Doe management

[Tyla]

I have recently taken on some ground in a very high fallow area. It is surrounded by heavily managed estates and has become a bit of a refuge, much to the neighbours understandable annoyance. I will hit it pretty hard in what remains of this season and continue next season.

It is very noticeable that, although there are large herds of deer, the majority are very young animals. I assume that this is due to the policy of targeting mature does for population management. I was looking at a herd of 100 odd animals today and majority were this years young, then yearlings with maybe 10 mature does.

It made me wonder if, by targeting mature does to reduce population, we are removing a lot of knowledge from the herd? I guess it depends whether you believe deer act purely on instinct or whether behaviour is also learnt.

Interested to hear thoughts and opinions

 

[SikaSeeker]

Without sounding like an ass, anything without antlers need to be shot. I have to think like this with some of my farms and that’s the way I treat it. It has a high population of deer, so I shot the antlerless ones. Hopefully some day I can be more choosey in what I shot. But at the moment they need reducing regardless of hierarchy.

 

[Pete6.5]

I've questioned the big doe policy for herd reduction. How many fawns can a five year old doe have compared to a one year old doe with its whole life ahead of it.

 

[Rake Aboot]

I target all does, and generally all young deer with a Doe I’ve shot, if possible.

 

[cjm1066]

Taking out the matriarch may change group behaviour, but group size tends to reduce as we enter spring.

 

[HonestJohn]

Without sounding like an ass, anything without antlers need to be shot. I have to think like this with some of my farms and that’s the way I treat it. It has a high population of deer, so I shot the antlerless ones. Hopefully some day I can be more choosey in what I shot. But at the moment they need reducing regardless of hierarchy.

That’s a really bad broad brush statement and may apply to you but not others.

 

[HonestJohn]

Taking out the lead hind or matriarch is just **** poor practice. They keep the herd from breaking up and dispersing, they know the winter feeding grounds and how to avoid death by exposure, they know what roads not to cross and when. Taking them out results in more dispersed youngsters, more road kills and collisions, more deaths from exposure, and so on.

Manage the female calves/kids, the female yearlings, and 2-4 year olds etc.

Managing the males generally doesn’t impact on herd size, but can change tree damage based on how it’s done (eg. Leaving a mature buck in a restock to keep out young bucks).

Basing deer density on what you see in Jan/feb/mar in terms of herds or large groups of roe feeding on fields, is naive. It can give you an indication of population across a larger area and sex mix, but it’s not a representation of localised density

Just my opinion, many will disagee, they can do so if they want

 

[SikaSeeker]

That’s a really bad broad brush statement and may apply to you but not others.

The numbers need to be lessened, the does are of too high a population. I don’t know how the farmers would feel if I told them I let a doe run off because I think she’s the matriarch.

 

[rem284]

Don't over think it. Shoot as many females whenever you can. Don't worry, there will always be plenty of them left

 

[RCS Deer Management]

Taking out the lead hind or matriarch is just **** poor practice. They keep the herd from breaking up and dispersing, they know the winter feeding grounds and how to avoid death by exposure, they know what roads not to cross and when. Taking them out results in more dispersed youngsters, more road kills and collisions, more deaths from exposure, and so on.
Manage the female calves/kids, the female yearlings, and 2-4 year olds etc.

Managing the males generally doesn’t impact on herd size, but can change tree damage based on how it’s done (eg. Leaving a mature buck in a restock to keep out young bucks).

Basing deer density on what you see in Jan/feb/mar in terms of herds or large groups of roe feeding on fields, is naive. It can give you an indication of population across a larger area and sex mix, but it’s not a representation of localised density

Just my opinion, many will disagee, they can do so if they want

Why don’t you want to break up the herds? Do you think perhaps you are projecting management principles from highland settings (where red deer genuinely have to battle to survive the winter) onto fallow in Arable areas where it is relatively easy even for inexperienced young deer to make it through the winter? We have all seen videos of herds of 300+ fallow in parts of the country, where they instantly move off your ground in one big group once you start shooting them, do you not think it would be beneficial for such herds to be broken up into smaller groups that you can get to work on individually?

 

[imnotrucknut]

I've questioned the big doe policy for herd reduction. How many fawns can a five year old doe have compared to a one year old doe with its whole life ahead of it.

Exactly this if you are long term managing the herd.
If the older does are still good breeding does leave them and take out the yearlings first.
If you hit them hard you run the risk of clearing them off you're ground.

Good luck with you're cull

 

[HonestJohn]

The numbers need to be lessened, the does are of too high a population. I don’t know how the farmers would feel if I told them I let a doe run off because I think she’s the matriarch.

That’s your job as a deer manager, to help educate landowners on why it’s actually acceptable to let some deer live !

 

[SikaSeeker]

That’s your job as a deer manager, to help educate landowners on why it’s actually acceptable to let some deer live !

I’d get my walking papers

 

[Blaser243]

I shoot areas with heavy populations of fallow in Hampshire - mostly arable, but some pasture land too. Taking out the older does is recommended because of the liklihood of a mature doe being pregnant (80%) compared to a yearling (just 50%). The point about a younger doe having more breeding years ahead of her isn't wrong though. Neither is the concept of just shooting anything without antlers.

I do not want our area to become like parts of Sussex, although there are areas where numbers are growing markedly. Neither do I want to wipe out the fallow.

It is possible for more than one thing to be true at the same time.

Breaking up a large population is actually a very positive result of culling efforts. The impact they individually have on biodiversity and agriculture is spread over a wider area - the burden is shared. It is also potentially easier to cull from smaller groups of deer than one big herd.

Anyone suggesting that they limit their cull to maintain their own sport has very understanding landowners. Even if farmers are happy, are you doing the right thing by the local environment, if you're not keeping numbers at a sustainable level?

 

[palmer_mike]

That’s your job as a deer manager, to help educate landowners on why it’s actually acceptable to let some deer live !

No it’s not. It’s the deer managers job to fulfill the wishes not the landowner.

 

[HonestJohn]

No it’s not. It’s the deer managers job to fulfill the wishes not the landowner.

So if the government said, eradicate all deer, you would see yourself as a good deer manager fulfilling their wishes?

 

[Rob 71]

No it’s not. It’s the deer managers job to fulfill the wishes not the landowner.

Exactly this to the best of your ability or lose the stalking rights to someone that will.

 

[Heym SR20]

There needs to be a basic understanding of herd management. Richard Prior in his book has an excellent chapter of three in his book on deer stalking and cull plans.

Fundamentally you need to have a clear understanding of the carrying capacity of the land and how many deer this can sustainably support. You need to look at the vegetation, health of the herd, cull weights etc.

So things like hard browse lines on trees, little understory vegetation and beasts small and minimal fat would indicate great pressure on the land. Little browse lines and beasts large and fat - population well with carrying capacity.

With herd and roaming species such as fallow and red this really needs to be done on a large area basis. Fallow will roam over a 20 mile radius. Roe will spend their lives with a few hundred yards of where they were born.

Herd structure is critical - you want a good mix of old mature animals as well as youngsters and young adults. And a good mix of the sexes.

Equally not that in most species the herd is divided. Usually a group of females with young and yearlings, and depending on time of year a mature male or two. You then have groups of younger bachelor males. These will be a mix of yearlings and young but mature animals, as well as good breeding beasts. But again time of year depends.

Then there will be old males that are hanging about - mostly beyond breeding age - these are typically the trophy animals - high value.

Depending on the ground, predators, food supplies etc typically there will be about 20 to 30% new young animals coming into the herd each year, so to keep a herd stable you need to loose similar numbers each year - natural death, disease, road kill and rifle all take their toll.

Your cull should really be 20 to 30% of all age classes. And if over stocked then you increase the take on all.

Leaving the dominant animals in places keeps the herd structure and knowledge. It also stops others moving into the terratory.

When selecting culls, i always look at condition. If its poor - its culled. Same applies to whether its breeding females or males. If its a good animal, that next year will be a better animal leave it.

By good, I am looking for something that is fit, healthy and a decent size for its age. These will produce really good prime carcasses, and also in the case of old males, really good trophies. This will maximise the return on your efforts.

Over population will result in lots of poor skinny carcasses. I was involved 15 odd years ago in a big cull in north west Scotland. The stags were typically runty little 12 stone bags of bones. Over about 3 years the population was knocked down by 60%. A few years later stags coming into the larder at 20 plus stone and lots of fat. Ditto the hinds.

 

[The Singing Stalker]

Surely the reality of seeing a herd of fallow, is you can see the biggest female and shoot something else? The chances are that one of the others will present?

 

[HonestJohn]

Exactly this to the best of your ability or lose the stalking rights to someone that will.

Because stalking rights are worth more than ethical and quality deer management?