ORIGINAL: GMMAT
If you do the math......how bad can it really be?
If we have to assume that the newborn ratio is 1:1......let's assume you hunt a square mile. 640 acres and your herd count is 20/sq. mi. .
Let's say you start with a 9:1 (highly unlikely....but for the sake of the argument.....we'll use it). 20 deer, total. Let's even go a step further and say you kill 2 racked bucks off your property. Now.....you are at 0:18.
Now....if you have a 75% fawn survival rate.....and assume100% are bred (1 fawn:1 Doe).....you have 18 does giving birth to 9 buck fawns and 9 doe fawns. Take out your 25% that don't survive.....and you now have13 fawns surviving......half of which are bucks.If you have an equal %-age of doe mortality....you now have a herd that entails 31 deer for the upcoming season......and closer to a5:1 Buck
oe ratio.
I'm one to see a lot of deer throughout a season....and I admit to seeing very few bucks. But.....that don't mean they aren't there.
Throw in displacement/Dispersal.....and I think it pretty much evens out (some leave.....some move in).
Is there anything wrong with this way of looking at this? I just think the ratios we see posted are sometimes NOT the way things really are in the wild.
Howcan you beaccurate on the buck to doe ratiowhen the deer move around so much. They move according to food sources an cover, logging, weather events an etc. some bucks travel several miles during the rut.I have had pics of bucks during the summer time that were 1/2 mile away. Just seems like there are to many variables.