Deer management does vs bucks

[pete dobinson]

Southern BC still holds a huge population of whitetail does. What I have noticed is their behavior has changed with the continued open season each year. Hunters who have failed to change along with them are usually the ones who claim there are none left.

No longer can you simply drive around for 15 min and tag out, you actually have to work for it.

I don't buy that, I've put too much time in that area. The whitetail deer population is way down compared to what it was.

 

[Brian46]

I don't buy that, I've put too much time in that area. The whitetail deer population is way down compared to what it was.

that is my experience in areas between osoyoos and grand forks down by the border.

 

[trevj]

I seen plenty of does with twins!

Seen a couple around here dragging triplets, this last spring.

They will have as many as the winter feed can support. Hard winter, generally equals fewer fawns.

Each area has it's own set of other circumstances that will have at least as much to do with population levels as whether bucks or does are targeted.

For example, how does the math work out when the breeding bucks are all heavily pressured in an area? You get a bunch of dry does, that didn't get bred, no matter the number around, or the food available.

Lots of big bucks (the dominant, therefore Primary breeding ones) run themselves ragged, shagging anything that they can beat into submission. Many of those do not recover enough resources to live through the following winters, esp. when those winter have a hard onset or heavy snows.

Anyone that says there is only one variable is full of poo.

 

[woodchopper]

if the goal is to reduce the total population then shooting the does is the answer.

a buck can 'service' around 30 does, if they are available and no other buck is around to distract him. So shooting one buck is not going to put a dent in the population as there will be another younger buck or several that will pick up the slack.

In one zone I hunt they used to have a antlered and antlerless moose draw. That changed about 20 years ago to help increase the herd size they got rid of the antlerless tag draw and substituted a Calf only tag. they did this in several zones. Now 20 years later there are tons of cows and calves. I don't know where all the bulls are hanging out. but hunting there you see 30 or so cows and calves in a season and might see 1 or 2 bulls.

so it works in that zone.

 

[pete dobinson]

that is my experience in areas between osoyoos and grand forks down by the border.

I've hunted near Barrier, north of Kamloops, I have seen more up that way. I haven't hunted it in a few years though, but down near the US border not as many as we used to see. I target Mule deer but always have a whitetail tag just in case. I do my share of hiking.

 

[cdn1canhunt]

To the op, antlered and antlerless harvests are dependent on so many variables... things like carrying capacity, habitat mgt, buck to doe ratios, fawn recruitment , human deer conflicts like collisions, crop damage etc. These all part of setting harvest goals

My suggestion is speak with your local MNR biologist about herd data, if you want a a better understanding how and why they set their harvest quotas. QDMA is good resource also and is at the front line when it comes to deer management.

 

[Brian46]

I've hunted near Barrier, north of Kamloops, I have seen more up that way. I haven't hunted it in a few years though, but down near the US border not as many as we used to see. I target Mule deer but always have a whitetail tag just in case. I do my share of hiking.

Hiking doesn't really work either anymore. They are gone long before you ever have a chance to see them in the thick bush they are in. Pattern them then wait somewhere on that route quietly.

When the doe seasons first started they just stood around, now they have become as elusive as the big bucks other than the odd stupid one a road hunter gets lucky on.

 

[cdn1canhunt]

Trail camera surveys would the best way to try to determine Herd dynamics. one camera /100acres left out for minimum of 2 weeks

 

[WhelanLad]

Following this Greatly as Australia has a DEER problem......................
everyone killen Stags an walkin past Hinds..... this needs to change and the more info I can gain, or discussions I can read, the better I can push this fact. - kill more hinds to lower deer numbers!!!!!!!!!!

 

[cdn1canhunt]

Following this Greatly as Australia has a DEER problem......................
everyone killen Stags an walkin past Hinds..... this needs to change and the more info I can gain, or discussions I can read, the better I can push this fact. - kill more hinds to lower deer numbers!!!!!!!!!!

Increasing the antlerless harvest is has been the North American management model for controlling herd density and composition for whitetails for decades. It should translate to other ungulates as well. But good herd data as well as hunting seasons and traditions have to be factor into the management equations.

 

[RidgeHunter]

I realise there is much more to herd mangment then just killing bucks vs does. And factors like environment, ### ratio, carying capacity etc will have a lot bigger impact then just killing more bucks vs does.

My question though, in it's simpelest form was: If all things are equal, what will have the bigger impact on the population, killing bucks or does?

I think i figured out the answer on my own from this article and some addttional math.
https://www.qdma.com/reality-doebuck-ratios/

In the article (which is looking more at ### ratio then actual population) they use the following numbers:
Does Bucks
1) Pre hunt population 100 20
2) Hunting Mortality -0 -18
3) Post hunt population 100 2
4) Natural mortality -10 -1
5) Remaining population 90 1
6) Fawn recruitment +37 +38
7) Pre-hunt population 127 39

Which equates to a total population of 166

Using the same math and variables they did, I reversed the scenario and looked what would happen if 18 does were killed instead of 18 bucks.
Here are the numbers:
Does Bucks
1) Pre hunt population 100 20
2) Hunting Mortality -18 -0
3) Post hunt population 82 20
4) Natural mortality -8 -2
5) Remaining population 74 18
6) Fawn recruitment +30 +31
7) Pre-hunt population 104 49

Total population is 153

So I realise there is WAY more to managing deer but in it's simplest form it does look like killing bucks has less of an impact on population numbers.

Edit to add - sorry formating on the numbers didn't work quiet how I'd hoped, but if it doesn't make sense the first number is does and the second is bucks. Likley makes sense if you look at the article.

 

[kc34]

I realise there is much more to herd mangment then just killing bucks vs does. And factors like environment, ### ratio, carying capacity etc will have a lot bigger impact then just killing more bucks vs does.

My question though, in it's simpelest form was: If all things are equal, what will have the bigger impact on the population, killing bucks or does?

I think i figured out the answer on my own from this article and some addttional math.
https://www.qdma.com/reality-doebuck-ratios/

In the article (which is looking more at ### ratio then actual population) they use the following numbers:
Does Bucks
1) Pre hunt population 100 20
2) Hunting Mortality -0 -18
3) Post hunt population 100 2
4) Natural mortality -10 -1
5) Remaining population 90 1
6) Fawn recruitment +37 +38
7) Pre-hunt population 127 39

Which equates to a total population of 166

Using the same math and variables they did, I reversed the scenario and looked what would happen if 18 does were killed instead of 18 bucks.
Here are the numbers:
Does Bucks
1) Pre hunt population 100 20
2) Hunting Mortality -18 -0
3) Post hunt population 82 20
4) Natural mortality -8 -2
5) Remaining population 74 18
6) Fawn recruitment +30 +31
7) Pre-hunt population 104 49

Total population is 153

So I realise there is WAY more to managing deer but in it's simplest form it does look like killing bucks has less of an impact on population numbers.

Edit to add - sorry formating on the numbers didn't work quiet how I'd hoped, but if it doesn't make sense the first number is does and the second is bucks. Likley makes sense if you look at the article.

Thanks for the link to the article I will give it a read today.
I am curious why they chose 10% as the natural mortality rate?
I would assume that % would vary widely based on winter severity, carrying capacity, etc, etc.
I think when there are hard winters and cold springs the mortality rate can be much higher like 20-30% or more?

 

[amber2010]

There is a study out of USA sorry can not remember name but it stated to have a healthy herd and more bucks was to take 3 does per 100 acres.

You have to put that into context. Some US states have a lot more deer per 100 acres than in Canada. Guaranteed where I hunt in Ontario WMU 62 there is NO WHERE near that concentration of deer.

 

[cdn1canhunt]

Harvest goals have to be regionally specific....40 deer/sq mile might be correct in the farm belt of the midwestern USA but it may be closer to 15 deer/sq mile or less in the woods of northern Ontario. Environmental impacts will be much different as well
Management goals will have to take all of these factors into account to be effective.

 

[M12shooter]

One can save all the does you want but habitat conditions and winters are the determining factors. Here in Western Manitoba much habitat has been lost in the past few decades coupled with several severe winters. Whitetail populations will likely never recover to former levels. Ethanol subsidies will spell the end as the last of the wild spaces are turned to annual cropping to grow grain for eco friendly fuel. Strong holds do still exist, often around towns and small cities where parks, river bottoms and shelter belts still provide suitable over winter habitat.

Eastern manitoba, Interlake and parklands deer numbers seem to be on a strong rebound. Regional restrictions should be imposed as continued bucks only is pointless here. So many hunters have only weekends and small blocks of time to hunt as with youth hunters...the future of the deer hunting pursuit. Lots just want to ding a doe and be done with it. My kid was 12 and we watched dozens of does walk by each day and he couldn't take one. Kids loose interest fast and Manitoba Conservation should be smart enough to allow a kid with a youth licence (12-16 years old) to shoot any deer...especially when all the new found rights based folks run around out there with basically no rules...even shooting at night if they want.. What a stooooped province I live in...

 

[pete dobinson]

You have to put that into context. Some US states have a lot more deer per 100 acres than in Canada. Guaranteed where I hunt in Ontario WMU 62 there is NO WHERE near that concentration of deer.

You're not kidding, the state of Texas alone has an estimated count of 3.5 Million whitetail.

 

[cdn1canhunt]

You're not kidding, the state of Texas alone has an estimated count of 3.5 Million whitetail.

Texas doesn't count the majority of its deer population is not free range. Most are high fence and survive by suplimental feed and minerals and water. Ranches are Huge acreages and managed, specific numbers of bucks and does are taken. They mostly farm deer in Texas.

 

[pete dobinson]

Texas doesn't count the majority of its deer population is not free range. Most are high fence and survive by suplimental feed and minerals and water. Ranches are Huge acreages and managed, specific numbers of bucks and does are taken. They mostly farm deer in Texas.

Maybe, but if you check the deer population in any of those southern states you will find that they have huge numbers of whitetails. With all the agricultural land down there and no predators the population exploded.

 

[TheTooner]

It's very simple. Any buck can mate with many does and it doesn't take him long. A doe can only have one pregnancy at a time, and they take longer.

E.g. a population of 11 does, 11 bucks. Assume the does will each produce twins and all fawns will survive:

Case 1: Shoot 10 does. The surviving doe (no matter how many surplus bucks there are to mate with her) will take five years to produce ten replacement deer. Not all of the replacements will be female, so even after five years there will be fewer does than the 11 we started with.

Case 2. Shoot 10 bucks. The surviving buck can impregnate all 11 does, so in one season there will be 22 additional deer, including some new does to add to the original 11 to produce offspring in the following season.


For any given conditions of habitat, to grow the herd you eat bucks and let does live, to reduce or maintain the population you kill some does, too.

 

[Dogleg]

If you shoot a doe you are killing it, every fawn it would have ever had and every fawn those offspring would have had. Five springs after you let that doe go she could have had 5 sets of twins but that's just the beginning. A doe fawn she drops this spring will have her own fawns in two more, and in some cases just one. In 5 her grand-daughters will be nursing their own, and if her daughters are anything like mom the tops ready to blow off.

If you want to grow numbers you save the does. If you need to control the population you better shoot does.