Aging deer by the lower jaw.

[lovemylegacy]

We have been noticing it has become more inaccurate on our ranch in mexico since we have been feeding protein for about 11 years. Some deer we know for sure were 8.5 but did not show the age. They were bucks that seemed to be at protein feeders daily. Glad to read this thought we were going crazy on deer we have seen for years. Went back on pictures on a couple to check and seen the teeth could not have shown there age.

Agree. Not that Im a pro or anything. I have personally decided that cameras are a better help in age guesstimation. Tooth wear is such a regional thing or determined more by what and how the deer eats.

I know there will be more arguments on this subject, but lets not get our tooth aging panties in a wad, no matter which side of the subject each person is on. I personally want to learn more and figure all of yall are good resources. Biologists, large property owners, property leasers, all have some important view points, so please, lets keep it civil.

[Top Of Texas]

Well I guess I should just fire myself. SMH

That would depend on the goals of the property and financial liberty of the owner to grow antlers. Only a small minority of hunters in TX are gifted with the privilege to hunt properties where letting a good, young buck walk carries little risk, or where deer can be provided unlimited supplemental feed regardless of costs. Those 2 aspects of management, age and feed, are typically the primary, if not the only, focus on such properties, and on those rare properties, you're correct, they dont need a biologist. All they need is a high school kid to keep the protein feeders filled and to run trail cameras. Anyone can grow big deer in the Walmart parking lot with feed and age. If doing so consistently and over numerous years brings on admiration from others, so be it. It doesn't require a biologist.

However, the vast majority of hunters in TX shoot a buck because the neighbors might, or stress out for a year worrying if a buck they let walk will make it to next season, expend family and business dollars trying to attract and hold more deer on their place, or wish the rancher would decrease his stocking rate, or wish TPWD would allow harvest of more doe, or wish their neighbors would help kill doe instead of bucks, and on and on and on.

I shine the lights of truth and contrast on these two different paradigms for one reason. When it comes to these "management" discussions, or "science" debates in deer mgt, it's an easy trap for any hunter/manager to fall into where credence is granted to the guy who can post the most pictures of big deer. After all, if he has big deer, he must know what he's talking about. That makes sense if you don't think about it. Those rare, exclusive properties don't have to worry about management details and intricacies. Just keep the feeders full and let good bucks get old. The rest of TX doesn't have that luxury and management details and intricacies are very important.

[Encinal]

That would depend on the goals of the property and financial liberty of the owner to grow antlers. Only a small minority of hunters in TX are gifted with the privilege to hunt properties where letting a good, young buck walk carries little risk, or where deer can be provided unlimited supplemental feed regardless of costs. Those 2 aspects of management, age and feed, are typically the primary, if not the only, focus on such properties, and on those rare properties, you're correct, they dont need a biologist. All they need is a high school kid to keep the protein feeders filled and to run trail cameras. Anyone can grow big deer in the Walmart parking lot with feed and age. If doing so consistently and over numerous years brings on admiration from others, so be it. It doesn't require a biologist.

However, the vast majority of hunters in TX shoot a buck because the neighbors might, or stress out for a year worrying if a buck they let walk will make it to next season, expend family and business dollars trying to attract and hold more deer on their place, or wish the rancher would decrease his stocking rate, or wish TPWD would allow harvest of more doe, or wish their neighbors would help kill doe instead of bucks, and on and on and on.

I shine the lights of truth and contrast on these two different paradigms for one reason. When it comes to these "management" discussions, or "science" debates in deer mgt, it's an easy trap for any hunter/manager to fall into where credence is granted to the guy who can post the most pictures of big deer. After all, if he has big deer, he must know what he's talking about. That makes sense if you don't think about it. Those rare, exclusive properties don't have to worry about management details and intricacies. Just keep the feeders full and let good bucks get old. The rest of TX doesn't have that luxury and management details and intricacies are very important.

I wish I was as smart as you think you are.

[TexasTK]

That would depend on the goals of the property and financial liberty of the owner to grow antlers. Only a small minority of hunters in TX are gifted with the privilege to hunt properties where letting a good, young buck walk carries little risk, or where deer can be provided unlimited supplemental feed regardless of costs. Those 2 aspects of management, age and feed, are typically the primary, if not the only, focus on such properties, and on those rare properties, you're correct, they dont need a biologist. All they need is a high school kid to keep the protein feeders filled and to run trail cameras. Anyone can grow big deer in the Walmart parking lot with feed and age. If doing so consistently and over numerous years brings on admiration from others, so be it. It doesn't require a biologist.

However, the vast majority of hunters in TX shoot a buck because the neighbors might, or stress out for a year worrying if a buck they let walk will make it to next season, expend family and business dollars trying to attract and hold more deer on their place, or wish the rancher would decrease his stocking rate, or wish TPWD would allow harvest of more doe, or wish their neighbors would help kill doe instead of bucks, and on and on and on.

I shine the lights of truth and contrast on these two different paradigms for one reason. When it comes to these "management" discussions, or "science" debates in deer mgt, it's an easy trap for any hunter/manager to fall into where credence is granted to the guy who can post the most pictures of big deer. After all, if he has big deer, he must know what he's talking about. That makes sense if you don't think about it. Those rare, exclusive properties don't have to worry about management details and intricacies. Just keep the feeders full and let good bucks get old. The rest of TX doesn't have that luxury and management details and intricacies are very important.

🤔 Yeah right

[J-Jac]

Wow... aging by the lower jaw took quite a turn ��. On another note, it still baffles me how some hunting clubs/deer managers use this specifically on unknown deer to identify an age even go so far as to kick someone off of a lease. Additionally, they will even argue with other hunters when teeth do not match catalogued yearly history with a given deer. We still turn in lower jaws per buck on one of the places I hunt and I think it’s irrelevant.

Encinal, you can come consult on our 2 ranches anytime since you now fired yourself! ��

[Top Of Texas]

Wow... aging by the lower jaw took quite a turn ��. On another note, it still baffles me how some hunting clubs/deer managers use this specifically on unknown deer to identify an age even go so far as to kick someone off of a lease. Additionally, they will even argue with other hunters when teeth do not match catalogued yearly history with a given deer. We still turn in lower jaws per buck on one of the places I hunt and I think it’s irrelevant.

Encinal, you can come consult on our 2 ranches anytime since you now fired yourself! ��

Yes, I can definitely be long winded and digress. Just attempting to to chase down the counter argument that tooth wear ages are irrelevant.

Again, tooth wear aging should not be applied outside the limits of the method (i.e. kicking people off).

Please, make an attempt at addressing the questions in Post #23. Those are not hypothetical scenarios. They are real life examples demonstrating the value of tooth wear ages. Scenario 1 is very common across TX. Scenario 2 is very common for high fence properties. I'm not making stuff up. Try it and see what conclusions you draw.

[J-Jac]

Scenario 2:
The same management decision could be derived from trail cams, field/blind surveys, and helicopter surveys. The reality is, they shot “too many does”, not just young ones.

[Top Of Texas]

Scenario 2:
The same management decision could be derived from trail cams, field/blind surveys, and helicopter surveys. The reality is, they shot “too many does”, not just young ones.

Nice. Helicopter survey is an excellent choice, depending on what part of TX you're in. But why go to the expense when looking at teeth costs nothing?

I dont think field/blind surveys would help since the hunters aren't seeing doe in the pasture to begin with. While it would quantify what they're observing, it doesn't shed light as to why or eliminate any of the potential environmental factors (i.e. big acorn crop).

Could you describe how cameras would reveal a shift in doe age structure?

[Troutamer]

I believe if you have jaws from deer of known ages to compare to from your area it can be accurate. Other than that there are way too many variables due to types of soil, diet, ect.

[Christianhuff]

Shot a 180” 6.5 year old and jaw said 3.5��

[Top Of Texas]

Shot a 180” 6.5 year old and jaw said 3.5��

I've had similar experiences. But extreme cases like that are rare. On a known age deer, the typical error is usually 1 year for someone knowledgeable and experienced with the method. It's odd that a guy could nail the age on 100 deer but miss 1 big buck and the technique suddenly becomes useless, meaningless, or irrelevant.

The point I'm attempting to make is that while tooth aging is not an exact science, it is an important tool in management.

[Encinal]

Nice. Helicopter survey is an excellent choice, depending on what part of TX you're in. But why go to the expense when looking at teeth costs nothing?

I dont think field/blind surveys would help since the hunters aren't seeing doe in the pasture to begin with. While it would quantify what they're observing, it doesn't shed light as to why or eliminate any of the potential environmental factors (i.e. big acorn crop).

Could you describe how cameras would reveal a shift in doe age structure?

By looking at them.

[Devin]

The Noble Foundation did a study on the accuracy of the tooth method years ago. They sent jawbones of known aged deer (tagged as yearlings) to 34 experienced deer biologists. Their results:



Full study here.

Back to y'alls bickering.....

[Encinal]

First, I want to encourage everyone to take the concept of tooth aging being an exact science, meaning every deer's teeth wears exactly the same, and flush that down the toilet of your brain. Replace it with this concept: Tooth aging is really really good for determining young, middle aged, and old in nearly all deer, thus it can be used for management purposes.

Let's address an item dear to the heart of most Green Screen users. "Did I kill that buck at a good old age with what could be its best set of antlers?"

Scenario 1: A group lease has killed 5 bucks per year for 5 years. They complain they can't grow big bucks, seem to peak around 130-135 B&C. Tooth wear age shows all 25 bucks to be be 3-5 years old. Staying focused on the topic, what's the management decision to be made?

Important for doe as well.
Scenario 2: A high fence propery has been heavily killing doe for 6 years trying to reduce population size, but doe are becoming hard to find, and hunters can't reach their quota. Their biologist pressures them to try harder. The lease boss, who understands tooth wear, shows the biologist doe ages. The first year of doe harvest showed a wide distribution of doe ages from 1-8 yrs with a peak around 4 yrs. The last year of harvest showed doe age to peak at 2 yrs with only a few 5 yrs. Staying focused on the topic, what's the management decision to be made?

You should be helping them before they kill deer not after. How does tooth wear keep a deer alive and fix the problem?

Assigning blame isn’t a management strategy.

[elgato]

When I read the two scenarios I find the same flaw in both of them .

Scenario 1: tooth age shows all 25 bucks to be between 3 & 5

Scenario 2: Lease boss bases ages between 1-8 with average of 4 on tooth aging. Second year a few 5 yr olds.

The flaw is believing anyone can with any precision give a precise age once a deer is 3 or older. There have been numerous studies varying that . In fact aging by teeth can be off by several yrs once a deer reaches 5 rendering the tooth wear data in scenario 1 & 2 invalid.How can a management decision be made on that?

There are far more effective ways to assess harvest strategy before the season begins to determine what to remove. Extensive research has been done by Dr. Harry Jacobson using cameras to analyze a herd in exacting detail using 100 acre grid patterns twice a year. He could capture essentially all the bucks and have deep insight into doe, doe/fawn populations. Most experienced deer managers also how to look at browse surveys to assess population dynamics. Direct observation teaches a lot. These methods as well as others provide the kinds of information needed before hunters start pulling the trigger.

One of the benefits of managing the same properties for decades is getting to watch the buck herd mature. Like many we used to save all the jaws and age them. Didn't take many years to figure out that the 6,7,8+ yr old bucks we were taking had tooth wear of 4 & 5 yr olds. After a few years we stopped bothering to remove jaws excepting uber old bucks we were curious about. Novelty.

In my hubris I used to think I could grow trophy bucks in a Walmart parking lot given enough feeders. I've used those exact same words. Turns out I was right. It would be much easier to grow deer in the controlled environment of a parking lots than the messy world of a ranch/farm. However after decades of trying to grow trophy bucks in nature the variables and vagaries of the real world have humbled me and I realize the naivety of that idea. I continue to be astounded at the complexity of dynamics that effect deer in the wild.Nonetheless in the most global sense I agree wholeheartedly that consistently growing trophy bucks requires age and nutrition. A biologist told me that once