Everyone's definition of a "cull" or "management" buck is going to be different. For those trying to maximize antler scores on mature bucks, I buck like the below buck is a perfect "management buck" - healthy 3 1/2+ buck that is only a 6-point.
Surprisingly, I've seen it make a difference. But that requires a large property and a lot of hunters willing to actually take out specific bucks. The result is fewer low-scoring mature bucks, which raises the average score of mature bucks.IMO labeling any buck a cull and killing at 3yrs old because you want to increase rack size on your property is akin to pissing in the ocean then expecting to measure a rise in sea level.
Surprisingly, I've seen it make a difference. But that requires a large property and a lot of hunters willing to actually take out specific bucks. The result is fewer low-scoring mature bucks, which raises the average score of mature bucks.
But what really makes the most difference is hunters willing to pass up the best 2 1/2 and 3 1/2 year-old bucks. Basically, reverse high-grading. THAT can make a profound difference over time. I wouldn't have believed how much of a difference it could make until I saw it with my own eyes.
So the benifit of "culling" is more about mathematically having less mouths to feed...but genetically speaking letting the best up and comers walk provides more opportunities in the future....or as you describe it...reverse high grading...makes sense....we're not going to cull out less desirable genetics in a wild herd...but we can reduce pressure on tha habitat and allow bucks to reach thier full potential.Surprisingly, I've seen it make a difference. But that requires a large property and a lot of hunters willing to actually take out specific bucks. The result is fewer low-scoring mature bucks, which raises the average score of mature bucks.
But what really makes the most difference is hunters willing to pass up the best 2 1/2 and 3 1/2 year-old bucks. Basically, reverse high-grading. THAT can make a profound difference over time. I wouldn't have believed how much of a difference it could make until I saw it with my own eyes.
I could not agree more for 99.9% of hunters who hunt smalller properties with no control over the surrounding areas. I've never seen a cull in my hunting career on the fair chase non high fence properties I frequent. For me, it is pretty simple. It is either a mature buck I want to shoot, which is a rare event these days, or a buck I do not want to shoot, which happens most of the time. Kids, guests and especially new hunters have the greenlight to shoot away as they do not remove many bucks at all in the big picture.IMO labeling any buck a cull and killing at 3yrs old because you want to increase rack size on your property is akin to pissing in the ocean then expecting to measure a rise in sea level.
Agreed. Let Nature take her course. Produce more older bucks and the bell curve distribution will take care of itself. There may not be a lot of high-scoring bucks, but there will be a few high-scoring bucks for the area.Agreed on both points. I can see how it could possibly work on a property where it's measured in sections rather than acres, essentially large enough to encompass numerous bucks' entire ranges.
But for most of us mortals who measure our land in acreage and are largely at the mercy of surrounding properties, the best thing we can do to increase rack size is not pull the trigger. Create an environment that entice deer to spend more time on our property away from neighbors, and let them age.
I hate the term "cull" because it is linked to the idea you can genetically improve the local buck population by removing the underperformers. This does NOT work. First, most of the genetics for antler characteristics are probably carried on the female side of the line, and second, the flow of genetics is so rapid across such a wide geographic area that you could never concentrate "good" genetics into a small area.So the benifit of "culling" is more about mathematically having less mouths to feed...but genetically speaking letting the best up and comers walk provides more opportunities in the future....or as you describe it...reverse high grading...makes sense....we're not going to cull out less desirable genetics in a wild herd...but we can reduce pressure on tha habitat and allow bucks to reach thier full potential.
Been saying that for decadesAllowing the best young bucks to achieve maturity is by far the best strategy. THAT makes a HUGE difference.
That is more along the lines of what this is. I have some much better targets on the farm, but would be over the moon for the kids or someone I bring to shoot this one.I've never seen
I could not agree more for 99.9% of hunters who hunt smalller properties with no control over the surrounding areas. I've never seen a cull in my hunting career on the fair chase non high fence properties I frequent. For me, it is pretty simple. It is either a mature buck I want to shoot, which is a rare event these days, or a buck I do not want to shoot, which happens most of the time. Kids, guests and especially new hunters have the greenlight to shoot away as they do not remove many bucks at all in the big picture.