Age this jawbone

[duckmanep]

Age?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[BrokenJ]

3.5

[Johnson]

3

[Hotrodd]

3.5

[ttaxidermy]

5.5 maybe.. Older than 3.5 without a doubt.. Probably 4.5..

[RMW]

4

[GarGuy]

Somewhere between 4 and 7

[BrokenJ]

Originally Posted by GarGuy

Somewhere between 4 and 7

I understand aging deer by tooth is not a perfect science, but please explain how your getting between 4 and 7 off that set of teeth. In dentine, enamel, and cusp terms.

[RMW]

Originally Posted by BrokenJ

I understand aging deer by tooth is not a perfect science, but please explain how your getting between 4 and 7 off that set of teeth. In dentine, enamel, and cusp terms.

Because none of that matters, and he’s a minimum of 4

[GarGuy]

Originally Posted by BrokenJ

I understand aging deer by tooth is not a perfect science, but please explain how your getting between 4 and 7 off that set of teeth. In dentine, enamel, and cusp terms.

No I won't do that stupidity.. my statement was based on teeth of known age deer we have killed. I have seen known 7 year olds with teeth every bit that good.

[Gherkin05]

I’d say he failed to floss, at the minimum.

[BrokenJ]

Originally Posted by RMW

Because none of that matters, and he’s a minimum of 4

Unless you have history with the deer, what you just said makes zero sense. What are you basing your call of 4 on? I respect garguys knowledge of deer that’s why I’m asking him.

[RMW]

Without history I would call those teeth a minimum of 4 where I hunt, that’s all I’m saying. I’ve never seen a 3 year old with teeth that worn ever.

[Mexico]

Teeth say 4 per textbook... but really who knows?

[brokeno]

I saw 4

[DeerGeek]

4.5

Middle aged

[FLASH_OUTDOORS]

3 with meth mouth?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[webb09]

Originally Posted by Mexico

Teeth say 4 per textbook... but really who knows?

2 beings know...God and that deer and neither will ever tell ya. That’s what I tell our biologist. Lol

[Mexico]

Originally Posted by webb09

2 beings know...God and that deer and neither will ever tell ya. That’s what I tell our biologist. Lol

[sotx]

Originally Posted by GarGuy

I have seen known 7 year olds with teeth every bit that good.

This without a doubt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ttaxidermy]

Originally Posted by BrokenJ

Unless you have history with the deer, what you just said makes zero sense. What are you basing your call of 4 on? I respect garguys knowledge of deer that’s why I’m asking him.

When you've seen enough deer jaws you know what a deer that is at least 4 looks like.. That deer has not been 3 in a year or 2.. It makes perfect sense..

[Bdub25]

4.5


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GarGuy]

Originally Posted by BrokenJ

Unless you have history with the deer, what you just said makes zero sense. What are you basing your call of 4 on? I respect garguys knowledge of deer that’s why I’m asking him.

I forgot I even posted here. I was grumpy about a totally unrelated situation and man it showed in my post. I'm with Taxidermy. The teeth are way to stained to be 3 in my opinion. The thing I'm sure if is that it's at least a middle aged deer. I'm not a fan of "text book" aging. Why? Because I have looked at the teeth of many known age deer in east tx. All the mature deer had teeth that text book aged them 2 to 4 years too young. I'm dead serious about seeing 7 year old deer with teeth just that good.

[ttaxidermy]

Originally Posted by GarGuy

I forgot I even posted here. I was grumpy about a totally unrelated situation and man it showed in my post. I'm with Taxidermy. The teeth are way to stained to be 3 in my opinion. The thing I'm sure if is that it's at least a middle aged deer. I'm not a fan of "text book" aging. Why? Because I have looked at the teeth of many known age deer in east tx. All the mature deer had teeth that text book aged them 2 to 4 years too young. I'm dead serious about seeing 7 year old deer with teeth just that good.

Exactly.. That is why I tell people, that want me to age their deer's jaw, that this is basically a useless gimmick and the bad that comes from this technique, in the form arguments and lease troubles, far out ways any benefit that comes from this VERY unreliable technique.... Ive aged deer that were known to be 6 or 7 that had tooth wear of a "text book" 3 year old... Man this will cause the $h!t to hit the fan on some leases.. Its a shame..

[texasdeerhunter]

Depending on what part of the state, I would call him 5.5. One thing is he not, is 3.5, I can say that with confidence no matter where he was killed

[Dc78]

3

[Top Of Texas]

3 years, or to be all official and scientificy about it 3.5 years

Based on the tooth wear and replacement method, widely accepted by the scientific community, the teeth indicate a three year old. Here's why - tooth number 4, which is the first molar, shows dentine, which is the dark material between the crests, is as wide or wider than the enamel, white stuff, that surrounds it. But on tooth number 5, the dentine is not as wide as the enamel that surrounds it. Thus, the teeth show 3 years old.

In general, deer's teeth wear from the front to the back. But it only appears that way, in reality tooth number 4 is just the oldest tooth in the deer's jaw it has had since being a fawn. Thus it shows the most wear. Teeth number 5 and 6 progressively erupt at years 1 and 2, respectively. Thus each shows 1 year difference in wear.

We know that tooth wear and replacement can miss a deer's actual age. However, this does not negate management applications within the limitations of the method. For example, we can say with a high degree of confidence that this buck had not reached an age to where his antler growth would be maximized.

Problems with the method are created when two things happen. 1) An individual who does not have a clear understanding of the method attempts to apply it. This is evident in comments on this thread. The method has had near all subjectivity removed, meaning everyone should arrive at the same conclusion. 2) The method is applied as a policing measure, often by an individual who is guilty of item number 1 above. As opposed to justification for removal from a hunting lease, it should be used for management and educational purposes to improve those leaseholders decision making.

The margin of error is seldom as wide as is portrayed by those who argue against its use. Very, very rarely will I approach a dead deer and, based on its body size and confirmation, be surprised when I look in its mouth. Those are extreme outliers, not the norm.

Garguy, if you have not yet, I encourage you, again, to contact Dr David Hewitt at the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute at Texas A&M Kingsville. He would love an opportunity to research the potential influences of region, soil type, fed or not fed, high fence or low fence, or any other variables that would impact the applicability of the tooth wear method. Study sites are key.

[happy bowhunter]

4.5

[GarGuy]

Originally Posted by Top Of Texas

The margin of error is seldom as wide as is portrayed by those who argue against its use. Very, very rarely will I approach a dead deer and, based on its body size and confirmation, be surprised when I look in its mouth. Those are extreme outliers, not the norm.
.

I often agree with the info you post. I even agree that it's not often as wide as I said but occasionally the error can be ridiculously wide.

Now for not being surprised when you look in his mouth... old deer with great teeth often have great conditioned bodies as well. Sunday I killed a deer that I have known for years. He was certainly 7 and probably be 8 depending on whether he was two or three when he got old enough to track. His teeth were txt book 5yr old.

As I record history on my deer I'm astounded at how long deer many live free range East Tx. Right now I have a deer that is at least 14. I have another that is 13. Both look younger this year than last year. I sent a side view of the 14 year old yo a well respected member yesterday and asked if he thought the deer was four. He leaned toward 3!!!

Without history I would have called him 4 even though there were things that bugged me. The other looks classic 5. Would be on the dont shoot list without history. Why do these deer live so long?? Because their teeth dont wear down as fast as other areas of the state.

Before I started keeping history I would have never dreamed a deer could last that long. I would pry his mouth open and pronounce him 6 with great confidence. Maybe he was 6...maybe he was 12.

Tooth aging is the best tool we have on free range no history deer. Its critical that lease managers understand your point. For me? TEETH MEAN NOTHING. I'll go with history when I have it. If I dont have it I realize my margin of error is high enough that I can hold others to it.

[rtp]

Originally Posted by Mexico

Teeth say 4 per textbook... but really who knows?

This right here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ttaxidermy]

Originally Posted by GarGuy

I often agree with the info you post. I even agree that it's not often as wide as I said but occasionally the error can be ridiculously wide.

Now for not being surprised when you look in his mouth... old deer with great teeth often have great conditioned bodies as well. Sunday I killed a deer that I have known for years. He was certainly 7 and probably be 8 depending on whether he was two or three when he got old enough to track. His teeth were txt book 5yr old.

As I record history on my deer I'm astounded at how long deer many live free range East Tx. Right now I have a deer that is at least 14. I have another that is 13. Both look younger this year than last year. I sent a side view of the 14 year old yo a well respected member yesterday and asked if he thought the deer was four. He leaned toward 3!!!

Without history I would have called him 4 even though there were things that bugged me. The other looks classic 5. Would be on the dont shoot list without history. Why do these deer live so long?? Because their teeth dont wear down as fast as other areas of the state.

Before I started keeping history I would have never dreamed a deer could last that long. I would pry his mouth open and pronounce him 6 with great confidence. Maybe he was 6...maybe he was 12.

Tooth aging is the best tool we have on free range no history deer. Its critical that lease managers understand your point. For me? TEETH MEAN NOTHING. I'll go with history when I have it. If I dont have it I realize my margin of error is high enough that I can hold others to it.

Actually game cameras are these days...

Yes.... Top Of Texas is dead wrong.. I'll say that without hesitation after 30 plus years of studying deer jaws, and many of those jaws were on "known age" deer. Very rarely is it accurate... I was studying deer tooth wear back studying deer tooth wear wasn't cool... I am sure you have been studying them that long or longer..

[mrpage25]

6

[BrokenJ]

Originally Posted by Top Of Texas

3 years, or to be all official and scientificy about it 3.5 years

Based on the tooth wear and replacement method, widely accepted by the scientific community, the teeth indicate a three year old. Here's why - tooth number 4, which is the first molar, shows dentine, which is the dark material between the crests, is as wide or wider than the enamel, white stuff, that surrounds it. But on tooth number 5, the dentine is not as wide as the enamel that surrounds it. Thus, the teeth show 3 years old.

In general, deer's teeth wear from the front to the back. But it only appears that way, in reality tooth number 4 is just the oldest tooth in the deer's jaw it has had since being a fawn. Thus it shows the most wear. Teeth number 5 and 6 progressively erupt at years 1 and 2, respectively. Thus each shows 1 year difference in wear.

We know that tooth wear and replacement can miss a deer's actual age. However, this does not negate management applications within the limitations of the method. For example, we can say with a high degree of confidence that this buck had not reached an age to where his antler growth would be maximized.

Problems with the method are created when two things happen. 1) An individual who does not have a clear understanding of the method attempts to apply it. This is evident in comments on this thread. The method has had near all subjectivity removed, meaning everyone should arrive at the same conclusion. 2) The method is applied as a policing measure, often by an individual who is guilty of item number 1 above. As opposed to justification for removal from a hunting lease, it should be used for management and educational purposes to improve those leaseholders decision making.

The margin of error is seldom as wide as is portrayed by those who argue against its use. Very, very rarely will I approach a dead deer and, based on its body size and confirmation, be surprised when I look in its mouth. Those are extreme outliers, not the norm.

Garguy, if you have not yet, I encourage you, again, to contact Dr David Hewitt at the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute at Texas A&M Kingsville. He would love an opportunity to research the potential influences of region, soil type, fed or not fed, high fence or low fence, or any other variables that would impact the applicability of the tooth wear method. Study sites are key.

Thank you for giving explanation, came to the same conclusion on age. Members without the clear understanding of the method is spot on.

[ttaxidermy]

Originally Posted by BrokenJ

Thank you for giving explanation, came to the same conclusion on age. Members without the clear understanding of the method is spot on.

Since we are "cherry picking" Top of Texas's last paragraph, in his own words, sums up the highly influencing variables and proves my point perfectly which is that it is virtually impossible to read tooth wear and age accurately.. Its a crap shoot at best.. Live with it. It is OK.
Read below...


"Garguy, if you have not yet, I encourage you, again, to contact Dr David Hewitt at the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute at Texas A&M Kingsville. He would love an opportunity to research the potential influences of region, soil type, fed or not fed, high fence or low fence, or any other variables that would impact the applicability of the tooth wear method. Study sites are key."

[GarGuy]

Originally Posted by BrokenJ

Thank you for giving explanation, came to the same conclusion on age. Members without the clear understanding of the method is spot on.

I understand the method well. Thats why I refused to explain based on tooth wear. I used the method for years but after collecting jaws on many many known age deer I learned the "method" severely under state's age on east tx deer. I cant speak for other places.

Tooth wear may have a place where no history is available but like TOT said... tooth wear is not meant to give you the actual age of a deer. It can give you an idea of a range. Saying with confidence how old the deer in the original post was is impossible. We can say how old the "text book" indicates but every experience biologist knows thats just an educated guess.

[BrokenJ]

Originally Posted by ttaxidermy

Since we are "cherry picking" Top of Texas's last paragraph, in his own words, sums up the highly influencing variables and proves my point perfectly which is that it is virtually impossible to read tooth wear and age accurately.. Its a crap shoot at best.. Live with it. It is OK.
Read below...


"Garguy, if you have not yet, I encourage you, again, to contact Dr David Hewitt at the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute at Texas A&M Kingsville. He would love an opportunity to research the potential influences of region, soil type, fed or not fed, high fence or low fence, or any other variables that would impact the applicability of the tooth wear method. Study sites are key."

Didn’t miss that paragraph, I have a Rwsc degree from Kingsville. Know Dr. Hewitt. Took part in many deer captures for various studies for CK, that Dr. Hewitt was aging the animals I was holding. As a wildlife biologist when it comes to filling data I can’t put between 4-7 when it comes to age. Everyone agrees there can be outliers. But when you have no history with a dead deer and it’s all you have it’s better than nothing.

[Top Of Texas]

Originally Posted by ttaxidermy

Actually game cameras are these days...

Yes.... Top Of Texas is dead wrong.. I'll say that without hesitation after 30 plus years of studying deer jaws, and many of those jaws were on "known age" deer. Very rarely is it accurate... I was studying deer tooth wear back studying deer tooth wear wasn't cool... I am sure you have been studying them that long or longer..

When I acknowledged the limitations of the technique, I did not intend to denounce its management applications. That list of potential variables (region, soil, fed, etc) I listed are not things I believe to have any influence. I'm just quoting what I hear folks report from their experiences and inferences, such as what GarGuy has witnessed. I'm very open to and heavily influenced by independent, objective, scientific research. It would be tantalizing to see results of such research.

I did this some time in the past to reveal the usefulness of the technique, so Ill do it again here. This comes across like a hypothetical scenario, but it's taking place in reality all over Texas.

A group of 5 hunters are seeking help on their lease that has excellent habitat where nutrition is high. They just can't seem to get over the 135-140 B&C mark although they've hunted the property for 5 years and killed 25 total bucks. Fortunately, one of the hunters saved jaws from all the bucks. An individual who understands the technique determines the bucks' ages range between 2 and 5 years old with the bulk of them being 3 and 4 years.

What's the management implication?

[critter69]

I guess my question is a little different, he’s dead, why does it matter ? He’s not going to get any older or any thing. Seriously, not trying to be a smart @$$ or any thing. Just wondering why age matters so much to many people, we don’t really think much about age, or weight here. ( mule deer and elk). Before or after killing them. Just curious.

[Top Of Texas]

Originally Posted by critter69

I guess my question is a little different, he’s dead, why does it matter ? He’s not going to get any older or any thing. Seriously, not trying to be a smart @$$ or any thing. Just wondering why age matters so much to many people, we don’t really think much about age, or weight here. ( mule deer and elk). Before or after killing them. Just curious.

Hunting offers many different levels of fulfillment for many different types of hunters. Those who choose to pursue mature animals and large antlers know that deer typically don't peak in antler size until around 6-7 years of age. Which in context of this thread, would be bucks that have at least 1 fully dished out molar.

[Top Of Texas]

Originally Posted by critter69

I guess my question is a little different, he’s dead, why does it matter ? He’s not going to get any older or any thing. Seriously, not trying to be a smart @$$ or any thing. Just wondering why age matters so much to many people, we don’t really think much about age, or weight here. ( mule deer and elk). Before or after killing them. Just curious.

I failed to mention the application. So, if the hunter desires larger antlers, then he by default desires to kill older bucks. This reveals the need to develop the ability to fairly accurately estimate buck age prior to killing. So once armed with such knowledge, the hunter can now pass on bucks that have not yet reached peak age. Imagine a world where that was universal. Plus, in TX, where baiting is legal and hunters have ability to follow bucks developments at feeders with trailcams over many years, then it helps the hunter decide what year to hunt a particular buck. That's why it matters. If someone needs meat in TX, in general, shoot a doe.

[ElfEyes]

TOT This is totally a curve ball but you seem to know what you're talking about. If on my lease where we have few doe and more bucks then doe. Would you push for shooting spikes instead of doe to help maintain/build your herd numbers? Sorry OP for highjacking your thread.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Top Of Texas]

Originally Posted by ElfEyes

TOT This is totally a curve ball but you seem to know what you're talking about. If on my lease where we have few doe and more bucks then doe. Would you push for shooting spikes instead of doe to help maintain/build your herd numbers? Sorry OP for highjacking your thread.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

The thing to keep in mind about population control is that bucks don't have babies. So shooting bucks doesn't contribute to controlling population growth. You'll hear the "mouth off the habitat" statement frequently when looking for justification to kill a buck, but for the future that is only 1 deer and will never be more than 1 deer. A doe becomes 2 deer, then 3 deer, then 5 deer, exponentially. So killing 1 doe prevents the future births of many deer. That's how you control the population and manage for quality browse plants.

I don't know enough about your situation to provide guidance on whether you should kill doe or not. But having more bucks than doe would be a nice problem to have. I also assume you're hunting over feeders which will almost always be dominated by bucks.

You could ask for free, professional, site specific guidance at:
https://tpwd.texas.gov/landwater/lan...ce/biologists/

[ElfEyes]

Originally Posted by Top Of Texas

I also assume you're hunting over feeders which will almost always be dominated by bucks.

Thanks for the info TOT and the link. I hunt deep east Texas so the only thing that dominates my feeders are crows and hogs

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Top Of Texas]

Originally Posted by elfeyes

thanks for the info tot and the link. I hunt deep east texas so the only thing that dominates my feeders are crows and hogs

sent from my pixel 2 xl using tapatalk

bahahaha!

[wytex]

Glad we can use annuli method for our deer teeth and it is very accurate for our climate.
We take the annuli age and compare it with the teeth wear to get a good handle on the wear aging up here. We have very rocky soil and it does affect wear quite dramatically.

I agree that those teeth show 3.5-4.5 years of age, you have to look at the lingual side of the jawbone and the amount of dentine showing on that side of the teeth.