Population dynamics

[Jethro]

Here in Collingsworth County we are just getting started in the MLDP program. We got a lttle of a late start on it being the first year, and are just now getting our surveys done. We still have one last round to do, but then all the data will be in to TPW to issue permits.

As we have gotten into this and really started looking at numbers, it has made me rethink some things I thought I knew. Our biologist has sent me the program he uses to analyze survey data, and playing with that has really opened my eyes.

One thing is that what is happening on my comparatively small property is certainly not the "Big Picture." I thought our buck/doe ratio (county) was pretty good just going by my trailcams, untill I started looking at the survey numbers coming off the 14 mile transect. I was really suprised at how low it was. I really think I have been stuck in the "five years ago" view of things and have had my head in the sand. Lease hunting has absolutely boomed here the last decade, and not alot of management has been done. Most of what has been done has been by the hunters themselves, and small minority of landowners. Bucks have been harvested in large numbers, and not so much work done with controlling does.

Second thing I noticed is how low our fawn recruitment is this year. Around 12%, when in this area average is usually around 43%. Once again, I have fair fawn numbers on my place (not normal, but fair), but it really amazed me how few I saw out doing the survey. The drought and record heat appear to have really taken their toll.

Trying to get doe numbers down, while getting buck numbers up, appears to be especially problematic in a year with low recruitment. How do you experienced managers handle that? Remember, this is not a mature program here, it is our first year, and things are out of whack. In a year with normal recruitment I think I know the answers. Just wondering if that answer is the same for this year, with the abnormal circumstances.

Recruitment is a must to grow more bucks. Reducing population is a must. How do you balance the two? Focus on does with no fawns?

I don't have much property, but my family has a fair amount (around 5k acres) and we are trying to come up with a suitable plan. I would love to hear ideas, I know there are some very knowledgeable folks on here when it comes to this kind of thing.

[Red_RaiderHTC]

First of all remember this. Take each years data with a grain of salt. Until you have several years of data that will show trends you still dont 100% know what you have. On my spolight routes we will get completely different numbers on a route that was done twice in the same week. Look long term to get an idea of where your at..
Second it is also possible due to conditions on your ranch that you are just not seeing all of the fawns. Most of the time if in tall grass you can not see them and ususally they wont move.
Third start talking with some of your neighbors and see if they would be interested in working with you and setting up a cooperative so that you can better the BIG PICTURE...

[Jethro]

We are forming a county wide cooperative (optional, for whatever landowners want to be in it), we probably have around 50,000 acres in it. There are four survey routes that run through the county, anywhere from 12.5 to 14.1 miles long. I am running the route out at Quail, where our property is. That route goes by multiple property owners, a variety of conditions and land use. I have not heard from the guys running the other routes yet to see if their observations are tracking with mine or not. I am really anxious to see their data as well, I should hear from some of them later this week.

Lots of in the field observations from different folks are confirming what the data is showing though.

I know what you are saying about different nights, from our first night to the second, numbers doubled. We ran them about a week apart, and the moon/weather conditons were completely different, and so were the results.

[comet]

Jeff please let us know what the west side of Samnorwood shows.

[Jethro]

Comet, we don't have a route for west 'Norwood per se, but the Quail route starts just across the river to the south of there a couple miles. Data would "probably" be very similiar, both part of the same river drainage. For that part of the route we were seeing one deer per 12 acres, which is way to high. Fawn crop (recruitment) is running about 12%, normal average for this area would be more like 40-45%, it is really down because of the drought. Buck/doe ratio is out of whack as well. That is average for two runs, we still have to do the third run this weekend.

IMO, don't shoot a buck unless he is really one you want, and try to lay down as many does as you can. resources will be very limited for the deer this winter, and we would even be well above capacity on a good year. It's going to take alot of shooting the next few years to try and get things back in order, but I think we have a real opportunity this year to do some good. Gonna take alot of effort across the board, not just spots here and there though.

I have several TBHers that hunt that area I talk to, if you want to be on my e-mail list just send me a pm and tell me about where you hunt.

[Redraider]

I feel you. We hunt in Cottle cnty and the doe population has gone thru the roof. The buck/doe ratio is way out of whack and it makes it hard to find a mature buck when they don't have to do anything to get a doe. There are times we will have 30 doe in a feed and not one set of horns. The state has increased doe tags for that cnty to 4 and I believe each person should shoot their 4. People have been mainly buck hunting that country for yrs and not managing the doe. We were part of a 38000 ranch 5yrs ago with 50 paid hunters. In 2 yrs there was never more than 10 doe killed a year on the entire place. Our landowner said he would do anything he could to help us kill more doe.

[Jethro]

The main thing I REALLY like about the new association we are forming, is that we have made a deal with the prison at Childress for use of the does. The main problem that most people have with shooting does is having a place to go with them. We are putting in a cold storage facility in Wellington (there is already one in Shamrock) to put the does in. Pretty simple system, you tag it with the MLDP tag, field dress it properly, take your weights and age, and put it in the storage unit. All the landowners wil have a code for the walk in. Only extra requirement for the prison is that the does cannot be gut shot or have the bowels preforated during cleaning. If that happens then you have to use the doe yourself. The prison will come pick them up like once a week, and the prisoners will process the deer for use at the prison. The hides are donated to make gloves for disabled veterans. I think it is a win situation for all involved.

[wellingtontx]

Jeff

The one thing I will add is that I do think the population dynamics are significantly different in the County the further away from the river you get. Also from our cameras we are seeing very few, if any, fawns this year.

[Encinal]

Most people will say that there is an overpopulation problem along with your out of whack ratios... so they are going to try to get you to hammer a bunch of does...

Another school of thought is that it's easier to get your buck numbers up the more does you have... let a couple of good fawn crops go through while you protect your bucks... then take off the doe side until you get to something closer to even.

It takes years to build a herd up... it takes weeks to cut a herd down.

All of these things are subjective depending on how large the property is, and how much control you have over it...

A lot of the time, smaller low fence places create a deer vacuum when they try to do the "right" thing and take out more deer... and this makes deer from miles around come in and fill the density hole that is made by the against the grain harvest strategy for the area.... and as a result it seems like you make very little progress.

[Jethro]

Robert, I agree, on both counts. Along the river is where it all started, back 20 years ago. Look at that area now, and that is what it will be like later in other areas of the county, unless something is done. If you get 10-12 miles from the river, the outlook is much better. Population not so big, ratios much better, much more balanced populations. The riverbottom is the root of the problem, especially in the center of the county. That area was the first to get high populations, and it has spread from there. Good cover and water, and alot of good cropland mixed in as food sources as well. That area is also where the high intensity buck hunting developed, and has been going on the longest. Not going to name names, but several large landowners down there have been the "take the money and run," type. Bring in lots of hunters, shoot lots of bucks, don't worry about the does. They are now reaping what they sowed, problem is, alot of other folks are reaping it too. Population exploded and expanded out from that epicenter. That area has to be gotten under control. Excess is spilling over into toher parts of the county that are still okay right now.

Encinal, I was hoping you would chime in. What you said, is exactly what I am talking about (or wondering about), I probably just didn't state it right. To grow bucks, you have to have bucks, and does are the engine that produces them. A year like this with low recruitment, means not many young bucks next year to be coming up the pipeline. This is my concern. With good recruitment I would say start laying some does down. Not all at once, I agree the process will take some time, even done right. I believe one of the big factors is to not shoot a buck unless he is really the one you want. Shooting a buck just to kill one is making the problem worse.

But now, the factor that is confusing me. As bad as range conditions are this year, probably if we don't kill deer something else will, like weakness/disease/starvation. So you can also argue the theory, that instead of random death that will take out bucks an does equally, you should reduce the does as much as possible to take stress off the buck herd. This winter is going to be bad. Really. Alot of the pastures already have practically nothing left, and we haven't had enough rain to get wheat up. Not much high fence around here, and not many folks feed protien, or at least not enough to really matter. Once the peanuts and rest of the crops get harvested, there is going to be very little left to eat.

Summer stress period this year hit the fawn crop hard, I wonder if the winter stress in Jan/Feb is going to finish it off, and a decent chunk of the adults as well. I know shooting does is killing the engine that drives production, but with this years situation, I can't figure out anything better to do.

I hear what you are saying on smaller low fence areas too, that is why we are trying to approach it from a county wide aspect, and get as many landowners and their respective hunters involved as possible. I think that is the only way to make it work.

My BIL's place on the river is 2880 acres, with about 8 very mangement minded hunters on it. Most of them take a buck every couple years. They have been trying to fix the doe problem down there but have been limited by the number of deer they could put in their freezer. They are really on board with this program, and I think we can do some good down there this year having an outlet for them.

[KMock]

Ther is a lot of good advice and opinon floating around here. IMO it is necessary to harvest does and at least attempt to control polulation dynamics. There are several reasons for this, most of which have already been noted. At no time is this more important than in a drought situation. Every peice of land has a carrying capacity which fluctuates with range condition & weather patterns.

Yes, does are the factory for reproduction but I havent seen any shortage of deer in the state due to over harvest. One scenario is a proven fact however and that is the scenario of over population and poor heard health. To expand on this, it is essential that we as heard managers reduce our stocking rate intesity (shoot) during drought just as cattle raiser are doing.

I am not suggesting we shoot an over abundance of deer, but your point about natural selection and natural death should be taken seriously if you don't reduce numbers in an over-populated are so the range can support the heard through winter.

If you your buck/doe ratio is out of line you will loose a higher percentage of bucks to stress related post-rut mortality. They will literaly die from too much sex . In all seriousness, a prolonged rut will increase the stress on bucks and their body condition simply will not support them through the rut. If you want to see bucks year after year, help them out by managing the doe population.

Lastly, a buck will only breed 2-3 doe max per year. This creates a simple equation. If your ratio is 4:1 you have one extra non-productive mouth consuming forage throughout the year. I realize these numbers are not concrete.

To echo Encinal, you will always have a migration of neighbor deer onto your property as you decrease numbers and improve habitat. It's an ongoing process. You are making big strides and should be commended for making a diference.

Good luck.

[Jethro]

Oh, I absolutely know the population has to come down, but the buck/doe ratio is out of whack too. The problem is trying to fix both at the same time. The equation is not as simple as it seems on the surface. You don't just have to bring the doe population down, you have to bring the buck population up as well, and that takes recruitment.

I really understand what you are saying Encinal, about needed a good fawn crop or two to get the bucks you need in the pipeline before you start shutting the production engine down.

I think, being low fence and having somewhat limited resources the first year, we still just hammer down. Population is high enough, and immigration in will be high enough, there should be PLENTY of does left next year, even shooting all we can. We are not dealing with a static system, but a dynamic one.

[Encinal]

Ther is a lot of good advice and opinon floating around here. IMO it is necessary to harvest does and at least attempt to control polulation dynamics. There are several reasons for this, most of which have already been noted. At no time is this more important than in a drought situation. Every peice of land has a carrying capacity which fluctuates with range condition & weather patterns.

Yes, does are the factory for reproduction but I havent seen any shortage of deer in the state due to over harvest. One scenario is a proven fact however and that is the scenario of over population and poor heard health. To expand on this, it is essential that we as heard managers reduce our stocking rate intesity (shoot) during drought just as cattle raiser are doing.

I am not suggesting we shoot an over abundance of deer, but your point about natural selection and natural death should be taken seriously if you don't reduce numbers in an over-populated are so the range can support the heard through winter.

If you your buck/doe ratio is out of line you will loose a higher percentage of bucks to stress related post-rut mortality. They will literaly die from too much sex . In all seriousness, a prolonged rut will increase the stress on bucks and their body condition simply will not support them through the rut. If you want to see bucks year after year, help them out by managing the doe population.

Lastly, a buck will only breed 2-3 doe max per year. This creates a simple equation. If your ratio is 4:1 you have one extra non-productive mouth consuming forage throughout the year. I realize these numbers are not concrete.

To echo Encinal, you will always have a migration of neighbor deer onto your property as you decrease numbers and improve habitat. It's an ongoing process. You are making big strides and should be commended for making a diference.

Good luck.

Correct me if I am wrong... but these numbers were gathered in herds that approached 1:1 ratios.

Deer in pens will breed 15-20 does in a year, So if you have a lopsided ratio, the bucks will still breed the vast majority of the does.. it will just take longer... and stress them out more as they are going to have to be breeding does that were missed for 1 or 2 cycles all the way into February and March.

[Encinal]

Oh, I absolutely know the population has to come down, but the buck/doe ratio is out of whack too. The problem is trying to fix both at the same time. The equation is not as simple as it seems on the surface. You don't just have to bring the doe population down, you have to bring the buck population up as well, and that takes recruitment.

I really understand what you are saying Encinal, about needed a good fawn crop or two to get the bucks you need in the pipeline before you start shutting the production engine down.

I think, being low fence and having somewhat limited resources the first year, we still just hammer down. Population is high enough, and immigration in will be high enough, there should be PLENTY of does left next year, even shooting all we can. We are not dealing with a static system, but a dynamic one.

It's a Math problem, but it isn't as simple as (Deer #-X)/Acres = 25 (as an example)

If you are at about a deer to 8 acres you need to have 1/3 as many deer to get to the deer to 25 goal (im a fan of higher density though and river bottom country is going to support higher density than the areas around it as you are seeing... especially in the summer time as deer flock there for the thermal cover and the cooler air in the lows)

I would concentrate more on people not killing bucks than people shooting does... (though that needs to happen)

Las Raices, when it was low fenced carried an extremely high density naturally since the majority of the ranch is along Las Raices Creek... our old partners would shoot does until their gun barrels were red every year... and the density never really changed... inflow to fill density vacuum in preferable habitat.

[Jethro]

Agreed. I'm with you there.

Just out of curiousity, on Las Raices in the "old days," were the surrounding landowners also trying to control population in a serious fashion or were the old partners pretty much on their own? That is a tough war to fight if the ones around you aren't helping out. Like trying to shovel quicksand.

Collingsworth County is 900 square miles, or about 576,000 acres. Alot of that is upland areas where the densities and population dynamics are not too far out of whack. We just started this cooperative this summer, and I think we have around 50,000 acres signed up in the program, with the bulk of that acreage along the river, in the areas that really need help the worst. I know we need more enrolled, but also think we are off to a pretty good start for the first year.

It's been years since I was in school for this kind of thing, and working in another field as a career I have forgotten alot. Last night I got out alot of my old books and started trying to get the wheels in the old noodle running right again. I have alot of reading and studying to do.