Age this jaw

[GarGuy]

Be sure to post antler pics so I can age them if bucks.

I just count the number of suckled teats on does.

[wonkdog]

TOT,

Do you have any comments about using Cementum Annuli Aging on incisors done by labs to age deer such as www.deerage.com as far as accuracy or having ever have done this process? I am only asking, because I'm going to send some in for the first time to get the results due to a conflict of opinion on a deer that was harvested and try and abide by harvesting bigger bucks at a certain age.

Thanks,

[Chance Love]

TOT,

Do you have any comments about using Cementum Annuli Aging on incisors done by labs to age deer such as www.deerage.com as far as accuracy or having ever have done this process? I am only asking, because I'm going to send some in for the first time to get the results due to a conflict of opinion on a deer that was harvested and try and abide by harvesting bigger bucks at a certain age.

Thanks,

He may not have comments on that process but I do. Save your money. Total waste of money. If your lease is arguing over the age of a deer based on tooth wear, I feel sorry for y'all.

[texasdeerhunter]

He may not have comments on that process but I do. Save your money. Total waste of money. If your lease is arguing over the age of a deer based on tooth wear, I feel sorry for y'all.

I agree with this too. We sent some off one year to try it instead of the traditional teeth again. A known 6.5 yr old came back as “4.5-5.5”, and if I remember right, every deer was “3.5-4.5, or 4.5-5.5, etc”. None of them said “5.5”, it gave a range each time.

[Top Of Texas]

TOT,

Do you have any comments about using Cementum Annuli Aging on incisors done by labs to age deer such as www.deerage.com as far as accuracy or having ever have done this process? I am only asking, because I'm going to send some in for the first time to get the results due to a conflict of opinion on a deer that was harvested and try and abide by harvesting bigger bucks at a certain age.

Thanks,

I think the technique was developed in the 1960's up north, like Canada, Wisc, Minnesota, or somewhere. I'd have to go back to the literature to be sure, but it's based on the deer experiencing periods of rapid growth (spring-summer) followed by periods of low to no growth (winter). Like a tree lays down annual rings. That's applicable up north where severe winters occur. But in most of Texas, mild and wet winters, combined with year-long to multi-year long droughts can make results a little fuzzy due to that unpredictable climate.

There has been an abundance of research on the subject. Let me check literature and get back to you so I'm not talking without a foundation. Give me a bit...

[Top Of Texas]

TOT,

Do you have any comments about using Cementum Annuli Aging on incisors done by labs to age deer such as www.deerage.com as far as accuracy or having ever have done this process? I am only asking, because I'm going to send some in for the first time to get the results due to a conflict of opinion on a deer that was harvested and try and abide by harvesting bigger bucks at a certain age.

Thanks,

WonkDog,

After reviewing the literature, what I stated earlier was accurate. It's a good method for deer that experience consistent annual periods of growth and non-growth, like those up in the northern U.S. with severe winters. Several papers pointed out that getting south of around the 36th parallel inaccuracy increases. Mississippi reported around 70% accuracy and Texas was in the mid 60% range.

What's really important for you and your fellow hunters to keep in mind, is the limitations of any aging method, be it tooth wear, cementum annuli, or building history via trailcams. Nailing down the buck's exact number of years is NOT the objective. Rather, to strive to kill a buck when it's most likely to have reached its peak in antler potential, which in itself is variable from deer to deer and year to year. And we know that if a deer has at least 1 dished molar that it is likely to be at or near that peak. It is totally inappropriate to use aging as a weapon to kick people off properties or create strife among hunting friends and family. Rather, aging by field and trailcam evaluations, works cohesively along with tooth analysis and equips us with the ability to improve our field and trailcam evaluation skills. There's no use in anyone getting bent off about a single buck. But if a group of hunters consistently kill bucks that do not have at least 1 dished molar, then they need to apply those past experiences to improve their field and trailcam aging skills.

I included a couple of photos. One just shows the rings (Fig 2) so everyone can get a grasp of what the evaluators are looking at. The other was from a southern California study (Table 2). The interesting thing is not that cementum annuli fails to consistently nail down the exact years; rather, that the data, despite its accuracy limitations, clearly reveals heavy hunting pressure on male (M) mule deer because 89% of the harvest was 4 years and younger. And, given the age distribution of females (F), there's no argument to be made that cementum annuli does not have management implications.

I see you're new to the forum. Check back at the Game Mgt topic over the next few months. I intend to create several posts regarding tooth wear that I hope will bury a hatchet in this never-ending topic.

[kruppa24]

4 year old but I’m just guessing.

[Greenheadless]

[Top Of Texas]

Be sure and check back over the next few months for several posts on tooth wear. The funny clips, memes, and gifs add a lot! Except the dead horse beating, that one is overused, or at least find a fresh one.

[switchbackxt]

I don’t 100% endorse teeth aging, but he looks 6.5 based on those teeth.

^^^
This

After looking at the photos again I’m going to say 3-6.
One side of the jaw is worn quite a bit more than the other. Pointed on the the last tooth on one side and worn on the other. GarGuy may be on to something with the point counting.

[GarGuy]

Cementum annuli was found to be 60% accurate lol. So if I just call all 8pts 4 because they have 4 points on a side, I guarantee that would be 60% accurate. I'm back to point aging for sure.

[wonkdog]

He may not have comments on that process but I do. Save your money. Total waste of money. If your lease is arguing over the age of a deer based on tooth wear, I feel sorry for y'all.

Thanks! Not really arguing. Just harvested a deer based on physical characteristics of what a mature deer appears to look like and once we pulled the jaw we suspect that it was much younger based on teeth wear so thought we would try the option of using the cementum annuli aging to determine age method if it was worth it just to see how old he might have really been.

[wonkdog]

I agree with this too. We sent some off one year to try it instead of the traditional teeth again. A known 6.5 yr old came back as “4.5-5.5”, and if I remember right, every deer was “3.5-4.5, or 4.5-5.5, etc”. None of them said “5.5”, it gave a range each time.

Interesting, we went ahead and sent it in anyways and the results came back with an exact year and not a range on what we suspected the deer was. I know it was a crap shoot and not that big of a deal really.

[wonkdog]

WonkDog,

After reviewing the literature, what I stated earlier was accurate. It's a good method for deer that experience consistent annual periods of growth and non-growth, like those up in the northern U.S. with severe winters. Several papers pointed out that getting south of around the 36th parallel inaccuracy increases. Mississippi reported around 70% accuracy and Texas was in the mid 60% range.

What's really important for you and your fellow hunters to keep in mind, is the limitations of any aging method, be it tooth wear, cementum annuli, or building history via trailcams. Nailing down the buck's exact number of years is NOT the objective. Rather, to strive to kill a buck when it's most likely to have reached its peak in antler potential, which in itself is variable from deer to deer and year to year. And we know that if a deer has at least 1 dished molar that it is likely to be at or near that peak. It is totally inappropriate to use aging as a weapon to kick people off properties or create strife among hunting friends and family. Rather, aging by field and trailcam evaluations, works cohesively along with tooth analysis and equips us with the ability to improve our field and trailcam evaluation skills. There's no use in anyone getting bent off about a single buck. But if a group of hunters consistently kill bucks that do not have at least 1 dished molar, then they need to apply those past experiences to improve their field and trailcam aging skills.

I included a couple of photos. One just shows the rings (Fig 2) so everyone can get a grasp of what the evaluators are looking at. The other was from a southern California study (Table 2). The interesting thing is not that cementum annuli fails to consistently nail down the exact years; rather, that the data, despite its accuracy limitations, clearly reveals heavy hunting pressure on male (M) mule deer because 89% of the harvest was 4 years and younger. And, given the age distribution of females (F), there's no argument to be made that cementum annuli does not have management implications.

I see you're new to the forum. Check back at the Game Mgt topic over the next few months. I intend to create several posts regarding tooth wear that I hope will bury a hatchet in this never-ending topic.

Thanks for the feedback. I've been on the forum a lot and actually for a long time without a username and login and usually just troll in the shadows and don't ever post anything, because I'm skeptical about what is out there on the open web.

Nobody is getting bent out of shape or being kicked off anything. We try to do the right thing and harvest mature deer based off physical characteristics and possibly having a history of the deer and just so happens one was harvested that looked mature standing on the hoof and once we extracted the jaw, the jaw appeared to be much younger than what we thought compared to how the deer physically looked is all. It was just one of those strange situations where it does happen from time to time. We went ahead and sent the incisors in using the cementum annuli method just to see the results which was probably a waste of about $35, but the results came back with the same age as what we suspected observing the jaw, so we'll move on and continue enjoying the outdoors.

[Top Of Texas]

Thanks for the feedback. I've been on the forum a lot and actually for a long time without a username and login and usually just troll in the shadows and don't ever post anything, because I'm skeptical about what is out there on the open web.

Nobody is getting bent out of shape or being kicked off anything. We try to do the right thing and harvest mature deer based off physical characteristics and possibly having a history of the deer and just so happens one was harvested that looked mature standing on the hoof and once we extracted the jaw, the jaw appeared to be much younger than what we thought compared to how the deer physically looked is all. It was just one of those strange situations where it does happen from time to time. We went ahead and sent the incisors in using the cementum annuli method just to see the results which was probably a waste of about $35, but the results came back with the same age as what we suspected observing the jaw, so we'll move on and continue enjoying the outdoors.

Cool!