Deer census?

[Football Hunter]

Or really a doe census.How would you do one?Hard to distinguish one from another,I can tell a real old doe,and a real young one apart,but other than that,they all look like Japenese cars to me."The same"

Reason IM asking,I assume I have a lot of does around me,This weekend I saw 16 does/fawns one buck.Cams seem to show about the same thing,but its hard to tell one from another.

IM thinking it could be easier in the spring,with them standing at TRs maybe.Or,is there some type of formula?

 

[BSK]

You don't actually census does like you do bucks. You can't identify the does individually, so you calculate the number of does you have by looking at the ratio of buck pictures to doe pictures.

As an example, let's say you have a grand total of 50 bucks in pictures and 100 does in pictures, but you know from looking at antler configurations that those 50 pictured bucks are only 10 different bucks being photographed multiple times. Since you have twice as many does in pictures as bucks in pictures (100 does pictured / 50 bucks pictures = 2.0 does per buck) and your buck pictures represent 10 bucks, then you probably have around 20 does (10 unique bucks x 2.0 does per buck = 20 does).

The big problem with these calculatons is how and where you got the pictures. Some camera locations will produce a heavy bias towards does and fawns (such as food plots and corn bait piles), while other camera locations will have a bias towards bucks (such as scrapes). In addition, when trying to get a census for "density" numbers, remeber that your getting pictures of far more deer than can be accounted for in "deer per square mile" calculations. Deer cross imaginary square mile boundaries, and even a census run over an entire square mile would be picking up deer from all the other surrounding square miles, highly inflating the density numbers.

Because of these problems, I don't use my camera data to get a true density census, but more to generate trend data over time. Are the real number of unique bucks going up or down over the years? Are the calculated number of does going up or down? Is the ratio of buck pics to doe pics changing over time? Is the age structure of the unique bucks changing over time?

 

[richmanbarbeque]

I can break it down FH, you have to many freaking does and you should be in unit L. We need to hook and kill some, I know if I'll ever get my butt out there. Ha!

 

[Football Hunter]

You don't actually census does like you do bucks. You can't identify the does individually, so you calculate the number of does you have by looking at the ratio of buck pictures to doe pictures.

As an example, let's say you have a grand total of 50 bucks in pictures and 100 does in pictures, but you know from looking at antler configurations that those 50 pictured bucks are only 10 different bucks being photographed multiple times. Since you have twice as many does in pictures as bucks in pictures (100 does pictured / 50 bucks pictures = 2.0 does per buck) and your buck pictures represent 10 bucks, then you probably have around 20 does (10 unique bucks x 2.0 does per buck = 20 does).

The big problem with these calculatons is how and where you got the pictures. Some camera locations will produce a heavy bias towards does and fawns (such as food plots and corn bait piles), while other camera locations will have a bias towards bucks (such as scrapes). In addition, when trying to get a census for "density" numbers, remeber that your getting pictures of far more deer than can be accounted for in "deer per square mile" calculations. Deer cross imaginary square mile boundaries, and even a census run over an entire square mile would be picking up deer from all the other surrounding square miles, highly inflating the density numbers.

Because of these problems, I don't use my camera data to get a true density census, but more to generate trend data over time. Are the real number of unique bucks going up or down over the years? Are the calculated number of does going up or down? Is the ratio of buck pics to doe pics changing over time? Is the age structure of the unique bucks changing over time?

So the most non biased way would be some sort of mineral lick?

 

[jmb4wd]

I checked my camera this week and I had 100 pics of the same doe and two fawns at a mineral lick. They are like clock work.

 

[Football Hunter]

I can break it down FH, you have to many freaking does and you should be in unit L. We need to hook and kill some, I know if I'll ever get my butt out there. Ha!

Maybe you can now,no need in worrying about the Cowboys any more,OUCH,guess that was a low blow.

 

[BSK]

So the most non biased way would be some sort of mineral lick?

I don't think so. I still see bias from year to year at mineral licks, but for unknown reasons the bias is different from year to year (some years heavily bias towards does and fawns, other years biased towards bucks).

Personally, I feel I get my best numbers from looking at a wide combination of non-baited set-ups. However, what I'm really interested in is comparing like-set-ups from year to year. In essence, I will look at each type of set-up independently. I will compare only food plot pics from year to year and then only scrape set-ups from year to year, and then only trail set-ups from year to year. Do the different data sets agree or disagree? Are they all showing the same trend over time?

All that said, I think the standard "camera census technique" actually fails at its primary goal--to produce an actual census. Too much sexual bias can occur at different types of baited sites, too much change-over in which deer are using a property occurs at different times of the year, and the census numbers will be HIGHLY inflated because deer move so far in their daily/weekly travels (you pick up deer from "your" square mile as well as all the surrounding square miles).

I use trail-cam data for a number of purposes: 1) to gather density TREND data (are the numbers going up or down over time); 2) to produce an actual census/inventory of bucks using the property; 3) to gather buck age structure data; and 4) to watch how different bucks move on and off the monitored property at different times of the year (monitor seasonal range-shifting).

 

[BigGameGuy]

Excellent answer Bryan. A group I'm working with on the Cumberland Plateau have been using trail cameras (Jacobsen method) to estimate their population in a fully mature hardwood environment. According to their estimates they have between 70-80 deer per square mile. I advised them that their estimates may not be very accurate according to the attractiveness of their bait sites so I recommended using their data for trend information only.

 

[BSK]

A group I'm working with on the Cumberland Plateau have been using trail cameras (Jacobsen method) to estimate their population in a fully mature hardwood environment. According to their estimates they have between 70-80 deer per square mile. I advised them that their estimates may not be very accurate according to the attractiveness of their bait sites so I recommended using their data for trend information only.

Because new bucks are constantly moving through any given area throughout the fall and early winter (hunting season), and because doe/fawn populations are estimated off of the number of unique bucks, using the standard density calculation method over a long period of time (the entire deer season) can produce some outrageously inflated numbers.

At our highest deer density in '06 (probably in the neighborhood of 25-30 deer per square mile--just before the '07 EHD outbreak), because "new" bucks are constantly being identified around the rut, a 6-month trail-cam census on my place produced a calculated deer density of 162 deer per square mile!

 

[102]

Southeastern Deer Study Group advises , as you BSK, that camera census are MOST in accurate at determing not only how many, but WHAT (bucs/does) you may have on your property.

102

 

[BSK]

The only "real" data you are collecting from a camera census is an inventory of bucks using the monitored property, and for me, that is the most interesting data.

I like to look at the buck inventory I get during my month-long baited census (August) versus what I get during my non-baited census I run all hunting season--from September through January--as well as combining the two data sets (total annual buck inventory).

 

[Boone 58]