Hypothetical on roe number reduction

Malxwal

Well-Known Member
A hypothetical question for the pro deer managers. Estate of circa 3000 acres, mixed arable and rough grazing with strips of mature forestry, not large scale though. Surrounded by more land of same nature. Factor wished deer numbers reduced for potential planting and regen. Would you begin your culling by hammering bucks ?
My thinking would be that you would just be creating voids into which more bucks would move, causing more damage. Would have thought it wiser to leave bucks in place, then hammer the does.
Interested to hear the wisdom from those of you who deal with these situations.
 

Monkey Spanker

Well-Known Member
A hypothetical question for the pro deer managers. Estate of circa 3000 acres, mixed arable and rough grazing with strips of mature forestry, not large scale though. Surrounded by more land of same nature. Factor wished deer numbers reduced for potential planting and regen. Would you begin your culling by hammering bucks ?
My thinking would be that you would just be creating voids into which more bucks would move, causing more damage. Would have thought it wiser to leave bucks in place, then hammer the does.
Interested to hear the wisdom from those of you who deal with these situations.
You may as well start as soon as possible on the smaller bucks. You will create a vacuum at some point anyway, so you may as well do it early. You can then keep going until you have effectively created a reduction in the general area. A few bigger bucks may slow any immigration to some extent, but better to have a couple big lads than loads of little ones that tend to smash the place up more. The key to reduction though will be a robust Doe cull which you clearly know. Good luck!
 

Blakey

Well-Known Member
The only way to seriously impact deer populations is to hammer the females ( the breeding machine for the whole population). Shooting a buck will result in a population reduction of one, shooting a doe will result in a reduction of one this season, two or three next season and so on. Pro
 

Minto

Well-Known Member
You only have one option at the moment and that is to shoot the bucks. As said above the females are the ones you need to cull hard to make an impact on the local population
 

Eddie P

Well-Known Member
Another advantage of taking bucks now:
You can give a leg or 2 to the land owner to prove you're on the land doing the job.
The land owner is likely not aware of the finer points of deer management, but meat in the freezer they wil understand as dead deer.
 

Freeforester

Well-Known Member
A mature buck in a new planted area will police the area 24/7/180, i.e. more than any deer manager, and eject and/or dissuade any other potential incomers. It is a grave error in terms of sylviculture to shoot such a buck in my view, he is far more worth as a help in the cause, not an enemy, he is keeping unwanted would-be pretenders out; accept the usually minimal damage he himself creates, becasuse if you do shoot him, all hell breaks loose among wannabe replacements, all intent on tearing up the other young trees/regen to demonstrate to others they are the new encumbent. Think about this.

Meantime, kill every female you can find without exception, thus reducing both population imbalance and pressure by mouths. Life without too many females is generally agreeable to the males! Trust in the knowledge that you will never overshoot the females, especially given your surrounding scenario, and I'd suggest that you consider to make up the most of the rest of the male cull by including any male calves shot either intentionally or otherwise with their dams - remember, male calves are next year male yearlings, and for the simple reason that the mature bucks will take care of any incursions by young and immature males for you. In this scenario, the mature buck is the foresters friend, but it is too bad that so many foresters and land managers fail to grasp this simple, common-sense rationale. Old, but tested means of establishing good wooded areas, so don't give yourself extra work, much less damage to the plantation/regen. Also, consider accepting that all male deer wish eventually to fray the velvet off their antlers, it's the nature of the beast, no? If this is accepted, then it follows that the best way to minimise (usually unquantified, yet much overstated) tree damage is to leave the big boy in peace, he will do far more good than harm for you.

Come 1April, you will wonder where all the does came from, believe me!
 

bogtrotter

Well-Known Member
A mature buck in a new planted area will police the area 24/7/180, i.e. more than any deer manager, and eject and/or dissuade any other potential incomers. It is a grave error in terms of sylviculture to shoot such a buck in my view, he is far more worth as a help in the cause, not an enemy, he is keeping unwanted would-be pretenders out; accept the usually minimal damage he himself creates, becasuse if you do shoot him, all hell breaks loose among wannabe replacements, all intent on tearing up the other young trees/regen to demonstrate to others they are the new encumbent. Think about this.

Meantime, kill every female you can find without exception, thus reducing both population imbalance and pressure by mouths. Life without too many females is generally agreeable to the males! Trust in the knowledge that you will never overshoot the females, especially given your surrounding scenario, and I'd suggest that you consider to make up the most of the rest of the male cull by including any male calves shot either intentionally or otherwise with their dams - remember, male calves are next year male yearlings, and for the simple reason that the mature bucks will take care of any incursions by young and immature males for you. In this scenario, the mature buck is the foresters friend, but it is too bad that so many foresters and land managers fail to grasp this simple, common-sense rationale. Old, but tested means of establishing good wooded areas, so don't give yourself extra work, much less damage to the plantation/regen. Also, consider accepting that all male deer wish eventually to fray the velvet off their antlers, it's the nature of the beast, no? If this is accepted, then it follows that the best way to minimise (usually unquantified, yet much overstated) tree damage is to leave the big boy in peace, he will do far more good than harm for you.

Come 1April, you will wonder where all the does came from, believe me!


This:thumb:
 
Top