I don't think you can say that everyone who uses this term or shoots what they consider to be a management buck is using it as an excuse to shoot a small or junked up deer. I luckily live in a place where I probably have more opportunities at nice deer than alot of others and I understand someone having a different game plan. But for someone to tell me that they cringe when they hear a certain term used or that they think it is BS...I think that is BS. To each his own, because like I said everyone has their own game plan, but if it is the last evening of the hunt and I have a 110-120 inch 2.5 year old and a another young buck that has 4points on one side and one spike on the other come by my stand, the 110-120 walks and the other gets taken out. He may have already spread his seed, but he won't directly do it again. Hopefully he tapped a doe whose daddy was a stud. I don't think by any means that this practice will completey alter the gene pool, but it will help in my immediate area imo....and I don't think that if I told a buddy about shooting the small deer instead of the nice young deer it would constitute BS either. If other people don't agree with it...I could really care less. I have my game plan and my terminology that I implement and use. If yours is different thats fine....I doesn't bother me or make me "cringe."
I don't hunt very large tracts of land so hopefully the neighbors will kill the "cull" bucks so I can concentrate on hunting the good looking ones. Seriously, I can only think of one time that I have even had a potential "cull' buck in front of me and I had NO desire to put my tag on him. He was a Rob buck actually.
I personally would rather see the 110-120 incher go another year. I have no desire to shoot another small buck like that. I plan on holding out for a mature deer or doing something to help the deer herd as best I can, even if it only has very little impact. With that said, if that same 110-120 inch deer on the last day of the season is following a doe instead of a....brace yourself....."management buck"....she is getting shot instead of the 110-120 also.
So, would you rather your neighbor shot the 2 1/2 year old 12 pointer or the 4 1/2 year old 6 pointer "cull" buck??? I'm afraid that many wildlife biologists would call your post BS. The fact is, that managing a deer herd has already been done in many different areas with very positive results. And, part of that program is in fact "culling" deer that do not carry the desired genetics. Even IF the buck only constitutes 40 percent of the makeup. Would you come sit in one of my stands if I told you I could promise you a 40% chance at getting a 15 yard shot at a 190" typical?? It's actually a pretty big number now isnt it.? Will it work on crowded public ground, NO. But it does and will continue to work in many areas. At least a dead buck will not be contributing ANY percentage of his genetic makeup to the herd. Maybe in your area "culling" is an excuse. I can assure you that is not the case everywhere. Call it whatever you want that wont make you cringe, but it can and does work on a large scale all over our country. Its not an opinion, its science.
As disrespectful as those who go out just to kill something without any thought to the impact they are making, people who just say to heck with it, I can't make a difference? A person may have a different goal than you, but I wouldn't say it's disrespectful. That person is trying to make a positive impact on a deer herd, whether you agree that it will work or not. Their effort is admirable, as at least they care. To me disrespectful is someone who has to kill something in order to define their hunt as succesful. Someone who goes out and shoots the first thing that comes by whether it's a 1.5 year old fork horn or whatever. I would rather shoot a doe than another 2.5 year old deer. For me there is alot more to hunting, especially bow hunting, than killing a deer. Rattling in a 120, then passing, get's my blood flowing and I feel a certain sense of accomplishment and success in a situation like that. I will be excited all off season to see what he will look like the next year. Maybe he will move on, maybe someone else won't pass on him, but I will feel good knowing that I tried to accomplish what I thought was the best for the deer herd in the area I hunt in. People may have different goals or ways of thinking, but I think people should be careful when they use certain terms to describe hunters with different goals than them. I just don't think is appropriate to label it a BS or disrespectful.....I think everyone here probably loves the outdoors as much as I do, we may not agree on the methodology, but I would be willing to bet that most everyone here is doing what they think is best for the deer herd where they hunt no matter how small the impact may be. Like I said before, it may be different than yours or mine, but I think they are all admirable attempts.
Then it is a difference of where we hunt and who we are around. Here, and in other parts of the country, a "cull" buck is usually just exactly that. I dont TYPICALLY see young deer getting killed and being labeled a cull. In fact, I dont believe I have ever seen that happen here. By definition biologically speaking a cull deer is MATURE and lacks the genetics desired for the area. And, actually, due to the age structure of our deer, there really are some 4 - 5 year old bucks running around that would be classified "culls" from a management perspective. True, any old deer may be a trophy to many, it is in the eye of the beholder. Biologically speaking, it can still be quite accurately called a "cull". I can see where someone shooting a young deer and calling it a cull would be frustrating to some folks. It would be to me also. But this thread paints with a much broader brush and is biologically incorrect, stating that there is no way "culling" deer will ever produce any positive results. That is simply not true, wildlife biology 101. Many biologist in Texas and other areas make a living managing deer herds for trophy potential. It works, period. Doesnt mean we have to like it. But it is, what it is.
I don't disagree witht the OP that the word cull or phrase "management buck" is used by some as a justification to shoot a smaller or deformed rack. But a lot of this comes down to semantics. There are many others that use these same two words to help distinguish between themselves (those hunting the same grounds) different classes of deer and the rules for that particular class of deer in which they have all agreed to as part of hunting these particular grounds. The specific that I am familiar with is a ranch in deep South Texas that a good business friend is part of in regards to their hunting. This is a large (8,000 acres if memory serves me) that is low fence and open range. The same group has hunted this ranch for over 15 years. Each member is allowed one "trophy" buck. They define "trophy" as a 10 pt plus that will score 150" plus. The member can allow a guest or a child or spouse to fill this tag, but once there is one killed in this category for the year the member is done EXCEPT for what they call "management bucks" or some of them call "cull bucks". His membership allows him and/or his guests to take two of these. He and/or his guests can take and are encouraged to shoot as many doe as they want. Their definition of a cull or managament buck- A mature (est 4 1/2 yo or older ) heavy beamed 8 pointer or less. They are targeting these animals not because they are trying to alter the genetic pool but because they are looking at these animals as individuals and ASSUMING (no guarantee or absolutes) that if this animal is only a 8 pointer at this age, he will MORE THAN LIKELYnever be bigger than an 8 pointand as he has reached MOST of his potential and they are trying to grow 150 class deer which is hard (not impossible but hard) to do with 8 pointers, even mature ones. They don't shoot any young bucks regardless of rack/points unless it is deemed to score 150" plus and they want to use their "trophy" tag on it. Nothind demeaning or disrespectful in this approach, at least from my perspective. It just gives them a common language and lays out what they are trying to accomplish in BUCK MANAGEMENT as opposed to HERD MANAGEMENT. I hunted with them last season with the idea of takjng a "cull" buck if the opportunity presented itself. It didn't. Here are pictures of the four best deer that I passed on because they all had more than 8 pts or were too young . Had they only been 8pts, I would have gladly killed the first two as I ESTIMATED them to be 4 1/2yo. I ESTIMATED the third deer to be only 3 1/2, so he would not have been a "Cull" even if he was only an 8pt. The last deer was ESTIMATED by me to be only 2/1/2, so he got an automatic pass as well. So what is guy to do? Shoot a "cull" hog instead and hope you get invited again next year. :D
Definitely a difference in where you hunt. Many spikes or "scrub bucks" (another term I don't care for) are killed in MI as yearlings (1.5) and labeled cull bucks. It is used both as an excuse and out of ignorance. You mentioned science before...every study I have read on the issue claims you cannot alter the genetics of free ranging whitetails. If you know of one that proves you can, I would love to read it.
When I reffered to a 1.5 yo management deer I didn't mean a young deer that was just a spike. In our area we have seen some really weird stuff on some of the young deer such as one normal antler and one that grows straight back or forward for that matter. When we see young deer that definetely have issues with their antlers, on our property, we label them as management deer. I would never suggest that a 2.5 year old four point with normal main beams should be considered a management deer. I wish I had a good picture of what I'm reffering to but I don't.
The pics aren't coming up on this computer, I will look at them when I get home later and see if they are what we would consider to be a management buck.
Is this a cull or management buck? If not now, he could have been a "weird", "messed up", or "scrub" buck at a younger age.
Vito if that is a MI buck get it off the internet, you'll have 5200 poachers by your spot in a week:p
I would again agree that it is futile in some areas. I have a friend that lives in Mississippi. His family owns several thousand acres. 10 - 15 years ago they started leaving all 10 pointers alone, no matter how big. Killing only 8 pts or less. At that time there were few 10's. Today they are taking some really nice deer and there are a lot more deer with 10 pts or more and fewer 8 pointers. I would argue that they have altered to some degree, the genetic makeup of their deer. This same principle has been applied on large tracts all over the country. Are the genes altered???? I know that the bucks sport better headgear.
There was an interesting article on this subject in D&DH a while back that basically outlined everything that has been covered in this thread. On open, unfenced property it is "impossible" (the word they used) to effectively control the genetics of a deer herd. The reasons they listed, that are reiterations of what was said here, were: By the time a buck is old enough to be effectively deemed as genetically inferior he has already sired so many offspring that his genes have been passed along. There is no control over what other deer come into the herd through dispersion so those genes cannot be accounted for. There is no way to determine what buck genes a doe is carrying so the female side of the equation is beyond control. Even with a large group of hunters the limit on buck tags generally prevents the ability to effectively limit a gene within the herd by hunting (GregH's post is a great example of this). So, all things considered it's pretty futile to try to control your genetics through shooting deer. I also agree that it is an excuse used by some to account for ground shrinkage or getting trigger happy, in which case it's pretty sad.
Maybe it works in other areas, IDK. I do know many yearling bucks are killed every year in MI because guys assume they won't ever amount to anything, or they want an excuse for killing a younger buck. That is a tough pill to swallow when one of MI's biggest problems is lack of buck age structure. Again, these are young bucks getting killed. We certainly don't have enough 3 and 4 year olds to cull, even if we wanted to.
