Cull Bucks

boot

Active Member
Just curious, how many out of you out there kill bucks that might be considered a cull buck or other bucks with poor genetics? I only get one buck tag a year for our farm so its hard for me to justify wasting it on a cull buck but I am curious how effective it is at managing a heard and growing big, mature bucks.
 
Unless you control all the genetics on your farm (i.e. high fence), there really is no such thing as a cull buck. The genes you wish to remove are already in the wild gene pool. Plus, does carry 50% of the genes.

I wouldn't use a buck tag on a cull buck for management purposes unless that deer will make you happy.
 
I don't technically use the word cull buck. What I typically do is after a buck is 3 years old and not looking very good genetically and is a bully buck on my properties I will remove this buck from the herd. I want to make sure to leave enough space on my farms to hold the more quality mature bucks in the area. I have watched 8 points that will never be more than a 140" buck push around my mature higher scoring bucks and eventually that older buck will move on if the young buck keeps pushing him around.

Cutman is correct unless you have enough hunters to properly manage the genes age structure then use your tag on what will make you happy. If you have enough hunters and can properly manage the genetics then you will be spinning your will taking a "Cull" type of buck and thinking you are in some way helping the herd. Go after those 4.5 and older bucks and older and you will see your quality change over time but only if the neighbors practice the same principles or you have a big enough piece of ground to hold your local herd.
 
I consider any deer 4.5 or older a "cull buck" :)

I am in a one-buck state as well, but I am happy with any buck that meets my age requirements. Maybe if I got better at killing 4.5+ yr old deer I would be more selective about "which" one I target, but I'm not there yet. And I agree with all the research that shows there is no way to alter the gene pool of a wild deer herd by "culling" deer.
 
It took me many years to get to the point to start letting 4.5 bucks walk and I can honestly say I get a happy trigger finger occasionally as well. I have also went seasons without drawing the string too. I came to the age where the kill means nothing to me. It is the quest or the "hunt" that I am looking to achieve. Several years back I shot my first 170" buck and after that time i vowed to take a 170" or better or nothing. I of course have changed that to try to take 5.5 yr old or better but I am sure I haven't ate my last tag.

Even though I hunt this way I don't feel that it is for everyone and all hunter's should take an animal that is a trophy to them or a deer that makes them happy. For some that may be a doe or a full racked 2 yr old for others like me it may be the oldest buck in the area. Take what makes you happy and keeps you excited about the next hunt.
 
I hate that term "cull buck". I feel that most places are nowhere near managed intensely enough to claim they are affecting the quality of their herd buy killing an underdeveloped buck. Most use it as some sort of excuse/justification for killing a deer that doesn't live up to someone's expectations. You want that deer that is fine - you live with that decision today and down the road. In IN WE GET 1 antlered deer thru over 3 months of deer hunting - you better make it count!
 
One buck tag a yr and I tend to eat tag soup if the right one doesn't walk by (probable more often than not). I don't worry about a small or goofy antered deer, they get a pass from me.
 
I don't call them "cull" bucks, but I put bucks on the hit list every year that fit what one would think of as a "cull" and aggressively try to remove them. As others stated, you aren't doing much if anything to alter genetics. I do it simply to make holes for better bucks to fill.

Any piece of ground can only hold X number of bucks 3.5 and older. So, I try to remove the bottom 50% of the 3.5s and 75ish% of the bottom 4.5s, all in an effort to get the best racked bucks to 5.5. It doesn't always work, but it increases the odds of that happen, if you follow me.

When you have the age and population dynamics rocking on a property, if you aren't removing enough bucks each year, some that are striving for dominance, yet not able to carve out a hole to rule on your ground, are extremely likely to relocate to the neighbors. The neighbors typically don't have as good of habitat or as good of an age structure, but have plenty of open holes to fill.

All that said, it's part art, part science. That 3.5 yr old 8 with short brows may end up exploding at 4.5, but odds are better that the long, skinny tined, 3.5 yr old 10, who is already developing stickers will. No, they don't always follow those rules I'm making up for who will and won't explode, but I sincerely believe that the %s work out over the long haul in my favor.

Final thoughts: the approach I just described isn't for everyone. Most of my clients with smaller, normal sized grounds are managing for 3.5s. If that buck is 3.5 and it's getting an arrow or lead no matter what it has on their head. Also, odds get too flacky to try to determine what will and won't become the largest racked bucks at anything short of 3.5 years of age. Too much of what 1.5 & 2.5 yr old bucks have on their head is still based on the timing of their birth, with many well timed bucks that on't blow up looking better than the poor timed future super studs.
 
You said it so much more eloquently then I did :D. I take the same approach as well though and is not for everyone. I was blessed with kids that took to the same approach as their daddy. That is not to say they didn't take out a few young deer along the way to get to that point and I wouldn't have it any other way. It isn't logical to think that someone will start out a trophy or age structure deer hunter to start their hunting careers.
 
hahaha....I've just written that point around a dozen times now on various forums. If it doesn't get clearer and more concise with each version, there's something horribly wrong with me. That said, I'm sure more than a few in this world would argue that there is something horribly wrong with me. So long as the wife and kids don't figure it out, I can live with that.
 
Imo there is nothing more misused and abused in deer management than the idea of removing cull bucks.First, until and unless the nutritional plane is 100% 365 days a year , preferably for years one has no idea what the potential of a buck is. And most herds aren't there.

Second unless you have a known history with the specific buck you think needs culling your fishing in the dark. Antler growth on 4 yr old and older bucks is not linear. It goes up and down for lots of reasons. Let the mantra be...KNOW THY HERD. I've seen 190" bucks drop to the 150's and 140" bucks jump to the 180's and everything in between. And there is absolutely no reason to ever consider culling a buck younger than 4!

Thirdly, when you remove a 'cull', all you have done is remove a mouth. Lots of reasons to do that but expect no more. There is NO genetic impact whatsoever...High fence or not.

Fourthly, it is far more important what bucks you leave in the herd than those you remove if you are trying to grow quality . Silly to think you can 'cull' and remove the best bucks and accomplish anything.

So often 'culling ' is just rationalization to shoot a deer. There are circumstances when removing a % of bucks makes sense but most herds aren't there. Far better to let as many bucks as possible get to the older age classes on high nutrition where I doubt most posters would consider them culls.
 
So often 'culling ' is just rationalization to shoot a deer. There are circumstances when removing a % of bucks makes sense but most herds aren't there. Far better to let as many bucks as possible get to the older age classes on high nutrition where I doubt most posters would consider them culls.

I think this last part is fascinating, and it's something I agree with as well. I posted a thread on QDMA last year about shooting some younger bucks rather than more does because my deer herd is so unique. My idea was VERY quickly frowned upon by the majority of posters, but to be honest they never really convinced me that I was wrong.

You have given me hope that there is scientific basis to my theory. If I have a relatively stable deer population (property is surrounded by water and no neighbors), and the buck:doe ratio is roughly 50:50 AND I HAVE to shoot 15 deer a year to keep the population stable, it makes sense that some of those deer are going to be young bucks. i don't like it but if there are 10 1 yr old bucks, 5 2.5 year olds, and 5 3.5+ year old bucks, some of those 1 year olds have to be sacrificed to keep the buck age structure balanced.

Sorry to get off topic but it seems relevant.
 
I think this last part is fascinating, and it's something I agree with as well. I posted a thread on QDMA last year about shooting some younger bucks rather than more does because my deer herd is so unique. My idea was VERY quickly frowned upon by the majority of posters, but to be honest they never really convinced me that I was wrong.

You have given me hope that there is scientific basis to my theory. If I have a relatively stable deer population (property is surrounded by water and no neighbors), and the buck:doe ratio is roughly 50:50 AND I HAVE to shoot 15 deer a year to keep the population stable, it makes sense that some of those deer are going to be young bucks. i don't like it but if there are 10 1 yr old bucks, 5 2.5 year olds, and 5 3.5+ year old bucks, some of those 1 year olds have to be sacrificed to keep the buck age structure balanced.

Sorry to get off topic but it seems relevant.


Lets explore the idea a little further. In the example above you only have 20 bucks of which only 5 are 3.5 yrs or older also suggesting there are very few mature deer at 4 or older. If indeed you are 1 to 1 that also proposes you have 20 does. Lets be generous and say your reproductive success is 100% or 20 fawns at 50/50 B/D. It is safe to assume there will be some natural fawn mortality over the fall so real recruitment is more likely 75%. But I'm happy staying with 100% for the example.Using a deer to 10 acres that also proposes you have 400 acres.

What to do. First deer management is never in a vacuum. Accepting that I would maybe shoot NONE of the bucks or only 1 or 2 if you feel you have to shoot something. Only 20 deer [ or less] need to be remove to continue stasis. I might shoot several of the female fawns and a few of the oldest does. Why the oldest does? They are the best mothers and most likely to have twins. Till I get my buck structure in line I don't want much female recruitment. I would continue this for several years letting the buck herd mature.

What should a healthy buck population look like. I think you want at least half you bucks 4 or older. So if you are limited to 20 bucks, 10 or so should be skewed between 4 and 6. { I've got a bunch from 7-10 } So that gives you 4,3,3 at 1,2,3. None of which you need to shoot.

Also you can easily increase carrying capacity on your land locked 400 acres and increase nutrition viv a vis year round food plots.

Now here's the fun part. Raise the nutritional plane to where they are all 100% 365 days a year . Epigenetic responses to the environment kick in and body weights, antler size, longevity, reproductive success, fawn size...just about any health marker known...all improve. Markedly!. So the bell curve on antler size overall increases which also means the outliers start to get big..really big. And what you are 'culling' then becomes you weakest bucks but they are 4 or older and by most standards trophies.And you get to shoot the giants.

In the real world I think I'm taking 20-30 bucks off my farm this year. Most will be 4 or older. Most will be 130" to 160" . { Are these culls?} { Or just removing mouths?} Undoubtedly there will be a couple younger bucks shot and perhaps a male fawn or two. No big deal as I have 40 or 50 bucks that are 4 or older.

Age is always your friend!
 
Interesting. My property is more like 300 acres with another 200 acres of marsh that the deer use but I don't count it towards carrying capacity. So we will stick with 300.

I think I'm on my way to what you suggested. Last year is when the age of the buck herd was skewed so young, so I passed on all mature bucks. I intended to shoot 8 does but ended up shooting 6 does and 2 button bucks (that I thought were does).

I'll post some of my trail cam picks when I get back in town and see what you think about the current crop of bucks. Thanks for your input.
 
Excellent posts, Baker. About the only parts I'd somewhat disagree with is that there is no reason to remove bucks before 4.5. I've lost way too many stud 3.5s (150+) to neighbors that the evidence pointed pretty clearly to being driven out by 4.5+s. When I hammer the low end 3.5s, it doesn't happen anywhere near as much (still happens, but much reduced level), as there aren't as many 4.5+s and more potential holes . No, other 3.5s are rarely pushing them out, but if you don't start removing at 3.5 you're likely to be too late. It's too tough to get the lower end 4.5s out before the push begins (in the Midwest and points north, mid Oct). So, the 3.5s that were removed in 2015 won't be there in 2016 to nudge 2016's 3.5s to their demise at the neighbors' hands. At the same time, it also reduces social stress levels, something that I see as not given anywhere near the importance level it deserves.

If I were managing a high fence, I very well might wait until 4.5 to put them on the hit list, as they can't drive other bucks to the neighbors, but feel that's a year too late on the larger, free range properties I use this method on. I've never managed a high fence. So, I'll certainly differ to your experience on that.

The other area that I agree, yet respectfully partially disagree is that one has absolutely no clue what bucks will and won't do year to year. I remember a similar comment in a similar discussion from the past and have wondered ever since if this isn't a difference between N & S deer. Agree it's not linear. I can point to bucks that didn't do much up until 4.5, 5.5, 6.5 and even a few 7.5s that suddenly blew up. Most that continued living were one year wonders, but a few weren't. Also have had bucks that have made 1 year drops and bounced back, others that dropped and didn't. I've had a bunch of bucks essentially flat line after hitting 3.5. I had a buddy that manages a natural genetics, 1800 acre high fence and his experiences are very similar in those regards.

All that said, somewhere over half follow a natural progression. Also, we have a lot of 3.5 yr old 8s that are 4.5 yr old 8s, 5.5 yr old 8s, 8s at 6.5 and so on....They put on a little mass and tine length, but they seem stuck at 8s and don't have it in them to break out of the 130s or140s.

I'm not saying one of us is "right" and the other "wrong," and I'm talking tendencies in all of this (plenty of exceptions). I suspect it's an issue of our environments impacting us in differing ways. It's a topic that I'd love to give you a call and get into in deeper detail on your experiences some time. If you're game, I'll PM you sometime in the future. I seem to have lost your number, one of the few skills I do have mastered (losing things)
 
Last edited:
Steve, I agree with this I have personally seen a property overrun by 3 yr old and younger bucks. I racked my brain for a year as to why mature bucks were not on this property. The property had not been hunted since 2009 and this was last season. I ran cameras year round and never once did I get a buck over 3 yrs old on camera from what I could tell. The other issue I saw on this farm was a predominate 9 point genetic. It actually appeared at times that many of these bucks could have been related they all looked similar with similar characteristics. One being the 9th point was on the same side on all bucks. Could this be a case of young bucks pushing the olders one off the farm?
 
BR,

I can't say I've ever seen where the 3.5s just became too much of a hassle for the 4.5+s to put up with, but I've heard guys express frustrations more than once or twice that they pass all these 3.5s and none of them are there the next year. I always figured some of them are just killed by neighbors, but they sure aren't killing them all, all the time (we tend to give neighbors WAY too much credit for how effective of hunters they are). I've heard it enough that I do suspect there is something to that. I just don't have experience with it myself and am afraid I'd be essentially guessing at the answer.

You do bring up a very interesting point, though. Over the years, I've taken over several larger properties that hadn't been hunted for 4+ years (maybe a few trespassers, but no where close to out of hand or any real hunting pressure). One would think that the hunting and caliber of bucks would be ridiculous.

One would be half right. Ton of mature bucks, but almost all the 4.5+s had low end racks. The best 3.5s typically had the most bone on their head, only to get a lot of them shot by neighbors or simply move their core areas off the ground and find a way to survive over there.

That said, I've only come into that situation 3 times over the years. So, that just isn't enough of a data set to really draw conclusions from, and it may have just been the luck of the draw those 3 times. Still, I found that profoundly interesting.
 
P.S. I should also say that there is a tremendous difference between putting 50% of 3.5s and 75% of 4.5s on the hit list and coming anywhere remotely close to actually removing that many. On a good year, we may remove 25% of the 3.5s and 4.5s. I've never had anything close to high hunting pressure on those large properties, and the bucks don't seem to realize they need to be removed. Even on the best years, more bucks on the hit list make it through than not.
 
I agree with others. Not going to change your genetics in free roaming deer. Free range hunters took the "cull buck" term from high fence situations to justify killing bucks that don't meet there ideal criteria. TV hunters use that term every time they shoot a smaller buck. Shoot what makes you happy.
Todd
 
I love these discussions.My comments on culling tend to be to a generic audience. Circumstances are unique and preferred outcomes differ. I'll expand my thoughts.

First, KNOW THY HERD!!! If you know your individual deer over time patterns develop and it becomes easier to figure out which deer should be removed.Again though, it's not the deer you remove that matter as much as the ones you leave behind.

Knowing thy herd also recognizes there are differences between northern deer and southern deer. Deer on my farm mature at different rates than deer on my ranch in Mexico. Conventional wisdom is that northern deer may mature faster than here in La. My experience is La., Tx., and Mexico.

Next, and perhaps most important: What are your goals. Having followed the QDMA forums for a while seems many would be delighted to shoot a 130"-150" buck. Heck Bullwinkle has invested lots of cash in what some contend to be one of the best counties in America and dreams of shooting a 150" buck. Thus for most the best chance at reaching that goal is allowing bucks to age. Culling really has no place. Bucks around here tend to make nice jumps between 3 and 4. 4 to 6 antler growth can vary a lot depending on lots of things...rut recovery, injury, winter nutrition, psychology, ..the list is endless. Nonetheless a buck 4 and older has a better chance of exceeding 130 with a terrific top end potential. So for many hunters their best bet is simply age. Forget culling.

For those that have a lot of control over their herd, have lots of buck in the older age classes [ 4+ ] and need to remove deer to keep population in check then removing a % of bucks makes sense. Then, by knowing your individual bucks or the trends within your herd you can remove a necessary % from the lower end of quality and help your herd. You have removed mouths from the herd , retained enough females to assure recruitment goals, and left the better bucks to reach their maximum potential. From what I've seen as the typical poster on QDMA this is not the case.

My main mantra however is nutrition. Year round nutrition improves the quality of all age classes of bucks. How would most hunters feel if that 'cull' 3 or 4 yr old was magically 5-15" or more bigger? Would he still be considered a cull? How can we know the top side potential of any buck unless they are on superior nutrition? I'm proposing for many hunters enhancing nutrition and letting bucks get another yr will produce bucks that exceed their goals. What I consider 'culls ' on my farm would be trophies in many hunters eyes. If as mentioned above you have a lot of 3 yr olds with promise but they never seem to improve with age I propose nutrition is the issue.

Steve et al I'm delighted to dig as deeply as interest allows. My farm gate is open to anyone anytime and I love giving tours.
 
Back
Top