# Our buck to doe ratio is now 1:1!



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

My 2004 Michigan deer seasons are over. I keep a daily log of how many deer we see while on stand each day on my property. My land is smack dab in the middle of the central U.P. experimental QDM area where antler restrictions of 3 points on one side are required on the unrestricted buck tag. Before QDM was practiced on our land, our antlered buck to adult doe ratio was worse than 1 to 10. Last year, the third year of the experiment, our ratio was 1 to 2. I just filled out the DNR's Deer Camp Survey, of which I have participated in for many years and in so doing, I tallied up our sightings for 2004. Our buck to doe ratio was an awesome 1 to 1 this season and I'd estimate that we have around 40 deer per square mile, which is within the carrying capacity of the ideal habitat in our area. We do not shoot does aggressively on our land. We got to where we are simply by passing up all yearling bucks and trying to shoot as many does as we do bucks. We only shoot does though when we feel that a doe harvest is needed to keep deer numbers in check. We are not trying to manage our property for trophy bucks but rather a quality herd with all age classes of deer fully represented. During gun season, those who hunted on my property saw at least one buck every time they hunted and everybody was successful at getting at least one adult buck (accept for me because I did not have any buck tags left). We are seeing more adult bucks than ever before. In my book, that's quality hunting and well worth the sacrifice of passing up all those young bucks.


----------



## Garret (Aug 2, 2002)

Congrats! Let's see some pictures!


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Garret said:


> Let's see some pictures!


My wife just went to Huron Camera with five rolles of exposed slide film for processing. It takes a week or more to get it back from the processor. I'll post some photos when I get them back. My wife's buck is a real dandy and it's her first one with a big rack, so she was thrilled beyond words. It was in first place on Saturday at the Wolverine Knife Work's buck contest in Rapid River. It was her fourth deer (second buck) in five years of hunting. She even guts her own deer and helps me cut them up. Now how cool is that? My nephew also got his first buck ever, another nice, adult specimin that I will be mounting for him.


----------



## Arin (Jun 2, 2004)

I saw only 7 does in Lapeer county and nothing in Oscoda county.

Where are you at?


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

That's great news. Congrats on your families success.

I've been busy and haven't filled out my EUP Deer Camp Survey yet but it will be in the mail within a week. I'll go through my daily hunting journal while muzzleloading hunting this weekend.


----------



## Swamp Ghost (Feb 5, 2003)

Excellent!


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Arin said:


> Where are you at?


My property is in Delta County in the Central U.P. 

I also should point out that we get lots of predation on our areas's deer herd by wolves, bears and coyotes. My wife had an encounter with a wolf when she was on stand on Nov. 20. It has been proven that large predators like wolves will typially feed on the most vulnerable prey they can find. When two fawns are born, if one of them is a button buck, it will likely grow faster that it's doe sibling. When the big bad wolf comes along he will more than likely go after the slowest of the two, typically the doe fawn. I have no doubt that wolves and other predators have contributed to our now even buck to doe ratio by thining out the doe numbers. Wolves also tend to be nocturnal predators. Deer catch onto that fast and in areas, such as ours, with wolves, deer tend to move more during the day, which is good for us hunters. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of wolves and think they should be reduced in numbers across the U.P., but they do have some value to the deer and to us hunters, as long as there are not to damn many of them.


----------



## Barry (Sep 19, 2001)

Where do I get the deer camp survey the previous posts mention? 

Two of us hunted state land in the Central UP restricted area. Our ratio was 3:1 with one harvested six point.

BTW, I received my UP QDM survey in the mail yesterday. I like how they give four choices on the survey. They added "don't care" with an explaination that it will not effect the results. No opinion is explained to be the same as a no vote.


----------



## GVDocHoliday (Sep 5, 2003)

I've always been and still am a believer that natural predators such as wolves and coyotes do nothing but strengthen deer herds. Think about it, we hunters usually go after the biggest, strongest deer there are. We weaken the heard unless properly managed. Natural Predators however rarely take the strongest and fittest of the heard, and weed out the weak and sick, providing for better breeding opportunities for those who survive predation.


----------



## wecker20 (Mar 10, 2004)




----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Barry said:


> Where do I get the deer camp survey the previous posts mention? QUOTE]
> 
> Contact Craig Albright at the Escanaba DNR Field Office 906-788-2351 ext. 117. In my opinion, that Deer Camp Survey provides the best data available to determine the size and sex ratio of the deer herd in the surveyed areas. It uses actual hunter observations in the survey. It also compiles hunter opinions on the state of the deer herd. In my opinion, this type of survey should be used statewide.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

GVDocHoliday said:


> I've always been and still am a believer that natural predators such as wolves and coyotes do nothing but strengthen deer herds.


That's true to a certain extent. If wolf numbers (or other predators with a taste for venison) get to numerous, then they can decimate the deer herd. In nature, predator and prey species typically go though boom and bust cycles. If you get to many wolves, the deer numbers bust. This is why wolf numbers need to be kept in check. So far, the DNR and the Feds have not addressed wolf problem areas where they have decimated deer herds in MI. When our game managers fail to manage predators like wolves, people tend to take maters into their own hands. As a result of the DNR's lack of action, just about everybody that I know in the Central U.P. will shoot wolves on sight. I've actually been chastised by a couple people for seeing wolves and not shooting them. The answer is simple: Have a hunting season on wolves similar to our elk season. The only way to save the wolves in MI is to elevate them to a game animal.


----------



## AKBuckbuster (Dec 10, 2004)

The wolves are coming. Don't think you'll go unnoticed. Why were so many deer extingused in Iron Mountain over the past years. The deer are not safe in the woods. It's safer in the city.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

What's been amazing the past few years is that I usually average seeing anywhere from 1/3 to 2/3 of the bucks I get on the game cames, while hunting. This year was no exception, with a rough total of around 12-13 different bucks on film, while seeing approximately 6 of those bucks while hunting. Although the 6 bucks I saw were not that bad of a total, with only 1 spike and most multi-tined yearlings, it again proved that is no way indicative of the actual sex ratio. Without the cameras you just can't really get a true, well....picture.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

In 2001, the first year under QDM, we had a sever winter where we lost most of our fawn crop. That fall the antlered buck to adult doe ratio was about 1:10. In 2002, there were few yearling bucks, but the ratio still improved to about 1:8. We had good fawn carryover in 2003 and we had a ratio of 1:2. We had a bumper crop of fawns in 2003 with 1.3 fawns per adult doe and they had excellent carryover in our area. This year our ratio was even at 1:1. We saw a bunch of yearling bucks from the bumper fawn crop of 2003. We also had a good crop of fawns this year and we saw 1.2 fawns for every adult doe. I also saw lots of yearling does this year. I saw a yearling buck to yearling doe ratio of 2 to 1. That ratio reinforces the theory that predators take far more doe fawns than buck fawns. Since our buck to doe ratio has improved so dramatically, fawn production has skyrocketed. Even though the winter of 2004 was a hard one, and the spring was wet and cold, we still had good fawn production. If we have a moderate to easy winter, I expect that the buck to doe ratio will be awsome again next year and fawn production will skyrocket especially if the spring is more hospitable than this year was. Based on our sightings this year, our overall deer population is about 1/3 larger than it was during 2000, but doe numbers are much smaller. With lots more bucks and fewer does, fawn production has actually been much higher than before QDM. 

I keep a log of all the deer I see, but I do not use that log in my calculations of buck to doe ratios that I have posted on this thread. I only use deer sightings during the last week of firearms deer season. Everbody who hunts on my land at that time (usually just my wife and I) tallies up deer sightings for each day afield. Every deer sighted gets classified as eithor an antlered buck, an adult doe, a fawn or unidentified. Unidentified deer don't get counted in the totals. I like to take my statistics during the end of Nov. because the rut can influence deer movements and by then the primary rut in the U.P. is about over. When my brother and his boys bowhunted with me during early Nov. they saw way more bucks than doe both on my property and on public land. I also like the end of Nov. because it give a better representation of what deer made it though the fall. I don't use remote cameras because I believe in low impact hunting and messing with them can and will spook deer, especailly those super spooky U.P. adult bucks.


----------



## GVDocHoliday (Sep 5, 2003)

Sorry but this is the first time I've read this thread in a long time. Trophy Specialist if you read some of my other threads on the wolves, one in this forum and the other in the general hunting forum, you'll see I'm very familiar with predator/prey dynamics and how one species effects the other. This is how mother nature has managed herds well before man came into play. Now we have people who want to manage a constant herd. I see this as an extreme, forest ecology adapted to the predator/prey relationships and what we are seeing now, with a decrease in deer, is the after effects of killing off natural predators. The deer population remains constantly high preventing any new forest regeneration. This as allowed more mature stands of forest to develop, blanketing the understory and forest floor, suppressing further regeneration.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

I finally got my slides back from the processor. Here's a photo of my wife Donna's 11 pointer that she took November 23, 2004 in the central U.P., QDM area. I examined the teeth of this deer and found very little wear or dentine buildup, so it was likely a young deer of perhaps 2 or 3 years old.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Here's a photo of my nephew Ryan hoisting up his six pointer that he took during the second week of November in the QDM area. It's was his first buck.


----------



## Northern_Lights (Dec 11, 2004)

Trophy Specialist said:


> My 2004 Michigan deer seasons are over. I keep a daily log of how many deer we see while on stand each day on my property. My land is smack dab in the middle of the central U.P. experimental QDM area where antler restrictions of 3 points on one side are required on the unrestricted buck tag. Before QDM was practiced on our land, our antlered buck to adult doe ratio was worse than 1 to 10. Last year, the third year of the experiment, our ratio was 1 to 2. I just filled out the DNR's Deer Camp Survey, of which I have participated in for many years and in so doing, I tallied up our sightings for 2004. Our buck to doe ratio was an awesome 1 to 1 this season and I'd estimate that we have around 40 deer per square mile, which is within the carrying capacity of the ideal habitat in our area. We do not shoot does aggressively on our land. We got to where we are simply by passing up all yearling bucks and trying to shoot as many does as we do bucks. We only shoot does though when we feel that a doe harvest is needed to keep deer numbers in check. We are not trying to manage our property for trophy bucks but rather a quality herd with all age classes of deer fully represented. During gun season, those who hunted on my property saw at least one buck every time they hunted and everybody was successful at getting at least one adult buck (accept for me because I did not have any buck tags left). We are seeing more adult bucks than ever before. In my book, that's quality hunting and well worth the sacrifice of passing up all those young bucks.


 

So help me understand this... You only shoot the big bucks, and leave the young and inferior to breed the does.....and your happy about this? It seems to me that while that might qualify as a management plan, it hardly seems like a Quality managment plan. I'm no biologist, but it seems to me that management means just that.....managing for a specific goal. Now if your goal is getting the ratio close to 1 to 1, you've succeded. If you wanted to eliminate the older and quality bucks, you've succeded. But if your goal is to grow a quality herd for the future, my money says no way. While I know full well there are large buck who survive the season, we all know there are plenty of small and inferior bucks now doing the majority of the breeding.


----------



## Swamp Ghost (Feb 5, 2003)

So let me get this, young deer are inferior? To whom?

So in other words, in order to become superior, deer simply have to mature? 

Then I wonder, how can we get more superior deer into the herd? Because


> we all know there are plenty of small and inferior bucks now doing the majority of the breeding


----------



## BSK (Apr 10, 2004)

Northern Lights,

The situation in the UP, with signficant winter-kills and migrating/yarding deer, certainly complicates the situation. But we have successfully managed herds under QDM in winter-kill/yarding areas. We have found several aspects of management that have to be handled a little differently though. And one of those "lessons learned" is that you cannot "stockpile" bucks forever. Eventually a severe winter kills a large number of deer, including some of the older bucks. In essence, managing for fully mature bucks is a tricky endeavor.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

BSK said:


> Swamper wrote:
> *I question whether 1:1 ratio is natural.*
> 
> We and others have studied unhunted (by man) deer herds.


Have you done or seen studies when there are high predator numbers made up of wolves, coyotes and bears like we have in the U.P.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

BSK,

As a testament to the survival abilities of even just yearling bucks, John Ozoga only recalls seeing 1 dead yearling buck in the yards in around 30 years of study. Also, as far as mature does and bucks...in his words it is almost impossible to kill one with winter severity. The higher the average age of both buck and doe, the more stable the population density. The fluctuation should come in with fawns and yearling does. Even after the last hard winter of 2000-2001, which for our area might have even been worse than the historically severe winters of 95-97, I still captured 6 different 2.5 year old 8-points in 2002....meaning those fawn bucks even fared pretty well in the 2000-2001 winter. On the other hand, I only had 1 fawn for 6 mature does in 2001, so the yearling buck crop in 2002 was terrible and I captured just 1...an average spike.

Carry an older herd made up of a high age of does and a good number of bucks and you will experience the most stability. Unfortunately a higher number of doe permits or heavier bowhunting in which hunters can shoot a doe will reduce the average doe age in northern regions. Add in an extremely low buck age structure and you have got a recipe for severe fluctuation in population density.


----------



## BSK (Apr 10, 2004)

Trophy Specialist said:


> Have you done or seen studies when there are high predator numbers made up of wolves, coyotes and bears like we have in the U.P.


Yes, but only in the South and Southwest. We have looked at herds that live in very high densities of predators such as coyotes and bobcat. In addition, some of the herds we've studied in TX not only have 'yotes and bobcats, but bear and mountain lion.

We don't find there to be any differences in sex ratio for unhunted herds with high predator densities. However we will find that the herd takes longer to hit carrying capacity and the negative effects of being at carrying capacity are less severe.


----------



## BSK (Apr 10, 2004)

NorthJeff,

We found that the herd lost deer of all ages equally (with the exception of fawns, which were virtually wiped out). Or should I say *bucks* of all ages equally. I suspect the loss of older bucks was due to rut stress going into a severe winter. The property had not yet reached a balanced sex ratio (although it was rapidly approaching that). There was still significant rut stress on older males.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

BSK,where was that property at? Just wondering if it was in an area that averages 150 inches or more, or if a possible extremely severe winter in a low snow fall zone...say 50-100 inches, where deer were not accustomed to the snow depth and colder temps, was the factor.

One of the things that you will find charecteristic of the Lake Superior watershed is that typically it is one of the better areas for both buck age structure and sex ratio in the state. To have an area with a very high buck to do ratio and therefore additional rut stress would most likely be the exception, rather than the norm.

Again though, John is getting me the report, but in a local deeryard 20% of the doe population was 10 years old or older...simply amazing and imagining the type of winters that a deer will see over the course of 10 years...they definately see some pretty severe ones.

Too early to tell how severe this winter is, but from Munising south, a little east and a little west we've had many portions that have had near 50" of snow just in the past 12 days! It was 1 this morning, single digits right now, and supposed to be close to -20 tonight away from the Great Lakes....just a taste of a typical U.P. winter and in no way an indication yet if severe or not. Munising has got around 130-140 inches to go just to reach an average winter


----------



## BSK (Apr 10, 2004)

NorthJeff,

Northern Adirondack Mountains of New York state.


----------



## Jeff Sturgis (Mar 28, 2002)

Just curious if you know the average snowfall amount there? The reason I ask is that doesn't seem too reflective of mortality here in the U.P. and I wonder if average snowfall and or temps could have something to do with it. For example, deer get used to their environment. For a 100" snowfall herd to get 200 inches has got to be a big deal, but for a 200" herd to get another 100 isn't much more restrictive than it already is. Also, for a deer herd to average say 3 months in a yarding situation, to add another month is hard, but to average say 2 months, and then add another 2 months has got to be a big differance.

Just wondering.

Also, most of our moderate to heavy snowfall zones are probably in the less than 5 to 15 deer per square mile range...what were those...pre-winter?


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

"Also, if 80% of the yearlings are passed on in their first year there are the around the same amount of bucks to shoot out there the next year....just most are a year older" 

That simply is not true. Depending on the area 10-20% of the bucks saved will be lost to non-hunting mortality . another 10+ % won't be AR legal as 2.5 buck. As a result the buck harvest in PA decreased by 30% in just 2 years after AR was implemented. In Ark. the buck harvets decreased by 40% in 5 years and Iin Miss. the number of bucks saved by AR did not result in aproportional increase in the 2.5+ buck harvest.


----------



## BSK (Apr 10, 2004)

NorthJeff,

I don't remember off the top of my head. I'll look it up.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

" Before QDM was practiced on our land, our antlered buck to adult doe ratio was worse than 1 to 10. "

How is that possible when EDSpin04 , stated that even if there are no doe harvested the worst possible B/D ratio would be 1:5 ? How many doe and how many buck did you harvest in order to improve the B/D ratio from 1:2 to 1:1?
I am truly impressed with your success and I think you should provide more details such as how many SM you control, what the over wintering deer density is, hw many hunter are inyour group and what the harvest rates are PSM. Thanks.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Happy Hunter said:


> " Before QDM was practiced on our land, our antlered buck to adult doe ratio was worse than 1 to 10. "
> 
> How is that possible when EDSpin04 , stated that even if there are no doe harvested the worst possible B/D ratio would be 1:5 ? How many doe and how many buck did you harvest in order to improve the B/D ratio from 1:2 to 1:1?
> I am truly impressed with your success and I think you should provide more details such as how many SM you control, what the over wintering deer density is, hw many hunter are inyour group and what the harvest rates are PSM. Thanks.


We had neighbors that were shooting most of the antlered bucks every year and not shooting any does. Before 1996, we also had a huge deer population of probably over 100 per square mile. We also had poor habitat then too. When the winters of 1995/1996 and 1996/1997 hit, we lost most of our deer. I would guess that now we (my neighbors and us) harvest about even numbers of bucks and does. If you read my earlier posts, predators also play a part in our deer population dynamics.

I don't know you mean by a SM? Nor do I know what are wintering deer density is, but I'd guess somewhere around 50 per square mile these days. I typically alow three or four guests to hunt on my property every fall (not counting my wife). My rule is that you have to help out with off-season projects in exchange for hunting privilages on my land and we typically take even numbers of bucks and does.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

"I don't know you mean by a SM? Nor do I know what are wintering deer density is, but I'd guess somewhere around 50 per square mile these days. I typically alow three or four guests to hunt on my property every fall (not counting my wife). My rule is that you have to help out with off-season projects in exchange for hunting privilages on my land and we typically take even numbers of bucks and does."

SM is the standard abbreviation for square miles , as in DPFSM or DPSM. If you have 50 over wintering DPSM and a recruitment rate of 50% , that means you have to harvest 25 DPSM in order to keep the herd stable and maintain a 1:1 B/D ratio. Can six hunters harvest enough deer to keep the herd stable and maintain a 1;1 ratio?


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Happy Hunter said:


> SM is the standard abbreviation for square miles , as in DPFSM or DPSM. If you have 50 over wintering DPSM and a recruitment rate of 50% , that means you have to harvest 25 DPSM in order to keep the herd stable and maintain a 1:1 B/D ratio. Can six hunters harvest enough deer to keep the herd stable and maintain a 1;1 ratio?


I own 210 acres, but I hardly control it. In my part of the U.P. predators (wolves, coyotes and bears) kill far more deer than we human hunters do. Mother nature's winter wrath also takes more than we do as well during some winters. We (neighbors included) probably kill about 10-20 deer PSM per year. I guessed that our DPSM is around 50 for the area, but on my property it is much higher at some times of the year due to the ideal habitat on my land. If we didn't have the predators in our area like we do, we'd have to kill a lot more does to keep things in check.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

Trophy Specialist said:


> I own 210 acres, but I hardly control it. In my part of the U.P. predators (wolves, coyotes and bears) kill far more deer than we human hunters do. Mother nature's winter wrath also takes more than we do as well during some winters. We (neighbors included) probably kill about 10-20 deer PSM per year. I guessed that our DPSM is around 50 for the area, but on my property it is much higher at some times of the year due to the ideal habitat on my land. If we didn't have the predators in our area like we do, we'd have to kill a lot more does to keep things in check.



In order to have a meaningful discussion it is important that you specify whether the 50 DPSM is the PS ( preseason) density or the OW( over wintering) deer density. When you say that the kill is 10-20 DPSM are you saying you average 15 DPSM? Do you know what the average recruitment rate is for your area? That harvest rate seems rather high for the UP.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

When I guessed that our deer population is around 50 DPSM I meant the summer population. In the winter our deer tend to migrate a lot, especially if there is logging activity around. When I said that I estimated our area hunter deer kill to be around 10-20 DPSM, that was just an educated guess. I don't get a chance to talk to all my neighbors every year, so I don't know exactly how many deer are being killed by hunters, and I certainly couldn't even guess how many are killed by predators. Of all my neighbors, only one that I'm aware of makes a significant effort to reduce doe numbers. Where I l hunt in the U.P. we are on the fringe of big snow country. Just 10 miles to the north of us the winter snowfall amounts double. Ten miles to the south of us and they get much less snow than we do. We are at the northen fringe of the high deer density area. My friends who hunt 5-10 miles south of me see many times more deer than we do. On some of the farmlands south of us there are probably well over 100 DPSM. There the recruitment rate is very high in those areas. In our area, my logs showed that we had a little better than one fawn per adult due during the last week of Nov. which is still good for the overall U.P. but not nearly as good as in other areas of the state.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

In your original post you stated the B/D ratio was 1:10 and that you improved that to 1;1 in just 3 years. Now you say you only have 210 acres , your neigbors don't shoot enough doe and you only allow six hunters to hunt your property and you harvest 1 buck for every doe. Therefore, it is was mathematically impossible for you to reduce the B/D ratio from 1:10 to 1:1.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Happy Hunter said:


> Therefore, it is was mathematically impossible for you to reduce the B/D ratio from 1:10 to 1:1.


Please go back and re-read *all* of my posts. You will see me mentoin the word *predators*  over and over. I'll say it again: We have lots of predators like wolves, bears and coyotes that impact our deer numbers.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

Trophy Specialist said:


> I also should point out that we get lots of predation on our areas's deer herd by wolves, bears and coyotes. My wife had an encounter with a wolf when she was on stand on Nov. 20. It has been proven that large predators like wolves will typially feed on the most vulnerable prey they can find. When two fawns are born, if one of them is a button buck, it will likely grow faster that it's doe sibling. When the big bad wolf comes along he will more than likely go after the slowest of the two, typically the doe fawn. I have no doubt that wolves and other predators have contributed to our now even buck to doe ratio by thining out the doe numbers. Wolves also tend to be nocturnal predators. Deer catch onto that fast and in areas, such as ours, with wolves, deer tend to move more during the day, which is good for us hunters. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of wolves and think they should be reduced in numbers across the U.P., but they do have some value to the deer and to us hunters, as long as there are not to damn many of them.


Here is a post at the beginning of this thread that I made in reguards to predation of deer in our area.


----------



## Happy Hunter (Apr 14, 2004)

That is a nice lttle theory you have regarding predation, but didn't you have predation when the B/D ratio was 1:10? All of the studies I have read state that males have a higher non-hunting mortality rate than females and I have never read where predators have shown a preference for female fawns verses male fawns.

Since you said the neigbors don't shoot many doe and your harvest ratio is 1:1 ,it would almost be impossible to maintain a 1:1 B/D ratio on a relatively small parcel of lamd.


----------

