BSK: Reasonable expectations

[Hunter 257W]

BSK,
What type of data do you use to provide realistic expectations for managed properties? Is there a similar data set for unmangaged properties that might let "regular" hunters know what they should reasonably expect as an upper end deer so they aren't constantly holding out for something that is very rarely there?

I'll start with the most important "metric" first Steve, and surprisingly, it isn't a metric it all. It's the hunters themselves. From the time a prospective client first calls me through the first time I tour their property, I'm subtly "interviewing" them to get a feel for their past hunting experiences, hunting style, knowledge, and personality. And of all these factors, the most important towards setting realistic goals is how teachable they are. By "teachable," I mean how open are they to new ideas? How set in their ways are they? Are they new to deer hunting or have they been hunting all their lives, hence believe every old hunting wives' tale ever told? Are they a product of today's outrageously unrealistic hunting media? Are they eager to learn, or more interesting in proving their knowledge and skills?

Why this is so important is twofold. First, some of the things I'm going to recommend for their property may sound crazy to the long-experienced deer hunter. They may not fit any of the crap the hunting media champions. If they don't have an open mind, they're going to reject my recommendations immediately. In addition, you wouldn't believe how many times I run into land-owners who hire a professional for the exercise of having that professional confirm exactly what the landowner already believes needs to be done. Any recommendations contrary to what the landowner has already decided upon will be consciously or subconsciously rejected out of hand. Secondly, you wouldn't believe how often the problem with a property isn't the property or the habitat (not to say it can't be made better--they usually can), but the problem is the way it's being hunted. As we tour a property, and I see where stands are located, and the hunters describe how they've been hunting the property, I realize very quickly the problem is simply poor stand choices and/or hunting styles (and it's usually stand choices). If the hunters are not teachable, it doesn't matter what I help them grow/attract to the property, they're never (or vey rarely) going to kill those bucks. This idea that killing older bucks is simply "a matter of having them" is total HOGWASH. Over and over again I've seen hunters NOT be able to kill what exists on their property, and it's all about hunting knowledge and stand choices. A HUGE part of the successes I've had with clients involves the simple matter of teaching them how to hunt older bucks. It doesn't matter how many older bucks I can help them grow or what their antler scores are if the hunters can't kill them. Ultimately, what's hanging on the meat pole is the true measure of success for a management project. And that's a monetary fact. We can wax philosophically all we want about the value of having "good" bucks in the woods to hunt, but if those bucks don't end up on the wall, the management will be deemed a failure. I guarantee it.

I'll get into the numeric side in my next post.

I scout a lot of public land and I can definitely agree that based on what I've seen the biggest problem with why people do not kill mature deer is a complete lack of knowledge on how to select the right spot to sit and the determination to find multiple spots. All too often I find where a guy has been using the same spot countless times. Even more commonly I find spots that I can't imagine why they chose to sit there.

And I can also think back on many of my own set ups and think "what was I thinking?"

On the flipside I've found that sometimes deer concentrate their movement through areas that make no sense at all. For instance my farm is very open. Mostly row crop or pasture land. There are a number of fencerows however that offer cover to travel between the little wooded areas that exist. What I discovered though is that a lot of times they will cross right through the middle of wide open fields or pastures at random avoiding the fencerows completely. This leaves them totally exposed and makes no sense. There is one particular corner in my woods that a lot of bucks go to by crossing about 600 yards of wide open field rather than using cover. For a long time I never hunted that corner because I thought it wouldn't have any daytime travel. Yeah, I know corners are classic funnels but not typically when they have to cover 600 yards of nothing to get to it.

 

[BSK]

The numeric side:

The numeric side of realistic expectations includes the abilities of the hunters (what age bucks can they consistently kill) and what age bucks can be grown on and attracted to the property (and often it's FAR more about what can be attracted to a property). What age bucks can be grown/attracted is strongly influenced by the hunting pressure in the surrounding area. What antler sizes each age-class of buck will grow is most influenced by the habitat and soil quality of the area (the property in question and all of the land within a 2-3 mile radius area). How far is the land-owner willing or can afford to alter the current habitat?

Some of this information can be gathered from satellite images. Just look at the property in question as well as the surrounding area. What percent is forest versus open? The higher the percent of open land the more impact hunters can have on the local buck population. And for habitat quality, what is the "open" land? Fescue pasture? Fallow fields in brush/briers? Agriculture? Is the terrain flat, rolling, ridge-and-hollow? The more "severe" the terrain, the shorter the visibility and the less impact hunters have on buck populations. Although some general idea of harvest pressure can be gained from looking at county harvest numbers over time, most of what can be learned about local hunting pressure has to come from the hunters themselves. How much shooting do they hear on the opening weekends of MZ and gun season? Does hunting pressure tail off outside of the opening weeks of firearms seasons, or are there a lot of deer hunters right through the season? When is the local peak of the rut? A peak rut near opening weeks of firearms seasons tends to take a greater toll on bucks.

Lastly, once realistic age structures can be determined, what is the average antler size for bucks of each age-class for that area? Some of this can be determined from TWRA harvest data for that county. Adjustments to those numbers can be made by assessing localized habitat quality. Thankfully, most hunters now run trail-cameras, and assessment of their past pictures is a HUGE help, especially in areas I'm not familiar with. I've got a plethora of data for the areas I work most frequently (western Highland Rim), but if I'm working areas where I do not have a lot of data (especially those areas just to the east of Nashville, and some parts of the Cumberland Plateau), a land-owner's trail-camera data can be especially useful.

 

[ROUGH COUNTRY HUNTER]

People are nuts and I'd say that no matter what BSK may tell them about realistic potential, they are going to expect to outdo bucks from the best states. A guy I know in my area was saying that surely we could grow a bunch of 130 or 140" bucks as if that was nothing and anything less than that was odd. The frame of mind of so many hunters has become that of a competition where the deer's rack score equates to the hunters score as a hunter. A 100" 3 1/2 year old is still a fine trophy and a realistic one but even that can't be expected with every 3 1/2 year old as many are going to fall far short of that.

TN can and does grow a lot of 130-140" deer. Over 140 you will start to see a rapid decline and a sudden drop once you get to the 170" mark, but 130-140" deer are not an unrealistic expectation for TN. Will you kill one every year? Not likely, but it isn't unrealistic to go into the season hoping for a 130

Very true.I see the potential in the properties that I hunt.130 inch deer are becoming common on trail cameras,but killing them is a different story.it is sure nice knowing that they are there

 

[ROUGH COUNTRY HUNTER]

People are nuts and I'd say that no matter what BSK may tell them about realistic potential, they are going to expect to outdo bucks from the best states. A guy I know in my area was saying that surely we could grow a bunch of 130 or 140" bucks as if that was nothing and anything less than that was odd. The frame of mind of so many hunters has become that of a competition where the deer's rack score equates to the hunters score as a hunter. A 100" 3 1/2 year old is still a fine trophy and a realistic one but even that can't be expected with every 3 1/2 year old as many are going to fall far short of that.

TN can and does grow a lot of 130-140" deer. Over 140 you will start to see a rapid decline and a sudden drop once you get to the 170" mark, but 130-140" deer are not an unrealistic expectation for TN. Will you kill one every year? Not likely, but it isn't unrealistic to go into the season hoping for a 130

Some areas maybe but not all. And hoping for one and it being realistic are two different things too. I've personally never gotten a single trail camera picture of a buck even remotely close to that on my land in 12 years. 100 inches is tops and I get excited over those. It's like saying people win lotteries all over so there's a real chance you will - then expecting it to happen. For something to happen to a few dozen hunters in a county is not the same at it being realistic for any individual hunter. Didn't we decide that there are about 240,000 deer hunters in the state? How many of those are going to kill a 130" buck? When you have the total number then convert that into a % and look at how realistic it is to expect a 130" buck.

well I can assure you that they are all around you in this county then.these local clubs are producing some very nice bucks by letting them reach maturity and trying to improve the habitat

 

[ROUGH COUNTRY HUNTER]

Thanks, Bryan. I always listen when you speak.

me too.

 

[Blackdog416]

Me too. These kind of discussions kept me interested in this site over the last fifteen years or so of lurking. Excellent points.

 

[BSK]

Let me once again stress, "realistic expectations" are NOT about what a property CAN grow. Lots of places in TN CAN grow a 150 class buck from time to time. That doesn't mean killing 150+ bucks on a regular basis is realistic. Realistic expectations are about what is going to be harvested nearly every year, based on the skill level of the hunters. If the hunters are not capable of killing 4 1/2+ year-old bucks every year, then you have to start looking at what 3 1/2 year-old bucks regularly grow. If the hunters aren't capable of killing 3 1/2s regularly, then you have to start looking at what 2 1/2s normally grow.

 

[ROUGH COUNTRY HUNTER]

Let me once again stress, "realistic expectations" are NOT about what a property CAN grow. Lots of places in TN CAN grow a 150 class buck from time to time. That doesn't mean killing 150+ bucks on a regular basis is realistic. Realistic expectations are about what is going to be harvested nearly every year, based on the skill level of the hunters. If the hunters are not capable of killing 4 1/2+ year-old bucks every year, then you have to start looking at what 3 1/2 year-old bucks regularly grow. If the hunters aren't capable of killing 3 1/2s regularly, then you have to start looking at what 2 1/2s normally grow.

Exactly true.I am happy to kill mature deer which I personally consider 4 1/2 or older.I consistently see or get pics of 120 to 130 class bucks.the key to my land has been the hinge cutting and all the habitat work I do.it really pays off

 

[Mike Belt]

Somewhere in that mix there is a "reasonable" potential. That may not be the same as a reasonable expectation and the hunter/s may never make a kill on that top end buck but it's nice to know that that caliber of deer roams the same hunting area.

 

[scn]

Bryan,

I think you had this info in your discussion on buck age structure, but could you hit me again with the percentage of 4.5 or older bucks in free range conditions (unhunted/underhunted and average). And, further, translate with normal TN densities to how many of those critters might be on a typicla 500 acre farm.

It is starting to look like it is almost a needle in a haystack deal, even if you are in the class of hunter that can kill these older animals.

I'll probably continue to hold out for such because that is where my interest lays these days. But, in the realm of realistic expectations, it seems that hunters may be setting themselves up for failure before they even start if that is the only thing that will make them happy.

 

[fairchaser]

One of the keys in hunters consistently killing mature bucks is to allow the total buck population to mature and to limit the numbers of does. These two factors will force the mature bucks to express their full rutting characteristics which will put them in front of a hunter with more frequency. The hunter must still bring his A game but he will have a chance.

Great discussion here BTW.

 

[Fleet Fox]

Let me once again stress, "realistic expectations" are NOT about what a property CAN grow. Lots of places in TN CAN grow a 150 class buck from time to time. That doesn't mean killing 150+ bucks on a regular basis is realistic. Realistic expectations are about what is going to be harvested nearly every year, based on the skill level of the hunters. If the hunters are not capable of killing 4 1/2+ year-old bucks every year, then you have to start looking at what 3 1/2 year-old bucks regularly grow. If the hunters aren't capable of killing 3 1/2s regularly, then you have to start looking at what 2 1/2s normally grow.

This pretty much sums it up. My first factor in becoming a better hunter, for my expectations, was to get as efficient as possible at aging deer on the hoof. In the beginning, a 110" 2 year old got me so excited that I couldn't resist shooting it. After a few of those, I realized that in order to please myself, I was going to have to sit and watch those bucks walk because even my highest-end 2 year olds weren't going to top 115 inches 99% of the time. I then set my sights on 3 year olds with larger than average rack measurements. It didn't take long to realize the differences in their movement once velvet had shed from the bucks younger than them. After killing 2 of my better 3 year olds in 2013 that measured 120 and a hair under 140, and having one very close chance at a mid 170s 5 year old that I had watched since he was 2, I decided that it was time for me to completely change my game if I wanted to kill bucks that are over the 130" mark consistently. I know now the property I hunt will present me with a chance to kill, almost every year, a 130 class or larger deer because I get them on camera. That means the ball is in my court to only hunt when conditions are in my favor, which is hard to do because I love sitting in a tree for many other reasons than just to kill a deer. However, it is the choice I have made and I will discipline myself to hunt that way. As fun as it may be to see 2 and 3 year olds on a regular basis during bow season, what is the purpose when I walk into the woods almost everyday knowing, with almost 100% certainty, that I am not going to kill one that day? I have other properties to hunt that won't present me the opportunities to kill the same class deer that this one particular farm will for a number of reasons, so I can overhunt them for my therapy. I also plan to start hunting public land, since it is close to home and can do nothing but increase my skills.

Over time, my desire to provide habitat, manage a herd and hone my hunting skills has given me much more fulfillment than just killing deer to parade around in the bed of a truck. Once you spend as much time as I do getting to know each individual deer and their habits, you almost feel obligated to do what is best for them as a group, which fortunately for me means killing a few of them.

 

[Mike Belt]

"to only hunt when conditions are in my favor" nails it, particularly if you're trophy status hunting based on your immediate hunting area AND if you're lucky enough to have the available hunting time to wait until those conditions are right.

 

[BSK]

Somewhere in that mix there is a "reasonable" potential. That may not be the same as a reasonable expectation and the hunter/s may never make a kill on that top end buck but it's nice to know that that caliber of deer roams the same hunting area.

Correct Mike, and if a client wants to know reasonable potential, I can give them some numbers.

 

[BSK]

One of the keys in hunters consistently killing mature bucks is to allow the total buck population to mature and to limit the numbers of does. These two factors will force the mature bucks to express their full rutting characteristics which will put them in front of a hunter with more frequency. The hunter must still bring his A game but he will have a chance.

Great discussion here BTW.

As long as hunters realize they will not be able to "stock-pile" mature bucks, I have no problem with that recommendation. And by "not be able to stock-pile mature bucks," I mean the buck population has a limit on what PERCENTAGE of the population can be mature. Now the key to that is percentage. If you have more total bucks, the same percentage means more total mature bucks. But also remember the habitat can only sustain so many total deer, including bucks.

 

[BSK]

This pretty much sums it up. My first factor in becoming a better hunter, for my expectations, was to get as efficient as possible at aging deer on the hoof. In the beginning, a 110" 2 year old got me so excited that I couldn't resist shooting it. After a few of those, I realized that in order to please myself, I was going to have to sit and watch those bucks walk because even my highest-end 2 year olds weren't going to top 115 inches 99% of the time. I then set my sights on 3 year olds with larger than average rack measurements. It didn't take long to realize the differences in their movement once velvet had shed from the bucks younger than them. After killing 2 of my better 3 year olds in 2013 that measured 120 and a hair under 140, and having one very close chance at a mid 170s 5 year old that I had watched since he was 2, I decided that it was time for me to completely change my game if I wanted to kill bucks that are over the 130" mark consistently. I know now the property I hunt will present me with a chance to kill, almost every year, a 130 class or larger deer because I get them on camera. That means the ball is in my court to only hunt when conditions are in my favor, which is hard to do because I love sitting in a tree for many other reasons than just to kill a deer. However, it is the choice I have made and I will discipline myself to hunt that way.

GREAT example of how a hunter progresses in their desires and skills. Thanks for posting that Fleet Fox.

Over time, my desire to provide habitat, manage a herd and hone my hunting skills has given me much more fulfillment than just killing deer to parade around in the bed of a truck. Once you spend as much time as I do getting to know each individual deer and their habits, you almost feel obligated to do what is best for them as a group, which fortunately for me means killing a few of them.

Well said Fleet Fox. Although everyone must understand that in some situations, killing more of them (deer) is the right thing to do. Each situation is unique.

 

[BSK]

Bryan,

I think you had this info in your discussion on buck age structure, but could you hit me again with the percentage of 4.5 or older bucks in free range conditions (unhunted/underhunted and average). And, further, translate with normal TN densities to how many of those critters might be on a typicla 500 acre farm.

It is starting to look like it is almost a needle in a haystack deal, even if you are in the class of hunter that can kill these older animals.

I'll probably continue to hold out for such because that is where my interest lays these days. But, in the realm of realistic expectations, it seems that hunters may be setting themselves up for failure before they even start if that is the only thing that will make them happy.

Discussing the number of mature bucks in a given area is such a difficult prospect. Such a huge "disconnect" exists between the numbers most of us hear about--such as deer per square mile--and what hunters will see or those running trail-cameras will photograph on a given property. And much of that discrepancy comes from the fact that deer can move around so much over time. For example, in an area with an AVERAGE deer density of around 25 deer per square mile, with common (for TN) population dynamics of an adult sex ratio of 1.5 adult females per male, and a fawn recruitment rate of 60%, in a square mile area (640 acres) there would be about 7 bucks, 11 does and 7 fawns AT ANY ONE MOMENT IN TIME. However, again, that's just a snapshot in time. Deer move around daily, weekly, monthly, seasonally, etc. One day the property could have 20 deer and the next day 40 deer, depending on food sources, hunting activity, habitat quality, etc. Adding up all these daily, weekly, seasonal movements may mean that MANY more deer use the property over the course of a hunting season than just the calculated 25. Deer using that 1 square mile also use all surrounding square miles and vice versa. Because of large individual deer ranges, and daily/seasonal movements, over the course of a hunting season, I find it very common for properties of this size to see 4-6 times the number of unique deer using the property than the deer density suggests. For example, the density suggest only 7 unique bucks should be on the property. But over the course of an entire hunting season, I would not be surprised to see trail-cameras pick up 30-40 unique bucks using the property at some point. And if we're assuming the area has a very good buck age structure, around 10% of those bucks will be mature, which means of the 30-40 unique bucks, 3 or 4 are mature. And interestingly enough, cut the size of the property down and you don't really lose a lot of those bucks--because buck ranges are so large, especially during the rut. At the same time, hunters have to realize that nearly every mature buck they photograph on their property is most likely being shared with many other surrounding landowners--potentially every one for miles around.

So looking at the raw numbers, in a 25 deer per square mile area, even with good dynamics you're only looking at about 0.7 mature bucks per square mile. A 100 acre property is really out of luck at only 0.1 mature bucks. However, the reality of the situation--large ranges, and daily/seasonal deer movements--may actually bring a couple of mature bucks across a 100 acre property during a given deer season.

 

[PillsburyDoughboy]

Alot of it is location location location.

My property produces usually one 150+ plus buck a season. There are many more spotted on the property by our group and trail cams.

Why my property?

A little background is in order.

Westvaco stripped areas about 10 miles in all directions around my property and planted pines about 20 years ago. There are two parcels connecting to me. One is a 100 acres track that is used as a cow farm that has green grass year round,, hay and has feed and grain out for the cows. The other track is part of the Westvaco track and its heavy in cedars. There are a couple of small land holds with private residences that don't mount to much scattared around.

So the deer have plenty of bedding on the one track and green and grain on the other track. What they do have to do is cross my track to get from one to the other. Also my track is one of the last tracks standing with large standing timber so I supply a lot of mast for the deer to consume. I also stratiically cut my fields in strips every other year so the deer have plenty of cover to move from area to the other to give them everything that they possibly need. So may place has just about everything that the parcels around me DO NOT HAVE.

Probably why I am constantly kicking people off there and telling people NO they cannot hunt on there.

 

[scn]

Thank you, Bryan, for the great info!

 

[TN Whitetail Freak]

I'm just gonna say Cades Cove, Ft Campbell, Presidents Island , and MLAAP. Its reasonable to to believe I can kill 130" every time I climb into a stand anywhere in the state. Regs that promote antler potential is the constant in each