Aging deer by Forensic Cementum Annuli

[chadmyers]

Yeah, it happens to me too. There was one buck that appeared one year that we had never seen before. I finally traced him to a property close to 6 miles away. He was on that farm for the previous 2 years. After getting hundreds of pictures of him that whole year, he disappeared and hasn't been seen yet


Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum

I finished my two year degree in wildlife and wanted to go on and pursue a 4 year and beyond, but unfortunately I broke my ankle playing church league softball. This break changed my life forever! For some reason it triggered something negative in my body and I started getting really sick. I was eventually almost completely bedridden for 3+ years. I've gotten a lot better in the last few years, but I don't think I'll ever be back to normal


Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum

 

[alldaysit]

Has anyone on here ever used this lab for aging their deer? I have a degree in wildlife and I know from experience that aging deer by tooth replacement and wear is more of a guess than a science. After a deer reaches 2 it is very hard to accurately age a deer using this method. There's too many factors that can make this inaccurate. I'm thinking about starting sending the bucks we harvest front incisors or molars to this lab every year, but I was wondering if anyone has any personal experience? I know it can be pricy, but knowing the accurate age of your bucks is very important! I'll post the link, let me know your thoughts.

http://www.deerage.com/


Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum

I have found it very valuable and fun. Totally worth the $25. Can't wait to send in the next one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[George]

Studies say that cementum annuli is + or - 1 year 50% of the time.

G

 

[Blizzard Ridge]

I had my 174" buck I killed last year sent off and aged and it broke my heart. What I thought was an older deer was only 4.5 yr old. I had him guessed at 5.5+. After studying the other big old buck I let walk several times last year I now believe him to be 6.5+ and should have used my tag on him instead. Oh well you live and learn I guess.

 

[Baker]

I had my 174" buck I killed last year sent off and aged and it broke my heart. What I thought was an older deer was only 4.5 yr old. I had him guessed at 5.5+. After studying the other big old buck I let walk several times last year I now believe him to be 6.5+ and should have used my tag on him instead. Oh well you live and learn I guess.

I'd stick with how you field aged the buck especially if you knew him from previous seasons. At the very least you shot a buck you really like. Doesn't matter very much what his age is in a well managed herd. You certainly didn't hurt anything. Could he have gotten bigger ? Maybe. But he also could have found numerous ways to die, get hurt or not blossom .If you like him take him. Simple.

 

[George]

+ or - 1, 50% of the time.

G

 

[willy]

I have sent in teeth the past five years to deer age.com, two to four sets a year. What I have learned from this experience is that they are like George said within a year plus or minus 50 percent of the time based on my picture history of the deer we have sent in. I do believe they can be way wrong also. I conducted a test and sent in front teeth of one buck and then its molar the next year to see if they came back the same age. They didn't. The front teeth were aged 5.5 and the molars came back as 3.5. I know the buck was at least a 5.5. They told me molar testing was more reliable than front teeth.

Gleaned from my deer age.com experiences I have decided to not send anymore teeth in. I feel very confident I can judge a buck 4.5 and older as well as they can. 4.5 is what I am after in deer management on my land. I'll put that money towards seed or herbicide.

 

[Tap]

I have sent in teeth the past five years to deer age.com, two to four sets a year. What I have learned from this experience is that they are like George said within a year plus or minus 50 percent of the time based on my picture history of the deer we have sent in. I do believe they can be way wrong also. I conducted a test and sent in front teeth of one buck and then its molar the next year to see if they came back the same age. They didn't. The front teeth were aged 5.5 and the molars came back as 3.5. I know the buck was at least a 5.5. They told me molar testing was more reliable than front teeth.

Gleaned from my deer age.com experiences I have decided to not send anymore teeth in. I feel very confident I can judge a buck 4.5 and older as well as they can. 4.5 is what I am after in deer management on my land. I'll put that money towards seed or herbicide.

I thought that molars were LESS accurate than incisors. Almost positive that I read that. Am I mistaken?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[willy]

Tap, this is from the deer age.com site.

"We also provide forensic cementum annuli aging utilizing one of the molars of a whitetail’s jaw. Our research has shown the results to be as accurate as using the incisors, though more time consuming and difficult to accomplish. We investigated this technique because we had a shoebox full of jawbones from over 25 years of hunting, but none of the incisors. We wanted to know the accurate age for many of those trophies that have hung on the walls of our homes and offices for many years. Click here to find out more about Whitetail Deer Molar Cementum Annuli Aging™, offered only by Wildlife Analytical Laboratories."

I talked personally with Henry C. the owner and he thought molar more accurate. I repeated what he said to me and he didn't change his statement so I sent in the molars. This conversation was a couple years ago.

 

[Tap]

Tap, this is from the deer age.com site.

"We also provide forensic cementum annuli aging utilizing one of the molars of a whitetail’s jaw. Our research has shown the results to be as accurate as using the incisors, though more time consuming and difficult to accomplish. We investigated this technique because we had a shoebox full of jawbones from over 25 years of hunting, but none of the incisors. We wanted to know the accurate age for many of those trophies that have hung on the walls of our homes and offices for many years. Click here to find out more about Whitetail Deer Molar Cementum Annuli Aging, offered only by Wildlife Analytical Laboratories."

I talked personally with Henry C. the owner and he thought molar more accurate. I repeated what he said to me and he didn't change his statement so I sent in the molars. This conversation was a couple years ago.

Thanks. I knew that molars took longer to analyze. But I (mistakenly) thought I read that it was less accurate. I stand corrected.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[MN Slick]

After reading this article I'm done sending mine in. I really wish it was more accurate. I think the best a guy can hope for is to follow them as they grow up. And if a tresspasser shows up and you like him send him a salvo since there's a good chance you won't see him again anyway.

http://wiredtohunt.com/2017/07/13/the-big-fat-cementum-aging-tooth-test-how-accurate-is-it-really/

 

[Drycreek]

I read somewhere that using known age bucks, the cemmentum annuli method was only slightly more accurate than tooth wear aging. I can't remember where I read it or the exact percentages, but I want to say tooth wear was in the 50s percent wise whereas the CI method was in the 60s. I had one buck aged last year at Deer Age. They said he was 5.5, I aged him at 4.5 through my scope, but they had weeks, I only had seconds.