Once a spike, always a spike

Seem it before. Not 100% convinced that all of those pictures are the same deer, especially from 1.5 to 2.5. He has no eartag, so I would really like to know what identifying characteristics they used to identify him year to year ESPECIALLY from 1.5-2.5.

Spikes, and general heritability of antler characteristics, have been studied extensively in quite a few states, and especially TX. In a TX studs on low fence, free ranging deer in a huge area over a number of years, TPWD netted bucks from helicopters and measured and tagged them. I may miss the exact numbers but this is close. Only about 20% of deer that were spikes at 1.5yrs reached 140” or more in their peak year. About 80% of deer that had 6pts or more at 1.5yrs reached 140” or more in their peak year. Does the occasional spike make a great buck someday? Yep. Does every great looking yearling become a monster? Nope. BUT we have to let him age, and thus breed, to find out for sure. The question is, if you know that 80% of spike yearlings are mediocre at best(I would of course love a 140” whitetail) and 80% of 6pt yearlings will become great deer, how many does do you want that spike to breed before you find out he isn’t going to be a great buck? 1.5yrs of age is the easiest time to make the call IF you’re going to cull. If you’re at carrying capacity and have a good buck to do ratio, then SOME YEARLINGS HAVE TO BE KILLED to maintain age structure. If you have to kill a yearling buck, you’re obviously MUCH better off killing the spike.

Frankly, I’m all for shooting what you want to shoot, but if you’re going to manage deer for trophy quality, first you get to the population level you want, then you get close to 1:1 sex ratio(for whitetails), then you focus on age structure. With a 1:1 sex ratio, good age structure from 1.5-6.5, and a stable population you MUST kill yearling bucks. If you’re going to kill yearling bucks, you’re stupid to spare the spikes and kill the 6pts.
 
Last edited:
ImBillT said:
Seem it before. Not 100% convinced that all of those pictures are the same deer, especially from 1.5 to 2.5. He has no eartag, so I would really like to know what identifying characteristics they used to identify him year to year ESPECIALLY from 1.5-2.5.

Spikes, and general heritability of antler characteristics, have been studied extensively in quite a few states, and especially TX. In a TX studs on low fence, free ranging deer in a huge area over a number of years, TPWD netted bucks from helicopters and measured and tagged them. I may miss the exact numbers but this is close. Only about 20% of deer that were spikes at 1.5yrs reached 140” or more in their peak year. About 80% of deer that had 6pts or more at 1.5yrs reached 140” or more in their peak year. Does the occasional spike make a great buck someday? Yep. Does every great looking yearling become a monster? Nope. BUT we have to let him age, and thus breed, to find out for sure. The question is, if you know that 80% of spike yearlings are mediocre at best(I would of course love a 140” whitetail) and 80% of 6pt yearlings will become great deer, how many does do you want that spike to breed before you find out he isn’t going to be a great buck? 1.5yrs of age is the easiest time to make the call IF you’re going to cull. If you’re at carrying capacity and have a good buck to do ratio, then SOME YEARLINGS HAVE TO BE KILLED to maintain age structure. If you have to kill a yearling buck, you’re obviously MUCH better off killing the spike.

Frankly, I’m all for shooting what you want to shoot, but if you’re going to manage deer for trophy quality, first you get to the population level you want, then you get close to 1:1 sex ratio(for whitetails), then you focus on age structure. With a 1:1 sex ratio, good age structure from 1.5-6.5, and a stable population you MUST kill yearling bucks. If you’re going to kill yearling bucks, you’re stupid to spare the spikes and kill the 6pts.
Click to expand...

Private land in texas with controlled harvest / hunter numbers / supplemental feed / heavily managed buck to doe ratios is one thing. There is certainly an argument there that yearling racks could be indicative of potential. But you get in large areas of public land where buck:doe ratios and buck age structure are poor, and many fawns get born late due to that, thats all out the window. Late born fawns from does not being bred until 2nd or 3rd estrous due to bad herd balance are going to have a small rack their first couple years, and will generally catch up by age 3 or 4. Also nutritional variables year to year on public land without supplemental feeding can play a big role. Its not necessarily genetic in those cases.
 
Last edited:
Dunning Kruger said:
Private land in texas with controlled harvest / hunter numbers / supplemental feed / heavily managed buck to doe ratios is one thing. There is certainly an argument there that yearling racks could be indicative of potential. But you get in large areas of public land where buck:doe ratios and buck age structure are poor, and many fawns get born late due to that, thats all out the window. Late born fawns from does not being bred until 2nd or 3rd estrous due to bad herd balance are going to have a small rack their first couple years, and will generally catch up by age 3 or 4. Also nutritional variables year to year on public land without supplemental feeding can play a big role. Its not necessarily genetic in those cases.
Click to expand...

A) what on earth is your post related to if it isn’t choosing between shooting one young deer or another young deer? If you’re choosing which young deer to shoot, then you’re trying to manage for trophy quality.

B) TPWD has also studied drought, and differing range conditions and has stated in publications that even on the poorest ranges in the poorest condition that although poor conditions depress antler quality, at least some yearlings manage to have 6pts and many manage to fail to meet TX spike criteria(at least one unbranched antler). The point I’m making is this, with whitetail deer, a spike is most often going to be inferior to his peers in his age class. If you’re going to shoot a young buck, and you care about future antlers, shoot the smallest racked one.

If you’re talking about large areas of public land with out of whack sex ratios, and you care about shooting big bucks, then why are you shooting a young buck and why do you care what a spike grows up to be? You should either accept that the game agency can manage seasons and bag limits without your help and shoot what makes you happy, or you shouldn’t be hunting there. Personally, I hunt a big piece of public with a low population and I shoot what makes me happy and don’t give a rip about trophy management there.

I’m actually in favor of people shooting what makes them happy rather than extensive trophy management beyond getting population, age class and sex ratio in a good place. BUT back when I was bigger on score and management, and trophies(and of course I’ve still never shot an animal anyone else would call a trophy) I spent hundreds of hours reading study after study after study on whitetails from all over the US. Most of them showed that some small yearlings become huge studs, and that some big yearlings never amount to anything. Most of them also showed that the easiest time to judge age and disparity of potential was at 1.5yrs, and the best time to control genetics was at 1.5yrs because the number of does they breed in a lifetime can never go backward.

Either you don’t care about managing for big antlers, or that spike should have been killed at 1.5yrs old.

I’m all for shooting big antlers, but I no longer care about managing for them. As I said before, get population, sex ratio, and age class in a good place and I’ll be very content. If you wanna eat it, shoot it. If you wanna hang it on your wall, shoot it. I’m now in the camp of every hunter with a tag making his own choices in what deer makes him happy and what deer doesn’t.
 
Last edited:
gussyfarm said:
Old buck, at least 9.5 years old. His rack was really funky the year before. In his prime he was 25 inch wide 160 inch 8pt
Click to expand...

Id bet hes a lot older than you think. Ive been lucky enough to get to watch a couple particular bucks, at least via trail cam, over 5-7 year periods. Both were bare minimum 3.5 yrs old initially, and they never regressed to that point. Buck my dad killed in 2019, we were watching him since he was a mature 5x5 in 2013. He was a bare minimum 9.5 when he got him, likely a year or two older. His best rack was 2018, but he was still a monster 178" in 2019.

Buck ill be hunting this coming season if hes still alive, same deal, 2015 he was a good 5x5, minimum 3.5 yr old, but i think 4.5. so he was no younger than 7.5 last season, but im guessing 8.5. In 2018 he got weird, regressed a bit, put on a weird tine and a lot of mass, then 2019 he sprung back and got bigger than ever. Meanwhile, his batchelor buddy hes been rolling with all these years, his rack didnt change a bit from 2015-2018, then 2019 the only change was he got slightly split browtines. But basically 5 seasons unchanged on him. He disappeared by august though, my guess is a lion got him.
 
ImBillT said:
A) what on earth is your post related to if it isn’t choosing between shooting one young deer or another young deer? If you’re choosing which young deer to shoot, then you’re trying to manage for trophy quality.

B) TPWD has also studied drought, and differing range conditions and has stated in publications that even on the poorest ranges in the poorest condition that although poor conditions depress antler quality, at least some yearlings manage to have 6pts and many manage to fail to meet TX spike criteria(at least one unbranched antler). The point I’m making is this, with whitetail deer, a spike is most often going to be inferior to his peers in his age class. If you’re going to shoot a young buck, and you care about future antlers, shoot the smallest racked one.

If you’re talking about large areas of public land with out of whack sex ratios, and you care about shooting big bucks, then why are you shooting a young buck and why do you care what a spike grows up to be? You should either accept that the game agency can manage seasons and bag limits without your help and shoot what makes you happy, or you shouldn’t be hunting there. Personally, I hunt a big piece of public with a low population and I shoot what makes me happy and don’t give a rip about trophy management there.
Click to expand...

My point is that on public land with poor herd structure, a yearling bucks antlers being small are just as likely to be caused by being born late, or other environmental factors, as genetics. The best thing to do in areas of poor herd structure is to let all young bucks walk, to increase the buck population and age structure, and not think youre going to control the genetics of a wild herd via culling. Thats my point. Its not about choosing between one young deer and another, its about not killing young deer period. Even if he never becomes a monster, more mature bucks in the herd benefits the overall health of the herd.

Basically i just think its an interesting article, and it shows that spike bucks can still be somebody some day. Dont get angry. Take your "cull bucks" if you want.
 
Last edited:
Dunning Kruger said:
My point is that on public land with poor herd structure, a yearling bucks antlers being small are just as likely to be caused by being born late, or other environmental factors, as genetics. The best thing to do in areas of poor herd structure is to let all young bucks walk, to increase the buck population and age structure, and not think youre going to control the genetics of a wild herd via culling. Thats my point. Its not about choosing between one young deer and another, its about not killing young deer period. Even if he never becomes a monster, more mature bucks in the herd benefits the overall health of the herd.

Basically i just think its an interesting article, and it shows that spike bucks can still be somebody some day. Dont get angry. Take your "cull bucks" if you want.
Click to expand...

I’m not encouraging anyone to shoot one deer or another. Culling of course is doing exactly that.

If you’re going to manage antler quality, you have to get everything else in line first. You’re scenario doesn’t have any of those other things in order. You’re encouraging people to let a deer walk, instead of eat him, in a situation where neither the game agency nor the other hunters is following your harvest strategy and your proposed reason for doing so is that his antlers will be bigger later. If someone wants to eat that spike, they’re gonna have to shoot it. Not everyone’s priority is the same. Either you want to eat the spike, and you shoot the dang spike, or you want to manage for trophy quality, in which case you get population, sex ratio and age class in order first, AND THEN YOU SHOOT THE SPIKE.
 
ImBillT said:
I’m not encouraging anyone to shoot one deer or another. Culling of course is doing exactly that.

If you’re going to manage antler quality, you have to get everything else in line first. You’re scenario doesn’t have any of those other things in order. You’re encouraging people to let a deer walk, instead of eat him, in a situation where neither the game agency nor the other hunters is following your harvest strategy and your proposed reason for doing so is that his antlers will be bigger later. If someone wants to eat that spike, they’re gonna have to shoot it. Not everyone’s priority is the same. Either you want to eat the spike, and you shoot the dang spike, or you want to manage for trophy quality, in which case you get population, sex ratio and age class in order first, AND THEN YOU SHOOT THE SPIKE.
Click to expand...
No, im not talking about managing for trophy quality, im talking about letting young bucks walk to improve overall herd health. Higher buck to doe ratio and better buck age structure means a more intense rut, more does being bred on time, more fawns being born st the same time increasing fawn survival, and bucks rutting for a shorter period meaning they go into winter in better health and have a higher winter survivsl rate. You have entirely missed my point and misinterpereted my intentions and my stance on the issue. Passing young bucks doesnt have to mean managing for trophy quality, it can mean putting the health of the herd above your own personal interests in filling a tag.

And once again, i just thought this was a neat article. Not trying to start a pissing match. If you want to kill baby deer, have fun. Tell yourself youre helping the genepool if that makes you feel better about it.

If youre running a highly managed private ranch and part of your management proccess is to remove a number of yearling bucks, then by all means kill the smallest of them,you have nothing to lose. But if youre hunting public land with a poor herd structure, let all the youngguns walk. Youre not going to be able to influence genetics in that situation, and a yearling bucks antler size wont tell you a thing about their genetic potential. the best you can do is help the herd structure by not killing off all the young, dumb fish in a barrel yearlings that are too easy to kill.
 
Last edited:
Dunning Kruger said:
No, im not talking about managing for trophy quality, im talking about letting young bucks walk to improve overall herd health. Higher buck to doe ratio and better buck age structure means a more intense rut, more does being bred on time, more fawns being born st the same time increasing fawn survival, and bucks rutting for a shorter period meaning they go into winter in better health and have a higher winter survivsl rate. You have entirely missed my point and misinterpereted my intentions and my stance on the issue. Passing young bucks doesnt have to mean managing for trophy quality, it can mean putting the health of the herd above your own personal interests in filling a tag.

And once again, i just thought this was a neat article. Not trying to start a pissing match. If you want to kill baby deer, have fun. Tell yourself youre helping the genepool if that makes you feel better about it.

If youre running a highly managed private ranch and part of your management proccess is to remove a number of yearling bucks, then by all means kill the smallest of them,you have nothing to lose. But if youre hunting public land with a poor herd structure, let all the youngguns walk. Youre not going to be able to influence genetics in that situation, and a yearling bucks antler size wont tell you a thing about their genetic potential. the best you can do is help the herd structure by not killing off all the young, dumb fish in a barrel yearlings that are too easy to kill.
Click to expand...

If you want to improve herd health on public land, let the state biologist handle it.
 
tjones said:
This is a joke, right?
Click to expand...

No. You think you’re gonna make an impact while 1000 other people follow the regs? If you have a problem with what the bio recommends, take it up with those in charge. Don’t ask someone else to pass a deer this year so that YOU can shoot him next year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Once a spike always a spike? In some cases, yes.
Replies
18
Views
1K
TheTone
TheTone
B
AZ deer 2023
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
PorterHouse
PorterHouse
CowboyLeroy
My second buck of a lifetime.
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
zigmos
Z
Engineguy852
Mule deer antler growth.
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
WyomingHunter333
WyomingHunter333
Little Big Man MT Chris
My Montana WT quest round 2
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
9K
Brittany Chukarman
Brittany Chukarman

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,615
Messages
2,026,753
Members
36,245
Latest member
scottbenson

Share this page

Back
Top