I agree with the majority of the article. The controlled area they discuss explains why people will jump on large unhunted properties. Ex: my Inlaws place that isn't hunted typically has more big deer on it on any given year than a 13k acre MLD3 lease that's only a cpl miles down the rd has shot in 10 years.

Chaparrosa Ranch is LF and has been culling all spikes and in all age classes from 2.5 and up since late 1990's. The result is eye opening.

3sided fence ranch in the pines started that in the late 60s and then decided to quit and just shoot mature deer and 3yo <8pts. It's been eye opening as well since range conditions don't fluctuate much and quality hasn't fallen off, nor did it improve much from the intense culling early on.

I agree with a lot of it, and also agree that many management bucks are taken on properties that will never see a difference, just like some that feed protein. IMO, culling is a tool, along with herd management, counts, improvement of habitat, supplemental feeding, etc. I do believe the control in the study at the King ranch is slightly flawed, mainly because they only took the bucks and, as the article stated, the ratio was out of whack. In a true management program, the entire herd is addressed, not just the males.

Same is true of taking spikes. Taking spikes will do very little on most places. Without additional management practices in place, you are simply taking a buck out of the herd. I can see the benefit when you are working on herd management and start taking the lower percentile of each age class.

Culling will not change the "genetics" of a place, but extensive culling and years of culling can have an impact IMO. We take every crab claw and no-brow buck we see. These two traits were prevailent in out area 20 years ago. Now, we might see one a year. Did we change the genetics? No. We improved the herd by implementing more than just culling. The better deer and more desired deer were the ones surving to maturity. Both traits are still in out herd, but they don't make it long.

Our ranch is 10k acres. We hunt 6500 and 3500 is not hunted. The traits are common on the 3500 and rare on the 6500. Also, based on drives, TC, the rancher, and the few times a year I sit over there, the hunted side actually has better deer and the antler size of the mature deer is larger. Because of genetics? No. Because of a management program.

My

I stopped believ g QDMA sermons after I saw what their "shoot every doe" preaching did to hunting opportunities in areas where deer numbers were once strong.

I've also been constantly amused at an organization that focuses so much attention on antlers, and yet claims its practices are not about growing trophies.

I started drinking a protein shake for breakfast. ....and lost 50lbs! !!! It was the protein shake, not the running 2 miles a day, plyometrics twice a week, or no dinner or snackes after 5:00

^^^^ Can you tell us a bit more about the Chaparrosa Ranch results? I did a quick internet search and didn't find much.

I agree with the majority of the article. The controlled area they discuss explains why people will jump on large unhunted properties. Ex: my Inlaws place that isn't hunted typically has more big deer on it on any given year than a 13k acre MLD3 lease that's only a cpl miles down the rd has shot in 10 years.

Until you have been there and seen the results you can keep brushing it off that culling/killing spikes does not work on any LF place. They did not use food plots or protein feeders back when I was able to visit there. Just used numbers control to keep pop numbers in check. Over all herd quality bottom to top has increased since they started this management program.

ha! This is true.

I'd bet they have a lot of avg deer running around to, just with 80k they can have more numbers in the upper end of quality. Would bet they also still have to do a lot of shooting of the undesirables that are still there despite their efforts.

Never said it doesn't work, I've always said its part of a bigger picture. I've also always said that people should focus on what they have the resourses to do.

there are certain properties that even I hunt would benefit with a heavy lower age spike harvest from a pure herd population perspective. With that said the resources to do so effectivley aren't there...yet.


The chaparossa is a premier ranch in size( 80k), native quality (w/ resourses to get there and maintain it.)

I will let you keep thinking you are correct....