Cold fronts do affect deer movement..?

[Bgoodman30]

Now the Deer Association has stated that cold fronts don't affect deer movement from their collar research... I could get on board with the moon thing but dis too much...

 

[Hymie3]

So apparently nothing affects deer movement???

 

[Bgoodman30]

So apparently nothing affects deer movement???

Nope years of hunting and cameras deer movement was just a figure of our imagination..

 

[lol]

Maybe my mountain deer are different. The only daytime movement I've documented since mid October was during the cold spell last week. Every day but one I had deer in my food plot during daylight on days when the overnight temp was in the teens. Since it warmed back up, nothing.

 

[swampbadger]

What a bunch of garbage. I don't care about their study. Maybe the deer they study don't have to travel far food to bed.

I know this much though, Deer get cold when it's cold outside. They move to areas that protect them from the elements. They still have to burn more energy to stay warm when it's below freezing for long periods. They have to feed more often or they will starve to death during those extremely cold times.

I know I've seen better more consistent movement when it's colder.

 

[DeerCamp]

Now the Deer Association has stated that cold fronts don't affect deer movement from their collar research... I could get on board with the moon thing but dis too much...

Obviously you have missed my diatribes on this in the past....

I have argued several times with Dr. Deifenbach at Penn State about this topic and he is unrelenting - but also admittedly not a hunter himself. They do great work, but in this case they misinterpreted their own findings.

Why?
1. The GPS collars don't show movement type in great enough detail to discern the type of movement that affects sightings
2. They usually exclude rut period data during this study, which is when most people hunt
3. They are using any temperature drop associated with a front as a "cold front"

In the PSU study, they looked at October movement only. A typical October day is Mid 70s with some days in the 80s. A typical October cold front isn't really "cold". Early October deer are still forming their winter coats.

My last statement to Defienbach is that if weather doesn't affect deer sightings, here's what we will do. I will invite you out to my farm to hunt 5 days of my choosing. I will then hunt 5 days of my choosing. We will see who sees more deer. He declined.

 

[Ski]

This new flush of GPS collar "deer science" lately is getting about as believable as covid science. You can tell me the sky is green all you want and show me all your research to prove it, but I can simply look up and see for myself that it is indeed actually blue like I've known all along. It's getting ridiculous.

 

[ImThere]

Maybe my mountain deer are different. The only daytime movement I've documented since mid October was during the cold spell last week. Every day but one I had deer in my food plot during daylight on days when the overnight temp was in the teens. Since it warmed back up, nothing.

This is my experience, but I had movement all hours including daylight. They were on their feet.

 

[TNTreeman]

I killed a 5 yr old big mature deer on Dec 23 a couple yrs ago when we had that flash freeze. I think it was zero or below. I had pics of him but only at night until that day. I saw more big deer that day and deer I've never seen than any other time. Time in the field/common sense>scientific studies.

 

[Bgoodman30]

Obviously you have missed my diatribes on this in the past....

I have argued several times with Dr. Deifenbach at Penn State about this topic and he is unrelenting - but also admittedly not a hunter himself. They do great work, but in this case they misinterpreted their own findings.

Why?
1. The GPS collars don't show movement type in great enough detail to discern the type of movement that affects sightings
2. They usually exclude rut period data during this study, which is when most people hunt
3. They are using any temperature drop associated with a front as a "cold front"

In the PSU study, they looked at October movement only. A typical October day is Mid 70s with some days in the 80s. A typical October cold front isn't really "cold". Early October deer are still forming their winter coats.

My last statement to Defienbach is that if weather doesn't affect deer sightings, here's what we will do. I will invite you out to my farm to hunt 5 days of my choosing. I will then hunt 5 days of my choosing. We will see who sees more deer. He declined.

Yes I have and they obviously left out most of this info from their post to stir the pot and create more clicks...

 

[348Winchester]

My latest study indicates there is less deer movement when deer are not moving.

 

[Crow Terminator]

I scrolled thru a TikTok video last night where the "expert" was saying the same thing. They said weather fronts and temperatures had zero effect on deer movement. Oh and they also said the rut happens the same exact time every year because it is triggered by the amount of sunlight during the day time.

 

[knightrider]

I scrolled thru a TikTok video last night where the "expert" was saying the same thing. They said weather fronts and temperatures had zero effect on deer movement. Oh and they also said the rut happens the same exact time every year because it is triggered by the amount of sunlight during the day time.

The rut does happen the same time every year within a few days due to photoperiod. But no fronts and temps play a huge roll in movement as we all know

 

[Crow Terminator]

The rut does happen the same time every year within a few days due to photoperiod. But no fronts and temps play a huge roll in movement as we all know

The bucks were still bachelor grouped up all through October and late November on my farm. While over in Meigs County, the next County over, they were cruising and chasing does at that same time. The ones on my farm are just now making scrapes and doing some cruising and a little chasing. Any idea why it would be different?

Note the date on the pic. Right during Muzzleloader season.

There's actually 3 bucks in the group but only 2 visible in this particular picture.

 

[lol]

The bucks were still bachelor grouped up all through October and late November on my farm. While over in Meigs County, the next County over, they were cruising and chasing does at that same time. The ones on my farm are just now making scrapes and doing some cruising and a little chasing. Any idea why it would be different?

Note the date on the pic. Right during Muzzleloader season. View attachment 256543There's actually 3 bucks in the group but only 2 visible in this particular picture.

Up in South CNF in Monroe county, first sign of any rutting behavior I've seen was the first of the month when I caught some bucks sparring on camera and another following a doe at the same time. A couple days later, I found my first rub that looked maybe a day old.

 

[knightrider]

The bucks were still bachelor grouped up all through October and late November on my farm. While over in Meigs County, the next County over, they were cruising and chasing does at that same time. The ones on my farm are just now making scrapes and doing some cruising and a little chasing. Any idea why it would be different?

Note the date on the pic. Right during Muzzleloader season. View attachment 256543There's actually 3 bucks in the group but only 2 visible in this particular picture.

Ok i shouldn't have made such a broad statement apparently (forgive me) photoperiod does essentially kick off the rut as in velvet coming off , does beginning to come in estrus. Now where you see rut activity on a certain day you will see it within a fewdays the same time next year in that area. Why its different on different farms only 50 miles apart is beyond me but it will be (basically) the same time frame on the same lands year after year.

 

[backyardtndeer]

This new flush of GPS collar "deer science" lately is getting about as believable as covid science. You can tell me the sky is green all you want and show me all your research to prove it, but I can simply look up and see for myself that it is indeed actually blue like I've known all along. It's getting ridiculous.

Agreed. I really wonder about those doing thus research, and what their true goal is. They can skew the data....

 

[DeerCamp]

The bucks were still bachelor grouped up all through October and late November on my farm. While over in Meigs County, the next County over, they were cruising and chasing does at that same time. The ones on my farm are just now making scrapes and doing some cruising and a little chasing. Any idea why it would be different?

Note the date on the pic. Right during Muzzleloader season. View attachment 256543There's actually 3 bucks in the group but only 2 visible in this particular picture.

To clarify, peak breeding happens at the same time every year for YOUR area. It's genetic.

The amount of activity we see changes, but fetal conception studies have confirmed the breeding dates don't change by much year to year for any given area. Usually just a few days difference for the peak.

 

[BSK]

I think the disconnect between research findings and hunters is that they are looking at different things. For example, in the study on how bucks reacted to increased hunting pressure, GPS collar data showed bucks actually increased the average distance they travelled each day under increased hunting pressure. Why, and the reason for the disconnect, is that bucks increased the distance they travelled each day under heavier hunting pressure because they had to take a more circuitous route to get from Point A to Point B and stay within heavy cover to hide from hunters. The researcher looks at the raw data - miles travelled each day - and says, "See, bucks aren't reacting to hunting pressure like everyone thought they would." The hunters suddenly see less bucks because the bucks are winding through every little patch of cover during their daily travels to hide from hunters. The bucks are travelling more miles per day, yet hunters are seeing fewer of them. The researchers need to look at the sum-total of the data, not one little piece of the data.

In the research Bgoodman30 is referencing (and I haven't seen the study), I can guarantee you the problem is the researchers look at the raw data and find bucks don't increase the amount of time they are active during a cold snap. Yet they probably are not looking at where and when bucks are active during a cold snap. That is what hunters are interested in. If a buck sticks to thick cover and moves 6 hours a day in hot weather (much of it during cooler night-time hours), but suddenly starts moving in daylight in open hardwoods for those 6 hours after a cold front, that is night-and-day difference to a hunter, but meaningless to the researcher. The researcher sees 6 hours in warm weather and 6 hours in cool weather and proclaims, "See, no difference."

 

[Ski]

Why its different on different farms only 50 miles apart is beyond me but it will be (basically) the same time frame on the same lands year after year.

Until I owned my own ground and really began paying attention to things, I had no idea how exact a doe's estrus cycle can be. I mean to the day. If she pops hot November 3rd this year then she's very, very likely to pop hot November 3rd next year, and so on. Furthermore a doe's female offspring seem to cycle generally around the same time as their mother, so an entire family group of does can be bred within a few days making the days leading up to and right after November 3rd dynamite rut activity on that property. 50 miles away on another farm the local does may not cycle until November 10th so it seems dead while the first farm is hot, then flip flops a week later.

It's not an exact science but it's pretty darn predictable. I've killed many a good target bucks from studying when they were on property the previous year(s). Don Higgins calls it the "same place same time" theory where if a buck is here today then odds are good he'll be here same day next year. That phenomenon is absolutely real and I am convinced it's because that buck knows when the ladies in that immediate area are ready to be bred. No reason to be there if they're not ready so he shows up on que when it's time.

 

[lol]

...

It's not an exact science but it's pretty darn predictable. I've killed many a good target bucks from studying when they were on property the previous year(s). Don Higgins calls it the "same place same time" theory where if a buck is here today then odds are good he'll be here same day next year. That phenomenon is absolutely real and I am convinced it's because that buck knows when the ladies in that immediate area are ready to be bred. No reason to be there if they're not ready so he shows up on que when it's time.

I should test that theory

 

[Ski]

I think the disconnect between research findings and hunters is that they are looking at different things. For example, in the study on how bucks reacted to increased hunting pressure, GPS collar data showed bucks actually increased the average distance they travelled each day under increased hunting pressure. Why, and the reason for the disconnect, is that bucks increased the distance they travelled each day under heavier hunting pressure because they had to take a more circuitous route to get from Point A to Point B and stay within heavy cover to hide from hunters. The researcher looks at the raw data - miles travelled each day - and says, "See, bucks aren't reacting to hunting pressure like everyone thought they would." The hunters suddenly see less bucks because the bucks are winding through every little patch of cover during their daily travels to hide from hunters. The bucks are travelling more miles per day, yet hunters are seeing fewer of them. The researchers need to look at the sum-total of the data, not one little piece of the data.

In the research Bgoodman30 is referencing (and I haven't seen the study), I can guarantee you the problem is the researchers look at the raw data and find bucks don't increase the amount of time they are active during a cold snap. Yet they probably are not looking at where and when bucks are active during a cold snap. That is what hunters are interested in. If a buck sticks to thick cover and moves 6 hours a day in hot weather (much of it during cooler night-time hours), but suddenly starts moving in daylight in open hardwoods for those 6 hours after a cold front, that is night-and-day difference to a hunter, but meaningless to the researcher. The researcher sees 6 hours in warm weather and 6 hours in cool weather and proclaims, "See, no difference."

That's probably exactly correct. And it's a problem. The source of the information matters every bit as much as the information itself, maybe more. If the source cannot be trusted to give objective accuracy then it doesn't matter how much truth it spews because nobody will believe it. That is the point we're approaching with this GPS collar stuff. An otherwise reliable source claiming cold fronts don't spur movement makes that source less reliable, IMO.

 

[Ski]

I should test that theory

It's 100% accurate about 10% of the time

 

[BSK]

Until I owned my own ground and really began paying attention to things, I had no idea how exact a doe's estrus cycle can be. I mean to the day. If she pops hot November 3rd this year then she's very, very likely to pop hot November 3rd next year, and so on. Furthermore a doe's female offspring seem to cycle generally around the same time as their mother, so an entire family group of does can be bred within a few days making the days leading up to and right after November 3rd dynamite rut activity on that property. 50 miles away on another farm the local does may not cycle until November 10th so it seems dead while the first farm is hot, then flip flops a week later.

It's not an exact science but it's pretty darn predictable. I've killed many a good target bucks from studying when they were on property the previous year(s). Don Higgins calls it the "same place same time" theory where if a buck is here today then odds are good he'll be here same day next year. That phenomenon is absolutely real and I am convinced it's because that buck knows when the ladies in that immediate area are ready to be bred. No reason to be there if they're not ready so he shows up on que when it's time.

A doe social unit (all females travelling in a group) are genetically related on the female side. They are all grandmother, daughters, grand-daughters, cousins, aunts, etc. The genetic component of their estrus timing will be virtually the same for all of them. This is Nature's way of ensuring maximum genetic diversity (the evolutionary development that makes white-tailed deer so successful in so many different environmental conditions). Because all of the does in a social unit will come into heat about the same time (due to their common female lineage genetics), and each doe will require a buck to follow and tend her for 24-48 hours, this means each doe will most likely be bred by a different buck. The result is all of their offspring will have similar genetics from their mothers, they will all have different fathers, maximizing genetic diversity.

And as you mentioned Ski, different doe social groups will have slightly different genetic timings for estrus. My property is almost a perfect rectangle, one mile north-south by 3/4 mile east-west. Doe social units on the northern half have little if any interaction with does on the southern half. Year after year after year, given similar food resources (basically, an adequate acorn crop), the doe social units on the southern half of the property come into estrus 5-7 days earlier than the doe social units on the northern half. And again, given adequate acorns, I can predict to within +/- 2 days when the "crazy chasing" will occur in the north and the south. It's like clock-work year to year.

 

[Wrangler95]

What a crock,during the bitter cold nights I saw tons of deer

 

[BSK]

That's probably exactly correct. And it's a problem. The source of the information matters every bit as much as the information itself, maybe more. If the source cannot be trusted to give objective accuracy then it doesn't matter how much truth it spews because nobody will believe it. That is the point we're approaching with this GPS collar stuff. An otherwise reliable source claiming cold fronts don't spur movement makes that source less reliable, IMO.

But what if a cold front DOESN'T spur movement but just changes where and when it occurs? Neither side is incorrect. The researchers see no difference in how much bucks move based on temperature. Correct. The hunters see much more daylight movement. Correct. Both are correct. However, both are not seeing the forest for the trees.

 

[deerhunter10]

In the research Bgoodman30 is referencing (and I haven't seen the study), I can guarantee you the problem is the researchers look at the raw data and find bucks don't increase the amount of time they are active during a cold snap. Yet they probably are not looking at where and when bucks are active during a cold snap. That is what hunters are interested in. If a buck sticks to thick cover and moves 6 hours a day in hot weather (much of it during cooler night-time hours), but suddenly starts moving in daylight in open hardwoods for those 6 hours after a cold front, that is night-and-day difference to a hunter, but meaningless to the researcher. The researcher sees 6 hours in warm weather and 6 hours in cool weather and proclaims, "See, no difference."

I have seen this to on studies. But just throwing that out there is just them getting engagement on social media instead of breaking it down. There's several "experts" some are some aren't out there looking for engagement rather then actually breaking down the facts.

Honestly that's why when you do post your data I like it because it is broke down, and not only that answer and discuss what you have found and ideas around what you've found. A lot of these organizations don't do that any more or not much of it. It's like a grip and grin photo but about outlandish data with a gotcha headline.

 

[lol]

But what if a cold front DOESN'T spur movement but just changes where and when it occurs? Neither side is incorrect. The researchers see no difference in how much bucks move based on temperature. Correct. The hunters see much more daylight movement. Correct. Both are correct. However, both are not seeing the forest for the trees.

I think that's kinda the point they're getting at. It's not the data that's wrong, it's the interpretation/conclusions that are suspect. Anyone reading research would be good to distinguish between data and conclusions and reason on their own.

 

[BSK]

I have seen this to on studies. But just throwing that out there is just them getting engagement on social media instead of breaking it down. There's several "experts" some are some aren't out there looking for engagement rather then actually breaking down the facts.

Honestly that's why when you do post your data I like it because it is broke down, and not only that answer and discuss what you have found and ideas around what you've found. A lot of these organizations don't do that any more or not much of it. It's like a grip and grin photo but about outlandish data with a gotcha headline.

There is some truth to that, especially in today's social media world. Then there is also the tunnel vision of some researchers. All they can see is the raw numbers. They can't conceptualize how differences in timing and location make all the difference to a hunter.

 

[Ski]

My property is almost a perfect rectangle, one mile north-south by 3/4 mile east-west. Doe social units on the northern half have little if any interaction with does on the southern half. Year after year after year, given similar food resources (basically, an adequate acorn crop), the doe social units on the southern half of the property come into estrus 5-7 days earlier than the doe social units on the northern half.

That's a very fortunate quirk of the property! You get to hunt two ruts back to back without having to travel, plus it likely retains "traveler" bucks for longer than most of us get to. What do you presume make the difference? Two different hollows?