Shooting spike bucks

[Scott Tschirhart]

When you see a whitetail deer with a large spike on one or both sides it is generally considered an inferior deer and we try to take them out of the gene pool.

I have two of them this year but I wasn’t quite sure about the current regulations. Fortunately Texas Parks and Wildlife gives us great diagrams to determine what is legal and what is not.

Fortunately they taste the same as any other deer.

[Old No7]

Fortunately they taste the same as any other deer.

Quite true. I shot a small 3 pointer one year -- 1 small point on one side, 2 spikes on the other -- as he had walked right up on me... The guys in deer camp teased me that I'd "Shot the village idiot..." and they were glad that his genes were removed from the gene pool. Yet they also wanted to bag bigger bucks for themselves, but that year, mine was tops (as small as he was).

Old No7

[jeepnik]

The problem with eliminating a predetermined "inferior" animal from the gene pool is that you start to limit said gene pool. When you do that recessive genes (the ones you are trying to eliminate) are more frequent. Mother nature knows what she is doing. Shoot a deer to eat, or if you must for a large rack. But don't eliminate the "inferior" animals. You end up doing more harm than good.

Oh, and by the way. Just because a buck has a huge rack, it doesn't mean any of it's offspring will have superior headgear. In fact it's entirely possible the recessive genes in that buck (they all have them) could come to the fore in all of it's offspring. It's all determined by which sperm is the fastest swimmer. And don't forget, that the buck is only 50% of the genes in the offspring. Mama might come from a line with great racks (yea, pun intended) or from one with tiny ones.

You can see this same thing in human female "racks".

[nwcatman]

When you see a whitetail deer with a large spike on one or both sides it is generally considered an inferior deer and we try to take them out of the gene pool.

I have two of them this year but I wasn’t quite sure about the current regulations. Fortunately Texas Parks and Wildlife gives us great diagrams to determine what is legal and what is not.

Fortunately they taste the same as any other deer.

we've seen that illustration for awhile now and my favorite way to irritate my son when we see a cull buck is to keep telling him i'll give him $100 if he can see that 1/8" gap at 100 yds.

[Ray]

Once upon a time I watched a much smaller buck challenge to a scuffle and chase away two much larger bucks. I was able to shoot the smaller aggressive buck. It was a somewhat non-typical (knotty & velvety) cowhorn spike. Everyone at the hunting lease bunkhouse agreed that it was unique and thought it showed evidence of being somewhat ambiguously gendered as there was no "sac". We went back to the gutpile and there were no evidence of internal testes as sometimes occurs. In the skinning shed, someone pulled a section of the jawbone and sent it along with the tail and a blood sample in the form of a bit of liver to auburn univ. Some six months later the lab report indicated that it had been indeed a genetic "doe" of sorts. It was at least five years old judging by the tooth enamel erosion and they suspected it had had a much larger rack in seasons past if it had dropped and regrew antlers. No way of knowing but often these "he-she-its" never drop & regrow. They also suggested that it might not be safe to consume. Too late. I had had the whole thing ground-up with prepared chicharrón seco/chile con carne mix and it was long gone.

IMG_20230923_161729875~2-2.jpg

The notes on the back of the skull mounting board.

[GunnyMack]

We all agree that spikes are normally a year and a half old deer. From what I understand, deer spend 2 years growing "long bones" . Legs, spine until they are deer sized. That means their bodies don't have the energy to grow large antlers.
That being said, a big bodied deer with spikes is an inferior deer . If you are a 'trophy' hunter that deer should be removed. If you are a meat hunter you see a big body and shoot it for the table.
Back when I started hunting it was very rare to see large rack bucks, most were less than 12-14" wide racks at most. It wasn't until the population dropped that BIG bucks started to be seen. Why? Because we had far too many deer, not enough food. Literally we had 100+ per acre, shouldn't be more than 10 per acre. Our forests were no reproducing, crops were decimated, car accident rates were through the roof.
It was also of the mindset to shoot whatever rack you saw from spikes on up.
Not until the science of deer became real did things change.

I've always been the guy who says shoot the deer you want to shoot.

We have a silly law regarding our vastly overpopulated bear hunting, the law says you must not shoot a bear smaller than 75lbs... The average person can't tell a 60lbs bear from a 100 lbs bear.

[Scott Tschirhart]

We all agree that spikes are normally a year and a half old deer.

These are not baby deer. These are full grown adults.

[Ray]

I think this is the one I mentioned above. The broken but not shed side is consistent with its aggressive behaviour. It actually chased away much larger bodied and antlered bucks and they left the scene in a hurry else I would have likely harvested one of them. The pedicle junctions look normal enough to make me think it had and would have yet again shed normally.

IMG_20251130_053147.jpg

[bmtshooter]

We have a few large antlered bucks in our area, but mostly bucks with small antlers. I have seen may with a decent antler on one side of their head, and a shriveled looking dwarf antler on the other side. These little basket racks are nowhere close to the legal minimum spread requirement. I fail to see how shooting only the ones with big racks will increase the number of bucks with large antlers in the area.

[Scott Tschirhart]

I shot a very nice buck last year on opening day. But I don’t shoot a nice one every year.

This year I have some young deer with antlers that indicate that they will be pretty special if left to grow.

They will have their chance.

But I see no problem with taking out the deer that will never really get there. I need hamburger meat and you can’t eat horns.

[GunnyMack]

We all agree that spikes are normally a year and a half old deer.

These are not baby deer. These are full grown adults.

I understand that Scott, and my fault for not stating a mature deer with spikes will probably never amount to much.

Normally a deer with a damaged limb will grow a lopsided rack opposite the wound. Could be multiple sets of antlers in consecutive years.
Sometimes the pedicle is damaged permanently. Or a bot fly larvae, I shot a funky buck that grew one good side the other deformed including a hole through.

[marlinman93]

When given a shot at a buck with a nice rack I take it. But I also never pass up the first legal buck I see as that might mean not harvesting a buck at all that season. Never been a trophy hunter, but have occasionally got lucky and brought home a decent rack.

[Scott Tschirhart]

Here’s a nice healthy deer. Photo taken today here in San Antonio on a green belt behind a friend’s house.

This is what a mature buck should look like in this area.

[Scott Tschirhart]

Here’s a healthy one taken last week in my subdivision.

[jeepnik]

What I'm gathering is that most of you are trophy hunters. Not taking smaller deer you think may become "special" or taking "inferior" deer to improve the gene pool. I guess I was raised as a meat hunter. I admit from time to time we would take an obviously injured or sick deer. Mostly to put them out of their misery. And if you kill it you tag it. It's about respecting the animal you hunt. Then again, that goes hand in glove with using sufficient (certainly not a .223) cartridge for the job.

[Scott Tschirhart]

What I'm gathering is that most of you are trophy hunters. Not taking smaller deer you think may become "special" or taking "inferior" deer to improve the gene pool. I guess I was raised as a meat hunter. I admit from time to time we would take an obviously injured or sick deer. Mostly to put them out of their misery. And if you kill it you tag it. It's about respecting the animal you hunt. Then again, that goes hand in glove with using sufficient (certainly not a .223) cartridge for the job.

How about you be you, and I will be me? There’s plenty of room for both of us.

[Scott Tschirhart]

The problem with eliminating a predetermined "inferior" animal from the gene pool is that you start to limit said gene pool. When you do that recessive genes (the ones you are trying to eliminate) are more frequent. Mother nature knows what she is doing. Shoot a deer to eat, or if you must for a large rack. But don't eliminate the "inferior" animals. You end up doing more harm than good.

Oh, and by the way. Just because a buck has a huge rack, it doesn't mean any of it's offspring will have superior headgear. In fact it's entirely possible the recessive genes in that buck (they all have them) could come to the fore in all of it's offspring. It's all determined by which sperm is the fastest swimmer. And don't forget, that the buck is only 50% of the genes in the offspring. Mama might come from a line with great racks (yea, pun intended) or from one with tiny ones.

You can see this same thing in human female "racks".

I see nothing wrong with managing a deer herd any more than you manage cows or other livestock.

If I don’t manage our cattle we have bad outcomes.

Even if I fail to manage the fish in my stock tank I’ll end up stunting the growth of some of them or I’ll have unnecessary competition for food.

I’ve hunted this ranch my whole life. It’s a great source of recreation for me and food for my family.

[wvfarrier]

This buck was pretty large and had spikes.that were easily 14" long and curved. I wanted my daughter to shoot him but she says he isnt big enough

[marlinman93]

What I'm gathering is that most of you are trophy hunters. Not taking smaller deer you think may become "special" or taking "inferior" deer to improve the gene pool. I guess I was raised as a meat hunter. I admit from time to time we would take an obviously injured or sick deer. Mostly to put them out of their misery. And if you kill it you tag it. It's about respecting the animal you hunt. Then again, that goes hand in glove with using sufficient (certainly not a .223) cartridge for the job.

Not sure where you got that conclusion since I specifically said I am not a trophy hunter.
As for a .223 not being enough cartridge for the job, that sounds like gun magazines talking. With the right bullet (not FMJ ball ammo) a .223 is a very viable cartridge in states that allow a .22CF cartridge. I've seen numerous deer taken with one shot using a .223 cartridge with a spire point. I personally used a .22-250 with spire points to take about 15 deer at ranges from 80 yds.-380 yds. and never needed a second finishing shot. If you've never used a .22CF rifle, I wouldn't count on what gun writers say about them.

[Streetstar]

Here’s a nice healthy deer. Photo taken today here in San Antonio on a green belt behind a friend’s house.

This is what a mature buck should look like in this area.

I dont know how you get a buck like that in south Texas-- a critter like that is an anomaly in Oklahoma -- although common in Kansas and areas north of Kansas

[Scott Tschirhart]

Doug, when you look at old photos from around here, these kinds of deer were common.

The screw worm epidemic of the 1950s was very hard on our deer population. It was devastating. When I was a kid, the deer were scarce.

Several decades later we have a healthy deer herd.

My nephew shot this one just outside the Castroville city limits this year.