Thoughts please

[Twodogs]

Hi

I have very little experience is such matters so it is to the wisdom of the collective I turn.
This Roe buck recently triggered my trail cam. I have never personally seem him, he seems to be a bit of a night owl and it was way past my bedtime anyway.

Thoughts please as to possible age and comment on the antlers re medal potential etc, or not as the case may be.

Many thanks
TD

 

[Pete6.5]

Middle aged and probably not a medal

 

[willie_gunn]

Main beams lack both volume and pearling.

Would think perhaps 3 or 4?

 

[Kjf]

It’s food , no idea of age / medal etc, it’s in season ……

It’s just food

 

[Camdig]

Nice buck and middle aged, might get a wee bit thicker beams and bigger cornets next year then again he might not.

 

[Phil fox man]

It’s food , no idea of age / medal etc, it’s in season ……

It’s just food

Totally agree kev,I sold a dinghy to a member and when he collected it he spotted a fallow head on my bench and said he would have paid good money to shoot it.i wouldn't it's just meat to me.
Get it shot and in the freezer.
Phil.

 

[User00056]

Nice wee buck, if a tad light framed. Possibly 4 or 5 going by the coronet spacing?

 

[Tim.243]

Hi

I have very little experience is such matters so it is to the wisdom of the collective I turn.
This Roe buck recently triggered my trail cam. I have never personally seem him, he seems to be a bit of a night owl and it was way past my bedtime anyway.

Thoughts please as to possible age and comment on the antlers re medal potential etc, or not as the case may be.

Many thanks
TD

View attachment 383346
View attachment 383347

Personally I would shoot it if the timing was right, enjoy the stalk share the story share the meat.

 

[Heym SR20]

To tell age.

First general deportment. Head held high, nice and sprightly- young.

Stooped, head held low RT rounded shoulders and hips - old.

Look at the shoulders, waist and neck. If triangular in shape with big shoulders - mature but fit and young. Old - still triangular but heavy around waist but shoulders and neck thinner.

Antlers - its a mature six point buck. Antlers well above the ears - about twice the length. But compare antlers to width of ears or forelegs- by comparison they are skinny. On a decent buck, antlers will be more the thickness of the forelegs (the bits you cut off at larder).

This is nice good looking buck, but still quite young. I would be leaving him for another couple of years. Let him sow his genes. Given his body size I would expect him to have a better head in the next year or two - especially if good food available.

If he was old, he would be more stooped, fat around the middle, the bases of his antlers would be grown together but long and skinny.

Even if you are just shooting for meat, it still pays dividends by concentrating your efforts on the poorer quality animals. This will mean that the general quality of the herd will improve. Only decent healthy well fed deer will produce a good carcass and a decent head.

Shoot all the fit a healthy bucks and does you will soon end up with skinny nasty little beasts. Its basic herd management whether you are managing deer, sheep, cattle.

 

[JH83]

It’s food , no idea of age / medal etc, it’s in season ……

It’s just food

Is that to say never think about promoting the better genes, just sod them all, get them in the freezer? Are you that short of food?

 

[Tim.243]

Is that to say never think about promoting the better genes, just sod them all, get them in the freezer? Are you that short of food?

That is why there are too many deer as people play at Jurassic Park
it is just a flicker of time we have been trying to fiddle with deer genes, you can't manage it with cwd or muntjac and they make up 1/3 of the 6

 

[Mungo]

Is that to say never think about promoting the better genes, just sod them all, get them in the freezer? Are you that short of food?

Selective breeding is hard enough when you have total control over who mates with whom and you can accurately measure everything.

When you have no idea who is even the population, let alone who is breeding, you’re vanishingly unlikely to affect gene frequencies by selective shooting.

You might just be able to do it if you had a fenced population where you knew every animal and could guarantee there was no mating by males from outside. No chance with a free ranging population.

The idea that stalkers have some magical ability to control the genetic structure of wild deer populations is pure fantasy.

 

[Kjf]

Is that to say never think about promoting the better genes, just sod them all, get them in the freezer? Are you that short of food?

Yes. Plenty of roe around . They are not park deer bred for genetics .

 

[Tim.243]

To tell age.

First general deportment. Head held high, nice and sprightly- young.

Stooped, head held low RT rounded shoulders and hips - old.

Look at the shoulders, waist and neck. If triangular in shape with big shoulders - mature but fit and young. Old - still triangular but heavy around waist but shoulders and neck thinner.

Antlers - its a mature six point buck. Antlers well above the ears - about twice the length. But compare antlers to width of ears or forelegs- by comparison they are skinny. On a decent buck, antlers will be more the thickness of the forelegs (the bits you cut off at larder).

This is nice good looking buck, but still quite young. I would be leaving him for another couple of years. Let him sow his genes. Given his body size I would expect him to have a better head in the next year or two - especially if good food available.

If he was old, he would be more stooped, fat around the middle, the bases of his antlers would be grown together but long and skinny.

Even if you are just shooting for meat, it still pays dividends by concentrating your efforts on the poorer quality animals. This will mean that the general quality of the herd will improve. Only decent healthy well fed deer will produce a good carcass and a decent head.

Shoot all the fit a healthy bucks and does you will soon end up with skinny nasty little beasts. Its basic herd management whether you are managing deer, sheep, cattle.

Cowmen and Shepperd's don't shoot their stock unless it is "fallen" as they are an investment, chickens yes as the chance of sick ones or poor birds infecting a whole shed is not worth the risk.
Cattle/sheep will/are often put in a stall with a vet check. You can't vet check your Roe deer only when it is at the game dealers minus the head.

 

[big ears]

Is that to say never think about promoting the better genes, just sod them all, get them in the freezer? Are you that short of food?

Maybe he realises that we all have a job to do and there are too many deer. If it’s in season shoot it would be a good policy for us all to adopt rather than pontificating on the whys and wherefores.

 

[Twodogs]

Many thanks for the advice and observations.

All the best
TD

 

[JH83]

Selective breeding is hard enough when you have total control over who mates with whom and you can accurately measure everything.

When you have no idea who is even the population, let alone who is breeding, you’re vanishingly unlikely to affect gene frequencies by selective shooting.

You might just be able to do it if you had a fenced population where you knew every animal and could guarantee there was no mating by males from outside. No chance with a free ranging population.

The idea that stalkers have some magical ability to control the genetic structure of wild deer populations is pure fantasy.

So your thesis is just shoot anything, the selective practices of stalkers to promote good genetics is absolute folly? I can’t possibly agree with that.

It’s rather sad IMO that this appears to be the prevailing thought. Just shoot on sight. Too many deer…as much as that’s a giant can of worms is that universally the case, to the degree that a ‘shoot on sight’ approach is adopted by all, especially with roe? I’d accept it with large populations of fallow and muntjac. A very large portion of the UK there really isn’t a deer problem at all. In any event, a dominant roe buck is a good regulator of territorial fraying.

I am part of a small number of people that cull a rather special herd of reds, with some of the best heads in England. They got that way by restraint and selective culling. It would be easy to blatter everything we see with the attitude of ‘better in my freezer’ ‘my neigbour will just have it’ but it isn’t done that way, and the results speak for themselves.

 

[JH83]

Maybe he realises that we all have a job to do and there are too many deer. If it’s in season shoot it would be a good policy for us all to adopt rather than pontificating on the whys and wherefores.

Oh believe me, I have plenty of culling work to be on with, as I explained above I’m not certain the ‘it’s just food’ mentality is justified. That’s my thoughts only, do as you will.

This attitude of ‘too many deer’ lets go and shoot all the good, promising young roe bucks is ludicrous. Again, in areas in Southern England on invasive deer and fallow (technically invasive) then it might be apt, but i’d suggest the majority of roe deer can be sensitively managed.

 

[Mungo]

So your thesis is just shoot anything, the selective practices of stalkers to promote good genetics is absolute folly?

There are many, many good reasons for not just shooting everything you see. Genetics is not one of them.

I’m all for careful, thoughtful culling by people who know the ground and know and care about herd - ultimately the best form of management in every way, no question.

But unless it’s a closed population where you have some level of control over who breeds with whom, you’re not going to have a measurable effect on gene frequency or phenotypic variation through selective shooting.

You can dramatically affect body and antler size by maintaining a population density that’s appropriate to the habitat and food availability. So thoughtful culling is definitely worth pursuing. But it is extremely unlikely to affect the genetics.

 

[JH83]

There are many, many good reasons for not just shooting everything you see. Genetics is not one of them.

I’m all for careful, thoughtful culling by people who know the ground and know and care about herd - ultimately the best form of management in every way, no question.

But unless it’s a closed population where you have some level of control over who breeds with whom, you’re not going to have a measurable effect on gene frequency or phenotypic variation through selective shooting.

You can dramatically affect body and antler size by maintaining a population density that’s appropriate to the habitat and food availability. So thoughtful culling is definitely worth pursuing. But it is extremely unlikely to affect the genetics.

Good, then barring some minutiae we are on the same page, not viewing deer as meat alone, which was my ascertation-and careful, structured management should be adhered to in order to positively effect the quality of the herd.

I think ‘genetics’ is possibly an misnomer, herd quality a more apt term.