# New study on culling spikes



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

http://www.petersenshunting.com/content/shooting-spike-bucks/1

I know the general consensus is to kill spikes. (young and old) Our reasoning being, why take the chance? Even the state of Texas is telling us to shoot them. (via AR's) I was suprised to read this article and it really made me wonder what our 2400 acre place could look like if we hadn't killed 2-3 yearling spikes every year for the last 15 years. Personally i would much rather cull 2-3 130 inch eights points. I understand that by the time they are mature they have probably already bred though. Maybe we'll start culling at three to minimize breeding form inferior deer. I can tell you that we have killed our spikes for those years and we now see more with 9 points and up than we used to. It hasn't made that big of a diffence if you ask me. What are some of your opinions on the subject?

I hunt in east texas. I referring more to free range properties not high fence. Nothing against you high fence guys. Yall are just on a different level.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

There's nothing new with that data. Dr. James C. Kroll has been an advocate of letting spikes grow since he first started public speaking about it. 

That's not a new study either, they're combining data from Mississippi and King Ranch that's not new at all.

In any case, I'm an advocate of running your property the way you think it should be run, so I think you should do what you think is right.

TH


----------



## aggiemulletboy (May 31, 2006)

I think it depends on lots of different things. How large is the deer population on your property? Is there proper nutrition available? This can have some effect on antler growth. Something that is a spike now as a 1.5 might get a good rack in a year or two. 

And then it comes down to preference. Do you want to take the young spikes or see what happens with them? I've seen some studies where on average, chances are that the average buck starting as a spike won't end up as a 10 pt, but it comes down to who is managing the property and pulling the trigger.


----------



## 2GOOD (Mar 16, 2008)

1 1/2 yo spikes, don't shoot them. You are just shooting a young buck. They will catch up at age 3 or 4 and you can make your decision then on wether to cull or not. Most of the spikes are due to lack of adequate nutrition as a youngster. If it's a 2 1/2 or older spike, roll his arse.


----------



## jdickey (Jan 30, 2009)

For those that can spot older spikes, I agree with 2GOOD....take 'em out. The problems are....too many hunters cannot judge the age of deer "on the hoof"....and there are simply too many meat hunters that will shoot any buck they see! Learn to use your judgment...and study these animals!


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

2GOOD said:


> 1 1/2 yo spikes, don't shoot them. You are just shooting a young buck. They will catch up at age 3 or 4 and you can make your decision then on wether to cull or not. Most of the spikes are due to lack of adequate nutrition as a youngster. If it's a 2 1/2 or older spike, roll his arse.


That is our approach also.


----------



## DMANCAN (Apr 7, 2009)

Hmm The problem with spikes is they get behind nutritionally somehow and take awhile to catch up. Usually from my experiences it alot of time can be due to an out of whack buck to doe ratio. If there are too many does and not enough bucks a doe can cycle two or three times till she is breed then the fawn is born late and is behind (2 or three months) from the get go. So the deal is do you take them out now or let them grow and maybe be stealing nutrition from a an up and up big buck.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

You can also get a big crop of spikes from a drought. We saw it a couple of years ago on our place. Bad nutrition for a young deer ends up on his head. We try to let them walk until 2.5 years... then they are freezer fodder.


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

This year we've fed 58 tons of protein and 25 tons of cottonseed free choice. It really helps to give''em all they want. We have the same 2 1/2 yr. old 'spikes hit the slab' rule. I don't remember a spike at the skinnin rack the last 2 years......


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

**** Brete, how big is your place? We are at 22 tons of protein as of today.


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

9K acres.....I just got the update today. Thank god for a wet year, they backed way off the protein from last year. The protein feeders are in pens. This is the first year we've fed cottonseed and they're not in pens so not sure how much went to waste(hogs, etc...)


----------



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

Trouthunter said:


> There's nothing new with that data. Dr. James C. Kroll has been an advocate of letting spikes grow since he first started public speaking about it.
> 
> That's not a new study either, they're combining data from Mississippi and King Ranch that's not new at all.
> 
> ...


This is a completely different study performed over a ten year period to settle the disspute between the mississippi study and the king ranch study. They tagged over 6000 deer in a 10 year span and recorded data.
Its also published in this months Texas Trophy Hunters. Its a little more in depth than the link i listed and it has a couple charts that are worth taking a look. Your right Kroll is a advocate of letting spikes walk but it hard to argue with the findings.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Brete said:


> 9K acres.....I just got the update today. Thank god for a wet year, they backed way off the protein from last year. The protein feeders are in pens. This is the first year we've fed cottonseed and they're not in pens so not sure how much went to waste(hogs, etc...)


OK so now I feel bad because we hunt 1800 under low fence...LOL Our feeders are in pens as well.


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

LOL....for what it's worth, ours is low fence too.....it's the Maverick County ranch I hunt.......

I haven't heard anything from the Batesville ranch I hunt but we had even more rain there this year.......gonna be a good year!


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

We have some good pics from around the feeders already. Going to be much better than last year unless the oak tree/acorns unleash their fury again.


----------



## CHARLIE (Jun 2, 2004)

This is going to upset some folks but the "shoot all spikes" is old school thinking. That has changed over the years and now most folks give the spike a chance. Remember God takes care of the body first and then the antlers. Give him a chance to catch up and after a year or so if he doesent well then he has to go.. I have seen pen raised spikes go to a 170 class deer in a few years. I also feel the "shoot all spikes" is an excuse for someone who has a itchy trigger finger to shoot something.

Charlie


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

All I can say is with about 40+ years of studying this under my belt, the jury is certainly out.

Last year I saw a lot of spikes, and this year I have seen none. The difference is last year was dry and this year we have had timely rains all year long.

FYI I feed protein year round, but, there is no substitue for forbs grown by mother nature, which is the deers primary diet, if available.

Dr Kroll advocated shooting spikes a while back, but, his studies do make you wonder. If your doe ratio is high, then shooting spikes may not work out for you. 

I think if you are on a place that has high deer density and you need to shoot a certain number for population control, then, by all means shoot spikes.


----------



## Jock Ewing (Mar 26, 2006)

My view is pretty simple. Kill the inferior bucks from each age class (assuming you take the proper does and balance out the ratio).

So if I have plenty of 1.5 year old deer and half have forked antlers and the other half are spikes, I am going to cull the spikes. If I just have spikes in the 1.5 year age, I would wait until they are 2.5 and shoot whatever is inferior. 

I will take my chances overall that the 1.5 buvk with forked antlers will be better down the road than the spike 1.5 year old.

I can see both sides of the argument. It really all depends on the place.


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

Jock Ewing said:


> My view is pretty simple. Kill the inferior bucks from each age class (assuming you take the proper does and balance out the ratio).
> 
> So if I have plenty of 1.5 year old deer and half have forked antlers and the other half are spikes, I am going to cull the spikes. If I just have spikes in the 1.5 year age, I would wait until they are 2.5 and shoot whatever is inferior.
> 
> ...


Actually, Dr Krolls' latest study shows that deer with forked antlers, and spike horned deer, have no statistical difference in antler score when they reach 5+ years of age. So, what he is saying is taking all the spkies will gain you nothing, according to his study.

Science is only as accurate as the information used, and I am sure peers will provide their own studies to the contrary. The truth is, what works for one ranch may not work for the next one.

One thing is for sure. MANY ranches take the least desireable deer, each year, along with the most desireable. What does that leave you?

An average deer herd. No wonder so many deer/range managers are pulling ther hair out 5-10 years into a manaegment plan that is not working out.

A 1.5 year old spike buck may or may not be inferior genetically. Their habitat and health has more to do with that first set of horns than genetics. Add to the problem the fact that the doe contributes just as much or more to the buck fawns' antler's, and it really gets interesting.


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

bigfishtx said:


> Actually, Dr Krolls' latest study shows that deer with forked antlers, and spike horned deer, have no statistical difference in antler score when they reach 5+ years of age. So, what he is saying is taking all the spkies will gain you nothing, according to his study.
> 
> Science is only as accurate as the information used, and I am sure peers will provide their own studies to the contrary. The truth is, what works for one ranch may not work for the next one.
> 
> ...


I agree with your take on spikes, but as far as taking the most desireable deer, it shouldn't be a problem if they reach maturity. Our ranch rule is 6 1/2. By that time they should have passed on their genetics several times.......


----------



## Woodrow (Jun 17, 2004)

I'm with Jock, well said.

IMO there is no absolute rule to apply to every property. We will not be shooting yearling (1.5 year old) spikes on our lease this year, most likely. And for the record, in my opinion, the # of 2.5+ year old spikes in existence is much less than what most people think (I think this is one of the biggest myths/misconceptions surrounding the "spike" discussions). So in essence, we probably won't shoot any spikes on our lease this year...it'll depend on a lot of factors.

I think something that a lot of people lose focus of in "culling" is that there is another side to the #'s game...not B&C score #'s (i.e. genetics), but population #'s. Supplemental feeding can offset some of this, but nonetheless I feel like a lot of ranches just have too many deer...in fact, one of the biggest challenges a lot of the top end south Texas places I know of face each year is killing enough deer (one of the major reasons for MLDP programs and similar). I think a lot of ranches could spend more money on lead and less on protein and achieve very similar results. So shooting yearling spikes isn't always about genetics, but that certainly plays a factor b/c if you have ___ # of bucks that need to be killed in a given year, a certain # of them may need to be yearling spikes...depending on what research you believe... 

I'll have to re-read the Kleberg Research to confirm, but as I recall it DID show that branch antlered yearling bucks averaged higher B&C scores at maturity than yearling spikes. 

Oh, and Charlie, that ain't "old school" thinking...some of the best in the business do it today (shoot all spikes), but it all depends on the property & goals.

Lastly, I've never subscribed to 'If Kroll says it, it is gospel'.


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

I think we should tell kids whether or not they will make first string in high school football when they are 3 years old.


----------



## 2GOOD (Mar 16, 2008)

Kyle 1974 said:


> I think we should tell kids whether or not they will make first string in high school football when they are 3 years old.


That's a great example.


----------



## B-Money (May 2, 2005)

It's really a numbers thing, right? If you have 10 bucks (1 ripe trophy, 6 managment, and 3 spikes) and all you need is 5, what do you shoot and what do you leave?

Besides...who is to say that the does are not carrying the gene for trophy racks?


----------



## kweber (Sep 20, 2005)

I'm still tryin' to wrap my head around the thought of $25K of deer feed


----------



## Deersteaks (Mar 30, 2010)

I am no expert but I have hunted my whole life. To the question of how to tell a young bucks age, it's really not that hard. Fawn spikes are almost always smaller than mature doe's. 1.5 year olds are about the same size and even if they are a little taller, they will still be long in the front legs and have a shallow chest. They are not thick and almost look , well, clumsy. If you are not sure, don't shoot. Of course, that being said, I am a meat hunter first , so ......good luck!


----------



## wickll (Oct 6, 2009)

I am glad to see that there are some out there who are saying that there is another side and maybe it is not always appropriate to shoot spikes. I have seen people get very upset if you tried to debate the idea of whether or not to kill spikes. They simply believe that the only good spike is a dead spike. When I worked with a wildlife coop in Goliad County, I was fortunate to get to work with one of the original experts in deer management. (TTH even referred to him as the father of whitetail management in Texas). His criteria for culling spikes were to first make sure you have the following 5 items in order. 1. proper buck to doe ratio 2. proper nutrition 3. population appropriate for the range 4. good age structure within the herd and finally 5. control of the deer harvest.
Very few low fenced ranches can meet all of these criteria. And although shooting spikes may not hurt, you are probably not helping the genetics of your deer herd unless you meet the above criteria.


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

spike... one horn.... 5 point.... I don't see any benefit to shooting a yearling deer, which is what the vast majority of spikes are.


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

I think it's been proven there's no way to tell what a 1 1/2 yr. old deer's potential is. What could possibly be the benefit or reason for shooting them unless you're just after meat.....


----------



## Bukkskin (Oct 21, 2009)

*I will not shoot a 1 1/2 yr old deer.*

IMHO, he could have been born in late August or Sept, or later. He can't compete on his first year with a deer that was born first of May of the same year. Now a 2 1/2 yr old spike, well he is a gonner. WHO knows.


----------



## Solid Action (May 21, 2004)

Don't shoot 1.5 year old spikes if they are true spikes. If they have nothing more than nubs, let the air out of 'em. Simple as that.


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

Deersteaks said:


> I am no expert but I have hunted my whole life. To the question of how to tell a young bucks age, it's really not that hard. Fawn spikes are almost always smaller than mature doe's. 1.5 year olds are about the same size and even if they are a little taller, they will still be long in the front legs and have a shallow chest. They are not thick and almost look , well, clumsy. If you are not sure, don't shoot. Of course, that being said, I am a meat hunter first , so ......good luck!


What is a fawn spike? Buck fawns will not have hardened antlers during deer season. They are still developing pedicels and at most will have visible, velvet covered "buttons". Hence the term button buck. If you see a hard antlered spike during deer season, it is most likely a 1.5yo deer.



Kyle 1974 said:


> spike... one horn.... 5 point.... I don't see any benefit to shooting a yearling deer, which is what the vast majority of spikes are.


Depending on lots of factors (geography, nutrition, timing of birth, population dynamics) the ratio of spike antlered to fork antlered yearlings (1.5) varies greatly. If a manager decides to harvest spike antlered yearlings, all of these factors (and more) should be taken into account.

I harvest 1.5yo spikes based on the year (what I am seeing) and have been doing it for about 10 years now.

Example: I shot a lot of spikes last season b/c the previous years fawn crop was extremely high and there were a substantial number of fork antlered yearlings versus spikes. In 4 years I will still have a good surplus of mature deer. This year I will probably refrain from harvesting any spikes at all b/c last year's fawn crop was the lowest on record (I could easily wipe out an entire age class) and in 5 years we will have still have a mature age class.

This is not gospel by any means, but should be taken into account when making these decisions b/c what you harvest this season affects your herd on down the road.


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

BTW I know a lot of people that do what I do for a living. The ones that manage big, free range deer country in south Texas and produce the biggest bucks, year in and year out all have some things in common:

1. Low deer densities
2. Balanced sex ratios
3. Quality habitat managment practices
4. Intense harvest w/proper culling techniques

My 2 Cents. Hope it helps


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

So, a place that has had 25% of its deer killed each year is going to be better than the same place that has not been hunted for 10 years? Which place would you rather land a hunt on?


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

bigfishtx said:


> So, a place that has had 25% of its deer killed each year is going to be better than the same place that has not been hunted for 10 years? Which place would you rather land a hunt on?


If I knew who was managing the place and that the right 25% of the deer herd were harvested, I would rather hunt the intensively managed place.

Are you trying to tell me that if you had your choice between hunting a newly opened public area (unmanaged) that had never been hunted (legally) and hunting a highly managed, free range, ranch in South Texas with the history of producing B+C class bucks, that you would choose the public land and also that you would expect to see better quality deer on the unhunted place?

That's one long sentence but I'm pretty sure its not a runon.

Anyway if you want to shoot a big deer, you stand a lot better chance on intensivley managed land than you do on an unhunted piece of property.


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

Think about it like this:

If you could only have 100 bucks on your place, you could only get them as yearlings (sight unseen) and you could choose which ranch you could get them from. 

Would you want them from the place that hasn't been hunted for 10 years or from the highly managed place?

Out of 100 the unhunted place will probably produce a good deer or 2 but your chances of picking a better yearling at random come from the managed place.


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

No matter what is said here...on average a 1.5 year old spike will be inferior to a 1.5 year old fork horned buck through maturity. There's just too may studies that show this.

And again I say...to each his or her own, it's your land or lease so follow your own instincts and practices...what works in one place doesn't mean it will work everywhere.

TH


----------



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

Trouthunter said:


> No matter what is said here...on average a 1.5 year old spike will be inferior to a 1.5 year old fork horned buck through maturity. There's just too may studies that show this.
> 
> TH


Can you name a few. I only know of three major studies. Thats not to say there aren't more. I only know of three. The first on is the Kerr study done in south texas on penned deer which is the one TPWD uses as its bible. The second one is the one done in Mississippi on free ranging deer that stirred up lots of controversy. The third one is this one done on free ranging deer in south texas. The latter two of the three all point to the opposite of what you are saying.


----------



## Texas Jeweler (Nov 6, 2007)

Brete said:


> 9K acres.....I just got the update today. Thank god for a wet year, they backed way off the protein from last year. The protein feeders are in pens. This is the first year we've fed cottonseed and they're not in pens so not sure how much went to waste(hogs, etc...)


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When hogs eat cottenseed, the gosop oil in the seed kills the hog! Just FYI...


----------



## BigBuck (Mar 2, 2005)

*Spike*

We have been managing ranches for 25 years. I agree with Cynoscion, TH and Woodrow. Get everything else in line first, then harvest spikes. Deer numbers, densities, ratios, etc. need to be adjusted first. Also, do not shoot all spikes if that is all you have for an age class. If you have both, leave the forkies and kill the spikes.
And, as a bonus, I said harvest and kill. :biggrin:
BB


----------



## Texas Jeweler (Nov 6, 2007)

If your going to run a management program, you have top set guide lines and boundries. Shooting spikes is a targeted idea, then can be identified easily and taken or passed! Were I to see a little buck, he has just a smallish point, probably let him go. I see a young buck, four inch spikes or better, ground check time!


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

Texas Jeweler said:


> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> When hogs eat cottenseed, the gosop oil in the seed kills the hog! Just FYI...


Don't know much about cottonseed, as I said, it's the first year we've fed it......... Haven't heard that before.....thanks for the info.....:cheers:


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

Cynoscion said:


> If I knew who was managing the place and that the right 25% of the deer herd were harvested, I would rather hunt the intensively managed place.
> 
> Are you trying to tell me that if you had your choice between hunting a newly opened public area (unmanaged) that had never been hunted (legally) and hunting a highly managed, free range, ranch in South Texas with the history of producing B+C class bucks, that you would choose the public land and also that you would expect to see better quality deer on the unhunted place?
> 
> ...


Not always....


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

bigfishtx said:


> Not always....


nope,not always......probably only about 95% of the time.....


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

bigfishtx said:


> Not always....


There is no such thing as always when you're talking about science and mother nature but it is about as close to always as you can get.


----------



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

Brete said:


> Don't know much about cottonseed, as I said, it's the first year we've fed it......... Haven't heard that before.....thanks for the info.....:cheers:


No it doesnt. Its a wives tale. The gossypol doesnt deworm them. It doesnt affect whitetail reproduction and it doesnt negatively affect antler grow in whitetails. It is true that the hogs and racoons dont readilly eat it. But hogs eat anything so if they are hungry enough they will eat it.


----------



## Deersteaks (Mar 30, 2010)

Cynoscion said:


> What is a fawn spike? Buck fawns will not have hardened antlers during deer season. They are still developing pedicels and at most will have visible, velvet covered "buttons". Hence the term button buck. If you see a hard antlered spike during deer season, it is most likely a 1.5yo deer.
> 
> Depending on lots of factors (geography, nutrition, timing of birth, population dynamics) the ratio of spike antlered to fork antlered yearlings (1.5) varies greatly. If a manager decides to harvest spike antlered yearlings, all of these factors (and more) should be taken into account.
> 
> ...


 You are right of course, I mispoke. But to most people, they are spikes,button bucks, or even poppye bucks. My point was ,that if they are smaller than a mature doe,they should be left alone. If you arent sure, don't shoot. Thats all


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

There is some real BS management ideas/insights on this thread...


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

Haute Pursuit said:


> There is some real BS management ideas/insights on this thread...


Call it out! Lets see what you think is BS and get to the bottom of it.


----------



## Marshman (Jul 24, 2008)

Cynoscion said:


> BTW I know a lot of people that do what I do for a living. The ones that manage big, free range deer country in south Texas and produce the biggest bucks, year in and year out all have some things in common:
> 
> 1. Low deer densities
> 2. Balanced sex ratios
> ...


ABSOLUTELY agree with that! Most ranches, mine included, have buck doe ratios out of whack, too many animals for the core carrying capacity of the property etc, ETC!!!!

Have the hardest time getting people to shoot more does! In years when it's dry, this time of year, I can corn a road and see over a hundred deer, mostly does, same with feeder pics. Know what everybody likes to shoot????

This year I have a couple weekends set up with a doe whacking bunch of killers, we ARE going to make a difference!

FWIW, where I used to hunt in Alabama, it was hard to get does shot there, due to rules and hereditary "fact" ie... "don't shoot the does, it is where your deer come from". We went on a doe whacking with a vengeance, over a five year period, our average animal improved a lot, and that was hunting with dogs and stalking. I think the herd size and buck doe ratio are a lot more important than whether you shoot the spikes or not...We are kinda arguing over a weed in a garden the size of a football field.......

Mikee


----------



## wickll (Oct 6, 2009)

Jbs8307 said:


> No it doesnt. Its a wives tale. The gossypol doesnt deworm them. It doesnt affect whitetail reproduction and it doesnt negatively affect antler grow in whitetails. It is true that the hogs and racoons dont readilly eat it. But hogs eat anything so if they are hungry enough they will eat it.


While I agree with most of the above, not so sure about the effects of gossypol on whitetail repro and antler development. Research has shown that the gossypol can cause sterility in bulls. If I recall correctly, it affects testosterone levels when fed at higher levels. I don't know of any tests (but there might be some out there) that have been performed on whitetails.

Don't get me wrong, I believe cottonseed is an excellent source of protein, but within limits. I believe overfeeding could lead to problems in deer as well. But what is that limit, I don't know.


----------



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

Marshman said:


> ABSOLUTELY agree with that! Most ranches, mine included, have buck doe ratios out of whack, too many animals for the core carrying capacity of the property etc, ETC!!!!
> 
> Have the hardest time getting people to shoot more does! In years when it's dry, this time of year, I can corn a road and see over a hundred deer, mostly does, same with feeder pics. Know what everybody likes to shoot????
> 
> ...


I completely agree with both statements. I love killin does. More meat for the grinder. I dont care what anybody says a mature doe is just as wary as an old buck. We dont get very many doe tags on our place anymore. (.7 to 1 doe to buck ratio) and the ones we do get we let the kids shoot. So let me know if you need someone to come out and fill a couple tags for ya.


----------



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

wickll said:


> While I agree with most of the above, not so sure about the effects of gossypol on whitetail repro and antler development. Research has shown that the gossypol can cause sterility in bulls. If I recall correctly, it affects testosterone levels when fed at higher levels. I don't know of any tests (but there might be some out there) that have been performed on whitetails.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I believe cottonseed is an excellent source of protein, but within limits. I believe overfeeding could lead to problems in deer as well. But what is that limit, I don't know.


A wild whitetail should self regulate intake of cotton seed. Now if you've got a 100 acre highfenced place with 75 deer on it then they probably wouldn't but free ranging deer eat a wide variety of things. The cotton seed should only be a fraction of their diet. IMO. 
Heres a study i found a while back: http://www.buckmanager.com/2009/02/24/feeding-cottonseed-as-supplemental-white-tailed-deer-food/


----------



## nhampton (Aug 8, 2007)

It boils down to a matter of numbers. Most leases have too many deer and of those there are too many does. If you can get a survival rate of 1 fawn per doe, your number of does only needs to be harvest + natural attrition. Once this is done the number of bucks should be increase or decreased to reach carring capacity for the land + feeding program. Then it becomes a problem of maintainence. Fawns are born every spring, therefore deer must be harvested in the fall. There will only be a small amount of large, trophy bucks to be harvested, half of the harvest numbers should be does to keep ratio's in line. This leaves less desireable bucks to be harvested. If you decide to make this cull decission at 3.5 or 4.5 this means that other than natural mortality, no reduction in bucks age class is possible therfore making it more difficult to keep ratios in line. Additionally, if the culling process does not begin until the latter age classes, it is much more difficult to keep the bucks, which should be culled, out of the gene pool.

The Kroll study indicated that the Kerr may have been flawed because the deer were penned, and were therefore exposed to "social" issues free ranging deer were not exposed to. There deer were trapped. I believe this sampling may have been flawed. Most traps are baited and therefore will attract more deer with poor nutrition as opposed to well nurished deer. My experience around feeders show a disapprotionately high number of spikes and younger deer. This could skew their results.

But the bottom line is this: get your numbers in line with your habitat and feeding program, get does numbers in line with harvest numbers, once that is done, cull your bucks, If you have enough carring capacity to wait to 3.5 or 4.5 you'll get some very nice cull bucks but you will need to harvest promptly to keep them from reproducing and you'll have the additional problem of trying to figure out if that's a big 3.5 yr 8 pt or a small 4.5 yr 8 pt. To me, that's the hardest call of all.

If the deer has had good nutrition, 1.5 yr old bucks should not just have spikes. That doesn't mean that no spike could ever be a trophy buck, it means that the odds are better for non spikes to acheive trophy status. Besides, even if their is no cooralation between spikes and eventual trophy status, all studies indicate that at least you should have done no harm (equal antler developemnet at a latter age). Plus you have made more forage for non spike bucks at a younger age. But you would still need to have other culling critera to maintain your ratios. IMO if you have a buck with a antler mass that is considerably less than what would be expected of a buck of its body size/type it should be considered for management harvest


----------



## Woodrow (Jun 17, 2004)

Woodrow said:


> I'm with Jock, well said.
> 
> IMO there is no absolute rule to apply to every property. We will not be shooting yearling (1.5 year old) spikes on our lease this year, most likely. And for the record, in my opinion, the # of 2.5+ year old spikes in existence is much less than what most people think (I think this is one of the biggest myths/misconceptions surrounding the "spike" discussions). So in essence, we probably won't shoot any spikes on our lease this year...it'll depend on a lot of factors.
> 
> ...


For the record, here is that Kleberg research I was referring to (presented by Mickey Hellickson, manager of King Ranch).

http://ckwri.tamuk.edu/fileadmin/us...owth_Research_-_Laredo__TX_2009_web_PART2.pdf

http://ckwri.tamuk.edu/research-pro...nt-research/south-texas-buck-capture-project/

Disclaimer: I'm not saying this is gospel. But this is recent research spanning 10+ years of data on mostly low fence ranches by some of the best "deer people" in the game. Lots of good info on the Kleberg site.

In short, it says:

*"Yearling antler size is a good predictor of antler size at maturity. Further, it does not matter whether the spike is a spike for nutritional reasons or genetic reasons."*


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

Woodrow said:


> For the record, here is that Kleberg research I was referring to (presented by Mickey Hellickson, manager of King Ranch).
> 
> http://ckwri.tamuk.edu/fileadmin/us...owth_Research_-_Laredo__TX_2009_web_PART2.pdf
> 
> ...


FYI Mick no longer works for the ranch. He was never the manager, he was chief wildlife biologist (and a pretty good one IMHO). He has forgotten more about deer than most of us will ever know.


----------



## Woodrow (Jun 17, 2004)

Cynoscion said:


> FYI Mick no longer works for the ranch. He was never the manager, he was chief wildlife biologist (and a pretty good one IMHO). He has forgotten more about deer than most of us will ever know.


Ahhh. Correct, I should have said biologist, but I didn't realize he no longer worked for the King Ranch...interesting.


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

Well, there are lots of different ideas here on display, and everyone has an opinion. There are different studies with different results out there, so, all you need to do is find oen that fits what you WANT to do and you can call yourself a "shade tree" deer management "expert".

Last year I saw a lot of spikes. This year I have not seen a single one. Did genetics change that much in one year, or, was nutrition what made those young deer "inferior"? 

When you spend some time at your ranch or lease, see what a difference timely rains seem to make in your herds "genetics".


----------



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

bigfishtx said:


> Well, there are lots of different ideas here on display, and everyone has an opinion. There are different studies with different results out there, so, all you need to do is find oen that fits what you WANT to do and you can call yourself a "shade tree" deer management "expert".
> 
> Last year I saw a lot of spikes. This year I have not seen a single one. Did genetics change that much in one year, or, was nutrition what made those young deer "inferior"?
> 
> When you spend some time at your ranch or lease, see what a difference timely rains seem to make in your herds "genetics".


 I completely agree.


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

CHARLIE said:


> This is going to upset some folks but the "shoot all spikes" is old school thinking. That has changed over the years and now most folks give the spike a chance. Remember God takes care of the body first and then the antlers. Give him a chance to catch up and after a year or so if he doesent well then he has to go.. I have seen pen raised spikes go to a 170 class deer in a few years. I also feel the "shoot all spikes" is an excuse for someone who has a itchy trigger finger to shoot something.
> 
> Charlie


170 class is the old 120 class 

but don't get me wrong.. I'd love to kill a 170 .. I haven't even broke 160 yet.


----------



## nhampton (Aug 8, 2007)

This year would be one that culling because of being a spike should work exceptionally well. Of the three factors that influence antler size, you can eliminate nutrition. Just about everyone has received average to above average rainfall. In Texas that means plenty of nutrition. TxPW has said first year bucks almost never have antlers, therefore anything you can readily identify as a protruding antler should belong to a 1.5 yr or older deer. Therefore all you have left is genetics.


----------



## bigfishtx (Jul 17, 2007)

*Speaking of cottonseed*

Did anyone see the study that was published a while back in TTHM showing the affects of cottonseed on the buck antler development?

They divided a large ranch into three sections, one was given supplemental protein feed, one cottonseed, and one nothing.

The results of the study showed that the deer with supplemental protein had an increase in average antler size, above the other two sections.

The interesting findng was, the section given cottonseed showed the lowest average antler development.


----------



## Woodrow (Jun 17, 2004)

The Kleberg study included several ranches with varying management programs/feeding plans, which is good b/c I feel that it makes the data more applicable to a broader range of ranches. However, something that needs to be realized here is that (as I recall) the presentation doesn't give us info on deer density of these ranches vs. carrying capacity.

So for all we know, all of these studied ranches had population densities at or under the carrying capacity of the land...thus the nutritional aspect would not be the same on the studied ranches vs. other ranches. Amount of supplemental feeding (& which deer are actually getting the supplemental feed) throws another wrinkle in...and the list goes on and on. 

Lots of things to consider in all of this...


----------



## Encinal (Jan 18, 2008)

Cynoscion said:


> Think about it like this:
> 
> If you could only have 100 bucks on your place, you could only get them as yearlings (sight unseen) and you could choose which ranch you could get them from.
> 
> ...


If it was next door to the intensely managed place and neither were feeding protein or doing DMP it would make almost no difference.


----------



## wickll (Oct 6, 2009)

Jbs8307 said:


> A wild whitetail should self regulate intake of cotton seed. Now if you've got a 100 acre highfenced place with 75 deer on it then they probably wouldn't but free ranging deer eat a wide variety of things. The cotton seed should only be a fraction of their diet. IMO.
> Heres a study i found a while back: http://www.buckmanager.com/2009/02/24/feeding-cottonseed-as-supplemental-white-tailed-deer-food/


Thanks for the link and study. I have been pretty much out of the management circles the last 10 years, so hadn't heard much on the cottonseed/gossypol . It was still pretty new back then.


----------



## Cynoscion (Jun 4, 2009)

Encinal said:


> If it was next door to the intensely managed place and neither were feeding protein or doing DMP it would make almost no difference.


This is an odd statement. Some of the best deer produced in the state each year (most people don't know about them b/c they don't enter contest, sell hunts, etc) come off of places that don't utilize DMP or feed protein.


----------



## Jbs8307 (Jun 29, 2009)

I am glad so many hunters have expressed thier opinions on this matter. I have read alot of interesting point of views. I think the best coarse of action where I hunt (Easy Texas) would be to cull spikes at 2.5 year old or older. We have a great doe to buck ratio so they probably wouldnt have bred yet and if they are still a spike at 2.5 you can take nutrition out of the eqaution. This will work best for our place. Thanks again for all the input.


----------



## Encinal (Jan 18, 2008)

Cynoscion said:


> This is an odd statement. Some of the best deer produced in the state each year (most people don't know about them b/c they don't enter contest, sell hunts, etc) come off of places that don't utilize DMP or feed protein.


Some always do, yes but those two things would be The ones that would be the diffences between neighboring places that would be hard to surmount.

If you are taking deer at random from a regional genetic pool it really doesn't matter what deer you get unless they are generationally bigger due to protein feed or genetically more concentrated on the larger end of the spectrum due to DMP. Management due to a rifle is insignificant compared to those 2 things.


----------

