Buck expectations per 1000 acres, per age class

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

What would every one consider to be a good age ratio of bucks per 1000 acres? Lets say the land is 80% wooded 20% fields.

I usually end up with about six 2.5 year old, three 3.5 year old and one 4.5+ per 1000 acres, per year, on my cameras.

 

[Winchester]

IMO you should have quite a few more than that on 1,000 acres.
How many cams do you have out and are they spread evenly over the 1,000 acres? Also what are you using as an attractant for the cam sites?

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

IMO you should have quite a few more than that on 1,000 acres.
How many cams do you have out and are they spread evenly over the 1,000 acres? Also what are you using as an attractant for the cam sites?

We have 11 cams out over salt licks. I really tought 10 bucks 2.5+ per 1000 acres was not to bad. If we counted the yearlings we would have around 20 to 25 bucks per 1000 acres. With a buck to doe ratio of 1 to 2.5 that gives me about 70 deer per 1000 acres. Before EHD hit we had a larger population.

 

[BSK]

How many you have will be determined by habitat quality.

The buck age structure numbers I keep coming up with for numerous managed areas are: 50% 1 1/2, 28% 2 1/2, 14% 3 1/2 and 8% mature (4 1/2+). I would consider these numbers "good." Not "fantastic" by any means, but good.

 

[BSK]

In addition to the above comments, with smaller properties (1,000 acres and under) I wouldn't put too much weight on a single year's numbers. It is common for buck age structure numbers to fluctuate from year to year on those size properties. I wouldn't feel comfortable with buck age structure numbers in those situation without at least three years of data. Five would be better.

In addition, there can be vast differences in the number of bucks and the age structure depending on when the numbers are collected. On those size properties it is not uncommon for there to be significant rotation of which bucks are on the property from summer through the deer season. Looking at 6-month censuses from early August through January, it is fairly common for individual properties to only pick up a 1/3 of the total unique bucks they are going to photograph over that 6-month span during their summer baited census. Another 1/3 of the total bucks may not appear on the property until after antler velvet shedding (fall-season range-shifters). The final 1/3 of the total bucks may only appear during the 4-6 weeks of the rut and then vanish as soon as the rut is over (rut range-expanders/shifters).

And again, these 1/3, 1/3 and 1/3 numbers are only averages over several years. The percentages of summer residents, fall-season range-shifters, and rut range-expanders/shifters may fluctuate radically from year to year.

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

The buck age structure numbers I keep coming up with for numerous managed areas are: 50% 1 1/2, 28% 2 1/2, 14% 3 1/2 and 8% mature (4 1/2+). I would consider these numbers "good."

Mine are pretty close to those %'s. 50% 1.5, 30% 2.5, 15% 3.5 and 5% 4.5+. With close to 45 deer psm.


Question is, with a buck to doe ratio of 1 to 2.5, if I where able to get the ratio to 1 to 1.5, do you think I would have more bucks in my herd? Or would I have less total deer?

 

[BigGameGuy]

BSK hit the nail right on the head with his comment on habitat quality. Let's use prime Unit L type habitat that on average supports 25 deer per sqare mile (pre-hunt) and let's say we are managing two square miles (that's 1,280 acres, a slightly larger area than the original question).

In a well-balanced situation your buck-to-doe ratio would be approximately 1:1.4. That means in your 2-mile area, you would have roughly 20 bucks and 30 does. Since buck fawns make up the largest age cohort you may have approximately 8 buck fawns. Leaving 12 bucks to be considered adult. Some would think a natural breakdown of the adult cohorts would look something like this: 4 yearlings (33%), 4 2-1/2's (33%), 2 3-1/2's (16%), 1 4-1/2's (8%), and 1 5-1/2 (8%). But looking at those numbers, that's even way better that what we are seeing in real world situations (Bryan's data). A more realistic breakdown would be 6 yearlings (50%), 3 2-1/2's (25%), 2 3-1/2's (17%), and 1 4-1/2+ (8%). These numbers match Bryan's data are are even supported by papers conducted in the midwest (Iowa) by Dr. Kroll.

Anyhow, the long and short of this post is to say that even if you manage your property perfectly, mature bucks (4-1/2+) will be scarce. In the situation outlined above, a TWO SQUARE mile property, on average may produce one mature buck. Keep in mind, property managers have the ability to "tilt the scale", especially when it comes to habitat. If you can increase the carrying capacity of your property and still keep the population in check you can increase the odds of growing more mature bucks. Although it may only be one or two mature bucks, it may be a 200% increase compared to average properties.

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

Let's use prime Unit L type habitat that on average supports 25 deer per sqare mile (pre-hunt.

That seems like a low number for prime unit L habitat. I would have thought more like 40 to 50 dpsm. What does unit A and B average?

 

[Winchester]

Let's use prime Unit L type habitat that on average supports 25 deer per sqare mile (pre-hunt.

That seems like a low number for prime unit L habitat. I would have thought more like 40 to 50 dpsm. What does unit A and B average?

I agree, sounds low, and from my experience, there isnt a 1,000 acre tract anywhere in unit l with prime habitat that doesnt hold atleast 2 fully mature bucks! 1,000 acres is a big chunk or property, especially on a 80-20 scale as mentioned here with prime habitat! Just because they are not showing themselves doesnt mean they dont exist.

 

[BigGameGuy]

Believe it or not many countywide deer density's are often over inflated. We just finished a preliminary thermal density survey in law enforcement area 22 (an 8-county area in south central TN) where our deer densities are believed to be the highest. The post hunt survey revealed a density estimate of 16 deer per square mile +/- 2 deer.

Absolutely, 100% without a doubt, there will be areas that are supporting 50+ deer per square mile, but then on the opposite end of the spectrum, there will be large expanses of forested areas that are supporting 10 deer per square mile.

My guess is well-managed hunting properties will be near the top-end of density estimates.

 

[usanglure]

Why would you say only 1-2 mature(4 1/2 yrs +) to 1000 acres. Would deer not killed mature? ie: passing on 2-3 yr old deer on consistent basis increase our mature ratio?

 

[BigGameGuy]

The number of mature deer realistically inhabiting an area depends on your herd density (which is dictated by habitat). Even in excellent habitats, mature bucks can not be stockpiled. In other words, passing four, 2-1/2 year old bucks one year does not mean you'll have four, 3-1/2 year olds running around the following year. It's amazing how consistent the data is from place to place and the data suggests that for every six deer that are "passed up" one year, only one of those will end up getting harvested in later years. (FYI - though there may be more there since you have passed them up, it doesn't make them any easier to harvest.)

 

[Football Hunter]

Thats a fact BGG

 

[BSK]

The buck age structure numbers I keep coming up with for numerous managed areas are: 50% 1 1/2, 28% 2 1/2, 14% 3 1/2 and 8% mature (4 1/2+). I would consider these numbers "good."

Mine are pretty close to those %'s. 50% 1.5, 30% 2.5, 15% 3.5 and 5% 4.5+. With close to 45 deer psm.


Question is, with a buck to doe ratio of 1 to 2.5, if I where able to get the ratio to 1 to 1.5, do you think I would have more bucks in my herd? Or would I have less total deer?

If the deer density is allowed to stay at 45 psm, and the sex ratio closer to balanced, you will have more total bucks.

 

[BSK]

EXCELLENT stuff BGG. Now for those who think BGG's buck numbers look low for 1,280 acres (1 mature buck), remember that deer density per square mile numbers are a "snapshot in time" calculation. If you could take an aerial photo or satellite image of a large area where every deer showed up as a dot--with their accompanying age and sex data--you could calculate the square miles in the image, count the deer, and then calculate an average deer density per square mile number. And that would be accurate.

But now look at this situation from a manager/hunters perspective. The problem with this deer density number (and total buck numbers by age per square mile), is that deer move around, and some deer--especially bucks--move around a lot. Some bucks will be covering 3,4, or 5 square miles. Some bucks have been documented covered 11 or 12 square miles. Now in the snapshot in time density image, a single mature buck only gets to be counted in the one square mile he appears in. Yet because that buck travels all over, manager/hunters running photo censuses end up getting him on film and recording him in their census in multiple square mile areas. What this leads to is individual mature bucks being "censused" on many different properties.

A an example of what this leads to, imagine a perfectly square 4-square mile area (2 miles east-west by 2 miles north-south), with each of the single square mile blocks owned by a different person. By BGG's calculations (1 mature buck per every 2 square miles), there should be 2 mature bucks in the 4-square mile area. But because these two bucks travel all over the 4-square mile area, managers censusing in each of the square mile blocks would catch both bucks in their census, giving each of them a calculation of 2 mature bucks per square mile. If the 4 land-owners then compare data, they would come up with 8 mature bucks in the 4-square mile area (2 mature bucks per square mile times 4 square miles). Yet there are really only 2 mature bucks in that 4 square mile area.

But from hunters perspective, this isn't a bad thing. If a hunter has an entire square mile, by BGG's calculations (1 mature buck per 2 square miles) the hunter gets depressed he only has a 50/50 chance of having even 1 mature buck on his property. Yet because bucks move around a lot, he may end up censusing several mature bucks crossing his property during the hunting season. Now none of these mature bucks live exclusively within his square mile property, he still gets to hunt all of them.

BGG's density numers are pretty close for my area. And with only 3/4 of a square mile of property I should only have 0.375 mature bucks on the property (a 38% chance of having even 1 mature buck). Yet because bucks move around a lot, I average getting 3 or 4 mature bucks using the property every year. Now of course I'm sharing those mature bucks with all of my neighbors for a considerabe distance, but I still get to hunt those mature bucks.

 

[Winchester]

Interesting for sure, now lets take say ORWMA. I dont know what the current total for acreage is with it shrinking some most every year anymore. I believe it to be less than 24,000 acres however that is still allowed to be hunted. Now what were saying is that only 24 mature bucks live in the whole entire area?
I will pull the kill #'s for a few years, but with every deer killed their checked by TWRA staff and aged. I can tell you that it must be an exception, because every living mature buck on the entire area has been killed multiple times in some years!! Seriously, has a thermal imaging study been done at ORWMA?? Or any other WMA's??

 

[Huntnbubba]

Man you guys are handing out some great info! I love hearing a good dicussion between some well informed people with the facts to back it up. This is the kind of stuff that makes this site worth reading! Thanks!

 

[BigGameGuy]

Winchester -

That's where tighter restrictions and improved habitat can make a difference. Think about it, the entire 36,000 acre area has six days of archery hunting. That reduces mortality tremendously allowing the herd to reach higher numbers and more natural age structures. In this case let's say it produces 3 mature bucks for every two square miles, that's about 90 mature deer walking around. Oak Ridge hunters killed 28 of them. That sounds great and it really is but look at it from a different angle...almost 70% of the mature bucks on Oak Ridge eluded hunters. (Keep in mind, these are hypothetical numbers.)

Another thing to keep in mind is that a good portion of Oak Ridge is within the high fenced security area. Once you put a fence up, all we know about free-ranging animals flies out the window.

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

The buck age structure numbers I keep coming up with for numerous managed areas are: 50% 1 1/2, 28% 2 1/2, 14% 3 1/2 and 8% mature (4 1/2+). I would consider these numbers "good."

Mine are pretty close to those %'s. 50% 1.5, 30% 2.5, 15% 3.5 and 5% 4.5+. With close to 45 deer psm.


Question is, with a buck to doe ratio of 1 to 2.5, if I where able to get the ratio to 1 to 1.5, do you think I would have more bucks in my herd? Or would I have less total deer?

If the deer density is allowed to stay at 45 psm, and the sex ratio closer to balanced, you will have more total bucks.

BSK,

I've made it a point for the last five years to at least take the same amount of does as bucks each year, and my buck to doe ratio has stayed basically the same 1 to 2.5 the last four years.

If I took out more does do you think bucks would take their place or would more does just fill their spot.

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

The number of mature deer realistically inhabiting an area depends on your herd density (which is dictated by habitat). Even in excellent habitats, mature bucks can not be stockpiled. In other words, passing four, 2-1/2 year old bucks one year does not mean you'll have four, 3-1/2 year olds running around the following year.

"Even in excellent habitats, mature bucks can not be stockpiled".

Can you go into more detail about the above quote.
Seems like if you let more mid age bucks make it to an older age, that all of them would not stop using the property. I know it works for the younger age class.


Is there a point at which a property will only hold so many mature bucks?