Managing Expectations

[BSK]

Great information deerhunter007. Sounds like your doing everything you need to be doing and seeing some success.

From your descriptions it sounds like what is needed is more education of hunters, something several of us have harped on to the TWRA, but I realize budget limitations provent wide-scale educational efforts.

 

[CWT]

Very good points bsk & deerhunter007

 

[Mike Belt]

Sometimes I wonder if game cameras aren't alot like fish finders. You can see they are there but you can't make them bite...or flop as the case may be.

 

[deerchaser007]

Great information deerhunter007. Sounds like your doing everything you need to be doing and seeing some success.

From your descriptions it sounds like what is needed is more education of hunters, something several of us have harped on to the TWRA, but I realize budget limitations provent wide-scale educational efforts.

Thanks,. i could improve my situation greatly in my area if i could get all the hunters that i have in the coop now to focus more on habitat and food plots. BUT,.. i'm in the hillcountry,.. hard to work in food plots on a hillside and hard to get a tractor up to the ridgeflats and for sure hard to get them interested in doing it by hand. BUT,.. i really believe i could increase the amount of older age bucks(3.5 & older) to above average in my area just from habitat work on surrounding properties. I just ain't got them that far into the management yet. BUT,. management babysteps will soon pay off over time also.

 

[BSK]

Sometimes I wonder if game cameras aren't alot like fish finders. You can see they are there but you can't make them bite...or flop as the case may be.

I guarantee you that is the case. They can lead to some truly humbling experiences. But they are a great lesson in just how good deer are at avoiding us.

 

[BSK]

Great information deerhunter007. Sounds like your doing everything you need to be doing and seeing some success.

From your descriptions it sounds like what is needed is more education of hunters, something several of us have harped on to the TWRA, but I realize budget limitations provent wide-scale educational efforts.

Thanks,. i could improve my situation greatly in my area if i could get all the hunters that i have in the coop now to focus more on habitat and food plots. BUT,.. i'm in the hillcountry,.. hard to work in food plots on a hillside and hard to get a tractor up to the ridgeflats and for sure hard to get them interested in doing it by hand. BUT,.. i really believe i could increase the amount of older age bucks(3.5 & older) to above average in my area just from habitat work on surrounding properties. I just ain't got them that far into the management yet. BUT,. management babysteps will soon pay off over time also.

Habitat improvements can certainly help. But again, we're back to "realistic expectations." I've seen many examples of what works and what doesn't work, and in TN unless a manager has several hundred acres to work with, I wouldn't feel comfortable telling them they can successfully manage for 3 1/2 year-old bucks. 2 1/2s, absolutely, but not 3 1/2 unless they were surrounded by larger clubs/leases.

And that's one of the major limitations in what the TWRA can do with bag limits and seasons. In a single county there may be a section where all of the land is broken up into 40-80 acre properties and there are 1, 2, or 3 hunters on each property. In that situation, even 2 bucks per hunter is too many. Yet just down the road may be a club or lease with thousands of acres and only 10 hunters. In that situation, a 2 buck limit may be unnecessarily limiting the hunters harvest. 3 does per day may be too many in the small-property area, but no limit on does what-so-ever may be perfectly acceptable on the nearby leases. The TWRA simply can't set limits and seasons that work for everybody. Everything has to be a compromise.

 

[BSK]

Our lease has 680 acres which is just a little over 1 sq. mile. The Deer density map shows our area to have at best 30 deer per sq. mile. We have 6 members and if each of us take 3 deer per year, that would be more than half the population. I know the fawn birth adds to the equation,but it just don't seem to add up.
Seems to me (statistically) the place would eventually be hunted out.

Now lets look at the mature buck factor, if the herd is balanced we would have at best around 15 Bucks. Out of that number I would think, only 2 or 3 shooters.Our goal is to eventually have enough older aged Bucks to give every member a chance to harvest a wall hanger.Unless I'm over looking some things,our goals for the lease are not obtainable. All this hard work, time, and money just don't seem to equal the projected reward.If I'm looking at this wrong or missing some things please explain it to me.I'm new to this management thing but I am trying to learn.We've had the property for 8 months and now with the bull dozer work done we have about 15 acres of food plots and roads limed and planted. Sorry for the rambling... maybe I'm just thinking and worrying to much.

According the the Quality Whitetails article, in average habitat, with an advanced age-structure, a 3,000 acre property has the potential to produce approximately TWO bucks every year that exceed 140 inches (10 in the 120+ category). In Ridgerunner's situation, since he has 680 acres, simply divide these estimates by four. He should be able to consistently produce 2-3 bucks in the 120+ category, and may produce one 140+ inch buck every other year. Trust me, I'm not trying to deflate anyone's hopes, I'm simply trying to avoid potential let down if someone puts in years of money and effort into trying to produce trophy-class bucks. It also emphasizes the necessity of cooperatives with adjoining londowners.

From what I have seen in the ridge-and-hollow hardwood regions of TN, in a free-ranging herd, hunters would be doing exceptionally well to produce a buck population that is 10% mature bucks (4 1/2 and older). And let's assume a well-managed herd has a adult sex ratio of 1.5 adult does per adult buck and the fawn recruitment rate of 80% (8 fawns per every 10 adult does survive to the hunting season). So in this well-managed herd, 27% of the population is adult bucks (1 1/2+ years old), 41% is adult does, and 32% is fawns pre-hunt (for every adult buck there are 1.5 adult does and 1.2 fawns in the population).

With a local herd density of 30 deer per square mile, on average there are 8.1 bucks per square mile. If 10% of the buck population is mature, then there are only 0.81 mature bucks per square mile, or 1 mature buck per 790 acres. If you drop the deer density down to 20 deer per square mile there would only be 1 mature buck for every 1,185 acres.

Now lets throw in the fact that in this terrain/habitat region, the average mature buck is only going to score in the low 120s, with two-thirds of all mature bucks being +/- 10 inches of that average (67% of mature bucks will score between 110 and 130). If only 10% of mature bucks top 140 gross, then in a 30 deer per square mile herd there would only be one 140+ mature buck for every 7,900 acres and in a 20 deer per square mile herd one mature buck over 140 for every 11,850 acres.

I hope this example shows why it simply isn't realistic to think you can manage for mature bucks with only 300 acres to work with and gives some concept of why mature buck harvests are so rare, even on well-managed properties, and why top-end antlered bucks are even more rare.

 

[TOW]

�realistic expectations��

Interesting article by Charles J. Alsheimer in Deer and Deer Hunting.

Some folks believe that they can manage for big bucks on fairly small properties. This kind of disproves that..

I don't think that that QDM will work all that well on small properties (the kind most of us hunt) unless you can get every property with a mile or two to do the same. Charles seems to agree on that one.

Now what we can do is plant food plots, provide good cover and a few does here and there hoping that it will attract and/or 'maybe' hold a good buck.

Charles' farm is 200 acres and his coop is 700 acres. Truly mature bucks of 5 1/2 don't seem to be all that common on that 700 acres and they are managing it extensively.

He has a picture of a 140 class ten pointer in the article and says - "If your hunting proerty is 250 acres or less, you will be hard pressed to "stockpile" one or two bucks like this".

He also says in the article - ".....after 16 years of working QDM, I've come to the conclusion that the best we can hope to "stockpile" in my area is one or two 125 - 140 inch bucks for every 250 acres. And this can only happen if you do everything right - from food plots to doe management to passing up yearling and 2 1/2 year old bucks."

Get the magazine and read the article in Deer and Deer Hunting - August 2008 edition.

You may or may not agree with Charles. I know I certainly don't agree with his moon/rut phase predictions. Too many fawn drop studies prove that to not be true..

 

[BSK]

He also says in the article - ".....after 16 years of working QDM, I've come to the conclusion that the best we can hope to "stockpile" in my area is one or two 125 - 140 inch bucks for every 250 acres. And this can only happen if you do everything right - from food plots to doe management to passing up yearling and 2 1/2 year old bucks."

I would agree with that.

QDM can work on "smaller" properties of a couple hundred acres, but without question, the smaller the property the less effect a single group of hunters can have and expectations must be realistic. Producing harvestable numbers of mature bucks on 250 acres is NOT realistic. Habitat improvements can certainly help, but again, too many hunters have "pie in the sky" expectations for their management programs.

 

[Chaneylake]

Chaneylake fits right into the norm. We have been practicing QDM on 2600 acres since 1992, our yearly average is 8-10 bucks gross scoring 100 to high 120's, there is usually 1 buck per season that will be in the 130's. The past season was an exception, we had a 144 and a 149 and a couple in the 130's. I based the 2007 season on lack of food [deer traveled more], we have no food plots on the property and the property did not flood [hunters were able to hunt entire season and not have to deal with high water]. we harvest 25-30 does per season.
I would love to think that the 2008 season would be as good as the 2007 season, but in reality we will go back to the norm.

 

[deerchaser007]

Great information deerhunter007. Sounds like your doing everything you need to be doing and seeing some success.

From your descriptions it sounds like what is needed is more education of hunters, something several of us have harped on to the TWRA, but I realize budget limitations provent wide-scale educational efforts.

Thanks,. i could improve my situation greatly in my area if i could get all the hunters that i have in the coop now to focus more on habitat and food plots. BUT,.. i'm in the hillcountry,.. hard to work in food plots on a hillside and hard to get a tractor up to the ridgeflats and for sure hard to get them interested in doing it by hand. BUT,.. i really believe i could increase the amount of older age bucks(3.5 & older) to above average in my area just from habitat work on surrounding properties. I just ain't got them that far into the management yet. BUT,. management babysteps will soon pay off over time also.

Habitat improvements can certainly help. But again, we're back to "realistic expectations." I've seen many examples of what works and what doesn't work, and in TN unless a manager has several hundred acres to work with, I wouldn't feel comfortable telling them they can successfully manage for 3 1/2 year-old bucks. 2 1/2s, absolutely, but not 3 1/2 unless they were surrounded by larger clubs/leases.

And that's one of the major limitations in what the TWRA can do with bag limits and seasons. In a single county there may be a section where all of the land is broken up into 40-80 acre properties and there are 1, 2, or 3 hunters on each property. In that situation, even 2 bucks per hunter is too many. Yet just down the road may be a club or lease with thousands of acres and only 10 hunters. In that situation, a 2 buck limit may be unnecessarily limiting the hunters harvest. 3 does per day may be too many in the small-property area, but no limit on does what-so-ever may be perfectly acceptable on the nearby leases. The TWRA simply can't set limits and seasons that work for everybody. Everything has to be a compromise.

Depends on the habitat outside the core area of the cooperative. If you have 1200 acres in a cooperative,. you manage for 2.5 and up,. and you are able to make the habitat and food sources much better than whats on the outside,. you can draw them deer from outside thru your cooperative area more by offering more. Especially if the focus is more toward winter food sources and good bedding habitat , and thickets for protection while moving thru the area. Of course ,. this is off topic of big horns and management of bucks inside a certain range,. but always has to be considered. My brother learned this this year when a 3.5 year old passed thru we never have seen before nor photoed before. Not by us ,.. or any of us in the cooperative. He had destictive 5 to 6 inch brows ,. but was not very wide so he got a pass by my brother. I would not have done that myself. BUT,.. i strongly feel this buck was out in search of a doe and the area around us made him feel safe to travel thru in daylight hours. It was 8:30 in the morning and the week after thanksgiving,. which seems to be typical for the rut in my area. SO,.. even though you can only manage for your 1200 acres,.. you have a chance to pull some deer from other areas that may be alittle outside that core area.

 

[BSK]

and you are able to make the habitat and food sources much better than whats on the outside,. you can draw them deer from outside thru your cooperative area more by offering more. Especially if the focus is more toward winter food sources and good bedding habitat , and thickets for protection while moving thru the area.

I couldn't agree more deerchaser007. In fact, these techniques are why smaller properties can be somewhat successful. In theory, a 250 acre property isn't big enough to protect a single yearling buck (due to individual deer range size), yet with good habitat work these small properties can attract and temporarily hold some older bucks. Again, "growing" mature bucks on 250 acres? No. But attracting and hold during daylight a couple of 2 1/2 year-old bucks? Sure, and even the occassional 3 1/2 year-old buck.

 

[Boone 58]

Bsk....I have looked intensively for that article where that was mentioned about thermal imaging giving an accurate herd for Tn more in the realistic range of 6 to 7 hundred thousand rather than a mill.....but cant find where i read that comment?
Will be on the lookout though.

 

[BigGameGuy]

Camoman,

There is no article (yet). The new estimates were first mentioned at the April Commission meeting. They came about a few months ago when the agency was trying to get a good handle on the impact of the EHD outbreak. We had known for a long time that the population model we had been using had become unreliable since selective harvest threw a wrench into our harvest data. The "close to one million" estimate came from the last time that model was run (2000). Over the last seven years there was no reason to believe we had sustained substantial growth to the herd since we went wide open on our doe harvest, so we stayed with that herd estimate.

In March, we researched other models and found that the most consistent population model for tracking herd growth was the Downing Reconstruction model. When we reconstructed our herd, we were coming up with numbers much lower than previous estimates so we weren't too sure what to make of the new information. At that same time, personnel in the field were coming in with thermal imaging data. This was actually collected from "seeing and measuring the number of deer", not just working with deer on paper. We then ran the field data to see what we came up with and sure enough, it verified the lower estimates.

When we began thinking about this it made much more sense. Our harvest numbers fell in line with those necessary to maintain a stable herd. It also brought the statewide deer per square mile average down from 24 to about 15. Every way we looked at it, the new estimates made sense.

We are now in the process of collecting thermal imaging data on a much broader scale and we're anxious to see how things play out.

 

[BSK]

Great information BGG.

 

[Locksley]

Interesting BSK Great information BGG.

 

[Mathews Hunter]

This is a great thread. Interesting stuff guys.

 

[Greg .]

BGG,

Do you think you could loan the NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission) that equipment and some expertise when you've completed your study?

 

[Anonymous]

I've said it before and I'll say it again--"realistic expectations." Hunters and managers have to have realistic expectations. It seems the need to expound on different management concepts has gone through phases. First it was explaining passing up young bucks. Then the shooting does concept. Now it is realistic expectations.

BSK, I agree with this 100%. My complaint and I think others on here is outlined very well is the same issue of QDM. I don't have the issue with me so all of this is from memory and I apoligive if a number is slightly off. I'm sure you have read.

Basically the sudy focused on 2 areas of Michigan. One more rural than the other. The rural area had 7 properties within a bucks average home range and the more populated study area had 17 properties owners on average within a bucks's home range. I have property In rutherford County Tenn. A yearly buck that uses 17 properties stands such a small chance to survive that we dont have a realistic expectation at a 3.5 yr old. I strongly feel a buck harvest reduction limit for the whole state or at least for the high hunter densitity areas there would be tremendous benefit in the age class.

Whats my answer other than to buy land elsewhere? We have plenty of deer its just every 200 yards of ridge has a hunter and they all fee if they don't shoot it the guy 200 yds down will so why not! I know a cooperative would greatly. I would just like to see the state lead the way!

 

[BSK]

plotman,

You'll get no argument from me that buck limits may have to be more restrictive in high hunter density areas to be effective. The question simply comes down to whether even more restrictive buck limits in Unit B would be measurably effective without puting undo limitations on hunters.

Honestly, if hunters in Unit B want more restrictive buck limits and the TWRA believes those more restrictive limits would be biologically effective, I have no problem with implementing them.

What I'm arguing against is more restrictive buck limits statewide. I don't think that is called for or would be that effective in some areas, especially Unit L.