Age debate East Texas...

[Etxbuckman]

There was a 200# 10 pt killed on our lease in Angelina County last week. And, he was only 3.5 yo.

Did not meet club minimum of 4.5.

Hard to judge that 3.5-4.5 gap.

That sucks. What happened to the member who shot him?

[gingib]

3.5 or 4.5 no older

[sweldo73]

I agree with what you said. I think cutting the teeth it's 85-90%, I know they say it somewhere on that website.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mickey Hellickson and others did a study a few years ago that actually showed the accuracy of even the cementum annuli technique is not very accurate. Yes, better than the tooth replacement wear technique, but nowhere close to 85-90%. Relying on these aging techniques to set fines on hunters is a bad idea, IMO.

The overall accuracy rate they found for the cementum annuli technique was only 61%.

The split on their accuracy results was as follows:
Young (2.5-3.5) = 68%
Middle-Aged (4.5-5.5) = 53%
Mature (6.5-8.5) = 56%

Ideally, without having the deer tagged at birth, the best way to try to determine the age would probably be a combination of tooth wear, cementum annuli testing, and a historical photo record of a given deer (again IMO).

[Bayouboy]

That sucks. What happened to the member who shot him?

Nothing. It was an honest mistake. We all make them at some point in our life. He will pay his $250 and forfeit his cull buck tag for this year. It won't be the first or last time to happen. Most people would have taken that deer. It was a beauty. Especially for East Tx.

There are some big bodied deer on this lease. Pregnant does from South Texas were turned loose on the place a few years back and it appears their genes have spread. You can't hardly go by body size only. I killed one of the biggest does I have ever taken this past Saturday.

[sweldo73]

There was a 200# 10 pt killed on our lease in Angelina County last week. And, he was only 3.5 yo.

Did not meet club minimum of 4.5.

Hard to judge that 3.5-4.5 gap.

For reasons I just posted, I'd be hard-pressed to believe it was a 200# 3yo. I realize that's not impossible, but given the inaccuracy of their methods it seems more likely that it was probably at least 4yo if not 5.

[sweldo73]

As for the original post, my first impression is that of a 3 to 4yo buck with a lot of potential. As some others have already said though, this one pic is not the best to judge from and with better pics it might become obvious that he's actually post-mature.

[Bayouboy]

For reasons I just posted, I'd be hard-pressed to believe it was a 200# 3yo. I realize that's not impossible, but given the inaccuracy of their methods it seems more likely that it was probably at least 4yo if not 5.

Circumference and width of the horns nor the neck were consistent with a 4.5 year old.

Besides, I am no expert at aging either. I look more at the brisket, neck, and legs than anything. It will be a learning experience.

[lovemylegacy]

http://www.deerage.com

Results in my experience are at about 50% when aging on tooth wear alone, the other 50% the tooth wear was wrong. We've done about 20 deer so far in the last few years. Oldest buck was 10.5, oldest doe so far has been 13.5



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This^^^ Tooth wear is the most inaccurate way to age deer, but trying to tell some people that is like, well, pulling teeth

[sweldo73]

Circumference and width of the horns nor the neck were consistent with a 4.5 year old.

Besides, I am no expert at aging either. I look more at the brisket, neck, and legs than anything. It will be a learning experience.

Fair enough, but where was he carrying his weight? His skeletal structure must be pretty large.

On our lease, we have a genetic strain where some of them just have larger skeletons which translates into overall larger body weights at younger ages compared to other bucks in their age class. But, those larger bodied bucks would measure noticeably larger in neck circumference than their same-aged buddies. If you've got 200# 3yos, then that could/should translate into some 5yos and up weighing in at the upper 200s (and possibly occasionally higher), if I remember the averaged growth charts correctly. Are you seeing those weights in those age classes?

[sweldo73]

This^^^ Tooth wear is the most inaccurate way to age deer, but trying to tell some people that is like, well, pulling teeth

But CA testing has only been shown to be marginally better at 61% accuracy, so it's not a fail safe either (or even close).

[lovemylegacy]

But CA testing has only been shown to be marginally better at 61% accuracy, so it's not a fail safe either (or even close).

I will take an 11% improvement. The point is tooth wear is inaccurate. You figure a deer that is picking food off the ground is gonna have more grit wear than one that doesn't.

[sweldo73]

I will take an 11% improvement. The point is tooth wear is inaccurate. You figure a deer that is picking food off the ground is gonna have more grit wear than one that doesn't.

Improvement yes, but far from a level of accuracy that should be used to determine a fine on a hunter. As I mentioned in the other post, I would advocate for a combination of all methods of aging to get as close as possible to the actual age (while accounting for the innacurracies of each method).

[lovemylegacy]

Improvement yes, but far from a level of accuracy that should be used to determine a fine on a hunter. As I mentioned in the other post, I would advocate for a combination of all methods of aging to get as close as possible to the actual age (while accounting for the innacurracies of each method).

I agree and that is the fly in the ointment. Its a tool to brow beat some hunters. Now! I think its a decent way to determine an age group, 1-3, 4-8, 9-death, when used with other tools, pictures, body size or condition, health of deer. But a single cure all? No

[Bayouboy]

Fair enough, but where was he carrying his weight? His skeletal structure must be pretty large.

On our lease, we have a genetic strain where some of them just have larger skeletons which translates into overall larger body weights at younger ages compared to other bucks in their age class. But, those larger bodied bucks would measure noticeably larger in neck circumference than their same-aged buddies. If you've got 200# 3yos, then that could/should translate into some 5yos and up weighing in at the upper 200s (and possibly occasionally higher), if I remember the averaged growth charts correctly. Are you seeing those weights in those age classes?

My first year on this lease. So, I cannot really say. But, I have seen some large bodied deer on my and others trail cams. Better than average for East Tx for sure.

[lovemylegacy]

I must admit, this has been a good thread. Thanx Swamp Ranger