Roe management - reading recommendations

Deer numbers have changed dramatically since Richard Prior was writing books. Not so sure that anything he wrote is too relevant any more TBH. He was a roe specialist. Did he manage muntjac, CWD or fallow?
 
That's certainly the first that I have heard of it and I have read quite a few books on deer management so surprised that none of those books including those by Richard Prior mention that. They don't mention hinds choosing non related stags for mates in the Rum project either! Certainly not that I remember. It is a hard read though so I could be wrong?
The data showing rare close inbreeding in the Rum project is quite new - mainly published in the last 4-5 years. It does happen, but much more rarely than predicted by which stags were holding harems.

With regard to Richard Prior: he had to do everything with little or no genetic data, so accurate assignment of paternity was usually impossible.

That’s the key problem with so much of the literature on wild deer management: very little has genetic data, so there’s no way to know who’s actually doing the mating.
 
Just because people write books doesnt mean they are correct 👍
At least a book will have passed through the hands of a discerning publisher who wouldn't knowingly endorse something that was incorrect, which is more than can be said for most of the "expert" opinions posted on the Internet.
 
That's certainly the first that I have heard of it and I have read quite a few books on deer management so surprised that none of those books including those by Richard Prior mention that. They don't mention hinds choosing non related stags for mates in the Rum project either! Certainly not that I remember. It is a hard read though so I could be wrong?
Think about it this way: close inbreeding is usually disastrous for the quality of the offspring. There is very strong natural selection to avoid it.
 
At least a book will have passed through the hands of a discerning publisher who wouldn't knowingly endorse something that was incorrect, which is more than can be said for most of the "expert" opinions posted on the Internet.
What would a publisher know , they're only interested in making money.
 
At least a book will have passed through the hands of a discerning publisher who wouldn't knowingly endorse something that was incorrect, which is more than can be said for most of the "expert" opinions posted on the Internet.
I think you have a touching faith in both the honesty and competence of publishers!!

But assuming they’re scrupulously honest, the problem is that they simply may not know what’s actually going on, and need to rely on the opinion of the experts. The experts may not know themselves. In the case of wild animal genetics, until recently, they largely had no idea.
 
Dogs will sh@g anything 🤣
They will - but they’re not wild.

We’ve subjected them to very intense selection for thousands of generations. And we’ve categorically broken the inbreeding avoidance mechanisms - because it’s in our interest to get them to mate with relatives.
 
Just because people write books doesnt mean they are correct 👍
Just like the internet then ? Should we just ignore both these sources ? Prior remains the guy who studied and stalked and wrote about the Roe the most . As regards is the Ttsx better than the Sako blade the better bullet ? you would certainly need to ask someone with a lot of experience on both. I mean he also travelled to study the Russian version of the Roe etc .
Its rare to read a book from the past and find it aligns so much with modern thinking , most of his work will i think stand up to scrutiny today and in decades to come
 
Is there?
Generally, yes.

Especially on females. Less so on males.

Almost every mammal species that has been investigated in enough detail has a suite of inbreeding avoidance mechanisms. In many mammals, it’s based on smell and seems to use familiarity as the reference - essentially using a simple ‘don’t shag something that smells like yourself’ rule of thumb.
 
Generally, yes.

Especially on females. Less so on males.

Almost every mammal species that has been investigated in enough detail has a suite of inbreeding avoidance mechanisms. In many mammals, it’s based on smell and seems to use familiarity as the reference - essentially using a simple ‘don’t shag something that smells like yourself’ rule of thumb.
It sounds reasonable. Evidence would be great though.
 
Stalking Roe we know the bucks are territorial, but then having stalked Roe for over fifty years I have found that the does are more so. If she is in season and there are no bucks on her patch she will go and fetch one. I have seen this many times. Last year there was a doe on my patch being alongside a very poor buck (in size and antlers) which I shot in early July. Within two weeks she was running with a very nice six pointer. He appeared with her and her twins again in October and at present is still on her patch with the family. When he is clean I may shoot him as I know she will look for another come the time. I also have another equally good buck in another family group, however there are two buck fawns in that group and I will shoot one of them. The mature buck there is resident on her patch and I will leave him another year.
We don't have many Roe so I can afford to be a bit selective and pick my beasts. I have hung back from shooting does because we have nothing they can damage and the owners like them and are happy to see a few more. Fallow however are our main cull animals and does are what we are taking all the time. Richard's bucks on Roe are good, particularly the later ones as his knowledge improved over the years.🦡
 
Stalking Roe we know the bucks are territorial, but then having stalked Roe for over fifty years I have found that the does are more so. If she is in season and there are no bucks on her patch she will go and fetch one. I have seen this many times. Last year there was a doe on my patch being alongside a very poor buck (in size and antlers) which I shot in early July. Within two weeks she was running with a very nice six pointer. He appeared with her and her twins again in October and at present is still on her patch with the family. When he is clean I may shoot him as I know she will look for another come the time. I also have another equally good buck in another family group, however there are two buck fawns in that group and I will shoot one of them. The mature buck there is resident on her patch and I will leave him another year.
We don't have many Roe so I can afford to be a bit selective and pick my beasts. I have hung back from shooting does because we have nothing they can damage and the owners like them and are happy to see a few more. Fallow however are our main cull animals and does are what we are taking all the time. Richard's bucks on Roe are good, particularly the later ones as his knowledge improved over the years.🦡
Thanks for posting this. You have anticipated an answer to one of the questions I have be thinking about... I was wondering whether, if I were to shoot all the roe bucks on a particular ground early in the season, whether the does would be likely to leave the ground in search of a mate (further reducing the overall numbers) or pull replacement bucks on to the ground (maintaining approx numbers). I appreciate that not all wild animals have read the manual and that they don't always behave as they are "supposed" to do. But it's a good example of the sort of general principles of roe management and the impact of selective culling that I am trying to understand in more detail.
 
having stalked Roe for over fifty years
Irrelevant and means absolutely nothing except that you stalked your first roe 50 years ago.
If she is in season and there are no bucks on her patch she will go and fetch one. I have seen this many times. Last year there was a doe on my patch being alongside a very poor buck (in size and antlers) which I shot in early July. Within two weeks she was running with a very nice six pointer.
How do you know that she went looking for a buck and it wasn't the buck that smelt her and came looking for her? Your explanation certainly isn't proof that she went looking for him.
 
Back
Top