Hunting Blogs

Who Owns A Buck’s Genetics?

By: J.R. Absher

May 14

The quest for trophy bucks is one that’s shared by millions of avid American hunters, but recent advances in genetic science may raise serious questions about modern game-management practices and ethics—and the future of deer hunting as we know it.

In new research being performed at the Louisiana State University AgCenter located in Clinton, Louisiana, the semen from a dead white-tailed buck has been successfully harvested and used to impregnate multiple does at the facility. According the center coordinator, Dr. Dearl Sanders, the experimental process had earlier proven successful for cattle, but this marked the first time it had been attempted with deer.

The semen utilized in the research was collected from a massive trophy whitetail killed in November on a private game preserve (translation: high-dollar and high-fenced) located near Vienna, Illinois. According to an Associated Press article appearing May 12, the deer’s testicles were removed, placed on ice and transported to the LSU facility soon after it was killed.

The semen was subsequently extracted and frozen in liquid nitrogen, providing 200 samples, or enough for approximately 100 potential deer pregnancies (based on a 60-percent insemination success rate).

Presently, six does at the facility are pregnant with semen extracted from the dead buck’s testicles, Dr. Sanders reports.

According to the article, LSU attorneys are investigating if the process may be patented and licensed.

“We can become the repository for this genetic material and reproduce offspring from ‘giant’ deer in the wild,” Sanders said in an LSU press release.

Could this mean “Frankenstein-deer” may be coming to your state in the future? Artificial insemination of deer on private game farms is nothing new, but it utilizes the semen from live bucks owned and kept specifically for that purpose.

You may remember my blog post from February about the Quality Deer Management Association and its opposition to the expansion of the captive deer-breeding industry and its fight against the passage of laws that could liberalize the private practice of deer breeding.

The idea of harvesting the genetic material from a dead deer, transporting it to another state or region, and using it to impregnate random, chosen females is simply too complex a matter for some of us to fathom.

Where could this be heading? Possibly to some useful things, like strengthening a local deer herd’s genetic resistance to certain diseases. But on the negative side, an uncontrolled, widespread usage of genetic harvesting and procreation has the potential for a disaster.

So, who owns a dead deer’s genetics? The hunter who shot and recovered it? And where do you think the use of a dead deer’s genetics could lead—the best and the worst-case scenarios? I look forward to seeing your comments below.

9 comments

# John Eason
Monday, May 14, 2012 3:56 PM
They need to stop playing with what GOD created !
# jsheley
Monday, May 14, 2012 8:29 PM
Aman!
# cfrantz
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 3:16 AM
I disagree as well. These are God's creations and who are we to try and control that. Sure I support the bettering of the herds and the prevention of illness. But there are other ways of doing that. As for this leading to the "ultimate trophy buck" ............. Mine is and always will be my 1st and only 7 point with a 28in inside spread, taken in 2005 in good ole PA. On state game lands after hunting for 10 years. So I can honestly say I do not support all this genetic exploration for the means of conjuring up "SUPER BUCK!" or does with testicles!
# RAbear51
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 6:44 AM
Technically the wild game of any state is the property of the people(the state) and as such any issue involving widespread genetic engineering should be put to a vote BY THE PEOPLE. As far as allowing the commercialization of the technique on the wild population I say NO WAY.The dream of and pursuit of a giant WILD buck is one thing but when we begin "making" these monsters I feel we have crossed a threshold that puts the sport in danger of becoming just another way to boost deflated ego's. C'mon ....is the ultimate "purpose" of hunting only/primarily a means to an end(the harvesting of the biggest deer)?Or is it , as I believe, a way to be a part of the big picture that we SHARE with all creatures and creations? I pray that my connection to BEING never degrades to a point where my pursuit is purposed by only the desire to have the biggest rack on the wall. And how genuine would such trophy be knowing trhat it is "created" by some geek scientist in a lab? Srrms participation in such pursuit is simply playing with creation and a game of TRIVIAL PURSUIT. Leave it alone !!!
# msalan03
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 8:16 AM
I disagree with all of this mess. Genically changing deer to make them bigger. I also disagree with these hunting ranches that enclose an area and trap the animals in the enclosures. I think if any animal that is harvested in a game area that is not free to go anywhere should not be allowed into record books. I think they should be completely wild animals only. Too many people are changing the deer and "creating" larger bucks just for trophys. It is all wrong.
# TCOMPARET
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:13 AM
Where this would be heading is that you may not "own" that nice free range trophy you shot. If it becomes possible to patent a set of genetics for deer, the owner of that patent could claim ownership of your deer. If your deer has a trace of the patented genetics, it's their deer. The precedence has already been set, when pollen from patented corn has blown on to adjacent fields, farmers have had to pay. If you think your license cost to much, wait till you get this bill.
# EliBourne
Wednesday, May 16, 2012 2:06 PM
Just manage the wild herds naturally. Quit playing God with all this genetic engineering junk and learn how the natural course of life and death alters the gene pool of a herd. Want to provide a better food/water source, fine. Want to create santuaries, fine. Want to selectively harvest cull bucks, fine. But manipulating the genetic structure of anything unnaturally will only lead to bad things happening. Let Mother Nature do her job. She has been at it longer than mankind. And dont even get me started on highfence shooting!
# wsmith27
Friday, May 18, 2012 11:33 AM
Let me start by saying that I have no desire to shoot any animal (big or small) in a “canned” situation. This type of hunting is simply not for me. However, let me bring a few points to everyone’s attention:
1. I do not believe we are “playing God”. In fact, “…God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” – Genesis 1:26
2. Being a Republican, a hunter, and a capitalist, I do not want the Government (State or Federal) telling me what I can or can’t do. I realize they have a fiduciary duty to us to protect the wildlife, but they should not be able to tell us how or when we can make money.
3. As I mentioned, “canned” hunting is not for me. But, if you can sell a whitetail for $20,000 to some city slicker that has no idea what hunting is, then more power to you. That is the definition of capitalism.
4. Not all high-fenced or genetically superior hunts are “canned”. I have hunted on very large estates where the animals are free to roam, and are often times more “wild” because of the hunting pressure.
5. Finally, as a hunter/outdoorsman, I feel we need to band together, and support each other in every aspect. There are too many antis out there. We can’t afford to fight amongst ourselves.
# RAbear51
Saturday, May 19, 2012 6:39 AM
who's fighting?? point one...Our role as "defined" by the Bible(which by the way can be interpreted MANY ways) yours or mine might not be "Right"..is to be "stewards" of living things. That implies responsible treatment of and caring for living creatures. Playing with the genetics of animals for the SOLE PURPOSE of creating huge UNNATURAL monsters is NOT responsible treatment of a species and is completely self-motivated with underlying greed. Point two..encouraging "city slickers" to come on out and gun down a science lab animal for their bragging benefit HURTS the sport of hunting in that we as hunters have now turned out a new "hunter" that is out there calling himself that with absolutely no inkling of ethics,soul-connection,innate connection to concepts of good animal "husbandry" and is now classed among us. Wouldn't education to these principals and our heritage better serve ALL HUNTERS, not just those that are in it to make a dollar? Wouldn't turning out people that have been taught new understandings,new experiences,new ethics be more beneficial to the overall ranks of HUNTERS and outdoors lovers?? Just sayin'

Post Comment

Only registered users may post comments.