Whats a Healthy buck to doe Ratio?

[BigHills BuckHunter]

I took out a doe a while back but it seems like our ratio is alot more does than bucks. We are thinking about taking out a few more with bow. What is the healthy buck/doe ratio?

[kenn1320]

Pre season its not uncommon to be 1:1. Many people think their ratio is way out of whack, but studies have shown its hard to get more then 1:3 bucks per doe respectively. There was an article one time that said you could kill all your bucks every year, and as long as the does got bred before the bucks got shot, the ratio cant get skewed by more then 1:3. Fawns are typically born at a .58 ratio favoring males. Just looking at the simple math, if you have an enclosure and you had 10 bucks and 10 does the pre season ratio is 1:1. You kill off all but 1 buck, your post season ratio is 10:1. Next year each doe has 2 fawns as an example and they are split 50/50 bucks to does. You now have the original 10 does, plus 10 more does from the female fawns. You also have 10 new bucks, and lets say the 1 buck from last year died. Your left with 10 bucks and 20 does, or a ratio of 1:2 and all your previous year bucks were killed. If this cycle repeated next year, you would have 20 does that had 20 female and 20 males. Your new count is 20 bucks and 40 does, or a 1:2 ratio again. As I said bucks are born at a higher rate of .58 percent, so your ratio gets closer then my example. Sure your not going to have every doe having 2 fawns and recruitment rates vary. Point is nature has a way of taking care of things and when somebody says their ratio is 1:10, its simply not the case. Also some guys think they should shoot a couple does for every buck, or even 1 doe for every buck. That is the worst thing you can do. You will wipe out your herd in no time. You do however have to take approximately 30% of the does in the herd each year to maintain current population. If you take less, the herd grows and more reduces the herd. You can see this by the examples above.
Info like this and more can be read in 6 monthly issues of quality whitetails magazine. The cost, a $20 yearly membership to QDMA.

[BigHills BuckHunter]

Thanks for the great post Kenn. Preseason looked to be 1:1 like you mentioned but it seems more skewed now. These observations are not just from hunting but shining too. Our families average kill ratio through gun and bow season is about 1 buck to 2 does. Maybe even 1:3. Its harder to equalize the kill ratio by letting yearling and 2 yr old bucks live. While yearling and 2 year old does get shot, yet it still seems there are more does in the end. Dont get me wrong, I believe the herd is at a healthy population and much more healthy population than it was 4 years ago. Back then our population seemed to be at an all time low thanks to EAB and T-ZONE. Like you said and I really agree with....A large population of deer that continues to grow is headed straight towards a crash.

[Stanley]

Don't forget the coyotes populations are increasing every year so in some places taking -0- does leads to no population growth. There is a big craze to kill a bunch of does every year. I'm not so sure this is the route to go. Does control the buck populations so for every doe killed there are less bucks born.

[adrenalin]

Don't forget the coyotes populations are increasing every year so in some places taking -0- does leads to no population growth. There is a big craze to kill a bunch of does every year. I'm not so sure this is the route to go. Does control the buck populations so for every doe killed there are less bucks born.

I agree, and have never heard of an area being affected negatively by to many deer. Not in Wisconsin, I think we have to many hunters for that to ever happen. Unless you own a rediculous amount of land it wont happen, and even if there are to many deer on your land they will spread out to your neighbors land. Take for example areas you can't hunt, the deer are doing just fine without herd balancing by people. Also if an area is "buck" habitat it will always hold more bucks, if it doesn't have buck habitat it will always hold more does regardless of how many does you shoot.

[bowhunter15]

Also if an area is "buck" habitat it will always hold more bucks, if it doesn't have buck habitat it will always hold more does regardless of how many does you shoot.

In an area in Minnesota I hunted last year, I saw a total of around 8 bucks and 0 does during the rut. Even trail cam pics throughout the summer there show bucks and coyotes but no does. Yet drive a couple miles down the road and it's doe dominant. I used to think that the ratio was somewhat screwed up there, but I think this statement has some merit. It must just be the local terrain and habitat that causes buck to frequent the area more.

[BigHills BuckHunter]

Also if an area is "buck" habitat it will always hold more bucks, if it doesn't have buck habitat it will always hold more does regardless of how many does you shoot.

In an area in Minnesota I hunted last year, I saw a total of around 8 bucks and 0 does during the rut. Even trail cam pics throughout the summer there show bucks and coyotes but no does. Yet drive a couple miles down the road and it's doe dominant. I used to think that the ratio was somewhat screwed up there, but I think this statement has some merit. It must just be the local terrain and habitat that causes buck to frequent the area more.

I agree with that. One area of the property is really thick bedding cover with ponds and ag fields scattered throughout. This is the buck habitat it seems. The more open areas of hardwoods seem to hold more does. But it seems like when the rut comes in the doe areas have more bucks in them. We had a big storm in 1998 which knocked down alot of trees on one part of the property especially, with the new undergrowth its been thick with briars and brush ever since. Its tough just to walk through there on drives. Always a donation of blood walking through there. Great spot to gun hunt over because bucks some big have been known to bed in there under pressure.

[Southern Man]

I have read in one of Kroll's books that does will take the best (most nutritional) habitat and the bucks will take what's left as long as it meets his needs. Natures way to provide for the birthing mothers. All a buck has to do is breed and stay alive, while does have to breed, carrry, and raise their young. So, it may not be just "Buck habitat", but the lesser habitat for the area. They both may feed in a corn field or in the oaks but that's not all there is to their diet. I dunno if that's true of not just what I've read. I would think there would be a little more to it than that though.

[kenn1320]

Don't forget the coyotes populations are increasing every year so in some places taking -0- does leads to no population growth. There is a big craze to kill a bunch of does every year. I'm not so sure this is the route to go. Does control the buck populations so for every doe killed there are less bucks born.

I agree, and have never heard of an area being affected negatively by to many deer. Not in Wisconsin, I think we have to many hunters for that to ever happen. Unless you own a rediculous amount of land it wont happen, and even if there are to many deer on your land they will spread out to your neighbors land. Take for example areas you can't hunt, the deer are doing just fine without herd balancing by people. Also if an area is "buck" habitat it will always hold more bucks, if it doesn't have buck habitat it will always hold more does regardless of how many does you shoot.

Im no forester, but the land at my work is severely over browsed. We had bucks that we know were 6+yrs old, yet their racks were in the 115" range. These deer show the signs of stress and malnurishment. I found a fawn with spots dead late in the winter, looked to be about 15lbs. These deer dont breed right, the rut is very drawn out, with some of the fawns havnig a hard time reaching that magic weight that triggers their body to allow them to come into estrus. The area Im talking about is Calhoun county, where big bucks are not uncommon. I believe if you reference the recent article DeerSlayer posted about the missisippi buck going from 110" or something small to B&C status with just a change of food, its a safe bet that the bucks at my work would "blow up" if they werent over the carrying capaicty for the land. We will never know, cause EHD wiped them out. Also worth bringing up is the big deer crash MI experienced in the late 80's/early 90's. Im not sure of the date, DS probably can talk more on that. We had deer numbers at all time highs, and our hunter numbers were at their highest as well. The dont shoot does attitude was still strong in the minds of many older hunters. It is said the deer numbers never recovered to what they were and part of that is by design. We as responsible hunters cannot let the population go unchecked. Im not saying to blast lots of does iresponsibly. It would not hurt to contact your local Natural resource office and ask them what they feel is a reasonable dpm(deer per square mile) for your area, and to ask them what they believe it is currently, pre/post season. You hear guys saying "The DNR wants all the does killed", we hear it all the time. However after listening to the officer at one of the QDM meetings, he said in our area they are targeting 20dpm. That sounds like a realistic number to me, yet we have guys in areas with 100dpm and that isnt enough for them. Remember with crops/cover changing as the season goes, even at 20dpm, its not uncommon to have 50dpm or more in your section today, then have few the next as they move around. One last thought on nutrition and too many deer. What looks like miles of food in some ag areas all year ends up being very little during the hardest months of the year. Its a common practice here in MI to chisel plow the fields shorly after harvest. There isnt a lot of surplus grains left on the ground, and with an area that is small woodlots and big open ag field, the woody browse that make up 60% or more of a deers daily diet cannot sustain large numbers of deer year in and year out.
As for coyotes and other predators negatively affecting recruitment rates, I couldnt agree more Stan. In fact I believe(my own thoughts here) that the affects of all these predators wasnt fully anticipated in many areas. I recall all the statements that yotes wont take down mature deer, then you see video of them doing just that. I truly believe some areas in MI have had the population reduced to a point that given the high predator problem the DNR hasnt been successful at increasing the population simply by controlling doe permits like they had the luxury of doing for so many years. My thoughts are once the population gets so low, it cannot overcome the predators and increase on its own, even if you stop the doe shooting. Im just a hunter/arm chair quarterback if you will, but that is my belief.
Onto the buck habitat versus doe. Im hoping Jeff Sturgis will chime in here on this, cause Id like to hear "theorys/experiences" from him on the layering. I have heard from many sources that lots of does can equal bucks forced out to other habitat where they can feel some solitude. Sure they will come around during rut, but as we seem to experience in many parts of MI, lots of deer = not much daytime rut activity. It has been my experience in other states with lower deer numbers, that bucks seem more visible as they search for does. In fact if I was doe hunting, Id have a harder time killing a doe in some areas I hunt, then a mature buck. This has been my experience and it coincides with what BH15 experienced in MN.

[Stanley]

Don't forget the coyotes populations are increasing every year so in some places taking -0- does leads to no population growth. There is a big craze to kill a bunch of does every year. I'm not so sure this is the route to go. Does control the buck populations so for every doe killed there are less bucks born.

I agree, and have never heard of an area being affected negatively by to many deer. Not in Wisconsin, I think we have to many hunters for that to ever happen. Unless you own a rediculous amount of land it wont happen, and even if there are to many deer on your land they will spread out to your neighbors land. Take for example areas you can't hunt, the deer are doing just fine without herd balancing by people. Also if an area is "buck" habitat it will always hold more bucks, if it doesn't have buck habitat it will always hold more does regardless of how many does you shoot.

Im no forester, but the land at my work is severely over browsed. We had bucks that we know were 6+yrs old, yet their racks were in the 115" range. These deer show the signs of stress and malnurishment. I found a fawn with spots dead late in the winter, looked to be about 15lbs. These deer dont breed right, the rut is very drawn out, with some of the fawns havnig a hard time reaching that magic weight that triggers their body to allow them to come into estrus. The area Im talking about is Calhoun county, where big bucks are not uncommon. I believe if you reference the recent article DeerSlayer posted about the missisippi buck going from 110" or something small to B&C status with just a change of food, its a safe bet that the bucks at my work would "blow up" if they werent over the carrying capaicty for the land. We will never know, cause EHD wiped them out. Also worth bringing up is the big deer crash MI experienced in the late 80's/early 90's. Im not sure of the date, DS probably can talk more on that. We had deer numbers at all time highs, and our hunter numbers were at their highest as well. The dont shoot does attitude was still strong in the minds of many older hunters. It is said the deer numbers never recovered to what they were and part of that is by design. We as responsible hunters cannot let the population go unchecked. Im not saying to blast lots of does iresponsibly. It would not hurt to contact your local Natural resource office and ask them what they feel is a reasonable dpm(deer per square mile) for your area, and to ask them what they believe it is currently, pre/post season. You hear guys saying "The DNR wants all the does killed", we hear it all the time. However after listening to the officer at one of the QDM meetings, he said in our area they are targeting 20dpm. That sounds like a realistic number to me, yet we have guys in areas with 100dpm and that isnt enough for them. Remember with crops/cover changing as the season goes, even at 20dpm, its not uncommon to have 50dpm or more in your section today, then have few the next as they move around. One last thought on nutrition and too many deer. What looks like miles of food in some ag areas all year ends up being very little during the hardest months of the year. Its a common practice here in MI to chisel plow the fields shorly after harvest. There isnt a lot of surplus grains left on the ground, and with an area that is small woodlots and big open ag field, the woody browse that make up 60% or more of a deers daily diet cannot sustain large numbers of deer year in and year out.
As for coyotes and other predators negatively affecting recruitment rates, I couldnt agree more Stan. In fact I believe(my own thoughts here) that the affects of all these predators wasnt fully anticipated in many areas. I recall all the statements that yotes wont take down mature deer, then you see video of them doing just that. I truly believe some areas in MI have had the population reduced to a point that given the high predator problem the DNR hasnt been successful at increasing the population simply by controlling doe permits like they had the luxury of doing for so many years. My thoughts are once the population gets so low, it cannot overcome the predators and increase on its own, even if you stop the doe shooting. Im just a hunter/arm chair quarterback if you will, but that is my belief.
Onto the buck habitat versus doe. Im hoping Jeff Sturgis will chime in here on this, cause Id like to hear "theorys/experiences" from him on the layering. I have heard from many sources that lots of does can equal bucks forced out to other habitat where they can feel some solitude. Sure they will come around during rut, but as we seem to experience in many parts of MI, lots of deer = not much daytime rut activity. It has been my experience in other states with lower deer numbers, that bucks seem more visible as they search for does. In fact if I was doe hunting, Id have a harder time killing a doe in some areas I hunt, then a mature buck. This has been my experience and it coincides with what BH15 experienced in MN.

Great post Kenn