The question i have asked before is how quickly do genetics from a breeder buck get “washed out” in a population of native deer?

I believe there is a study that has shown it happens pretty quickly. The recent NDA magazine talked about a study called the Faith Ranch study and its east and west yana pastures.

Long and short, they set up two 1,100 acre high fence pastures with identical animal structure except the west was emptied of “all” deer (i say all deer as that is a strong word, but for purposes of the study they emptied the pasture of all deer). The researchers then put up two breeding pens in the west pasture and introduced a 176” breeding buck in one and a 223” non-typ breeder in the other, and then put 15 doe in each they captured from surrounding land. The fawns from each breeding were captured, recorded and dna sampled. Then the bucks and the doe and fawns were released into the west yana pasture. This process of breeder bucks breeding doe was repeated annually. The east yana pasture was just allowed to do its thing according to nature with no breeder bucks. Full time supplemental feed was supplied for both pastures and doe were harvested annually to keep herd numbers in line with typical carrying capacity.

Capture and recording of animals was done in each pasture over many years, and analysis was started in 2021 with results showing mature bucks from the west yana were on average 7 inches bigger than east yana bucks. However, since recording and dna analysis was done, it showed something pretty remarkable. The average gain from the west yana was isolated to only bucks bred from the actual breeder pen (first generation), with an average of 10-12” compared to native herd bucks. The bucks from the west yana that were from breeding performed (second or more generations) outside the breeding pens only showed an average of 1-5” over the control of the east yana bucks.

Hard to know exactly without seeing the actual data, but this suggests that any breeding benefit from a breeder buck is washed out in a native herd within potentially one generation…

This long term study has lots more work to be done, including looking at doe dna within the family tree. But i found that aspect to be very interesting.

Thoughts?

Ahem, the antlers developed by a breeder buck being delivered tremendous amounts of protein through a direct feeding program serving as a primary source of nutrition should be better than its naturally fed off spring only being provided with supplemental feed. That doesn't correlate to the superior genes being washed out, but more akin to the offspring aren't being fed as well as the breeder bucks prior to when they were brought into the pen.

I got kinda dizzy trying to understand who was in each pasture but I think what is missing what were the backgrounds of the 15 doe in each pasture. What I understand, does are the dominated input(60%) to the fawns in all of the pastures. Thus a dilution after each year of breeding. However, the breeding from each buck gives the male traits, thus larger racks . I do understand the dilution from doe to doe. Thus the movement back towards the natural beginning, as I understand it. For sure, this is beyond my understanding other than reading the results which is expected but at what rate. A table and graph of results would help me understand how and how fast the process was going. The experiment is so very interesting and would like to know more about it.

You mentioned not seeing the actual data. It would be available, wouldn’t it? I’m not the type to be able to go through that kind of detail, nor would I understand it. If you really want to see the actual data, and can’t, then holler at me and I might know someone that knows someone, that might get it.

The faith ranch also has some of the biggest deer in the world free range. Maverick County.



That’s gonna affect the outcome a little.

You can influence and change genetics but you have to have a flood of new genetics to accomplish it.


Keep in mind there are not near as many “native” herds as people think. Deer were brought in from different areas all over the country to stock areas where they didn’t exist.

100 years ago there was only estimated to be 235,000 whitetail in Texas. Now there are 5.5 million.

Sorry i haven’t responded back until now, lots going on to prevent that…

Hud and fish, all the animals were fed the same opportunity and the doe were from the locally surrounding area, so they were native to the area. Breeder bucks were used to breed and then released afterward to the larger pasture on the west. On the east, animals were allowed to do their normal breeding as nature would allow. Deer populations were maintained with doe harvest, so the thought the fawns and resulting offspring didn’t have the same nutritional advantages as the breeder bucks is just a non-issue. Population was controlled and supplemental feed available 100% of the time. Also, bucks were allowed to age to maturity and many measurements were done over the lifetime of these deer.

First gen (from breeder) were bigger but the Second gen and later mature Bucks were within only a couple inches compared to their control mature bucks on the east. Even is the native deer in the east pasture are the largest out there, the effect of the breeder buck was diminished within one generation. I have no doubt that area has many big bucks, but the native genetics being “biggest in the state” SHOULD have created a better situation to enhance the breeder buck’s genetics, but they did not. The fact the second gen and later bucks were only 1-5” better than the control east pasture bucks tells us its possible nature reverts back to nature pretty quickly. It is entirely possible the majority of the genetic influence from a antler standpoint is from the doe, and not the buck at all. It is entirely possible antler heritability is just simply not something that can even be predictable in the wild. We know in breeder pens it works, but using native genetic deer, maybe there is nothing we can “see” phenotypically that translates to bigger antlers in offspring.

This is an ongoing study, meaning data is still being evaluated and doe side will be evaluated using dna and family trees. This will be the interesting part in my mind.

Another thing to remember is the numbers above are simply averages. We all know averages are at best average and at worst fail to see individuals. There may have been some monsters and some dinks and those average out to he just average, so thats where evaluating the data could influence the outcomes of this research.

The main reason i brought this up is it appears to show genetic washout of introduced superior genetics is fairly quick within a native population. How this affects me is if i see an obvious HF deer on a low fence property, the old adage of “letting him breed and not shooting him” is probably an incorrect take on reality and shooting a pretty buck is more in line with reality. Obviously the decision to shoot needs to be within a given management program. However, if all the checks are met, one can feeling good about shooting a pretty buck and no one should make anyone feel bad they “didn’t let that buck breed”

Hope that makes sense

Yawn

I’m not yawning, I think it’s good stuff. Thanks TxBuc.

I definitely am not board and still interested in numbers. I would like to see a graph with averages and standard deviations on total inches of the whole herd vs by age. Then and only can I understand the data and the perception of the whole herd. How much has DNA per individual doe and buck play? Has a research paper been written and published. I love research on deer ...this should have a factor direction that can be measured and defined. Since all the work that went into the project I would expect some data not expected and expected,

Thank you Buckeye for bringing this information as we all got something from the test. It's very interesting as we all go through seeing big bucks for a while and then back to a normal average deer. Don;t know why, but possibly some day something will be found out that we as hunters can put to use. I have a complete doe turnover every 5 years ...in theory..thus giving us something different. I have not compiled data to see what differences during each turnover. Someday maybe I'll give it a shot. Who knows.lol

This is like a "really" scenario to me. As if you could implant a one time quick fix and all will be good. Compounding is the key here.

My first job out of college was doing research and development with genetics. The study has no impact on low fence genetics. With every doe in that pen bred by one buck, the deer in that pen become more inbred with every generation. In nature there are no absolutes but young bucks travel and genetic material remains diverse. It is why you see genetic traits radiate outward with time, rather than remain static in a given area. In nature that pretty buck will breed 2-3 does per year producing 2-6 fawns per year. Most of the little bucks will change area codes by the time they reach breeding age. The does will remain. That study is only valid for a small high fence area where deer can’t do what deer naturally do. Data can be assimilated to support the goals of those who pay for it. Deer breeders are in the put and take business of selling a crop of deer every year.

Yep

I don't know about the young bucks moving to another are code.. What I see is at each of the fawning areas are last years fawns, bucks and does. are with their mother. I do believe some possibly could move to an area close but not far away. Young bucks that I can identify have stayed close to the mother for a couple of years and even until they reach full maturity. My census numbers reflect that the fawns are close by and are part of my census the following years minus the harvested animals. However, bucks come from all around the area looking for hot does, so as the home bucks travel away but only for a short time. The herd stays in tack for most of the time roaming an area not determined as I believe some travel as much as a couple of miles but are back home in about a week or so. However, I suppose other areas may not feed year around and bucks may fight for food causing the weaker small bucks to leave. That does not happen on my lease to a point that I can tell.

I’m not familiar with this specific study but curious to know about it and especially as it goes forward. For what it’s worth, I don’t think The Faith ever sells any deer and they don’t allow much hunting outside family and friends. They have deep pockets, a lot of country and smart folks that, I believe, have good intentions. It’s not real different than someone studying mice or rats, they are just trying to learn stuff. I dont see where their motivation would be to steer the data in a self serving direction.
It doesn’t appear they are trying to manipulate numbers to help out breeders cause the results are showing the opposite. It appears that when offspring from a specific buck is turned outside the pen that expression of large antlered bucks is not necessarily expressed in future generations.
As TsBuc pointed out, this is not just applicable to a penned situation or HF. The study appears to show that any one specific free range buck does not have a major impact on the expression of his antler traits in future generations. And, yes I know, they are released into a HF but there has to be some type of control to be able to get any data at all. Mice/rats are not free to roam when they study them yet they gain valuable insight by studying them.
I’m not saying that’s my opinion and maybe I’m interpreting it wrong, but it appears that’s what this study is showing.

Without diving into the rabbit hole of genetics, the data tells more about the general combining ability of the one particular buck that was used than anything else.

To me it always goes back to someone thinking a big buck is some pedigreed stud of the forest. In reality, at least in my limited knowledge, they are nothing more than a Heinz 57 mutt that drew the long straw or winning loto numbers. Wild genetics is the epitome of random and generally no matter what you throw at it, it will trend back to random as soon as it’s left alone.

My take as well, They aren’t livestock.

all the big Anti-Breeder But HF guys sure dont seem to have an issue with DMP pens. I wonder why. You go from a 1:1 maybe 1:2 breeding ratio in the wild to a 1:20 buck breeds does. So now your 6 best bucks can now breed 120 does…

wash out is quick at a 1:1 or 1:2 breeding ratio. Not so quick at 1:20 breeding ratio, especially when you factor in natural selection/attrition on a 1:1 or 1:2

Bobo, Im not sure at all but I had the impression they weren’t trying to figure out what happens in a breeder/pen type situation but were using that set up to learn about what happens in the wild.
Edit;;;regardless their intention, I think there can be things applicable to a wild herd.

The ones in that pen were livestock and were bred as such. Their study showed a cattleman’s approach of how to get a lift from an F-1 cross across an entire herd. That study has zero application to what happens within the breeding dynamics of a free range deer herd. I’m not up for an argument about what works and doesn’t in the wild. There are some places with a proven track record to illustrate what works. Using a study like this to justify harvest decisions in a wild herd is a reach.

The majority of deer hunters “management decisions” are influenced more by their trigger finger than what works. I like the guys that own that better than the ones that talk in circles to justify it.

Smokey, Im not too much up for discussing this stuff either but I want to comment. It seems to me you and I are agreeing on the basic take away I get out of this. It seems you are too but it doesn’t seem you are saying that. We agree(I think) that many/most hunters kill what they consider inferior bucks because they want an excuse to pull the trigger. The jury is out on if that’s helping any long term genetics. I dont think that alters genetics much at all. My opinion on the study is that it is showing the same thing. It appears after the first generation there’s little improvement in any expressed increase in size.
By the way, last night I talked to my real good friend that’s hunted the Faith quite a bit and he has some inside scoop on all this. When I have time Ill offer some insight.

Just ask BW. Pretty sure he put together their wildflife mgt plan.

I will, but they have biologists on staff, so Im not betting.

nailed it.