their bachelor groups.... since then, 3 others have showed up. Could be coincidental.

Could be coincidental or not

Nobody knows your deer better then you. Its a personal decision. Put your wife, or kids on them.

yeah, though no wife and kids. (The one in the pic that got killed was by a youngun as his first deer..... after he had opened all his Christmas presents). I just feel that the majority of the does need to get slaughtered as well to git rid of the problem. That is one thing that stinks about free range, when things are good they are good...when things go south, they head that way in a hurry as well.

I think this goes back to the high fence/low fence argument. I think the needs of a high fenced ranch are different than those of a low fenced one.

Maybe there should be a low fence forum and a high fence forum.

That way people can stay out of other peoples business and we won't have to read argument after argument. Post pics of your high fence deer or low fence deer. You may want to show off the big 12 point 180 class deer on the photos forum, but as soon as you get asked "high fence?" then nobody congratulates you. Of course, you have to keep your population down in a high fence situation and if you want to shoot does or spikes then have fun doing it. I have 125 low fenced acres and I don't shoot either of them. My kids might, my wife might, but once only.



Murfdog

Did you not read all my post? I'm niether confused nor misguided. I never said that it is the law that you harvest spikes, it is the law that you CAN harvest spikes. And also that I have only ever taken 2 (in 30 years).

No confusion or misguidance on my part friend. Earl

I did not say there were not any 2 1/2 year old spikes. I am referring to my place which has a 1 to 1 buck doe ratio, a great age structure, plenty of water year round, supplemental protein feed 9 months of the year, and massive cropland that borders our ranch. My point is that when all the necessary elements for whitetail growth are met things like this dont happen. If everyone would focus as much on land management, population control and sex ratio as much as trying to justify shooting spikes and culls the whole state would be better off.

x2