# Technique used at state TB lab for determining a deer's age



## IronMike (Nov 12, 2004)

I hunt in DMU 452 (the TB area) and consequently we leave the head of each deer we shoot at one of the DNR check stations so that they can be checked for TB. Last night I checked the test results on-line. In addition to reporting the TB status (all 7 of our deer were negative for TB), the results include the deer's age. I am a little skeptical of the reported age for at least one of the two bucks we shot. Does anyone know what technique the state TB lab uses for determining a deer's age?

Thanks,
Mike


----------



## bigrackmack (Aug 10, 2004)

I would say their teeth?........Mack


----------



## walleyechaser (Jan 12, 2001)

IronMike said:


> I hunt in DMU 452 (the TB area) and consequently we leave the head of each deer we shoot at one of the DNR check stations so that they can be checked for TB. Last night I checked the test results on-line. In addition to reporting the TB status (all 7 of our deer were negative for TB), the results include the deer's age. I am a little skeptical of the reported age for at least one of the two bucks we shot. Does anyone know what technique the state TB lab uses for determining a deer's age?


Are you thinking they over or underaged the buck? Just curious.
I think they use the teeth to do their aging but now I'm curious to know for sure.
A gentleman brought a head and cape by last night that was taken just down the road from me the other night and there's no doubt the buck was a 6 1/2 or 7 1/2 year old but that's down here. The mass of the rack at the bases was tremendous plus we've seen this deer for several years.


----------



## jdawg240 (Oct 1, 2007)

I think Lansing saws a tooth and looks at it under a microscope. Ive had several doe's come back from lansing a different age on the tb card than what the check station told me. My local bioilogist told me Lansings numbers are more likely to be correct versuse the feild check stations. Nothing agaisnt our under staffed DNR but most of the people working the check stations watch a 45 minute video to be certified to work a deer check station. I stick with the labs numbers.


----------



## fairfax1 (Jun 12, 2003)

I fall into the camp that for a 'down n' dirty' quick estimate the tooth-wear method is as good a tool as we currently have. Clearly, research has shown that it is not a sure-fire guarantee of accuracy, particularly in the older age classes; but, the most accurate method, the centum annuli examination, just ain't practical for in-the-field give-it-quick estimates.

One can imagine a day when some sort of technology...or knowledge....emerges that a quick prick in the ear, or something like that, will give an acceptably accurate reading.


----------



## wyldkat49766 (Apr 21, 2007)

jdawg240 said:


> I think Lansing saws a tooth and looks at it under a microscope. Ive had several doe's come back from Lansing a different age on the TB card than what the check station told me. My local biologist told me Lansing's numbers are more likely to be correct versus the field check stations. Nothing against our under staffed DNR but most of the people working the check stations watch a 45 minute video to be certified to work a deer check station. I stick with the labs numbers.



Ah. Well that explains why my DNR aged buck went from a 4.5 to a lab checked 3.5. Also, TB free from Presque Isle county


----------



## IronMike (Nov 12, 2004)

walleyechaser said:


> Are you thinking they over or underaged the buck? Just curious.


One of the bucks was aged at 2.5 years, but he seemed to have many of the characteristics of an older buck (say, 4.5 years). 

Mike


----------



## Ferg (Dec 17, 2002)

Mike I moved this in here to Jean can answer your question from the lab directly and without any more speculation 

ferg....


----------

