ORIGINAL: tsoc
Like a lot of you I am searching for answers not assuming I already have them.I know how it seems to me with the experiences I have and what I see and all the literature I read about these topics.I do believe that from a management point of view,we should manage for the habitat first,the deer herd second and the hunter last.
I do not see why hunter satisfaction should not be part of the equation,you could reasonably argue that this has been done for many,many years with the key part of hunter satisfaction being giving hunters what they want in the way of seeing many deer.Either way we are manipulating harvest numbers to fullfil management objectives.Over the last several years the DEC has been much more in tune with at least attempting to arrive at a more appropriate balance.
There is a flip side to every thing and the satisfaction thing is no different.I have seen many instances in my home area where physically capable hunters have stopped hunting because of the low probability of them seeing a buck beyond a 1 1/2 year old.What is the average age of a deer hunter in NY? I am quite certain that it is over 45 years old.I seem to recall it was 48 years old.My wish is that we could pursue something that addresses every one's interest's in the order I previously stated.Habitat first,deer herd second,hunter last.
For those of you that are ready to jump at me and tell me that I just want to have it be made easier for me to kill bigger deer,I will tell you that I don't need anybody's help in that area,most every year I kill deer that are very good bucks for the area I hunt in.But I devote a tremendous amount of effort and time in to working toward having that happen.
I think we need to have a greater consideration for those outside of our home management units.Many of you may reside in area's where you don't see a problem,where you have a reasonable possibility of seeing older age bucks without losing your job or your marriage.
I want to throw out as questions a couple of things from a biological perspective,absolutely every thing I have ever read indicates that it is most beneficial to a deer herd to have a concise breeding period in which the very large majority of the doe's are bred in their first estrus cycle,the supposition here being that as a result of this fawns are dropped early enough to give them the greatest opportunity for nutritional benefits and size for survival going in to the winter.Is the stress on older age classes of bucks in a balanced herd because of the competition for breeding any more severe than the stress that a younger age class buckwould experience in an unbalanced herd where the young buck continued to breed doe's through their first,second and third estrus cycles? And in that scenario what are the implications as it relates to fawn drop,and the fawns ability to survive going forward?
Excellent questions. There have been countless articles and studies concerning the rut, whether it is timed to moon phases, or is it more a function of photo periods, etc. In fact, The Michigan Unified Conservation Clubs had an article about this subject this past fall in their monthly magazine.
Although I am a bit hazy on the specifics, I seem to recall something about what causes the "second rut", which in basic terms was explained that does who are not successfully bred during the first rut will go into a second estrus period. A third estrus cycle is rare.
Yes, the later a doe is bred during the rut, the later the fawn will be born in the Spring, and this does have an affect on a fawn's survival through their 1st winter.
And you have truly nailed the way to go in this post. In order to build a good house, one must first build the foundation. Habitat is the foundation. Great post...