Buck Before Does

[David Barker]

Ok i was at my butchers getting a wee buck done. I had a choice but chose to shoot a fat wee buck knowing that the females left will breed and multiply giving me more deer as the population over the last 10 has been reduced to a level i don't like. Butcher told me that if i leave a doe in ten years it could have produced 152 any one know if this is correct and would any one else in scotland chose a buck over a doe in winter

 

[Emilio]

A few buck are enough for many young so unless you get almost all it will make little difference. Doe are key to reducing numbers, becaus one less doe means less young.....

 

[Freeforester]

If she’s a mature doe, (say 2) then it’s
3 [1 (her) +2 ]in year 1, and for the next 4 years, plus a couple of singles in her last breeding years so about 17 before her demise, and repeat the exercise for the offspring, according to how many female calves she throws, with the year 1 conceived birth being a singleton female
3 + 1 (assuming one of first years twins is female, not always so but we’ll say so for the exercise) repeating the exercise adding a singleton, 4 or 5 sets twins plus another singleton or two in dotage (roughly 18 per female) though it can be the case that she has twins into old age; we have not accounted for losses via RTA, predation, fences, illness and exposure, etc, but the number will quickly bounce back, basic rule of thumb is the post doe season population nearly doubling every mid May.

 

[kieran222]

Ok i was at my butchers getting a wee buck done. I had a choice but chose to shoot a fat wee buck knowing that the females left will breed and multiply giving me more deer as the population over the last 10 has been reduced to a level i don't like. Butcher told me that if i leave a doe in ten years it could have produced 152 any one know if this is correct and would any one else in scotland chose a buck over a doe in winter

Wow, that's a different kind of deer management. Probably ok if you are the land owner but not what most land owners expect of someone given permission to manage deer numbers.

 

[Hazlett]

Butcher told me that if i leave a doe in ten years it could have produced 152 any one know if this is correct

Doing a very rough calculation, working on each doe having a 90% rate of twins (with 50:50 sex ratio), from age of 2 and a mortality rate of 10%, that seems to be about right.

 

[Mickeydredd]

Wow, that's a different kind of deer management. Probably ok if you are the land owner but not what most land owners expect of someone given permission to manage deer numbers.

He has stated that, for him, the numbers are lower than he would like. Perhaps the landowner agrees, in which case he is managing the population appropriately.

Not all landowners have a zero tolerance to deer, thankfully.

 

[Mungo]

Ok i was at my butchers getting a wee buck done. I had a choice but chose to shoot a fat wee buck knowing that the females left will breed and multiply giving me more deer as the population over the last 10 has been reduced to a level i don't like. Butcher told me that if i leave a doe in ten years it could have produced 152 any one know if this is correct and would any one else in scotland chose a buck over a doe in winter

How big is the bit of land and how many are currently there, do you think?

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

My boss has the same approach, last year he bought 100 acres, it’s surrounds a 30 acre wood which is a honey hole for fallow!

He knows he will never control the numbers of deer in the area so therefore he lets me poke about and please myself, shooting fallow for my freezer, I’m never gonna make a difference even if you lamped it hard it would take you 25 years to control the numbers in that area so really if the OP has the green light from the land owner to please himself then so be it.

 

[slider]

Ok i was at my butchers getting a wee buck done. I had a choice but chose to shoot a fat wee buck knowing that the females left will breed and multiply giving me more deer as the population over the last 10 has been reduced to a level i don't like. Butcher told me that if i leave a doe in ten years it could have produced 152 any one know if this is correct and would any one else in scotland chose a buck over a doe in winter

I thought there was a drive to reduce roe in Central Scotland?
Landscape scale deer management required

 

[slider]

If she’s a mature doe, (say 2) then it’s
3 [1 (her) +2 ]in year 1, and for the next 4 years, plus a couple of singles in her last breeding years so about 17 before her demise, and repeat the exercise for the offspring, according to how many female calves she throws, with the year 1 conceived birth being a singleton female
3 + 1 (assuming one of first years twins is female, not so always so but we’ll say so for the exercise) repeating the exercise adding a singleton, 4 or 5 sets twins plus another singleton or two in dotage (roughly 18 per female) though it can be the case that she has twins into old age; we have not accounted for losses via RTA, predation, fences, illness and exposure, etc, but the number will quickly bounce back, basic rule of thumb is the post doe season population nearly doubling every mid May.

So
1
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512

Less natural death, culled, RTA's

 

[Freeforester]

So
1
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512

Less natural death, culled, RTA's

That would presume all female offspring, which I feel is theoretically possible but highly unlikely ( it was the easiest way to arrive at a figure, but inevitably the original female and first of the progeny were unlikely to live and reproduce beyond +/- 7years) ; given a sex ratio of offspring being typically roughly 50:50 the recruitment rate would be rather less than the maximum possible, and thereafter real life mortality would also average a bearing, as you also suggest. A more realistic figure might be in the order of one third the max, I’d suggest, but even this might be optimistic, as each instance of mortality of any female in the real world would have a significant impact on the eventual figure.

It does illustrate the importance of culling females hard though. Ideally any doe taken should have a covering of suet over the kidneys plus caul fat around the rumen, if these are generally absent then it’s probably best to shoot more of them.

Shooting mature males in the winter only serves to ensure a greater instance of fraying damage come the spring, as youngsters compete for a vacated territory, as the incumbent, if left to live, will ensure their own familiar patch is not invaded by opportunists. His fraying and marking stocks don’t tend to vary.

 

[palmer_mike]

That would presume all female offspring,

No.
Allowing for 50% female offspring leads to the same figures. Each doe has one kid of each sex and the doe also stays to breed the next year. Therefore doe numbers double year in year for that maternal line (until age or other factor removes the doe from the equation)

 

[HonestJohn]

If you’d like to increase the population a bit, leave the does for the winter and focus on cull bucks, assuming there are bucks to cull that need culling. Or, leave the deer for a season or two and do something else. Nothing wrong with not shooting a ground, gives it peace, chance to get some fresh blood in, etc.

Many areas really don’t have deer problems, but grey squirrels actually could do with managing.

 

[Freeforester]

No.
Allowing for 50% female offspring leads to the same figures. Each doe has one kid of each sex and the doe also stays to breed the next year. Therefore doe numbers double year in year for that maternal line (until age or other factor removes the doe from the equation)

There is the matter of the female yearlings also being expelled, albeit not perhaps so vigorously as the young bucks.

Best to give by health indicators rather than counting beans, I’d venture.

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

There is the matter of the female yearlings also being expelled, albeit not perhaps so vigorously as the young bucks.

Best to give by health indicators rather than counting beans, I’d venture.

Or shoot on site and they keep coming

 

[David Barker]

Wow, that's a different kind of deer management. Probably ok if you are the land owner but not what most land owners expect of someone given permission to manage deer numbers.

This was discussed with the landowner as his wife was disappointed that she was not seeing deer in front of the house for a long while. Managing deer up the way while not talked about much on here i feel is a good way to improve some of the over grown woods. Most of the chaps i talk to want more deer not less. I suppose its what you see as deer management.

 

[TringSaint]

Ok i was at my butchers getting a wee buck done. I had a choice but chose to shoot a fat wee buck knowing that the females left will breed and multiply giving me more deer as the population over the last 10 has been reduced to a level i don't like. Butcher told me that if i leave a doe in ten years it could have produced 152 any one know if this is correct and would any one else in scotland chose a buck over a doe in winter

I think that is based on a doe having x young per year and 50% of those are does an they also have x young per year and so on, so all totted up is 152, but there are a lot of assumptions in there like the split of male to female offspring - this is determined by the buck /stag, so if the male has predominantly male or female sperm then this can wildly skew the numbers.
It also doesn’t assume for mortality at any point in the decade or a reduction in birth rate.

 

[palmer_mike]

, so if the male has predominantly male or female sperm then this can wildly skew the numbers.

Male or female sperm? Is that an actual thing?

 

[TringSaint]

Male or female sperm? Is that an actual thing?

Yes, all ova / eggs are female (X) and it’s the sperm that carries either the X or Y chromosome.
Y is dominant hence all males are XY, whereas females are XX.

 

[Sol]

I believe in red deer the older the male the more sway towards one sex, right? I think Its hinds first then stags that's why countries outside like Germany are very strict on what age the dominant stag is taken at.
A young stag breeding just equals more hinds, where an older stag breeding equals more males.... what isn't ideal, but at least those "weaker" stags can be sold too hunters.

I'm not sure if there's a study on roe though problem Is since the bucks hold territory there's only so many places he can be and soon as he finds a hot doe he will lockdown with her for a few days until she allows him too breed, whilst say that 5 yo buck breeds that one particular doe there's a half decent chance there's a younger more secretive buck sneaking in and breeding another doe on the other side of his territory

Roe If I have the chance I take a young male first they travel and inherently fill up the voids again by the time there hard antlered Doe if there's no kid, and In very very rare cases a Doe first If there is kids.
There's only one particular doe I would shoot that has kids right this second and Its ones hammering the crap out of a farmers kale field.