High-grading
In Mississippi, research headed up by Bronson Strickland found that protection of small-antlered young males — intended to more closely balance adult sex ratios — might inadvertently contribute to smaller than normal antlers in subsequent years in some areas.Although there have been relatively few studies conducted to evaluate the effects of culling on antler quality among free-ranging whitetails, findings from field studies tend to fuel the culling debate.
Although there have been relatively few studies conducted to evaluate the effects of culling on antler quality among free-ranging whitetails, findings from field studies tend to fuel the culling debate.
For example, research conducted by Mitchell Lockwood and his cohorts from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, indicated selective breeding by superior-antlered yearling bucks improves subsequent yearling antler scores. Lockwood and his group concluded the following: “Our findings clearly indicate that under constant suboptimal environmental conditions, phenotypic change in antler quality can be realized with intensive selective harvest of yearling males.”
For example, research conducted by Mitchell Lockwood and his cohorts from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, indicated selective breeding by superior-antlered yearling bucks improves subsequent yearling antler scores. Lockwood and his group concluded the following: “Our findings clearly indicate that under constant suboptimal environmental conditions, phenotypic change in antler quality can be realized with intensive selective harvest of yearling males.”
Those favoring culling claim spike-antlered young bucks are genetically inferior, will never attain quality antlers typical of fork-antlered yearlings even when mature, and will contribute to perpetuation of such undesirable traits. In addition, they claim culling will help reduce deer density, thereby improv- ing herd nutrition, as well as remove small-antlered genes from the herd and improve future antler quality.
Those favoring culling claim spike-antlered young bucks are genetically inferior, will never attain quality antlers typical of fork-antlered yearlings even when mature, and will contribute to perpetuation of such undesirable traits. In addition, they claim culling will help reduce deer density, thereby improv- ing herd nutrition, as well as remove small-antlered genes from the herd and improve future antler quality.
Although there have been relatively few studies conducted to evaluate the effects of culling on antler quality among free-ranging whitetails, findings from field studies tend to fuel the culling debate.
Although there have been relatively few studies conducted to evaluate the effects of culling on antler quality among free-ranging whitetails, findings from field studies tend to fuel the culling debate.
Until recently, the culling debate has revolved primarily around studies using captive deer, held in unnaturally high densities and fed either high-quality or restricted diets. Such controversy now seems to surface at any regional meeting among hunters and wildlife professionals.
The practice of culling bucks with small antlers as a management strategy originated in Texas during the 1980s. Presumed benefits of such harvesting were based upon penned deer research. These early studies indicated that removal of spike-antlered yearling bucks not only improved antler quality, but also improved inherent genetic traits for large antlers. However, later studies challenged these findings. While conducting controlled breeding studies of deer from Northern as well as Southern regions, Mississippi researchers found no evidence that removal of yearling bucks with spike or few antler points improved antler quality. Instead, they argued that a yearling buck’s antlers were more influenced by birth date and nutrition than genetics.
The practice of culling bucks with small antlers as a management strategy originated in Texas during the 1980s. Presumed benefits of such harvesting were based upon penned deer research. These early studies indicated that removal of spike-antlered yearling bucks not only improved antler quality, but also improved inherent genetic traits for large antlers. However, later studies challenged these findings. While conducting controlled breeding studies of deer from Northern as well as Southern regions, Mississippi researchers found no evidence that removal of yearling bucks with spike or few antler points improved antler quality. Instead, they argued that a yearling buck’s antlers were more influenced by birth date and nutrition than genetics.
Whitetail deer management strategies sometimes include culling bucks, which has many facts and myths based on research.
Those favoring culling claim spike-antlered young bucks are genetically inferior, will never attain quality antlers typical of fork-antlered yearlings even when mature, and will contribute to perpetuation of such undesirable traits. In addition, they claim culling will help reduce deer density, thereby improv- ing herd nutrition, as well as remove small-antlered genes from the herd and improve future antler quality.
The Culling DebateStudy results on captive deer have produced recommendations ranging from removing all spike-antlered bucks (primarily yearlings) to complete protection of all yearling bucks regard- less of their antler traits.
Until recently, the culling debate has revolved primarily around studies using captive deer, held in unnaturally high densities and fed either high-quality or restricted diets. Such controversy now seems to surface at any regional meeting among hunters and wildlife professionals.
The practice of culling bucks with small antlers as a management strategy originated in Texas during the 1980s. Presumed benefits of such harvesting were based upon penned deer research. These early studies indicated that removal of spike-antlered yearling bucks not only improved antler quality, but also improved inherent genetic traits for large antlers. However, later studies challenged these findings. While conducting controlled breeding studies of deer from Northern as well as Southern regions, Mississippi researchers found no evidence that removal of yearling bucks with spike or few antler points improved antler quality. Instead, they argued that a yearling buck’s antlers were more influenced by birth date and nutrition than genetics.
Culling is the selective removal of presumably inferior deer in order to improve the quality of the remaining population. Among whitetails, the culling harvest strategy generally involves targeting those bucks with inferior antlers for removal to improve overall antler quality of those left to do the breeding and for harvest at an older age.