Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Teeth Aging Texas Hill Country Deer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #76
    Threads like this make me realize why I don't even look at their teeth anymore...
    It's a shame so many "lease bosses" look at tooth aging as a strict management tool...
    It is basically useless info to look at teeth.. Stirs up a lot of unnecessary trouble on some ranches..

    Comment


      #77
      A big problem has become hunters and managers applying the technique beyond its limitations (i.e. hunters being kicked off leases, or that deer is X years old). Tooth wear can be a key element in making management decisions when applied appropriately, and that's what those charts demonstrate.

      Maybe another leading cause of confusion is people getting hung up on the "years". Consider this...

      Let's say we flush the years down the toilet. Instead let's call them categories, say from 1 to 8. For example a category 4 jaw would show dentine as wide or wider than enamel on tooth #4 and #5, and a category 6 jaw would show tooth #4 completely dished. Don't worry about the years. We know for a fact that antler size increases with tooth wear to a peak, then declines with extreme tooth wear. Look back at the charts regarding beam, spread, and base circumference as they clearly demonstrate this to be true. Now look back at chart of "116 harvested bucks". Those hunters are selecting to harvest deer primarily based on body conformation (field judging) and some history. What we see is a correlation between body conformation and tooth wear categories. That is, as buck's bodies get bigger and more filled-out their teeth are wearing at a similar rate. Forget about the years.

      The facts are:
      1) Body mass conformation increases with time, to a peak.
      2) Antler size increases with time, to a peak.
      3) Tooth wear increases with time.
      4) Thus, antler size and body conformation are correlated with tooth wear.
      Forget about the years.

      So, from a management standpoint we see that bucks peak in antler size when tooth wear reaches categories of 6 and 7. The previous charts support this. And we see from the chart of "116 harvested bucks" that our hunters are doing a pretty good job of killing bucks around the peak of the bucks' lives. Forget about the years.

      QUESTION FOR ALL READERS:
      So then, let's say a group of 5 hunters have killed 5 bucks per year for the last 5 years (25 bucks total). They complain that the ranch cannot produce bucks over 140 B&C. Based on tooth wear, the bucks all fall into categories 3 and 4. What's the management implication?

      Comment


        #78
        5-3-8 plus

        Comment


          #79
          Clearly the deer need more age and maybe other things. The management plan for me would be to collect pics from the members over last 5years and develop as much history as possible. Then identify a hit list group of bucks for the next season. I would have a sit down with members and help them to understand what a fully mature deer looked like alive.

          There would have to be a solid consensus among members that n.v maximum antler development was their intent. We can look at teeth after they are dead but the managenent decisions MUST be made on live walking deer. Unsure members would ge ccx encouraged to get a deer green lighted from pics before hunting him.

          On your number class teeth... I agree they have best antlers at your 6 or 7 number but I gave personally proven many of my deer dont reach that wear until 10 plus. Honestly quite a few have had best antlers at 10. It would be hard to risk letting all of them go to that age due to natural mortality but if my goal was to grow a boomer every year, that's exactly what it would take.

          Comment


            #80
            Deer 3 is ancient based off those teeth!

            Comment


              #81
              Originally posted by GarGuy View Post
              Clearly the deer need more age and maybe other things. The management plan for me would be to collect pics from the members over last 5years and develop as much history as possible. Then identify a hit list group of bucks for the next season. I would have a sit down with members and help them to understand what a fully mature deer looked like alive.
              I think that would be an excellent approach! And that need was identified through tooth wear. As far as "maybe other things", I excluded things like habitat quality, deer density, etc in an attempt to maintain focus, for simplicity sake.

              Comment


                #82
                Originally posted by Top Of Texas View Post
                A big problem has become hunters and managers applying the technique beyond its limitations (i.e. hunters being kicked off leases, or that deer is X years old). Tooth wear can be a key element in making management decisions when applied appropriately, and that's what those charts demonstrate.
                Again, those charts are assuming that what the teeth show is accurate and in direct correlation to a specific age.

                Originally posted by Top Of Texas View Post
                Maybe another leading cause of confusion is people getting hung up on the "years". Consider this...

                Let's say we flush the years down the toilet. Instead let's call them categories, say from 1 to 8. For example a category 4 jaw would show dentine as wide or wider than enamel on tooth #4 and #5, and a category 6 jaw would show tooth #4 completely dished. Don't worry about the years. We know for a fact that antler size increases with tooth wear to a peak, then declines with extreme tooth wear. Look back at the charts regarding beam, spread, and base circumference as they clearly demonstrate this to be true. Now look back at chart of "116 harvested bucks". Those hunters are selecting to harvest deer primarily based on body conformation (field judging) and some history. What we see is a correlation between body conformation and tooth wear categories. That is, as buck's bodies get bigger and more filled-out their teeth are wearing at a similar rate. Forget about the years.
                But their teeth do not wear at a similar rate. That is the problem. Tooth wear is all over the place. Every deer is different. Some will wear just like the book says, most will not.

                Originally posted by Top Of Texas View Post
                The facts are:
                1) Body mass conformation increases with time, to a peak.
                2) Antler size increases with time, to a peak.
                3) Tooth wear increases with time.
                4) Thus, antler size and body conformation are correlated with tooth wear.
                Forget about the years.
                1) I'll agree with this
                2) I'll agree with this
                3) Of course it does, but not at the same rate from deer to deer...the root of the problem with aging by teeth
                4) Cannot agree with this.

                Originally posted by Top Of Texas View Post
                So, from a management standpoint we see that bucks peak in antler size when tooth wear reaches categories of 6 and 7. The previous charts support this. And we see from the chart of "116 harvested bucks" that our hunters are doing a pretty good job of killing bucks around the peak of the bucks' lives. Forget about the years.
                You might as well forget about the years, if going by tooth wear.

                Originally posted by Top Of Texas View Post
                QUESTION FOR ALL READERS:
                So then, let's say a group of 5 hunters have killed 5 bucks per year for the last 5 years (25 bucks total). They complain that the ranch cannot produce bucks over 140 B&C. Based on tooth wear, the bucks all fall into categories 3 and 4. What's the management implication?
                I would argue they got REALLY lucky for all bucks to fall into the same categories by teeth. Like the same odds as hitting the lottery lucky.

                We kill our "trophies" at 8+, and on the RARE occasion at 7. We have been on this place a long time, and have great history with a vast majority of the bucks. The tooth wear is all over the board, on known aged bucks. We could kill an 8 year old buck tomorrow, and his teeth might actually show 8. Who knows. But they could also show 4. Neither would surprise me. And with the history we have, neither jaw would change my mind on how old the buck was.

                Comment


                  #83
                  Originally posted by GarGuy View Post
                  On your number class teeth... I agree they have best antlers at your 6 or 7 number but I gave personally proven many of my deer dont reach that wear until 10 plus. Honestly quite a few have had best antlers at 10. It would be hard to risk letting all of them go to that age due to natural mortality but if my goal was to grow a boomer every year, that's exactly what it would take.
                  That gives rise to a question, which also occurred to me when reading about Chance Love's 10-11 yr olds with 3 and 5 yr old teeth. Many hunters don't have the luxury of trailcams and/or following deer for consecutive years, or simply choose not to, myself included. Rather, many rely on field judging based on body conformation. Generally speaking, a trained group of hunters can get pretty good at only killing older age bucks using only that technique. No history. Since the data reveals that body confirmation and tooth wear are correlated, and antlers peak at tooth wear categories of 6-7, then the question is - How did the deer that you and Chance Love refer to reach the actual age of 10 years while appearing fully mature in physiology for at least 4 years and with history? Clarify for me, because I see only a few possibilities
                  1) Body development, in addition to tooth wear, was delayed in those particular deer.
                  2) Body development was not delayed, but the deer avoided harvest until later years.
                  3) Body development was not delayed, but the deer was intentionally not harvested for some reason.
                  Granted, the presumption I'm making is that if you determined the deer to be fully mature, based on conformation and history, that you would have harvested the deer. If not, then why not?

                  I'll also state again, though more pithy, that tooth wear is scientifically based and primarily objective. Following bucks over consecutive years remains highly subjective.

                  Comment


                    #84
                    This thread is depressing.

                    Comment


                      #85
                      Originally posted by Top Of Texas View Post



                      QUESTION FOR ALL READERS:
                      So then, let's say a group of 5 hunters have killed 5 bucks per year for the last 5 years (25 bucks total). They complain that the ranch cannot produce bucks over 140 B&C. Based on tooth wear, the bucks all fall into categories 3 and 4. What's the management implication?
                      if bigger is what they want, i'd say all 5 guys aren't going to get to kill a buck for a few years. 1 or 2 total per year for a couple years would probably help a lot.

                      Comment


                        #86
                        owning and leasing good country, I concur that the teeth dont match. Maybe they do from 1-4 years old, but after that it is a crap shoot. we killed 2 known bucks this year that were 8 years old. And 1 buck that was 7. None of the teeth were aged over 5 using the normal tooth charts. And before asking how we know they are the same deer, we watch them from year to year. same locations, same horns, so body features, same ripped ear or birth mark. One has had a broken leg since we got on the place 5 years ago and it was 4 when we got on. Both 8 year olds where the best they have ever been this year. Both by over 15 or so inches.

                        Comment


                          #87
                          Man this really is an interesting thread!

                          Comment


                            #88
                            Don’t even look at teeth it’s a complete waste of time. As stated numerous times above, known age of deer and teeth do not show accurate age.

                            Comment


                              #89
                              Originally posted by top of texas View Post
                              that gives rise to a question, which also occurred to me when reading about chance love's 10-11 yr olds with 3 and 5 yr old teeth. Many hunters don't have the luxury of trailcams and/or following deer for consecutive years, or simply choose not to, myself included. Rather, many rely on field judging based on body conformation. Generally speaking, a trained group of hunters can get pretty good at only killing older age bucks using only that technique. No history. Since the data reveals that body confirmation and tooth wear are correlated, and antlers peak at tooth wear categories of 6-7, then the question is - how did the deer that you and chance love refer to reach the actual age of 10 years while appearing fully mature in physiology for at least 4 years and with history? Clarify for me, because i see only a few possibilities
                              1) body development, in addition to tooth wear, was delayed in those particular deer.
                              2) body development was not delayed, but the deer avoided harvest until later years.
                              3) body development was not delayed, but the deer was intentionally not harvested for some reason.
                              Granted, the presumption i'm making is that if you determined the deer to be fully mature, based on conformation and history, that you would have harvested the deer. If not, then why not?
                              That's an easy answer. We don't shoot deer just because they are mature. They also need to be big enough (antler wise), and really need to "trip our trigger". Otherwise they will get more time. I feel it is silly to shoot a deer just because he is "old enough". Some will get by us on their own of course also. If we let one go, and let him go, and let him go, and he just falls off, we are ok with it. However, that rarely happens.

                              Originally posted by top of texas View Post
                              i'll also state again, though more pithy, that tooth wear is scientifically based and primarily objective. Following bucks over consecutive years remains highly subjective.
                              Are you actually suggesting that it is not possible to follow a buck for consecutive years based on antler characteristics? Or even other characteristics?

                              I will agree that tooth wear is "scientifically based and primarily objective"...but I won't agree that it is true and accurate. The mere fact that teeth can and do wear at different rates for different individuals (deer, people, ect.) negates the whole tooth-wear argument.

                              Comment


                                #90
                                OK, umm...y'all raise your heads out of the bunker for just a second, look around, and think about it. Stop focusing on the years. OK? Think about how the data is all tied together. Body conformation, hunter selection based on body conformation, antler size, and tooth wear. They're all tied together and tooth wear is what gives them all meaning. So much meaning that the data is predictable. We should all be able to agree that a buck will peak in antler growth when its tooth wear meets categories 6 and 7. Or that a buck will not have peaked if tooth wear showed categories 3 and 4. Thus we can use the data to predict outcomes. Stop focusing on the years.

                                There have been several statements in this thread claiming that tooth wear occurs at different rates for different deer. In general, and on average, that is inaccurate when looking at a complete data set. If tooth wear occurred at different rates, and that was the norm, then those charts wouldn't have a gradual increase that peaks at categories 6 and 7. Instead, they would look like either a straight line or have peaks and valleys at categories 3-4 or 7-8 or they would be "all over the place". That's the type of chart we see when analyzing random data sets where the variables have no correlation. That is, they would be unpredictable. Clearly, that's not true for tooth wear as it relates to body conformation and antler size because, as I've already pointed out, it's predictable.

                                As related to deer history. I have had an untold number of bucks over the years where I felt very confident I had followed their development with trail camera photos or sightings. As someone stated earlier - antler shape, unique marks, or whatever (sometimes very creative), are used as cues in an attempt to keep track of the same buck during its life. I get it. I've done it. However, if I took notice of a buck at middle age (a starting point based solely on body conformation), followed that buck all the way through and beyond maturity (based on history), and finally killed it at what I believed to be 10 years of age (based on history), but it's tooth wear showed category 4 or 5, then I would naturally assume that I must've got my bucks mixed up. Because that would be an extreme, off the page outlier. So much so, that I would have to come to the deductive reasoning conclusion that I just got some bucks mixed up. If it happened on a regular basis, it would seriously draw into question my subjective ability to properly identify the same buck in consecutive years. It would not draw into question my ability to apply the objective technique of tooth wear.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X