Buck Manager | Buck Manager

Deer Management and Thoughts on Predator Control

Game cameras are great for hunters and deer management because they allow 24-7 surveillance of trails, feeders, food plots, and water sources. Not only can motion-triggered cameras be used to collect valuable survey data for herd management, but they can also capture some amazing wildlife photos, such as this awe-inspiring photo of a mountain lion dragging a whitetail buck directly in front of a protein feeder and right in the path of a game camera. Although it’s a great photo that demonstrates why an unlucky hunter may not be seeing any mature bucks, the mountain lion is simply doing what it does best.

Game cameras really do capture some great wildlife photos, but not all of the time. In today’s high-tech world, anyone with a little bit of computer knowledge can splice together parts of several photos and fabricate a seemingly amazing photo. I received the above mountain lion and deer photo in my inbox at least every other day for a couple weeks now, so hunters and non-hunters apparently find this photo fascinating and are passing it around. So why do predators get so much attention? I think part of it is the mystique surrounding them. They literally kill for a living. The other reason is because we as humans love to place blame. So although I believe this photo of a mountain lion carrying a buck is fake (May 16 update: the photo is real), predator management as part of your overall deer management program could be very real. Should you attempt to control predators on your property?

In areas where good deer habitat exists, predators do not pose a serious threat to white-tailed deer populations. The only real exceptions include islands of good habitat–say 500 acres or less–surrounded by vast expanses of poor habitat and then high-fenced ranches less than 1,000 acres in size. Good habitat not only makes for healthy does, which increases fawning rate, but also provides excellent fawning habitat that promotes increased fawn survival. These two factors are critical to the recruitment of deer into the population, but good habitat will not make a difference if it’s only 200 acres surrounded by thousands of acres of poor habitat.

This is because the patch size of the habitat is important. Patch size is a biological term that refers to amount of available habitat. The smaller the patch size, the smaller the block of habitat, the more susceptible the patch becomes to the influence of predators. In the example above, the patch size of good habitat was 200 acres because it was assumed that the area surrounding it was not good habitat, as in areas over-grazed by livestock, huge bermuda fields, plowed fields, or wide open prairie. As the patch size decreases, the influence of predators of the deer population increases. In short, if there are 200 acres of prime habitat surrounded by nothing good for deer, then all of the deer and predators sink into that patch.

Now assume the patch size is 80 acres. It makes for easy pickin’ by predators. At some point the patch becomes so small that it does not function as habitat. A smaller patch increases the probability of predators encountering deer, particulary highly susceptible fawns. The same can be said about high-fenced or game-fence ranches, regardless of the habitat quality surrounding them. The issue with high-fenced ranches is that predators, such as coyotes, knowingly or unknowingly use the tall fences surrounding the property as funnels to corner deer. In low-fenced areas, deer can simply run away or run outside of the patch to safety. In high-fenced properties, deer are more prone to run down fencelines and, in a panic, continue to dart into the netwire fence and corners they can not jump.

As the size of a high-fenced property decreases, the percentage of the property that is near a fence line or corner increases. This means that smaller high-fenced ranches are more susceptible to high levels of predation than large high-fenced ranches. In addition, any high-fenced ranch is more susceptible to predation than low-fenced ranches surrounding it in the absence of predator control. This is only because taller-than-normal netwire fences impeed the escape of deer and increase the efficiency of predators.

With that said, high-fenced ranches have a greater ability to control predators than most low-fenced properties. The most notorious deer predator is the coyote because they are both numerous and crafty. Coyotes can go straight through barbed-wire fences, jump and climb 5-foot netwire fences, but 8 and 10-foot fences are a different story. As a result, coyotes can only go under high netwire fences. Slides, or locations where coyotes cross under netwire fencing, are easy to find and this makes them highly susceptible to traps, particularly snares. Smaller high-fenced properties are more susceptible to the impacts of predators on deer, but they are also easier to monitor and control.

To sum up, smaller ranches can provide good habitat that can sustain a white-tailed deer population, but smaller properties also require more intensive predator control, especially when surrounded by poor habitat. In addition, predators are easier to control on high-fenced properties because of limited predator access, but deer within ranches surrouned by tall netwire fences are very susceptible to predation because of corning. Supplemental feeding and food plots can keep deer healthy and help them grow bigger antlers, but good habitat and predator control, when necessary, can ensure that you have a deer to manage in the future.

TPWD Adopts New Deer Hunting Regulations

An important part of any ranch’s deer management program is informed and proper harvest. Without sufficient population data, improper white-tailed deer harvest is inevitable, and management objectives will never come to fruition. Managing proper harvest often means managing deer hunters.

At the big ranch called Texas, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission has adopted a series of hunting regulations that expand special buck antler restrictions and liberalize doe harvest opportunities in dozens of Texas counties. The new rules take effect during the 2009-10 hunting seasons.

Citing strong support for the changes during the public comment period, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) staff said the new regulations reflect a shift toward biologically-based communities for managing deer populations. One of the biggest changes involves further expansion of the department’s successful antler restriction regulations into 52 additional counties where biologists have identified a need to provide greater protection of younger buck deer.

Texas gets new Deer Hunting Regulations

According to Clayton Wolf, TPWD big game program director, the antler restrictions have significantly improved age structure while maintaining ample hunting opportunity, based on data to date in the 61 counties where the rule is currently in effect. New counties under the antler restrictions regulation this fall include: Anderson, Angelina, Archer, Atascosa, Brazos, Brown, Chambers, Clay, Cooke, Denton, Ellis, Falls, Freestone, Grayson, Grimes, Hardin, Harris, Henderson, Hill, Hood, Hunt, Jack, Jasper, Jefferson, Johnson, Kaufman, Liberty, Limestone, Madison, McLennan, Milam, Mills, Montague, Montgomery, Navarro, Newton, Orange, Palo Pinto, Parker, Polk, Robertson, San Jacinto, Smith, Stephens, Tarrant, Trinity, Tyler, Van Zandt, Walker, Wichita, Wise, and Young.

In addition, the department got overwhelming support to increase whitetail bag limits in several areas of the state with growing deer numbers or populations sufficient to support additional hunting opportunity. The department is increasing the bag limit in most Cross Timbers and Prairies and eastern Rolling Plains counties from three deer (no more than one buck, no more than two antlerless) or four deer (no more than two bucks and no more than two antlerless) to five deer (no more than 2 bucks).

Counties affected include: Archer, Baylor, Bell (West of IH35), Bosque, Callahan, Clay, Coryell, Hamilton, Haskell, Hill, Jack, Jones, Knox, Lampasas, McLennan, Palo Pinto, Shackelford, Somervell, Stephens, Taylor, Throckmorton, Wichita, Wilbarger, Williamson (west of IH35), and Young.

The department is increasing the bag limit from four deer to five deer in Pecos, Terrell, and Upton counties. The justification for this change is that white-tailed deer densities throughout the eastern Trans-Pecos are very similar to densities on the Edwards Plateau, where current rules allow the harvest of up to five antlerless deer.

Another change increases the bag limit from three deer to five deer (no more than one buck) in selected counties in the western Rolling Plains. Counties affected include: Armstrong, Briscoe, Carson, Childress, Collingsworth, Cottle, Crosby, Dickens, Donley, Fisher, Floyd, Foard, Garza, Gray, Hall, Hardeman, Hemphill, Hutchinson, Kent, King, Lipscomb, Motley, Ochiltree, Roberts, Scurry, Stonewall, and Wheeler.

The department also extended whitetail hunting from 16 days to the full general open season in Dawson, Deaf Smith, and Martin counties (three deer, no more than one buck, no more than two antlerless). Increased deer estimates equate to longer and more liberal deer hunting seasons.

Areas of the state having sufficient doe populations that warrant additional hunting opportunity will be getting more doe days this fall: from 16 days to full-season either-sex in Dallam, Denton, Hartley, Moore, Oldham, Potter, Sherman and Tarrant counties; from 30 days to full-season either-sex in Cooke, Hardeman, Hill, Johnson, Wichita, and Wilbarger counties; from four days to 16 days in Bowie and Rusk counties; from four days to 30 days in Cherokee and Houston counties; from no doe days to four doe days in Anderson, Henderson, Hunt, Leon, Rains, Smith, and Van Zandt counties.

The department is also expanding the late antlerless and spike season into additional counties. Counties affected include: Archer, Armstrong, Baylor, Bell (West of IH35), Bosque, Briscoe, Callahan, Carson, Childress, Clay, Collingsworth, Comanche, Cooke, Coryell, Cottle, Crosby, Denton, Dickens, Donley, Eastland, Erath, Fisher, Floyd, Foard, Garza, Gray, Hall, Hamilton, Hardeman, Haskell, Hemphill, Hill, Hood, Hutchinson, Jack, Johnson, Jones, Kent, King, Knox, Lampasas, Lipscomb, McLennan, Montague, Motley, Ochiltree, Palo Pinto, Parker, Pecos, Roberts, Scurry, Shackelford, Somervell, Stephens, Stonewall, Tarrant, Taylor, Terrell, Throckmorton, Upton, Wheeler, Wichita, Wilbarger, Williamson (West of IH35), Wise, and Young. In Pecos, Terrell, and Upton counties, the season would replace the current muzzleloader-only open season.

In East Texas, the department is establishing a special muzzleloader season in additional counties, lengthening the existing muzzleloader season by five days to be equivalent in length with the special antlerless and spike buck seasons in other counties, and altering the current muzzleloader bag composition to allow the harvest of any buck (not just spike bucks) and antlerless deer without permits if the county has “doe days” during the general season.

New counties affected include: Austin, Bastrop, Bowie, Brazoria, Caldwell, Camp, Cass, Cherokee, Colorado, De Witt, Fayette, Fort Bend, Goliad (North of HWY 59), Goliad (South of HWY 59), Gonzales, Gregg, Guadalupe, Harrison, Houston, Jackson (North of HWY 59), Jackson (South of HWY 59), Karnes, Lavaca, Lee, Marion, Matagorda, Morris, Nacogdoches, Panola, Rusk, Sabine, San Augustine, Shelby, Upshur, Victoria (North of HWY 59), Victoria (South of HWY 59), Waller, Washington, Wharton (North of HWY 59), Wharton (South of HWY 59), and Wilson.

TPWD also added one additional weekend and 10 additional weekdays in January to the current youth-only deer season. They also established a one buck only, antlerless by permit, nine-day mule deer season for Parmer County — the first ever deer season for that county.In other action, the commission approved a temporary, indefinite suspension of the current lesser prairie chicken two-day season in October until population recovery supports a resumption of hunting.

With all the changes, TPWD is encouraging hunters to check the Outdoor Annual of hunting and fishing regulations for county and species specific rules before going afield this fall. The annual will be available online and wherever hunting licenses are sold beginning August 15.

Last Shot at Finding Shed Antlers

Spring has officially sprung and although a few white-tailed bucks may still be holding onto last year’s antler growth, the vast majority of bucks have already shed their antlers. The timing of an individual buck’s antler development depends upon many things, but the primary factor is the buck’s hormone levels. In short, areas where local deer populations breed earlier always shed antlers earlier. And although looking for deer sheds is not an important part of a deer management, it can be awfully fun!

This is an exciting time of the year, not only because whitetail bucks are beginning to grow new velvet-covered antlers, but also because their antlers from last year are lying on the ground… somewhere. A lot of hunters may have their spring food plots in the ground or their supplemental protein feeders filled, but then neglect to get out in the field during the spring. I was once guility of this. Following the close of deer season I would just shut her down and stay out of the field until mid-summer, but that was many years ago.

Since that time, early spring has become one of my favorite times to get out into the deer’s world. Not only can I get a good assessment of late-winter habitat use, but I have waited long enough that most bucks have shed the last year’s antler growth. And that gives me my best chance at finding a few shed antlers. With short green grass, sparse brush, most antlers laying on the ground, and favorable weather, early spring is my best opportunity to cover some country and see what I can find.

The best spots to find shed “horns” year-in and year-out continue to be food plots, in the general area around supplemental feeders, watering sources, draws, woodlines, and well-traveled corridors. In areas with thick brush cover, I always have good success in tree-covered (closed canopy) areas with an open understories (no brush), primarily because deer often use these spots as bedding areas. In fact, two of the four whitetail sheds I found yesterday were in these types of areas. The other two were along woodlines, where the edge of a wooded area turned into open field.

Since finding shed antlers is not always easy, especially in an area with a low deer density, it is a good idea to look in areas that you think deer reguarly visit. Yesterday, I spent 2 1/2 hours of continuous walking who-knows-how-many miles and covering an untold number of acres to find 4 sheds, and one of those was from the year prior. And this was even after narrowing down my search to areas that I believed deer frequented. Of course, I have spent longer days in the field looking for sheds and have come back with less, often zero.

But yesterday I found 4 sides, no matches, and none of them were exceptional by any stretch of the imagination. It was still enjoyable, and there is always something about standing exactly where something notable happened, at least in a buck’s life anyway. Currently, the deer is without his most notable defenses. His testosterone levels are low, there is no need to battle for receptive does, and the buck has started a new antler growing cycle.

The next time I stand over his antlers they may still be attached.

More Research on the Supplemental Feeding of Whitetail

Spring is officially here and plants are green again, but the lack of rainfall has kept native vegetation from really taking off. On the bright side, trees, shrubs, and vines are leafing out thanks to some precipitation and warmer temperatures, and providing new-growth browse for hungry white-tailed deer.

And speaking of deer food, there is some on-going research that may shed more light on the supplemental feeding of deer and its impact on native plants. Deer managers agree that supplemental feeding, whether it be protein pellets, whole cotton seed, or some other type of high-protein food, really helps local deer populations.

However, the words “supplemental feeding” have become almost synonymous with “deer management” in some circles, and although not totally accurate, it’s not far off. Although the management of deer populations incorporates much more than the addition of free-choice protein, most landowners giving deer management an honest effort are providing some sort of supplemental food.

So as common as this practice is for the management of white-tailed deer, it also deserves further attention. By definition supplemental food is, well, supplemental. The foods placed out for deer are merely there to add to an individual deer’s natural diet, not replace it. If this were false then a property could support an unlimited number of deer as long as food was continually added to the system. This won’t work.

But some often confuse deer breeders and deer management. Yes, deer can live in pens devoid of vegetation with protein pellets and water, but imagining a ranch that looks like a deer pen would be a sad, sad sight and the deer population would still suffer from density-dependent factors. It was commonly thought that the addition of supplemental food reduced a deer’s use of natural plants — and it’s true — but maybe it all goes down a little different.

Past research found that deer provided with supplemental food in the form of free-choice protein pellets still used native plants, but the deer only consumed the most highly preferred plants available to them.

However, preliminary results from research conducted in South Texas suggests that supplemental food does not encourage selective foraging by deer. So why is it important? Well, we all know that deer prefer to browse on certain plant species. Food preference is probably a function of palatability, digestibility, and overall nutritive value.

In areas with high numbers of deer, highly palatable browse species become over-utilized, stunted (hedged), fail to reproduce, and can die. When this happens over a ranch or ranches and year after year, entire plant species can disappear. This leads to an unhealthy system with plant species after species succumbing to over-use over time.

Under the first scenario, supplemental feeding would not prevent the over-use of preferred browse species by deer, but new research may find that free-choice feeds reduce the use of preferred browse. This is important for deer managers that are interested in providing good wildlife habitat because it gives real credit to the fact that free-choice pellets really are supplemental.

Deer not only use preferred browse species, but they also use moderately and slightly preferred browse plants. This widespread use of browse species suggest that supplements can buffer the use of native plants by deer, but not fully protect them.

So regardless of what the current study finds, both scenarios end up proving that deer can not live on supplemental feed alone. Even when supplemental food is provided free-choice, white-tailed deer still desire native browse plants in their diets. Not only are these plants important for food, but also for the shelter and screening cover they provide for deer and other wildlife species. And let’s not forget that browse plants typically contain protein levels ranging from 15 to 35%. And that can feed your deer and really supplement your supplement, for a lot less money.

Cold Weather, Overpopulation Leads to Deer Die-Off

Every hunter wants to harvest a trophy buck, but when it comes to white-tailed deer hunting the reality falls somewhere between shooting a big buck versus deer overpopulation. On one hand, you have hunters that really just want to harvest a single deer, preferably a big, mature buck. Then on the other hand, you have deer numbers that need to be controlled. This will probably not come as a surprise to you, but the average deer hunter only wants to harvest one deer, or more precisely, one buck. While most hunters love seeing numerous deer while out in the field, an important part of deer management is population management.

The reason I bring this up is because just this last week ranches near Kerrville, on the western edge of the Texas Hill Country, were finding dead deer after several days of cold and wet weather. The cause of these deaths — malnutrition. And before assuming that these deer were confined within a high fence that maintained too many animals, I’ll let you know that they were not. In fact, most of the animals found dead were free-ranging white-tailed and axis deer, but they were all starving. Basically, the deer population of the area has exceeded the carrying capacity of the winter range. They were all competing for limited winter forage, and the weakest died.

Reports indicate that the found deer were in poor physical condition, hip bones exposed, backbones showing, and no internal fat. The rumens of most of the dead whitetails were packed with cedar, some dead oak leaves, and even yucca leaves. Axis deer rumens were packed primarily with dry grasses. The cedars (ashe juniper) in the vicinity of the dead animals were severely browsed. Obviously, the cause of death was malnutrition caused by overpopulation that was exacerbated by the cold, wet conditions that persisted over several days.

Axis deer are more susceptible to cold, wet weather than white-tailed deer because they are an exotic subtropical species, but the end result of malnutrition is realized when mixed with winter weather. Deer in less than optimal condition are always more susceptible to disease and death. Additionally, parasite loads can only make an individual animal’s situation worse. So how can winter die-offs be avoided?

First, the deer population must be kept in check with the habitat. Sure, you may only want to harvest one buck, but realize that the health of each individual deer depends on the availability of food. Supplemental feeding can help, but only if it’s at an adequate level and of the proper type to support the deer population. Each deer impacts every other deer because of the competition for limited resources, but this contest can be greatly reduced if free-choice supplemental food is provided 24-7, year-round. When animals are found dead, remember that the weakest die first.

When monitoring a deer population, many factors can indicate potential deer management problems. Individual body weights, fawn survival (as an indicator of doe and habitat health), and habitat use can all be used to gauge herd health. With that said, pay close attention to the health of deer harvested early in the season. Underweight deer (for their age) are good indicators of a potential problem. In addition, if deer are eating undesirable species, such as cedar, they and the habitat are in very poor condition.