buck to doe ratio

[frednfrog]

Are there any biologist on MM that could educate me on what is a healthy buck to doe ratio for mule deer? Was hunting with my son this weekend and saw 20 some does in two days and no bucks at all. I know that most of them are still in thier bachelor groups but even the yearlings seem to be all does. I'm just wondering if NMDGF started allowing a few doe hunts for youth or more ES achery hunts if it would improve the deer herds here in New Mexico?

 

[kysersosay]

There are many biologists that frequent these forums, and about a gillion self-proclaimed "Pros" You're likely to get a thousand different opinions, so I guess I'll be the first.
For one, don't be tempted to apply buck:doe ratios from your own observations from one weekend in October to the unit or the state, for the reasons you already describe.

Buck doe ratios are important, but the idea of killing does to improve the ratio of bucks doesn't really track. Fewer does just means fewer deer- it really is that simple. NM allows ES archery hunts for elk (in addition to many many cow tags), because elk herds in NM are almost universally at or above desired levels. These have been pretty well studied and are based on elk biology, social factors (depredation), hunter oportunity, etc. Even so, you'd find hundreds of folks who would argue they kill too many or not enough in this area or that, often plenty of folks who would argue both points for the same area.

We do hunt a few does in areas where we have a lot of depredation issues (crop damage), but few would argue that NM (or the west) has too many mule deer anywhere.

Managing bucks and bulls is really kind of a seperate deal. In general the higher the buck ratio the better- for a lot of reasons. Most reasearch says 12(bucks):100(does) is about the threshhold where you start having issues with does not being bred or being bread by yearlings, or too many does being bred in the second estrus which causes other problems. Others might tell you my numbers are off a few points here (and I wouldn't argue with them too loudly). At these levels, hunters will notice that the vast majority of deer harvested are forkeys. Some areas in NM are managed for a much higher ratio fron 22:100 to 30:100 and it basically requires far fewer buck tags being issued to do it. It will improve the distribution of bucks throughout age class. Fewer hunters = more big bucks.

Along this line, one would think an unhunted population of deer would ultimately have buck to doe ratios approaching 100:100. Not the case. For one, bucks start tearing each other up pretty bad during the rut. The rut makes for a hard winter for a buck anyway. Bucks (especially big bucks) are more susceptible to lion predation because of their solitary nature.

I've posted what I thought was a pretty good condensation of several studies done on point restrictions (and why they don't work) on this site, but it generated little interest. Many have the intuition that a 3-point restriction would improve the number of mature bucks out there, but the sad truth is it has the oposite effect. We've tried it here in NM recently, and I'm glad they gave it up. Forcing all 50K deer hunters to take mature bucks is not the way to go, and forkeys are not mature deer. The sad truth of nature is that only a small percentage of wild animals make it to adulthood, whether we decide to shoot them or not.

Beware the new pill that allows you to loose weight without watching your diet and excercising. Managing mule deer is basically the same. Land development, Habitat, drought, suppressed fire, historic cattle grazing practices (not to poke at current cattlemen), and yes, predator control are what effect mule deer populations the most. NM tries to maintain some areas for a more quality hunt, other areas for more oportunity to go hunting, they try to mix in ways to keep youth in the hunting game and they try to affect positive changes to the habitat, but you'd be hard pressed to find any single person who thinks they do a good job of doing all of it in all places.

That's my opinion, I've been at this enough to know there will be other posts to follow who'll tell you I'm full of crap.

 

[junior]

I would say the poaching problem in a couple of units north is harder on the population than any BS a biologist or anyone else can come up with!

 

[nmelktrout]

kysersosay, thanks for that post man. Interesting reading for me. I've always wondered why they put the three point restriction in place and then removed it? It seems that most of our deer herds are fairly thin and I wonder how much toll several years of drought has had upon the situation or if there are any studies taking this into consideration. I personally thought the three point minimum was a good idea as this (and I'm sure some other factors that were less obvious) seemed to help our deer herds in NW Colorado tremendously back in the early 90s. We actually quit hunting deer on our place in Colorado due to such low buck numbers for some years. But, after the three point minimum had been in place for around 4 years the deer hunting turned on and really hasn't looked back. Mature bucks seem to be shot more frequently and there seems to be more of them. I guess I like the idea of younger bucks getting a head start... and, having spent some time on some operations with some very successful deer management programs in various states, wonder why there isn't at the very least a minimal doe harvest alowed in New Mexico? Are our herds in such dire straights that we need every doe? I really don't know but would be curious to hear what the rationale is behind the current management program. I've noticed a lot more deer every year where I deer hunt in NM and I guess I just chalked that up to finally having some good rains and forage for a couple of years running? Interesting thread.

 

[crazeymaez]

Its great to see deer making a comeback.Hunting does just hurts the population.I would rather go hunting and see 20 does instead of nothing at all.They used to have doe hunts one on the sandia mountains and it just wiped out the deer.I have no problems shooting cows.But im speaking from a northern mountain view.I know theres ranches around corona and down south where it would probably benifit the herd.

 

[kysersosay]

Nmelktrout. Your right, I think this is a good discussion, the type of thing I'd hope we'd see more of here on MM.

I can't exactly speak to what happened in CO and if or why or how it may be related to a point restriction. Didn?t it coincide with a significant limitation of overall deer hunters? I know that during NM?s attempt at point restriction, we had the first two years of rainfall eeking towards the historic average in over a decade. I've cut and pasted (below) some discussion of point restriction that I put on here in 2007, along with a couple of new links that are pertinent.

As far as killing does as a part of a very successful deer management program, I admit to being at a complete loss trying to place what programs you might be talking about, and how killing the baby-makers factors in, but I'm open and interested in hearing more about it. For me, life is all about coming to learn my thinking used to be wrong.

I do realize that we can't preach Habitat-habitat-habitat, and see quite clearly that deer populations improve with good rainfall, without recognizing that deer populations are a product of the seasonal and perennial carrying capacity of the country they live. In that context, some would say that killing does increases survivorship of (leaves more to eat for) the bucks. This has been applied to good effect on some deer ranches- usually ones that feed deer, or have crops and really good deer numbers locally. I'd be very cautious of trying to apply this concept state wide or even unit wide for the long-term. In the big picture, every buck comes from a doe, and she can make up to 10 of them in her lifetime. As a manager you'd want as many does as possible on the ground that are able to respond to a year of good rainfall/forage by making more does and bucks.

For those interested in this topic, I'd check out these links. I know it's a lot more than most folks like to read here on the forum. SLOT limits are very interesting to me, and the article on them is worth a read for sure.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Here is one of my longwinded soliloquies about antler point restrictions pasted from another post. NM went to a 3- point statewide restriction recently and dumped it for this coming fall. The commission went with the overwhelming outcry from NM hunters who wanted the restriction to ?help the deer herd?. Most hunters here are convinced that the A-P-R has not only helped the deer herd, but the trophy quality. Well, it's rained a little bit around here. I was able to dig up some of the research from the internet, the best studies I couldn't find directly, but there are some great summaries.


?I want to throw this out maybe I'll start another string with it someday but I disagree entirely about the antler point restriction. The (NM) Game Commission changed it back (from 3 point or better) because of the overwhelming science against it. The majority of hunters on this forum have no interest in shooting a forked horn buck, We are a specialized group of hunters with our own pet issues. I contend that you (us) especially should be thankful point restriction is gone. Wildlife ecology is one of the more difficult sciences because there is no way to have a controlled experiment and there are always a thousand things at work on a population, but one thing that's universal (even among deer and other ungulates) is that survivorship increases drastically once an animal becomes an adult. Forkey bucks are not adults, they're juveniles and research consistently shows that (shot during the hunting season or not)a good portion of them will not make it to be a 3/4 pointer, and the more that aren't shot the more that are "wasted." (Think of how many spike elk you see versus the number of first year raghorns- most would say there's a huge drop off in the number they see anecdotally, and we haven't shot spikes for years.) Forkeys are what I want the 40+ thousand other deer hunters in NM to be shooting. The alternative is that all NM hunters are shooting adult bucks and in that scenario trophy quality(age class) and buck:doe ratios have been shown to go in the crapper. I know it's counter-intuitive to some folks. I'll try to get a few of the more keystone studies and post em here for discussion.
We especially should be shooting spikes (deer), they're either poorer genetically or not as well nourished (making them more likely to croak off anyway). I also think spike restriction has a real potential to harm antler genetics. Setting aside the illegal harvest (ground checking) issues, I can't think of any good reason to keep folks from shooting spike elk either.
In the meantime, we have some units we manage for big bucks, some we manage for lots of bucks and some we manage so Joe Blow and his 12 buddies can go drink beer and maybe one of em can stumble across a buck.?

The aforementioned studies?..
* WAFWA- great summary/discussion of (Mule deer) antler point restriction research and other ?Harvest based? population dynamics. (this is a short ?Must read? for Mule deer hunters.)
http://www.createstrat.com/muledeerinthewest/harvest.html
NM questionnaire. ?summarizes some of the research- I concede it's written in a one-sided way, but that don't make it wrong.
http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/documents/DeerAntlerPointRestrictionsInformation-Questionnaire.pdf
Mississippi (whitetail) Why not the 4-point law? I like this one too-
http://www.mdwfp.com/xNet/Files/Wildlife/Deer/Website/Antler_Criteria_04-2007.pdf
Colorado Elk 1971-1972
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0091-7648(197621)4%3A1%3C3%3AAEOYBE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Z
GAME AND FISH Magazine article about Washington?s 10 year A-P-R ? sites ALL conflicting viewpoints, great discussion.
http://www.wogameandfish.com/hunting/mule-deer-blacktail-deer-hunting/wo_aa075504a/
http://www.monstermuleys.info/cgi-b..._thread&om=15865&forum=DCForumID6&archive=yes

XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Just so you guys don't think I'm trying to stack the deck, I tried to find one for the opposition.
Pennsylvania New Antler Point Restriction Study
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?a=465&q=151294
Are A-P-R working in Pennsylvania?
http://www.lhup.edu/smarvel/Seminar/FALL_2004/Miles_2/PA.htm
I'd like to point out that (in my opinion) this study has NO application for western Mule deer herds. Pennsylvania is a place with too many white tail deer and heard dynamics are basically opposite from most mule deer pops. Also the Penn. Game Commission had tried for a number of years to control the deer population boom by killing more and more bucks (does that make sense to anyone?). Effectively they overwhelmed the survivorship (of juvenile deer)issue by just killing them all- 99% of bucks harvested were yearlings, so they actually had killed ALL of their bucks. A-P-R were started concurrently with a dramatic increase in the number of does killed, subsequently buck to doe ratio increased dramatically, and the ratio of yearlings to adult bucks harvested dropped.

HERE IS SOMETHING INERESTING THOUGH!!!
I mentioned SLOT limits for trophy mule deer management when I originally posted this information on MM in 2007. Just like is used in some warm-water and cold-water fisheries, you keep the little guys (yearlings, spikes), throw back the mid sized (3-4 pointers), and keep the pigs if you get into one. I used it to help explain my theory, but I hadn't known it had been put into practice with big game populations until I saw this study out of Texas. Trophy Mule deer hunters, read this!
SLOT limits Spikes and mature bucks only- Texas (whitetail). Great study.
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/game_management/deer/antler_restrictions/

 

[frednfrog]

Thanks for all the great conversion and opinions thats exactly what I was after. My thoughts on doe hunting is not that everyone would have the opprotunity merely for some youth hunts and for limited entry areas for archery. I'm looking at it kind of like raising cattle. If you have a cow that go's barren or dry due to age you ship her because not only will they not make any more babies but she will interfere in the breeding of the young and healthy by running them off the bulls.

 

[kysersosay]

I love the ES option for archery elk, and we argued like crazy to allow youth hunters to take forkeys during the point restriction phase. NM is trying to find ways to increase and improve their youth hunts to provide kids as many tags as possible, and as good a chance of going home bloody as possible. (many NM hunters or MM members might disagree) I just don't think killing does is worth the trade off. It strikes me as killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. Still, there are a few ES or doe hunts in limited areas, scour the proclamation. We'll see many more doe antelope hunts in NM in coming years.

I get your cattle analogy, but I think that when a doe?s age starts to interfere with her ability to turn forage to babies, she's probably not going to be around for long. I'm not sure they behave the same way as barren cattle anyway. Too bad we can't really tell the barren does on sight- I'd say why not hunt them- but at least they will likely feed a lion in place of her pregnant granddaughter.

I hope NONE of this comes across as argumentative or ?holier-than-thou? to anyone, but as one last food for thought: If someone suggested a rancher shipped some percentage of his momma cows across the board (every year) without knowing which ones are still good breeders, I'd guess he'd probably tell them to go pack sand.

 

[nmelktrout]

Kysersosay, thanks for all the information man, I'm still reading/digesting it all. Interesting studies to say the least. And no worries about your tone in this thread, you are just giving us answers to the questions we had asked and they are some great answers. In fact, it's greatly appreciated. I've always been astounded at all of the classic desert muley country I've seen in New Mexico but just always wondered (besides the obvious drought/available forage reasons) why there were so few deer, why they are managed in this manner, and why it is taking them so long to re-establish themselves in the available habitat. I guess I'm starting to see the light behind what the F&G's muley philosophy and why current practices are the way they are. I hear that overhunting was a problem for many years in NM and combined with drought and predators, probably hammered the deer populations to miniscule levels in many areas. From what I've seen where I hunt the deer numbers have been steadily increasing for several years, as has the number of mature bucks I've been seeing. F&G is trying their best to deal with keeping sportsmen happy AND manage quality deer herds, a complicated equation to say the least!
Thanks again,
Cody