Was watching a deer show (Deer and Deer Hunting). There is a show on regarding predation. They were talking about predators knowing when fawns were dropping, and their impact on the deer herd.

We all talk about getting the Doe/Buck ratio in balance to get the chance to see more big bucks. What about balancing it to just see more deer, and less food for predators = less predators.

Here is he senario:
Predators primarily kill fawns, and not adult deer. Newly born fawns are very susceptible to predation. If the doe / buck ratio is really high towards the Does then:
1) Breeding is spread out
2) Fawns are then dropped over an extended period of time
4) The predators now have month 1 = banquet of fawns, month 2, and sometimes month 3

If the ratio is in balance then a great majority of fawns will drop within 2 weeks of each other. The predators will then only have 1 good month to kill fawns.

So:
Balancing the herd (Does to Bucks) will result in less predators, more deer, better rut, seeing bigger bucks.

Predator satiation

Shoot every yote you see,trap them if possible, shoot only mature bucks and shoot only enough does to keep your deer herd below the carrying capacity of your land=more deer and less predation.

X2
I don't understand why people of at least average intelligence think the only way to have balanced buck/doe ratio is to kill more does when killing less Bucks would accomplish the same goal.The only time you need to kill more does to balance the buck/doe ratio is if your herd has reach or is nearing the carrying capacity of the land. In all other instances the correct coarse of action would be to kill less bucks. I think there is no doubt that having a balanced sex ratio would compress the fawning period therefore reducing predation I just think in a lot of places they go about it in the wrong way.

Beer Belly,


I hunt where there has always been a low population density. The DCNR even recognized the need to restock deer there when they held part of our lease within the past fifteen years.

1. How does balancing does to bucks result in less predators on our lease when deer are only a small part of their diet for a short period of time?

2. How does killing does on our lease increase the deer population?

3. How does killing does result in a better rut in areas of low population density?

4.. How does killing more does result in bigger bucks on our lease?

One-size-fits all does not fit at all in science-based deer management.

killing more does=less fawns to make it to maturity.

It is encouraging to me to see that more and more Alabama hunters are seeing that just shooting more does is not always the correct answer.

The deer herd in my immediate area is very balanced. I run trail cameras most of the year and have for 5 years now. Our buck to doe ratio is no worse that 1:2. The past 2 years our fawn mortality, based on trail camera surveys, is upwards of 90%.

Simple math and in lower deer herds, simply correct. However, in many deer herds, that math is not as simple and, often, simply incorrect. Individual doe health has a lot to do with it, and that is influenced by both relative population and relationship to habitat.

I vote for a Bounty on yotes. More deer and would be nice to see rabbits again.

I have to disagree, killing less bucks will not balance out your herd alone,you will still have a need to take some does. However shooting fewer bucks and only taking does as needed will help balance,I believe there are about an equal amount of doe and buck fawns born each year,so just shooting less bucks will not balance your herd,but if more deer is your goal then you are on the right track.

The impact coyotes are having on Southeastern deer herds is a compicated equation, but the fact they appear to be having a major impact in some areas is now indisputable. The question is, how severe is the impact?

Calculating approriate doe harvests in a high coyote environment is a very complicated equation.

and depending on the moon phase and when high tide occurs, also the wind direction. You'd argue with a rock goobler.....

I'm with ya Gob, sometimes less is more.

I didn't say killing fewer bucks and killing no does would balance your buck/doe ratio. But just killing more does is not always the answer. If you killed no deer at all for 6-7 years you would have a balances ratio. Or if you killed the same amount of each for 6-7 years you would have a balanced ratio. If you are below carrying capacity there is no reason to kill more does than bucks. In my opinion the correct process would be if you are over your carrying capacity you should kill as many deer as it takes to get below the carrying capacity once you get below the carrying capacity you should kill equal amounts of bucks/doe. If you do this for 6-7 years you buck/doe ratio will be where it should be. Which in a non hunted population will be somewhere around 1.2-1.3 does for each buck due to a higher natural mortality rate for bucks. If your population is still decreasing then you need to lower the amount of bucks being killed therefore lowering the amount of does allowed to be killed if the population is growing up to or over carrying capacity you need to kill more bucks therefore allowing more does to be killed. This will keep your deer population at a natural level which will allow most all does to be bred on there first estrus cycle therefore shorting the rut and decreasing the number of fawns lost to predators. This is only possible on large tracts of land where you can control all or most of the land the deer live on so if you are trying to manage deer on a few hundred acres or less any success of your management practices will be greatly determined by your neighbors.

Not that simple, and you should want your herd WELL below carring capacity, for many reasons.

I do not know any reason why a deer herd would need to be below 75-80 percent of carrying capacity unless you just don't enjoy seeing deer when you hunt.

in reality just how many deer do you need to see,Keeping your deer well below the lands carrying capacity will be more beneficial to your property and your deer.More food for the deer you have, gives you healthier does which in turn means healthier fawns ,and an overall healthier herd. I would rather hunt a property with fewer and healthier deer than an over populated less healthier herd,look at the large racked,big bodied,mature deer that has been killed in Alabama the last few years,those deer got there by good management on ground with a deer herd well below the lands carrying capacity.

I do not understand your logic of deer on a property that is at 25% or carrying capacity will somehow eat more and be larger than deer on a property that is at 75% or carrying capacity. If a said property is at 75% carrying capacity that means all of the deer on said property will have everything they need or want to eat to reach there maximum potential of weight or antler size same as if that property was at 25%. In either case they will not eat anymore or any less. Only when a piece of property gets at or above carrying capacity would reducing the number of deer in increase weight or antler size of those deer. Maybe me and you have a diffrent interpritation of carrying capacity. As far as seeing deer I like to see deer eveytime I hunt but I know in this part of the world that may not be possible. But I do expect to see deer somewhere around 3/4 of the days I hunt don't have to be a lot of deer just some deer or a deer. I do that where I hunt and most of the bucks we kill weigh somewhere around 200lb so I think they getting all they want to eat.

Cycles up and Cycles down,


boom and bust

I kill every yote I can get a chance at, even tried my 380 at over a hundred yards the other, was hoping for a hail mary