Roe numbers

[Mr Lewis]

Estates in places such as Sussex, Hampshire etc that are well managed and consistantly produce good quality trophy stalking and medal heads have roe deer densities of 50-60 deer / KM square across the entire estate regardless or woodland / farmland split

 

[bogtrotter]

Estates in places such as Sussex, Hampshire etc that are well managed and consistantly produce good quality trophy stalking and medal heads have roe deer densities of 50-60 deer / KM square across the entire estate regardless or woodland / farmland split

No offence but yet again someone who is missing the point, while roe may be feeding on crops or even grassland they don't live there, one farmer on my ground grows sugar beet I shoot a lot of deer on his ground but they are not my deer, they are mearly attracted to the crop.

To say there is no difference between farmland and woodland is nonsense, roe may visit farmland but they return to cover, they may even live in crops for example oil seed rape but that is seasonal and weather dependant


I'm afraid if you have farmland without any cover you won't have many resident roe, you may get your neighbours feeding on your land , but you won't have many residents.

You mention a figure of 50 /60 roe per square km regardless of whether farmland or woodland again let me say you seem to be missing the point, what I was saying is that roe resident roe numbers emphases on resident are determined by the amount of cover on the land.

Now there is a big difference between an estate in your area and a large block of sitka spruce in the north you mention 50/60 roe per square km which at first glance seems high, however 1 square km is slightly in excess of 247 acres which would support around your figure of 50 roe, but thats lets call it 250 acres of cover, 250 acres of farmland without cover will not support those numbers.


So yes its just possible on very good ground with good cover to maintain these sort of numbers
however at that level careful management will be paramount.

 

[eggy s]

Estates in places such as Sussex, Hampshire etc that are well managed and consistantly produce good quality trophy stalking and medal heads have roe deer densities of 50-60 deer / KM square across the entire estate regardless or woodland / farmland split

I have 50.2/KM according to my last count.

 

[Mr Lewis]

No offence but yet again someone who is missing the point, while roe may be feeding on crops or even grassland they don't live there, one farmer on my ground grows sugar beet I shoot a lot of deer on his ground but they are not my deer, they are mearly attracted to the crop.

To say there is no difference between farmland and woodland is nonsense, roe may visit farmland but they return to cover, they may even live in crops for example oil seed rape but that is seasonal and weather dependant


I'm afraid if you have farmland without any cover you won't have many resident roe, you may get your neighbours feeding on your land , but you won't have many residents.

You mention a figure of 50 /60 roe per square km regardless of whether farmland or woodland again let me say you seem to be missing the point, what I was saying is that roe resident roe numbers emphases on resident are determined by the amount of cover on the land.

Now there is a big difference between an estate in your area and a large block of sitka spruce in the north you mention 50/60 roe per square km which at first glance seems high, however 1 square km is slightly in excess of 247 acres which would support around your figure of 50 roe, but thats lets call it 250 acres of cover, 250 acres of farmland without cover will not support those numbers.


So yes its just possible on very good ground with good cover to maintain these sort of numbers
however at that level careful management will be paramount.

I guess you have not heard of field Roe then?

 

[Southdowns_stalking]

Its about looking at a piece of ground and assessing what numbers it could realistically hold

I totally agree, i was just trying to inform people that sometimes it works the other way around, and gave a couple of examples. The only real way to estimate the numbers to any degree on said piece of ground is to get out on the ground or use trial cameras, but this again will only be a estimate.

 

[Roebuck243]

We take everything we see last ten years . We see more and more Roe every year with no decline ,but it's top class ground for holding and medals.

 

[Cyres]

Having been given DG's book on deer management as a birthday present I was quite suprised to read of his sustainable roe population of 50+roe per Km sq.

What further complicates any degree of counting in our areas are the blocks to which we have no access or even sight off. Lamping a couple of times a week does give you some clues but what I have noticed with the v wet weather deer tracks and paths are more visible and in places there appears heavy traffic despite no roe being seen day or night.

Also there appears to be a considerable population of urban roe which live undetected in semi surburban areas.

I would like to know how far roe actually travel, I am sure its a lot further than we think.

On another issue I spent 15+yrs fishing a small stream in Shropshire, I lived on it and reconded I knew it inside out. I studyied the dace and Chub population as part of my Honours degree project and had fish tagged for years. When we sectioned it off and electrofished the study area it became very clear that I had seriously understated the popultion density.

Some years lated the brook suffered a nigh on 100% fish kill due to a massive leak of pig slurry, the size and varriey of dead fish I saw was remarkable.

Thus even the best of scientific studies are at best flawed and we have little idea of population densities.

CF reasons why badger cull was postponed.

D

 

[roestalker]

No offence but yet again someone who is missing the point, while roe may be feeding on crops or even grassland they don't live there, one farmer on my ground grows sugar beet I shoot a lot of deer on his ground but they are not my deer, they are mearly attracted to the crop.

To say there is no difference between farmland and woodland is nonsense, roe may visit farmland but they return to cover, they may even live in crops for example oil seed rape but that is seasonal and weather dependant


I'm afraid if you have farmland without any cover you won't have many resident roe, you may get your neighbours feeding on your land , but you won't have many residents.

You mention a figure of 50 /60 roe per square km regardless of whether farmland or woodland again let me say you seem to be missing the point, what I was saying is that roe resident roe numbers emphases on resident are determined by the amount of cover on the land.

Now there is a big difference between an estate in your area and a large block of sitka spruce in the north you mention 50/60 roe per square km which at first glance seems high, however 1 square km is slightly in excess of 247 acres which would support around your figure of 50 roe, but thats lets call it 250 acres of cover, 250 acres of farmland without cover will not support those numbers.


So yes its just possible on very good ground with good cover to maintain these sort of numbers
however at that level careful management will be paramount.

+ 1 Bogtrotter

 

[tom308w]

about 20 years ago on a small walled estate in sweden they wanted all the roe deer shot and estimated that there were 20 roe in there at the finish they got 80 out and wernt sure if they got everything
atb tom

 

[stratts]

Very interesting thread for a noob like myself to try and understand deer numbers.

I have a 1000 acre farm permission that I have seen Roe, Muntjac, Red and CWD on that nobody currently stalks over. If I posted or PM'd the area by google earth, could someone attempt to help me assess the land for numbers as I plan to approach the landowner about stalking in the future?

To me it has a good mix of arable, woodland, spinnies, ponds, hedgrows and lakes, and is a pleasure to shoot over already.

Might be something interesting for someone to do during the dark evenings maybe?!

Cheers

 

[JMS906]

Having spent 4 years counting a variety of species in a variety of ways I am pretty confident NO-ONE knows how many deer are on their, or anyone else's ground for that matter.

This is a pet peeve of mine when "cull figures" are mentioned.
They are a "wet finger in the air" at best, rarely reviewed on a regular basis and are reactionary to sightings and actual deer shot.

I have seen forests driven and the number of deer coming out are double what are expected, similarly I have seen areas of "good" ground that hold very few deer.

I recall reading an article, possibly in the BDS 'Deer' journal, concerning a roe deer count exercise undertaken in Denmark. In short, nets were set surrounding woods and the roe driven into them. They caught, not double the number estimated, but ten times the number estimated.

-JMS