bluebird2

Without a doubt , northern hardwoods should have an understory when there is enough sunlight to support that understory despite the effects of competing vegetation.

Cornelius08

Thanks for the info on the previous dd study guys....

Cornelius08

Do either/both of you believe you should be able to see no further than 50 yards across widespread areas of a MATURE northeastern hardwood forest due to understory?

bluebird2

Any one that believes that we should have an understory in mature hardwoods that limits visibility to 50 yds. is living in fantasy land. In a healthy stand of mature NE hardwoods it is not unreasonable to see a 100 yds. or more.

Windwalker7

I'm a little confused!

To hear you and RSB talk, you say that the land can't support high DD. Yet you worry about the deer herd growing on SFL.

You guys talk out both sides of your mouth. First you two say, the land can't support high DD then it won't have high DD.

How will a deer herd grow if habitat is so bad?

So why are you worried about DD getting out of control in bad habitat on SFL? According to you guys it can't happen.

If deer can't find enough to eat, they won't be there.

bluebird2

The point you are missing is that the current DMP has nothing to do with the number of deer the habitat can support. It is simply about the number of deer that the habitat can support so DCNR can get the desired regeneration of commercially valuable species of trees.

Tony_Loyd

Yes that sounds true.
Why worry about DD ,if the forest or land can't support them?
They will move on and not be there, if there is no food for them to be had.
If you quit thinning the heard,they will have to adapt and start eating the junk browse of maples now wouldn't they?
It seems like you are letting them eat all the oaks by thinning the heard out so the maples and junk trees as been said has a chance to overwelm the forest.
The deer are not touching the maples because they don't have to and are eating the hardwoods.
Sounds counter productive to me.
Pa will be all maples if you don't let the deer population grow to help thin the maples and junk trees.
You are actually doing more harm to hardwoods than you think by thinning the deer population.
They do not have to eat any other plants other than hardwoods because there is no competition for food with less deer and no reason for the deer to search out other foods as in maples.

DougE

You shouldn't be able to get a clear shot at a deer in a northern hardwoods stand beyond 100 yards.Northern harwoods(not oak/hickory)have a lot of shade tolerant species that will grow(be it slower)under a mature manopy.Oak is different,Oak does not grow well under a mature canopy so you shouldn't expect good oak regeneration under a mature canopy.You have to remember though,only about 40% of our forests are oak/hickory.

DougE

The answer is very simple.Once the habitat gets degraded to the point is in many places,it takes very few deer to keep it that way or make it even worse.Most of these areas will never have high deer densities again,even with no doe hunting unless we have several mild winters and good mast crops.Still,unless the heard is kept very low,the habitat will never start to recover.That sucks but that's what happens when you have too many deer for too long.

DougE

You don't get it.Deer are picky eaters.They eat the more prefered species first and then they start eating the less preferred.Deer are called a keystone species because they can single handedly alter the composition of the forest.This is bad for the deer,other wildlife and us.

You have no idea what you're talking about.LETTING THE DEER HERD GROW WILL NOT INCREASE OAK PRODUCTION.Thinning the herd,along with sound silvaculture technigues such as shelter wood cuts,burns and herbicides is what get's oak regeneration.If you want oak regeneration,the deer will eat the oaks before they touch the maples.If you spend any time up this way,I can prove it to you very easily.I can also show you areas with oak regeneration so thick,you'll have a hard time walking through it.Why?Less deer.This isn't all about oak regeneration,as only about 40% of our forests are oak/hickory.It's about the habitat.Thousands of acres have little to no browse because we decades of too mnay deer.Deer need browse in the winter.If there's no prefered browse,why would you want to add more deer to that landscape?It makes no sense.


You guys simply don't get it.It takes very few deer to impact regeneration in areas with poor habitat.