Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
12-20-2008, 04:00 AM
#21
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Plum Boro, PA
Posts: 1,423
RE: Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
I think each situation is different and there isn't a cut and dry right or wrong answer. I do not kill any does in the main area that I hunt. Why not?In my management unit there are very liberal bag limits and the season runs long, so thesmall woodlotI hunt gets hammered hard bygun hunters for an extended period of time. IMO, there are more than enough does taken out of there every year, so I'm not going to add to the body count. Sometimes I'm amazed that ANY does make it through the season in that patch of woods.
12-20-2008, 05:00 AM
#22
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 21,043
RE: Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
I've read both sides of this controversy. I don't think its irresponsible. Let the hunter make his own mind up. I know several people who, getting up there in age, are "getting soft" and don't have the heart to shoot a doe, especially if they have young ones. I don't see a problem with that. Myself on the other hand, I will shoot a doe and be happy with it. I like taking a doe early in archery season if I can.
On the other side, I would like to know what having a more even buck to doe ratio has to do with growing quality bucks. I just don't see the logic in this. Maybe our property has some magic clover or pixie dust that gives us the bucks we have. Our buck to doe ratio is definitely out of whack by apretty good margin. Yes, we're trying to take more does out of the herd, but its not our primary objective. Our goal is quality food and age. That IMO, has far more to do with the quality of the bucks than a more even buck to doe ratio.
I work for Penn State University and have spoken with a deer biologist there. One thing he explained to me is the dominant bucks and does are just that, dominant. They have first dibs on preferred food and breeding. They will dictate who gets to eat and breed at any given time. However, this is simply the opinion of one biologist.
We're working on culling more does out simply because....none of us wants to see 30 does for every buck. I'm guessing our property is somewhere in the neighborhood of 10:1 or so. Again, thats a guess and it could be significantly higher than I realize. But again, I don't honestly hold a lot of weight on this more even buck/doe ratio bit.
On the other side, I would like to know what having a more even buck to doe ratio has to do with growing quality bucks. I just don't see the logic in this. Maybe our property has some magic clover or pixie dust that gives us the bucks we have. Our buck to doe ratio is definitely out of whack by apretty good margin. Yes, we're trying to take more does out of the herd, but its not our primary objective. Our goal is quality food and age. That IMO, has far more to do with the quality of the bucks than a more even buck to doe ratio.
I work for Penn State University and have spoken with a deer biologist there. One thing he explained to me is the dominant bucks and does are just that, dominant. They have first dibs on preferred food and breeding. They will dictate who gets to eat and breed at any given time. However, this is simply the opinion of one biologist.
We're working on culling more does out simply because....none of us wants to see 30 does for every buck. I'm guessing our property is somewhere in the neighborhood of 10:1 or so. Again, thats a guess and it could be significantly higher than I realize. But again, I don't honestly hold a lot of weight on this more even buck/doe ratio bit.
(As it pertains to a small area)Also....It's nearly IMPOSSIBLE for a deer herd to have more than a 1:4 buck:doe ratio (and they won't be able to sustain THAT). I used to think the ratio here was worse than it is......but numbers don't lie. Tell me how many deer you think you have....and I'll run the numbers for you. Not MY numbers.....common sense numbers. Tell me how many people hunt your piece.....number of tags.....size of acreage.
12-20-2008, 06:28 AM
#25
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 307
RE: Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
GMMAT, not to question you but I have never heard 4:1 is about as high as it can go. Around about 15 or so years ago in S Alabama (A little over a 1000 acres owned by my best friends family) we could sit on any number of green fields and count 50, 60, 70 does. Now this is the report from each person on each field.Browse line was 6' off the ground and visable from any point in the fields. I remember going weeks without seeing a buck down there, even when I would back off to the hardwoods or a few hundred yards off the fields. In that situation would you not think the numbers were far greater than 4 to 1. An average doe weighed 60 or so lbs.
12-20-2008, 08:08 AM
#27
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: IOWA/25' UP
Posts: 7,145
RE: Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
I like a HUGE deer population. I don't care if crops are ate, homeowners bushes are eaten, cars are wrecked from deer collisions...I want tons of deer; I am a Bowhunter...so it only reasons I want the pop high. I rarely shoot does anymore. Farm Bureau has conspired with the DNR to shoot tons of does and my friends and I used to go crazy and shoot 6 or more does a year cause it was fun and cheap whacking them with the bow. We quit it and we now just shoot one or two a year just for the meat.
12-20-2008, 08:08 AM
#28
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 307
RE: Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
I have no idea, I am actually trying to learn from your statement. It makes some sense to me and may change the way I have always thought about it. I am 29 and have been at this a long time, but I would never rule out new thoughts. I use you as an example, last year you thought you had 3000 does a sq mile, this year new grounds seams to have changed you mind a bit. Our 1000 acres down there is the only place for along way that has no deer dogs running on it and I am sure this could skew the numbers as well.
Tell me how you would guestimate some numbers and I will then do this for our area. I would like to see what number we actually get.
Tell me how you would guestimate some numbers and I will then do this for our area. I would like to see what number we actually get.
12-20-2008, 08:26 AM
#29
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 21,043
RE: Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
Let's use this for an example.....
HUnter says he has 50 deer/sq. mi.. He thinks his buck:doe ratio is 1:9 (This number is not unusual to see thrown out....as I've found here.....but irrational, as you'll see).
OK....so I say 1:9 to make the numbers even. We'll start with 5 bucks and 45 does. Let's say that each buck breeds 7 does, as I don't think it's possible for 5 bucks to breed 45 does. And if we're going to assume that....let's assume that all does drop one fawn (which is likely "light"). So our herd of 50 is now a herd of 85. We have to assume that the newborns are spilt 50/50 buck:doe.....so while we started with 45 does and 5 bucks......we now have 63 does and 22 bucks. You can now do your fawn mortality rate......mortality rates for the herd....etc....
But when it's all said and done.....when you extrapolate.......you're going to come up with a 1:3 at worst, probably. You'd have to do some EXTREMELY funky math to get different numbers.
HUnter says he has 50 deer/sq. mi.. He thinks his buck:doe ratio is 1:9 (This number is not unusual to see thrown out....as I've found here.....but irrational, as you'll see).
OK....so I say 1:9 to make the numbers even. We'll start with 5 bucks and 45 does. Let's say that each buck breeds 7 does, as I don't think it's possible for 5 bucks to breed 45 does. And if we're going to assume that....let's assume that all does drop one fawn (which is likely "light"). So our herd of 50 is now a herd of 85. We have to assume that the newborns are spilt 50/50 buck:doe.....so while we started with 45 does and 5 bucks......we now have 63 does and 22 bucks. You can now do your fawn mortality rate......mortality rates for the herd....etc....
But when it's all said and done.....when you extrapolate.......you're going to come up with a 1:3 at worst, probably. You'd have to do some EXTREMELY funky math to get different numbers.
12-20-2008, 10:18 AM
#30
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 307
RE: Shooting only bucks irresponsible?
Instead of trying to figure out our numbers I will tell you that I agree with that math and the basis behind it. Would you be in agreement then that based on which fawns (male/female) we in the higher mortalitly rate could skew your numbers from year to year...or say just by chance 95% of buck fawns died but all the doe fawns lived. This could throw your numbers for a few years or even make them jump from say 3 to 1 to 5 to 1 for awhile. I am basing nothing on fact and just looking for your thoughts.