Mossy Oak Game Keepers "The Culling Effect"

[kmckinnie]

I cull 2 bucks every year. DNR says I can. I’m glad I’m not hung up in n antlers ! Even tho I kill better than the average hunter. ?
Y’all just hunt some kill a average buck and be happy ?
One day your monster will come along.
Don’t shake so much u miss him. ?

 

[ddavis1120]

I watched the show and also read about the study in QDMA's Quality Whitetails. Culling 93% of the 1.5 year old bucks is a staggering number.

In the 70s and 80s we were "culling" almost as many 1.5 year olds and didn't need any helicopters or scientists' assistance. Who would have ever thought we were ahead of the curve.

 

[kmckinnie]

All the bucks I’ve killed would be better next year but one or 3 !

 

[buckpasser]

I’ve read it before, but the show stated it as well. 50% of rack size was attributed to environmental factors. You can only get them as far as genetics will take them, but you can’t maximize that without plenty of quality food. That could explain some of the variation of the food sources in the area changed.

I fully believe that. Cutovers and land changing from planted pines to agriculture or vice versa should really affect overall health. In this case though, size and even size of antlers has remained relatively static, while the “genetic” trend appears to swing more with the standard buck being a ten, eight, “cull”, etc. over the years.

 

[Tight Lines]

I will say this though, there is a legitimate practice called selective harvest that uses the term management bucks. Selective harvest is removing "inferior" bucks once they are old enough see their potential to free up food resources and social space for other deer. Same process as culling, but for a different and more scientifically valid purpose.

Interesting, never thought of it that way...I've always lumped management and cull into the same group, maybe because so many TV hunters do...but I get the point...instead of trying to change the genetics, you are improving the overall herd balance and age classes of bucks?

 

[C.Killmaster]

Interesting, never thought of it that way...I've always lumped management and cull into the same group, maybe because so many TV hunters do...but I get the point...instead of trying to change the genetics, you are improving the overall herd balance and age classes of bucks?

Yes, if you start protecting young bucks enough then you will eventually start to stockpile older bucks with poor antlers if no one shoots them. You may even start to see sex ratio skewed towards bucks. You see it a lot more on large, more intensively managed properties. I've seen this happen in the 15 inch rule counties, you occasionally have mature bucks with poor antlers that aren't legal for harvest. Over time the number of them increases because no one can shoot them, they become a protected group. Because there are more and more, it leads people to think that genetics are declining.

 

[C.Killmaster]

Interesting, never thought of it that way...I've always lumped management and cull into the same group, maybe because so many TV hunters do...but I get the point...instead of trying to change the genetics, you are improving the overall herd balance and age classes of bucks?

Here's an example scenario:

A 3,000 acre club kills around 20 does a year, but only 2 or 3 bucks a year because they have high standards, say 135" minimum. Bucks and does are born at a pretty much 50:50 ratio, so over time you reach a point where you have to kill more bucks just to keep the sex ratio balanced and balance the herd with the habitat.

A selective harvest strategy would be to remove 3.5+ year old bucks with fewer than 8 points because they are unlikely to ever meet the club standards. In addition, we'll take out any 4.5+ bucks that are less than 110" because they are also unlikely to ever meet the minimum. These are termed management bucks because we removed them for management purposes rather than a trophy or recreational purpose.

 

[across the river]

Here's an example scenario:

A 3,000 acre club kills around 20 does a year, but only 2 or 3 bucks a year because they have high standards, say 135" minimum. Bucks and does are born at a pretty much 50:50 ratio, so over time you reach a point where you have to kill more bucks just to keep the sex ratio balanced and balance the herd with the habitat.

A selective harvest strategy would be to remove 3.5+ year old bucks with fewer than 8 points because they are unlikely to ever meet the club standards. In addition, we'll take out any 4.5+ bucks that are less than 110" because they are also unlikely to ever meet the minimum. These are termed management bucks because we removed them for management purposes rather than a trophy or recreational purpose.

As opposed to say Hancock county where I’ve heard more than once the genetics is falling off, when really you are basically protecting mature six points and harvesting all the mature 8 plus deer. Genetics haven’t changed but you are basically protecting the group that should be in the management buck group. Correct????

 

[Tight Lines]

Here's an example scenario:

A 3,000 acre club kills around 20 does a year, but only 2 or 3 bucks a year because they have high standards, say 135" minimum. Bucks and does are born at a pretty much 50:50 ratio, so over time you reach a point where you have to kill more bucks just to keep the sex ratio balanced and balance the herd with the habitat.

A selective harvest strategy would be to remove 3.5+ year old bucks with fewer than 8 points because they are unlikely to ever meet the club standards. In addition, we'll take out any 4.5+ bucks that are less than 110" because they are also unlikely to ever meet the minimum. These are termed management bucks because we removed them for management purposes rather than a trophy or recreational purpose.

Thanks, completely makes sense. I've just always thought of management and cull as the same thing...probably because of the media...what you explain makes sense though, we want a doe to buck ratio that is balanced, and also age classes that are balanced...

 

[C.Killmaster]

As opposed to say Hancock county where I’ve heard more than once the genetics is falling off, when really you are basically protecting mature six points and harvesting all the mature 8 plus deer. Genetics haven’t changed but you are basically protecting the group that should be in the management buck group. Correct????

Absolutely correct, great example. I'm hoping to explore some potential reg changes to make those big sixes legal.

 

[BuckNasty83]

Grant Woods-


Researchers believe that does contribute more to the genetic potential of a buck’s antlers than the sire. However, no matter how good the genetic potential is, the age structure and quality of the habitat determine how much of a buck’s antler potential can be expressed. That’s why I never worry about a buck’s genetic potential unless the habitat is fabulous. I don’t believe it’s practical to select which doe produces better bucks in a wild, free-ranging situation. A buck’s potential is usually not known until he is 4.5 years old or older. It’s very tough to know which doe produced a buck 4.5 years later.

It is very common for does in good habitat to have twins or triplets. If the adult sex ratio is not managed to be balanced, then it is unlikely that a buck will express his full antler development potential. Likewise, it is very important to ensure there is plenty of quality food for each deer in the population by harvesting enough does to balance the habitat’s capacity to produce quality food with the number of deer in the area.

Given the above, I suggest harvesting enough does to meet the management objectives for that property. I harvest the first doe I can legally and don’t stop until the prescribed doe harvest quota is met – independent of the doe’s age, number of fawns, etc.

Growing Deer together,

Grant

 

[elfiii]

Absolutely correct, great example. I'm hoping to explore some potential reg changes to make those big sixes legal.

That would be great because I'm in a 4 points or better for both bucks county and it's not uncommon to run across a big six that gets a pass. I don't know how you would regulate that though. I'm not a fan of the spread limit. At 200 yds in low light conditions can you tell if the rack meets the minimum spread or not?

 

[C.Killmaster]

That would be great because I'm in a 4 points or better for both bucks county and it's not uncommon to run across a big six that gets a pass. I don't know how you would regulate that though. I'm not a fan of the spread limit. At 200 yds in low light conditions can you tell if the rack meets the minimum spread or not?

One of our other Bios made a suggestion that I like that kind of ignores the brow tine, but I haven't fleshed out the wording. Basically, as long a deer has a G2 and G3 then it's legal. So it would be at least 3 points on one side, but the brow tine can't count as one of the 3. This also would help judging bucks from the side if you can't see the brow tine.

 

[ddd-shooter]

Mr. Killmaster, are you familiar with the study done where they found that doe nutrition during gestation was a huge influence on body and antler size? I wanna say it was deer in South Dakota? It was eye opening to me, but made sense. I think I heard about it from a biologist on the meat eater podcast.

 

[C.Killmaster]

Mr. Killmaster, are you familiar with the study done where they found that doe nutrition during gestation was a huge influence on body and antler size? I wanna say it was deer in South Dakota? It was eye opening to me, but made sense. I think I heard about it from a biologist on the meat eater podcast.

I'm not familiar with that particular study, but I saw it in the lists of podcasts. Going deeper is the idea of epigenetics. Mississippi State demonstrated this by taking deer from areas of the state with poor habitat and raising them in a pen on a perfect diet. The first generation improved, but still didn't compare to deer from good habitat areas. However, after about 3 generations they finally caught up. This explains why areas restocked with small GA coastal deer produce really good quality deer these days. Everyone gets hung up on genetics, but the reality is that most GA bucks probably never reach their full genetic potential due to nutritional limitations.

Here's a link if anyone wants to dig deeper:
https://extension.msstate.edu/sites/default/files/publications/publications/p3013.pdf

 

[dixiecutter]

need to cull inferiur does

 

[across the river]

One of our other Bios made a suggestion that I like that kind of ignores the brow tine, but I haven't fleshed out the wording. Basically, as long a deer has a G2 and G3 then it's legal. So it would be at least 3 points on one side, but the brow tine can't count as one of the 3. This also would help judging bucks from the side if you can't see the brow tine.

If the brow tine doesn't count and they have to have 3 points on one side, wouldn't that eliminate the ability to harvest most six point bucks? You are essentially where you are now. I know some people don't like the 15 inch rule, but what if you made it four on one side and then say deer with less than four on one side could be killed if the inside spread is 15" or greater. That would essentially illuminates all of the young four or six point deer you would want to protect anyway. Every deer that had six or less points that I have killed or seen killed over the years that was 15" wide, was mature, and I don't think they will be many mature deer that would not fit into one of those two categories.

 

[C.Killmaster]

If the brow tine doesn't count and they have to have 3 points on one side, wouldn't that eliminate the ability to harvest most six point bucks? You are essentially where you are now. I know some people don't like the 15 inch rule, but what if you made it four on one side and then say deer with less than four on one side could be killed if the inside spread is 15" or greater. That would essentially illuminates all of the young four or six point deer you would want to protect anyway. Every deer that had six or less points that I have killed or seen killed over the years that was 15" wide, was mature, and I don't think they will be many mature deer that would not fit into one of those two categories.

Yes, it would prohibit young 6 points from being killed, but allow mature 6 points without brow tines to be killed. The goal is to maintain the 4 points on a side, but allow people to kill these big 6 points that never grew brow tines. I see what you're saying about spread, but it's just harder to judge because the deer has to look at you face on. You can judge if a deer has a g2 and g3 from the side, you don't have to get a head on look.

 

[bilgerat]

why not use the 16' main beam rule that BF Grant has?

 

[Sixes]

Absolutely correct, great example. I'm hoping to explore some potential reg changes to make those big sixes legal.

That would be great, we had a buck that was never more than a 5 point that has hopefully died, we had him on camera for 9 or 10 years.

In his prime, he was a 2x3 and outweighed other mature bucks by what looked like 25 pounds or more. He was also very aggressive and like a bully. Towards the end, we would never even see him other than on camera. We haven't seen him the last 2 years so we guess that mother nature finally caught up to him