Out of curiosity what do those who cull a lot of fallow think about taking fishtailed fallow bucks ? Many say they will never grow a good head
Fishtailed fallow bucks
- Thread starter SussexSteve
- Start date
Very few places where the stalker/s have the option to manage fallow with regard to improving the ‘quality’ of beasts.
K
K
Just my personal experience and opinion. ( I know you asked about fishtail Bucks ) two separate areas I've stalked where there was large numbers of Fallow with rubbish bucks and pricket's i hammered Pricket's which was uneven below the ear's along with the fishtail Bucks probably 3-4 years the quality of both pricket's and bucks had improved some 6+ years the quality was very good yes some mature fishtail Bucks was left or escaped a bullet which then bread . Again i personally have never ever seen a rubbish head grow a good head Rubbish will always been rubbish get them out of the gene pool then slowly they will start producing better quality heads. Takes time a lot of hard work but you will see the rewards of your efforts . One niggle i did get when the quality improved every season I'd hear oh so an so shot a helluva Buck just a shame they never got stuck into the rubbish or worse still those out there who only shoot the Big Bucks in the rut . A person i got into a heated debate with about shooting rubbish males and the females in winter his answer " they would not look nice on my wall " sorry for the long reply Steve
samdk
Well-Known Member
Totally agree! Years of poor management have left a pretty poor gene pool in most areas.
Question in a blind taste test would you be able to tell the difference in a rubbish head or a good one which could as easy be a fillet from a doe on your plate. Game dealers pay the same rate as that is where they end up with out a head/feet.
samdk
Well-Known Member
All true!
But as deer stalkers our role is to manage the species we shoot, not only the population but for the betterment of the heard.
After all, we are replacing the apex predators that our country lack and the natural selection they would bring.
Woodsmoke
Well-Known Member
Indeed! And yet one particularly opinionated member here seems to think my policy of taking older roe bucks on a small acreage that's been unmanaged for decades is 'trophy hunting'
You can spot the wannabes a mile off, can't you? 
That is true, but if you want to improve the herd then body size and conformation should be your primary selection criteria, over and above antlers.
Does a fishtail have any other causes that potentially genetic? I.e the thread about roe bucks suggested a poor or better head was more to do with feeding/nutrients from doe etc, so could the fact that where there are fallow the numbers are high have any cause?
StephenToast
Well-Known Member
Not many apex predators select the animals they want to eat based on what is growing out of the top of their head. That is a purely human concept.
baguio
Well-Known Member
True. However, they do target the weakest and easiest to catch. When certain stalkers spend days and weeks trying to kill a particular animal which is in it's prime, the poorer animals in the herd, it's purely trophy hunting and not good deer management.
The question I always ask people is "would a farmer shoot it if it was in his field and fenced in as part of hit stock" If there are worse animals in the herd then the answer to that would be NO!
Regarding your second part of the reply How long ago since the Apex predators where in the UK taking deer?
I was under the impression we shot deer to put them into the food chain not just because they have a good set of antlers as you never see a post of good money spent on shooting a doe then having her sent off to the taxidermist to go on the wall.
The thing is people spend time " managing " them, then they move into next doors beans/rape/wheat and he calls in a team an shoots them.
Yes they are nice to see but a fallow with a nice head eats just as much as the one with a poor head, the does eat just as much.
StephenToast
Well-Known Member
If "stalkers" followed natural selection they'd leave murder bucks as surely they are the most succesful male by killing their rivals?
Personally I find managing deer of any species based on their antlers ridiculous.
baguio
Well-Known Member
The murder buck thing is quite correct. As regards antlers, it’s proven scientifically that reds with the biggest antlers are the most successful breeders on the Isle of Rum. That’s been proven over many years and not by me. I’ve just read the book. Personally, I like to promote the best. Some couldn’t care less. It’s entirely up to them and I get that too.
Fair enough, but that's not deer population management then. It's selling stalking. The two overlap, and are not mutually exclusive, but are not necessarily always the same thing.
Last edited:
samdk
Well-Known Member
I have not mentioned antlers only the betterment of the heard, however antlers are part of that and something female Fallow deer asses when breeding so we should too.
Poor body condition, age and health will make particular deer more susceptible to predation.
Poor antlers and poor body condition will make them less likely to hold a rutting stand be picked my females.
In either case these these poor examples would not reproduce, natural selection at its finest. These are criteria that we need to consider when culling.
Similar threads
