Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New Trophy's
New trophy room comments
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Classifieds
Trophy Room
New items
New comments
Latest content
Latest updates
Latest reviews
Author list
Series list
Search showcase
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Food Plots
Mulch, and appropriate lime and fertilizer
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BSK" data-source="post: 5869160" data-attributes="member: 17"><p>This is going to sound crazy coming from someone who is all about measurement and data, but my biggest problem with doe numbers is figuring them out! Although I've been running season-long camera censuses for many years, the data collected is confoundingly contradictory, depending on "what the camera is pointed at." In essence, I get vastly different numbers from cameras over food sources versus any other camera location. And from what I can tell, it's all about how long deer of different sexes feed in one location. A doe group will feed in a plot for an hour or more, producing many pictures. yet quite often bucks just feed across the area one time, only producing a few pictures. This produces highly skewed sex ratio numbers because the does linger so long, producing a far higher number of repeat photographs per deer of the does compared to bucks. Yet when I look at cameras NOT pointed at food sources - any type of non-food source - I get numbers closer to what I believe are real and what we observe while hunting. So which numbers to use? I compare them both. But I take the food plot data with a huge grain of salt.</p><p></p><p>Below is a graph of my camera census adult sex ratio (does/buck) for cameras pointed into food plots versus all camera locations not pointed into food plots. Notice the massive rise in calculated does per buck for food plots but NOT for other locations. Also of interest, why did the doe numbers peak around 2020 in food plots and then begin to fall? My suspicion is because that is when we cut a lot of timber and produced a lot of natural forage, hence does no longer needed to relly on the food plots as a food source.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BSK, post: 5869160, member: 17"] This is going to sound crazy coming from someone who is all about measurement and data, but my biggest problem with doe numbers is figuring them out! Although I've been running season-long camera censuses for many years, the data collected is confoundingly contradictory, depending on "what the camera is pointed at." In essence, I get vastly different numbers from cameras over food sources versus any other camera location. And from what I can tell, it's all about how long deer of different sexes feed in one location. A doe group will feed in a plot for an hour or more, producing many pictures. yet quite often bucks just feed across the area one time, only producing a few pictures. This produces highly skewed sex ratio numbers because the does linger so long, producing a far higher number of repeat photographs per deer of the does compared to bucks. Yet when I look at cameras NOT pointed at food sources - any type of non-food source - I get numbers closer to what I believe are real and what we observe while hunting. So which numbers to use? I compare them both. But I take the food plot data with a huge grain of salt. Below is a graph of my camera census adult sex ratio (does/buck) for cameras pointed into food plots versus all camera locations not pointed into food plots. Notice the massive rise in calculated does per buck for food plots but NOT for other locations. Also of interest, why did the doe numbers peak around 2020 in food plots and then begin to fall? My suspicion is because that is when we cut a lot of timber and produced a lot of natural forage, hence does no longer needed to relly on the food plots as a food source. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Food Plots
Mulch, and appropriate lime and fertilizer
Top