When a doe is bred, there should be a 50% chance that she will have a buck, right?

If the odds play fair , then 50% of all deer born are bucks and 50% are does? Am I correct so far?

If predators take a certain number of these new borns, would they target young does more than young bucks? probably not, right? The same goes for disease or any other natural causes of death to these deer.


Without man, natural selection would keep things in order, right?

Even road kills are not buck or doe specific....are they?

Are there any doe specific diseases?

Some bucks die in breeding battles, and some does die during fawn birth or soon there after for various reasons, I'm sure.

I guess what I getting at is that the way a deer herd gets out of balance is mainly due to man, right? The taking of too many bucks versus does is the main cog in the mechanism...?

What would have happened if the limits had been more liberal back when there were fewer deer? What if when the TWRA first opened a deer season, it was doe or buck and not just buck only? And would the herd ratio been different today if the TWRA and the hunters themselves decided that does needed to be taken out just as much as bucks do?

I remember hearing people say things like..."There are too many does, they need to thin them out." I remember seeing herds of 20 plus does back in the 70s and 80s, most times not a buck in the bunch.

Did we (hunters/TWRA)drop the ball on this one? Should we have done more before the buck/doe ratio got so out of whack that we needed to open a one doe per day season in some counties of Tn....?

Just sitting here thinking about how man often tries to "undo" what he caused in the first place. This seems to be just another example......

thanks for any input
_________________________
There are some people who always seem angry and continuously look for conflict.

Walk away; the battle they are fighting is not with you, but with themselves.