Teeth Aging Texas Hill Country Deer

[Mexico]

Sorry fellers, been out of pocket for a few days. I want to post these jaw pics so y'all have time to respond a little. And I'll go back over some of the recent posts to the thread and give my thoughts. Anyway, here is a jaw off a buck we killed this past weekend. By the teeth, how old?

My first deer hunt was in the late 70's. I believe this deer was standing next to the nubbin buck I shot that hunt.

[Chance Love]

Old enough to comfortably say that the buck had achieved, and possibly surpassed, his peak antler development.

So we will agree the teeth show 8? Since as far as I know there are no tooth wear charts that go any further. I started watching that buck 10 or 11 years ago. Back then he was about a high 120's 8 point, and I figured him at 3 or 4. Most likely 4, but was hoping he was only 3. And I hoped he would someday turn into a 140"+ 8 point. That never happened. Biggest he ever got was around 135" or so. He was a 10 some years, some years a 9. An 8 once or twice more. This year he was a 9, and my wife shot him. She has NO limitations on what she is allowed to shoot. She liked the way he looked and she shot him. He scored 123". He was a minimum of 13. No if's, and's or butt's about it.

I have offered scientific, mathematical and statistically sound evidence that tooth wear correlates with age, body conformation, and antler size. How you're not seeing that, I don't really understand, nor can I conceptualize an alternative way to describe it.

Conversely, all you have offered as evidence is - Trust me.

Again, the "sound evidence" you are offering is based off the same-old tooth wear aging charts from YEARS ago...that have a most definite flaw. And out of all of the studies you keep mentioning, I haven't seen any evidence of REALLY old deer. All seem to be sticking with mostly younger and middle aged class bucks up to age 7 or so.

That's why that guy, a gazillion comments ago, wanted to see, or that is said, "BETTER" get to see photos of the bucks, because people want to see the evidence. They're not willing to take your word for it. Nor am I. Because I have not witnessed, with regularity, what you're claiming to be a regularity.

True, some here will not take my word for it, but a lot will. What in the world would I have to gain by lying? I'm just trying to help folks. And I've already explained we have a rule about posting pics on the internet. But to your point, what good would it do anyway since it is highly unlikely a buck can be followed for consecutive years based on antler characteristics? (A little sarcasm there)

My comments in no way reduce the value of aging on the hoof or developing history with a deer. Those are fabulous management tools. Yet, the value of aging on the hoof and developing history with a deer in no way reduce the value of tooth wear.

The only tooth wear that seems fairly accurate is up until about age 3 or 4. I'll give you that much.

If you regularly witness 10-ish year old bucks with 4-ish year old teeth, then my years of experience would suggest you've likely mixed up your bucks or possibly mis-aged the bucks starting points. The data I've presented support that as well. Because that just doesn't happen very often. I don't say that from a "trust me" stand point, rather as supported by the real-life data I've presented.

Let's talk starting points. I've already stated we usually start watching bucks when they are 3 or 4, maybe 5+. Yes that age guess is based off body characteristics. It's typically not very hard to distinguish between a 2,3,or 4 year olds. I promise, these bucks are NOT yearlings when we start watching them. If we are mis-aging them at all at the starting point, we are under-aging them. We will give bucks the benefit of the doubt on age. MANY bucks we will watch for 5+ years, some quite a bit longer. So you tell me, on the low end if we start watching a buck at 3 years old, and 5 years later kill him, and his teeth show 5...what is the conclusion on teeth? I'm not talking about bucks that MAY be the same buck year after year. We can READILY identify these bucks year after year after year.

Mis-aging bucks from photos is obviously very common given the Noble Foundations table I shared, which would add credence to the concept that you incorrectly assigned a buck to an age. In fact, you yourself stated that, "...some never will express the traits of an older buck." If that's true, then how did you ever first, accurately, put them into an age category? That is, what was their starting points? See what I'm saying? If some bucks appear to be, perpetually, 3-4 years old, then how do you know at what point they were actually 3-4 years old?

I do not like to age off photos. Never have liked it. We can get a decent guess off photos, but we prefer to watch them in person. We go off personal observation of physical characteristics, attitude, how they interact with other bucks. ect. And most importantly...HISTORY. My ability to put them into the 3 or 4 year old age class is not an issue as stated above. IF we mis-age at the starting point, we will go with a younger age than they actually are.

And to complicate that, you suggest that other bucks will show body conformation of maturity. How do you decide which bucks do and which bucks don't?

Sounds highly subjective, dare I say, even opinionated.

Are you actually suggesting ALL bucks will show a body conformity that is consistent with each age class? That there can never be a deviation? Surely not. To answer your question, I don't decide which ones do and which ones don't. For example I look at one and decide "Ya, I think he's a 135" 4 year old." Then next year we watch him and again we say "Hey, he still looks 4." Two years later same thing. Four years later, same thing, he still looks 4. It happens. And it's not rare. And let's say in that example we kill him the fourth year of watching him. Meaning we have him at 8 years old. Then the teeth show 4. What??!! How can that be? So if we had the starting point wrong and he was a 2 year old the first year (a 135" - 2 year old has never existed where we hunt) that would put him at a minimum of 6 years old. And the teeth are still wrong.

Opinionated, yes. But it's an opinion based on a LOT of experience. Honestly, if it's an opinion based on data that re-occurs again and again, is it really an opinion?

Tooth wear is mostly objective. It breaks it down to the relationship between the widths of dentine and enamel. We could make it completely objective by using a micrometer to measuring them. I often make fun of that concept, because, from a management standpoint, it's ridiculous. Yet, during my literature review, I found a paper in a peer reviewed journal where they did exactly that. They found that, "...the correct year class was achieved for 48% of male deer, and 90% were classified within 1 year of their actual age." Those were wild bucks, captured and marked as fawns over a 10 year period, and included the harvested jaws of 140 of them from ages 2 to 7 years. If you'd like to read it, the citation is: Wildlife Society Bulletin (2011-) , Vol. 37, No. 2 (June 2013), pp. 451-457.

So they never killed a buck older than 7, in a 10 year study?

I fully understand the charts. I learned how to age teeth before I ever saw a chart. When charts got popular, for the most part they seemed accurate---because that was what we all learned back then. But like I said, I have never seen a chart go past age 8. Why is that? Where is the "official" data showing what a 13 year old jaw looks like? Would all 13 year old jaws look the same?

ToT, my responses here will likely come across as defensive, as would be expected when one's knowledge/ability/whatever, is called into question. You are obviously an educated man, lots of studies, books, charts, ect. And maybe some real world experience in there too. Well, I'm no novice at this deer thing. For quite a few years my lively hood has been fairly dependent on getting this right. As I stated several times, in the past I used to strictly adhere to what we were taught as far as using teeth as an aging tool. But when I have history with bucks, and there is NO doubt they are the same bucks, and the teeth are consistently wrong, well that tells me what I thought in the past is wrong also. It IS possible for scientists to be wrong. And that's ok. Remember, at one time they all thought the world was flat.

We like to hunt, and like to raise OLD deer. We don't let it interfere with the fun of hunting. It actually enhances our fun. A specific age is not important to us. Although that being said, we prefer our "trophy" bucks to be at least 8 years of age. Anything past that is just getting fun to watch. We don't HAVE to shoot a trophy every year. I killed one in 2018, prior to that is was probably 6+ years when I killed the last one. There are two guys that hunt with me. One has been there 9 years and killed his first "real" trophy this year. Another guy has been with me 5 years and killed a big one a couple years ago. It's fun for us to watch them. I even have one buck that I placed on the "don't even think about ever shooting this buck" list. I was watching him at least 2 years before buddy #1 came on board 9 years ago. He is a no doubt minimum 13 year old, and could be older. And he looks as healthy as a horse. A very visible deer. He will die of old age as we will not kill him.

Can you point me to ANY studies that have compiled data on the teeth on KNOWN aged bucks over 10 years old, or 12?

[DocHolliday]

Teeth Aging Texas Hill Country Deer

Why the “don’t even think about shooting” buck?

Great rack, small rack?
Camp pet deer first couple years?
Or just very identifiable rack and you want to see how old he may actually get?

Just curious, appreciate your info, good thread.

[Chance Love]

Why the “don’t even think about shooting” buck?

Great rack, small rack?
Camp pet deer first couple years?
Or just very identifiable rack and you want to see how old he may actually get?

Just curious, appreciate your info, good thread.

Early on (2009 I believe) I had hopes he would turn into a great deer as he was around a 130" 10 point at 3-4 years old. He never did. Kept rolling the dice. Best he ever got was maybe low 140's. But he was always fun to watch. Always had a blind left eye since day one. I decided to let someone hunt him several years ago because he was a nice, high 130's 10 point, and had a weird extra point coming out of the side of his head. We estimated his age to be at least 10 that year. Before he got hunted, he broke that point off. So gave him another pass. After that season, he dropped to about an 90" 8 point at age 11. No point in shooting him that year, let's see what he does next year. It was at this point I put him on the do not shoot list. Turned into a 120's 9 point at 12. This year (at least 13 years old) he has 3 on one side and 6 on the other, and grew that side of head point again. There's some history on him that you didn't ask for.

Basically, I like the deer. I have watched him SO many times over the years. I feel like he "won" the game, and out of respect for the deer--he gets a lifetime pass. I'd like to see how long he can go. I've been on this lease for 15 years. He's likely been there just as long. Hope that makes some kind of sense.

[DocHolliday]

Early on (2009 I believe) I had hopes he would turn into a great deer as he was around a 130" 10 point at 3-4 years old. He never did. Kept rolling the dice. Best he ever got was maybe low 140's. But he was always fun to watch. Always had a blind left eye since day one. I decided to let someone hunt him several years ago because he was a nice, high 130's 10 point, and had a weird extra point coming out of the side of his head. We estimated his age to be at least 10 that year. Before he got hunted, he broke that point off. So gave him another pass. After that season, he dropped to about an 90" 8 point at age 11. No point in shooting him that year, let's see what he does next year. It was at this point I put him on the do not shoot list. Turned into a 120's 9 point at 12. This year (at least 13 years old) he has 3 on one side and 6 on the other, and grew that side of head point again. There's some history on him that you didn't ask for.

Basically, I like the deer. I have watched him SO many times over the years. I feel like he "won" the game, and out of respect for the deer--he gets a lifetime pass. I'd like to see how long he can go. I've been on this lease for 15 years. He's likely been there just as long. Hope that makes some kind of sense.

Very cool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Krivoman]

https://discussions.texasbowhunter.com/forums/showthread.php?t=561067

This thread reminds me of this deer. 12 year old from low fence Lampasas. teeth were a bit conoe'd but per tooth chart was between 6/7

I think after a certain age the teeth just dont work to age them.

[Top Of Texas]

So we will agree the teeth show 8? Since as far as I know there are no tooth wear charts that go any further.

Yes, we agree the teeth show 8 years. Yes, we agree that 8 years is the oldest age category of the tooth wear technique. Yes, we agree the deer could be older than 8 years in reality, a lot older. What I can't seem to get across to you is the value of the wear on that deer's teeth in regards to deer management. That's an old deer. Don't get hung up on nailing down the years.

Because you value personal observation, I'll share some first-hand examples...

First-hand example #1 - I flushed a doe and buck one day, a mid-120-ish 8 point. He had a thick neck, short stubby wedge shaped head, and his shoulders looked broad and thick as the pair ran over a hill (out on the prairie). I thought it looked like a nice old deer. I returned the next day, sat on a hill, spotted the buck at about half a mile, stalked in and shot him. His teeth showed he was 7 years old.

From a management stand point, explain to me what I did wrong.

First-hand example #2 - I had put up a corn feeder to kill doe. Unfortunately, mostly bucks started using it. First year, there was a young buck that hit it almost every day. I guessed him at 2 years old. I believe I followed that buck for 5 seasons and he got bigger every year. A hunter killed him the 5th season when I suspected he would be 6 years old. His teeth showed he was 6 years old.

From a management stand point, explain to me what I did wrong.

First-hand example #3 - I rattled in an incredible buck but thought he looked 4 years old and passed. Another hunter spotted him the following year, and although the deer was huge, the hunter also thought he looked too young with too high of potential and passed. I killed the buck the 3rd year, when he'd grown even more, and we thought he would be 6 years old. His teeth showed he was 6 years old.

From a management stand point, explain to me what I did wrong.

First-hand example #4 - A hunter killed a buck this season, 2020. At first, the hunter was on-the-fence about the deer's age. Was it middle-aged or really old? After a second sighting and rattling in close, he judged him to be really old and killed him. The teeth showed 8 years old. Our fawn crops in 2011 and 2012 were next to 0% due to drought. That would suggest the deer was most likely born prior to 2011, which would have made him at least 10.

From a management stand point, explain to me what the hunter did wrong.

First-hand example #5 - I rattled in a big 11-point that I estimated to be old enough to shoot (at least 6 yrs). Got some great photos and let him go as some hunters were coming that next week. The hunters found him (no feeders) and killed him. His teeth showed 6 years old.

From a management stand point, explain to me what we did wrong.

First-hand example #6 - We were high-racking in S TX. We spotted a wide heavy horned buck with a thick neck, squinty eyes, pronounced brisket, and short stubby legs. I shot him. His teeth showed 8 years.

From a management stand point, explain to me what we did wrong.

I could keep going.

Also, to acknowledge your point - First-hand example #7 - While hunting public land in Nebraska, a nice mature looking buck appeared. I killed him, and his teeth showed 2 years old. I'll share a picture if y'all request and y'all tell me if he looks like a 2 year old or not. In fact, I've got photos, of some sort, of all the examples discussed above if you want to see.

Tooth wear doesn't have to always be spot on. It doesn't have to nail down every year for every deer. It can't. It doesn't have to be flawless. Nothing in range and wildlife science is. But it's not so far off, on a consistent basis like what you describe, that it nullifies the management implications. It is extremely valuable. Here's another try...

Let's say you have a chance to get on 1 of 2 leases. Each lease is 30,000 ac. They are 20 miles apart in the "Golden Triangle" of Texas. Prices are the same. Hunter density is the same. Tooth wear (from 100 bucks) on Ranch #1 averages 4 years old. Tooth wear on Ranch #2 (from 100 bucks) averages 7 years old.

Which lease would you prefer?

[Top Of Texas]

What in the world would I have to gain by lying?

I do NOT think you're lying!

[Top Of Texas]

what good would it do anyway since it is highly unlikely a buck can be followed for consecutive years based on antler characteristics? (A little sarcasm there)

Uh-uh! I've stated numerous times that developing history can be done and can be a great management tool and that I've done it myself. It just fails to negate the management value of tooth wear.

[Top Of Texas]

The only tooth wear that seems fairly accurate is up until about age 3 or 4. I'll give you that much.

So if you regularly kill bucks that you know to be 10-14 years old but the buck's teeth show 4 years old...

Then explain to me the biological mechanisms by which tooth wear suddenly ceases at age 4. That is, if you consistently kill bucks whose teeth indicate younger than reality, then what exactly is going on that makes the deer's teeth suddenly stop wearing at the same rate than it was wearing from fawn to 4 years old? What happens, biologically and physiologically, that makes those teeth stop wearing at that rate?

[Top Of Texas]

So you tell me, on the low end if we start watching a buck at 3 years old, and 5 years later kill him, and his teeth show 5...what is the conclusion on teeth? I'm not talking about bucks that MAY be the same buck year after year. We can READILY identify these bucks year after year after year.

I believe that happens. But it is not the norm.

[Top Of Texas]

Are you actually suggesting ALL bucks will show a body conformity that is consistent with each age class? That there can never be a deviation?

Nope! But the trend is most definitely true, as my personal observation and the prior charts give testimony to that fact.

[Top Of Texas]

For example I look at one and decide "Ya, I think he's a 135" 4 year old." Then next year we watch him and again we say "Hey, he still looks 4." Two years later same thing. Four years later, same thing, he still looks 4. It happens. And it's not rare. And let's say in that example we kill him the fourth year of watching him. Meaning we have him at 8 years old. Then the teeth show 4. What??!! How can that be? So if we had the starting point wrong and he was a 2 year old the first year (a 135" - 2 year old has never existed where we hunt) that would put him at a minimum of 6 years old. And the teeth are still wrong.

I don't run a lot of trail cameras. It takes a lot of the fun out of hunting for me. It's a personal issue. But there've been 2 bucks that come to mind during this discussion. One of those, in 2013 was a 3 yr old, short tined, 10pt. In 2015 he was a 3yr old slightly wider short tined 10pt. In 2017 he was a 3 yr old short tined 10pt. Never did lay eyes on him, but did find 1 shed horn. The other buck, had a unique looking rack where his brows were almost as long as all his other "Gs" and he had a ripped ear. I got first pictures around 2013. Then again in 2017 and lastly 2019 when he looked so old he might fall over any minute. I had a chance to kill him that year, 2019, and couldn't bring myself to do it.

Now, I never got a look at either of those buck's teeth. But money would be good a bet that both would've had at least 1 dished molar.

[Top Of Texas]

Opinionated, yes. But it's an opinion based on a LOT of experience. Honestly, if it's an opinion based on data that re-occurs again and again, is it really an opinion?

Yes, it is still an opinion. This is a great example of the importance of the scientific process. You've made an observation and, based on that observation, have developed a theory. But that theory has not been tested through an objective, independent, statistically sound and designed research project. Right now, it's just a some guys aging deer on the hoof, shooting the deer, not liking what they see in the deer's mouth, and declaring tooth wear is "meaningless."

I don't need a research project to tell me the sky is blue. Nor do I need one to tell me that if I roll an egg off a roof onto a concrete sidewalk that the egg will break. But I could easily design a project to prove both of those theories. What you and you're buddies are observing should be tested scientifically. Want me to shut-up? - That's the way to do it! I encourage you, just like I have GarGuy, to contact Dr. Dave Hewitt at the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute at Texas A&M Kingsville University, and offer to provide a study area and potential financial resources to address what you see to be a limiting issue in deer management. He'll jump all over it, and he has some other data that also demonstrates the inaccuracies of tooth wear. Yet, those preliminary studies do not negate the management value of tooth wear.

[Top Of Texas]

So they never killed a buck older than 7, in a 10 year study?

Pull up the paper and read it. It was published in the Wildlife Society Bulletin, which isn't quite as technical mumbo-jumbo (still some though) as the Journal of Wildlife Management.