Predation on Deer

[Lundy]

. The only thing those numbers prove is that we hunters are creatures of habit. It doesn't prove at all that the ratio hasn't changed.

I agree with much of what you are saying but not all. One reason being that the largest majority of hunters, by a large margin, shoot only one deer per year not two.

The other is there is just no other data available to imply that the ratio has changed, there is however data to say that it hasn't significantly changed, if at all.

Again, statewide harvest ratio's, individual areas could be different. Maybe an analysis of county by county harvest records the last 10 years may show a shift in some county's, maybe many county's. I don't know

Each hunter knows more about the population, ratio, fawn survival rate in his own little piece of heaven than the ODNR could ever hope to know What relates to one guys hunting area may be very different than the guy a couple of miles down the road, as you already know.

 

[Milo]

I remember when the coyotes first got here in force enough to impact wildlife. My family used to be huge rabbit hunters and we never deer hunted much at all. For weekends on end we would pillage to wood lots for bushy tails. We did this for years on end and then it was almost like a switch flipped and the rabbit population declined greatly. One year it was really telling that none of the rabbits we were hunting ever circled. We had 8 jumps and 8 straight to holes that day. That was the decline that we have ever yet to see the numbers recover or be at the level again. It seems to me that the population of small game susceptible to coyotes are more than likely down also. They have moved on to other game and the logical next step is deer du to their abundance.

 

[GoetsTalon]

Owls and redtails plus the yotes have wiped out rabbits!!! I have never shot a hawk but you know what they say. Never say never!!!!

 

[epe]

Once again short on time to debate. Lol.. Two things in the last couple of years. I know of several hunters who called in bucks as does with the new telecheck system. If I know of several, how many "does" checked in are bucks? Much easier to do. Also, what would the % be this year without the early doe on muzzy season?

 

[Lundy]

Once again short on time to debate. Lol.. Two things in the last couple of years. I know of several hunters who called in bucks as does with the new telecheck system. If I know of several, how many "does" checked in are bucks? Much easier to do. Also, what would the % be this year without the early doe on muzzy season?

I'm guessing that with your first hand knowledge that you have called your GW to report these known violations?

I'm sure your GW will call you when he gets done hunting

 

[beaston]

Once again short on time to debate. Lol.. Two things in the last couple of years. I know of several hunters who called in bucks as does with the new telecheck system. If I know of several, how many "does" checked in are bucks? Much easier to do. Also, what would the % be this year without the early doe on muzzy season?

So these guys never did anything illegal with the old system? If our morals are questionable to start with than yeah I can see the new system being easier to skew. I believe the example Milo gave with the rabbit population decline is also due to avian population trends. Fox use to be there main predator only difference is we added coyotes and birds of prey. Not a good mix at all.

I was just reading an article about the amount of yearling bucks that are breeding the does. Typically one third of the does are bred by this age class, but if the amount of mature bucks(3.5+) are way down in an area than that would require more breeding by the yearlings. yearlings lack technique, stamina and physical size to breed all the does within a certain window. This produces an extended rut and in return and extended fawn drop,and that means more predation occurs in the spring. The basis of this article was how effective APRS can be to herd health and growth.

 

[Jamie]

. This is why managing a deer population by counting dead deer is a horrible method.

what is the best way, then? or one that is, at very least, acceptable? does anyone on this forum have any formal training in wildlife management? I think there is more to it than observing deer while hunting, counting dead ones, and taking bribes from special interest, although I could be wrong.

 

[GoetsTalon]

Learned something pretty cool that i did not know. The genetics for big bucks come from the doe. A big buck that breeds a doe dosen't mean if she has a buck that it will grow up like dad. The does carry the genetics that produce the monster bucks!!!

 

[Milo]

what is the best way, then? or one that is, at very least, acceptable? does anyone on this forum have any formal training in wildlife management? I think there is more to it than observing deer while hunting, counting dead ones, and taking bribes from special interest, although I could be wrong.

counting live deer? there are states that do that...

 

[Milo]

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/young_naturalists/counting_critters/index.html


here is an example...Live animals determine the population not dead ones.

 

[Milo]

http://tn.gov/twra/deerdensities.html


check it

 

[Jackalope]

what is the best way, then? or one that is, at very least, acceptable? does anyone on this forum have any formal training in wildlife management? I think there is more to it than observing deer while hunting, counting dead ones, and taking bribes from special interest, although I could be wrong.

There are tons of methods other states use. One is the use of forward looking infra red. FLIR. Each year in the spring the fly a certain route right after dark, the same route every year. And they count the number of deer out in the fields. The object is to get a baseline for the local population. If they count about 200 deer every year and the next year they only count 125 they know something's up. This gives them a trend line for the population.

The DNR drives around in the spring stopping at certain spots and counting turkey gobbles. They have a set route and set spots. The same can be done with deer. We have a warden in every county. One week out of the year in the spring the wardens can drive a set route and count deer in their county. Every year the same route. 5 evenings in a row. It doesn't give them a population rather a trend line for the population.

When I brought this up to Tonk he said that costs money. It does. We have DNR employees walking around poking sticks in the mud counting bog turtles but you can't count a species that accounts for almost half of your revenue? They count turkey gobbles but not deer? Hell. We have biologist that drive around in the spring counting the sound of peeper frogs.

There are many ways a state can keep an eye on the deer population. They're about to start a camera study on public land to check hunter impact. If they can do that they can have their warden drive around and count deer. That is if it doesn't take away from their hunting on the clock time.

But here's the deal. Whatever the method, they know how to get a count and keep an eye on the population. They simply refuse to do it.

 

[Milo]

http://dnr.wi.gov/wnrmag/2009/10/deer.htm

 

[MK111]

There are tons of methods other states use. One is the use of forward looking infra red. FLIR. Each year in the spring the fly a certain route right after dark, the same route every year. And they count the number of deer out in the fields. The object is to get a baseline for the local population. If they count about 200 deer every year and the next year they only count 125 they know something's up. This gives them a trend line for the population.

The DNR drives around in the spring stopping at certain spots and counting turkey gobbles. They have a set route and set spots. The same can be done with deer. We have a warden in every county. One week out of the year in the spring the wardens can drive a set route and count deer in their county. Every year the same route. 5 evenings in a row. this will also give them a trend line for the population.

When I brought this up to Tonk he said that costs money. It does. We have DNR employees walking around poking sticks in the mud counting bog turtles but you can't count a species that accounts for almost half of your revenue? They count turkey gobbles but not deer? Hell. We have biologist that drive around in the spring counting the sound of peeper frogs.

There are many ways a state can keep an eye on the deer population. They're about to start a camera study on public land to check hunter impact. If they can do that they can have their warden drive around and count deer. That is if it doesn't take away from their hunting on the clock time.

But here's the deal. Whatever the method, they know how to get a count and keep an eye on the population. They simply refuse to do it.

Exactly. And if the GW don't want to be bothered with the counting just replace them.

I even started my own counting survey. Monday night I sat on my overlook watching my food plot from 4:30-5:50PM. Seen 2 flocks of turkeys 11 & 31 for a total of 42.
Seen 2 nice bucks at 5:20. Plus at 5:50 there was 5-7 deer walking around in the plot but too dark to see sex.
The new food plot is drawing them in. I keep records.

 

[Jackalope]

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/young_naturalists/counting_critters/index.html


here is an example...Live animals determine the population not dead ones.

Mould you look at that. I mean look at it. Just look at it.

 

[Jamie]

wow, who knew?:smiley_clap: good stuff.

alternatives galore. how many of these states actually have a deer herd as prosperous as ours has been for the last 20 years?

 

[epe]

I'm guessing that with your first hand knowledge that you have called your GW to report these known violations?

I'm sure your GW will call you when he gets done hunting

Just like the game warden got back to my buddy who got shot at by a guy this weekend because they were hunting waterfowl in a field and the shots were making his dog bark...
No comment on the early doe muzzy? Lol

 

[Jackalope]

wow, who knew?:smiley_clap: good stuff.

alternatives galore. how many of these states actually have a deer herd as prosperous as ours has been for the last 20 years?

There are tons of variables that go into why a deer population is great. Most are natural, crops, cover, soil nutrition, genetics, predation etc. The state of Mississippi could have the best deer management program in the US and they'll never have great deer hunting. The state of Ohio could have great deer hunting and shitty management and ruin it. Maybe the fact that we've been blessed with so many great natural factors that built our deer population it's led to lackey management practices. In reality it wasn't until the DNR actually tried managing the population that they screwed it up. For the most part our state naturally has everything it needs to be a great deer state.

 

[CritterGitterToo]

Much of Ohio has really good soil due to the glacier recession hundreds of years ago that deposited tons of minerals in it. Add in lots of good cover and you have a solid base for growing big bucks. For years opportunity to kill them with a gun was limited to shotguns for one week. Then, opportunity was increased year after year to "cull" the herd.

Only hunters can change the landscape of the deer herd in Ohio. The Ohio DNR has no interest in conservation of the resource. There is a lot they "can" do but not much they "will" do.

 

[yotehunter]

Much of Ohio has really good soil due to the glacier recession hundreds of years ago that deposited tons of minerals in it. Add in lots of good cover and you have a solid base for growing big bucks. For years opportunity to kill them with a gun was limited to shotguns for one week. Then, opportunity was increased year after year to "cull" the herd.

Only hunters can change the landscape of the deer herd in Ohio. The Ohio DNR has no interest in conservation of the resource. There is a lot they "can" do but not much they "will" do.

When the tag sales go to the dumps they may figure it out, or just charge more for the ones they do sell, and in return odnr will see a loss in revenue to feed us all this bs, they can do a lot. But won't if the revenue is still supporting their salaries. I guess what I'm saying is if they are still selling record tag numbers they don't think there is a problem let's be honest its all about the dollar .