Doe thread for Bsk

[FARMTOFIELD]

first, im glad your back.

So in reading another thread, let's dive in to adult sex ratios. You mentioned having to many does, and to few does. I'd be interested in hearing your experiences on both and especially with too many does. At what point does it go south, and what is the best way to reduce the population without hurting the hunting( assuming most peoplehunt on small parcels). On my 80 acres there have been very few hunts this Season in what I haven't seen double digits. A few mornings I have seen 20+. I have approximately 5 acres of food and 75 acres of 6 year old cutover. It's not a bad deal, as I have killed 1 3.5, a 4.5, and a 5.5 yr old bucks in the last 2 seasons, but at what point will to many does cause problems?

 

[BSK]

Rockhound,

I really hesitate to post what I'm about to post because I fear small-land managers will all start going "backwards" on management strategies and we will go back to where we were in parts of TN in the mid 2000s - an overpopulated deer herd.

But from what I have seen, there's a big difference between managing smaller properties (a couple hundred acres) versus managing large properties (1,000+ acres). When managing small properties, few of the deer you see while hunting or on camera live exclusively on your property (considering the average home-range size of both bucks and does). So for the small-land manager, it really is about providing what your neighbors don't have to draw deer to your property versus theirs. By influencing the local deer population to spend more time on your land, you can have more of an management impact on them through your harvest practices than your neighbors do.

For the small-land manager, the three things bucks will be looking for through the fall and early winter season are 1) the best food, 2) the best and most secure cover (and/or lowest hunting pressure); and 3) easiest access to the most doe. Provide any one of these three things, and you will draw more bucks to your property. Provide all three, and you're going to see some pretty impressive results.

What I hesitate to write is that rut-related problems with an unbalanced sex ratio generally only occur on the large scale; i.e. thousands of acres. The same can generally be said of deer overpopulation. You only see habitat damage due to over-population on the scale of thousands of acres (with a few notable exceptions). The reason I hesitate to write these things is I don't want to see all the small-land managers - which make up the majority of managed land in TN - going back to not shooting does. Then we'll go back to where we were before the big EHD outbreak of 2007, which in some parts of TN, especially the western part, was a significantly overpopulated deer herd.

 

[TheLBLman]

In the absence of more meaningful data, my rule-of-thumb goal is to have a balance-sex harvest.
It is somewhat self-regulating, in that if you have fewer deer, you will kill fewer of both sexes, and vice-versa if you have more deer.

 

[FARMTOFIELD]

Thanks for the reply, I completely understand why you are hesitant. It sounds like I'm seeing a ton of deer due to providing the perfect habitat.

 

[DoubleRidge]

Very interesting thread.....and also refreshing to see land managers consider this topic in detail....verses assuming there are too many doe and begin the slaughter....im absolutely not against killing does....I just think as land managers and stewards we are wise to consider what's truly needed to benefit the herd... Study and discuss as is being done in this thread.....I tend to lean towards making improvements to the habitat with various methods in order to support more deer using the property....and by all means take does when it's needed...... appreciate everyone's input on the topic.

 

[DeerCamp]

Rockhound,

I really hesitate to post what I'm about to post because I fear small-land managers will all start going "backwards" on management strategies and we will go back to where we were in parts of TN in the mid 2000s - an overpopulated deer herd.

But from what I have seen, there's a big difference between managing smaller properties (a couple hundred acres) versus managing large properties (1,000+ acres). When managing small properties, few of the deer you see while hunting or on camera live exclusively on your property (considering the average home-range size of both bucks and does). So for the small-land manager, it really is about providing what your neighbors don't have to draw deer to your property versus theirs. By influencing the local deer population to spend more time on your land, you can have more of an management impact on them through your harvest practices than your neighbors do.

For the small-land manager, the three things bucks will be looking for through the fall and early winter season are 1) the best food, 2) the best and most secure cover (and/or lowest hunting pressure); and 3) easiest access to the most doe. Provide any one of these three things, and you will draw more bucks to your property. Provide all three, and you're going to see some pretty impressive results.

What I hesitate to write is that rut-related problems with an unbalanced sex ratio generally only occur on the large scale; i.e. thousands of acres. The same can generally be said of deer overpopulation. You only see habitat damage due to over-population on the scale of thousands of acres (with a few notable exceptions). The reason I hesitate to write these things is I don't want to see all the small-land managers - which make up the majority of managed land in TN - going back to not shooting does. Then we'll go back to where we were before the big EHD outbreak of 2007, which in some parts of TN, especially the western part, was a significantly overpopulated deer herd.

Its interesting - in my experience from physically being in the field hunting, I would have estimated that we have a 1:3 buck to doe ratio on my home farm - I hunt other properties, but this is the only one I "manage". I think it can feel misleading because I tend to see the does in groups most of the year, and usually see them on most hunts. It leads me to believe we have too many does at times.

BUT - when I actually sat down last year, printed all of my saved trail cam pics, and really scrutinized them, I identified 24 DIFFERENT bucks over the course of the season utilizing a 36 acre property in Henderson County in some form or fashion.

This really opened my eyes to the idea that looks can be deceiving. So I have a simple rule of thumb. We shoot one doe for every buck we kill.

As long as the number and quality of deer we see stays stable, that's the plan moving forward.

I would note that after several years of not shooting any does, we killed 3 in 2018. I felt like the rut action was a little better the next season, but probably coincidence.

 

[DoubleRidge]

Its interesting - in my experience from physically being in the field hunting, I would have estimated that we have a 1:3 buck to doe ratio on my home farm - I hunt other properties, but this is the only one I "manage". I think it can feel misleading because I tend to see the does in groups most of the year, and usually see them on most hunts. It leads me to believe we have too many does at times.

BUT - when I actually sat down last year, printed all of my saved trail cam pics, and really scrutinized them, I identified 24 DIFFERENT bucks over the course of the season utilizing a 36 acre property in Henderson County in some form or fashion.

This really opened my eyes to the idea that looks can be deceiving. So I have a simple rule of thumb. We shoot one doe for every buck we kill.

As long as the number and quality of deer we see stays stable, that's the plan moving forward.

I would note that after several years of not shooting any does, we killed 3 in 2018. I felt like the rut action was a little better the next season, but probably coincidence.

DeerCamp....this has been my experience as well....years ago I went through a time period where I felt like we had too many does....but after really studying the pics and keeping notes of my own visual observations.....then really looking at the herd from a male vs female standpoint I realized exactly what you stated ....looks can be extremely deceiving.... totally agree.

 

[BSK]

In the absence of more meaningful data, my rule-of-thumb goal is to have a balance-sex harvest.
It is somewhat self-regulating, in that if you have fewer deer, you will kill fewer of both sexes, and vice-versa if you have more deer.

This is an EXCELLENT rule of thumb. Absent data suggesting an over or under-population, killing one doe for every buck killed is a sound practice.

 

[BSK]

BUT - when I actually sat down last year, printed all of my saved trail cam pics, and really scrutinized them, I identified 24 DIFFERENT bucks over the course of the season utilizing a 36 acre property in Henderson County in some form or fashion.

DeerCamp,

For the small-land, especially the VERY small-land manager, this point is critical. A big difference exists between calculated deer density in an area, which is a single snap-shot in time of all the deer in a vast area divided by the square miles of area, and how many huntable, manageable bucks a small-land manager will have use his or her property in the course of a hunting season. Deer move around a lot, and some deer, such as older bucks during the rut, move great distances. This means many more bucks will use the property during the hunting season than average deer density numbers would suggest. And the smaller the property, the greater the disparity between deer density numbers and actual unique bucks crossing the property from October through December.

 

[woodsman04]

I have recently begun some different habitat and hunting strategies on my personal property of 70 acres in Giles county.
My neighbor select cut all trees over 20 inches in the year of 18, and for some reason clear cut about a 20 acre piece that joins me. I'm happy for that clear cut, unless they make it a hayfield or ag land, because that will be a huge thicket that borders me.
In the fall of 19, I myself had logged all walnuts, poplar, sweet gum, cherry, and ash. And some hackberry. So now the deer have lots of different habitat stages in one 300acre block of woods.
My own property used to be cow pasture. But now I don't have cows, and I let the fields grow up and rotate bushhogging different areas each fall. I always plant about 2 or 3 acres of different clovers and also spread wheat and rape mixed in.
I love bow hunting, but I do not bow hunt up there anymore. I save the place for the rut. I want the deer to feel as comfortable as possible. Last two years I didn't see any results. But this year I have seen several deer on each trip, and even see them in my food plots that used to I never did when I bow hunted there.
I still haven't seen any results in getting pictures of mature bucks, that so far seems unchanged. Every year I will only get one or two bucks on camera in my food plots at night and that same buck or two working my perennial scrape.
I'm hoping with my new management and less pressure I can get more big bucks up there, but I don't know if that's possible.
Also, I do not shoot does anymore either. That goes back to me making the deer comfortable. I'll let my neighbors shoot does or whatever. I want them to be relaxed on my property.
since I have a different place I can hunt that ain't mine so to say, I'll do my doe hunting for meat there.
It's just how I do it, and I'm lucky to be able to have a few spots to hunt.