Cattails or marsh grass

[Dewey]

Look for irregular shaped water features as well. I say irregular because if you see a perfect little water feature (canal, pond, etc) it is proably man-made and would generally not be within cattails.

I will respectfully disagree with this. In my experience, some of the best mature buck bedding is directly related to man made canals in cattail swamps. Mostly, where a corner is formed by two canals meeting. The spoils where the dredged earth was piled, is the only dry spot for a deer to lay. The corner is a natural barrier from predators. I know of 3 mature buck bedding areas located within 40 yards of two man made canal meeting (a corner).

I agree and have seen this myself many times.

[ Post made via iPhone ]

[mike_mc]

A friend told me he found a website that shows a map of what type of vegetation is growing in that area. I tried searching for it, and maybe this is it? Haven't taken the time yet to check it out yet. http://dnr.wi.gov/maps/gis/datalandcover.html

[stash59]

forgot about that one

[whitetail_addict]

Scouted an area new to me yesterday that looked really good on maps too... big wet marsh with obvious trails visible on Google Earth between several isolated red oak islands (not much for white oak in that area) out in the middle of the marsh. I made about a 2 mile loop out through knee high water following the deer trails from island to island and the sign I expected, especially for this time of the year, was not only not there... I didn't even see but maybe 4 or 5 old rubs from past seasons. This particular marsh was mainly the shorter marsh grass and I didn't see any cattails. Also, the islands didn't seem to have the red brush thickets on the edges... some brushy spots but not many.

The larger surrounding area in general is all public forest with scrub red oak and pine and then river bottom habitat that is more hilly and has white oak as well. The forest land has not been known for high deer numbers or big bucks but the river bottoms only a few short miles from this marsh area I checked out are full of sign and I've seen and heard of at least a few nice bucks in and around those river bottoms. The entire area overall doesn't see much for bowhunting pressure at all and is mainly a gun hunting area with a lot of hunting cabins. That said, the pressure is probably minimal outside of that one week of gun season here in WI.

So, from previous posts in this thread it seems as though the cattails alone could be one of if not the reason I'm not seeing much for deer sign in this marsh. However, is it likely that the deer are just more attracted to the river bottom areas with the white oaks as opposed to the forest and marsh areas with not much more than scrub red oak?

Like I said I'd say the numbers are lower than a lot of the state which obviously would mean less deer sign too but as was said only a few short miles away the bottoms are loaded with buck sign so the deer are in the wider area. Would the lack of bowhunting pressure keep the deer from pushing back into this marsh grass marsh since they are really being forced into it?

[whitetail_addict]

This is the first real large marsh area I've found near me so I'm kind of new to the marsh habitat. But now that I've found it I want to scout it and learn it to try and apply the marsh video tactics and add that element to my options for hunting every year. Learning why the deer aren't in this particular marsh however may save me a lot of time in the future allowing me to skip over unproductive marsh land and similar marsh areas in the future and only focus on marshes with the particular elements preferred by deer and big bucks in particular.

The area overall is an area where 90% of the guys that hunt it say big bucks just don't exist, yet every year I hear of one or two that are either killed or seen. That's enough for me to believe there's something or somewhere for these bucks to hide out year after year to get that big and apparently most guys aren't on to it. My goal is to figure it out because the lack of bowhunting pressure there, even with the lower overall deer numbers, makes it an untapped resource for me. Finding those few key buck hideouts in the thousands of public acres there will be the hard part.

[fishlips]

Some spots I have scouted have sign earlier in the year but you couldn't find a deer in it later in the season. Guessing you aren't to that part of the season yet though.

the problem with marsh grass too is that it starts to lay down and there is less cover for the deer.

[ Post made via Android ]

[stash59]

Have you gone back to the aerials yet to try and distinguish the difference in how this area looks like from the aerials. I would think the lack of red brush would show up on the aerials. You may have to toggle back in time to find a fall picture that shows the contrast. This may also point you in the right direction if you find some areas with red brush. Or at least some kind of brush that like red brush offers both cover and a food source.

Brush like alders offer cover but deer don't find them very palatable. So they only eat them as a last resort. New growth maples and aspens/poplar are some other great cover and food source combos. Talking with the local deer biologist may give you some more that may be more relavant to this area.

It's hard to believe that the deer aren't using this area if the hunting pressure is so low. Also remember that lower deer densities also often means bigger bucks. Since the hunting pressure is lower.

Sounds like a place worth the while trying to figure out whats going on.

[whitetail_addict]

I'm thinking the cattails definitely have something to do with the lack of sign since the river bottoms likely have good cover as an alternative to the less desirable marsh grass.

Do you think the white oaks in the river bottoms are a big enough draw to pull the deer out of the upland areas that pretty much just have red oak? Those islands, though isolated, are pretty much only holding red oaks.

Also, I think I may have underestimated the draw of red brush since it not only offers the thick bedding cover but also a preferred browse. These islands had little, if any, red brush on or around them.

I guess overall the one thing that still stumps me is the fact that the trails through the marsh grass are about 2 foot wide and very noticeable on Google Earth year after year. Tracks aren't evident only because the trails are through the marsh water. These trails indicate to me that the deer must be using this area heavily at some point during the year. ???

[john1984]

Often times on the aerials, cattails grow in circles, thats what I look for:



The circular shapes you see are cattails, i can guarantee that cuz i just walked this a few weeks ago,.

If you use google earth, use the feature where you can view aerials from different times of year. The circles show up better at certain times of year. Some times of year the circles are invisible. Other times you can spot them really easy.

I've noticed the same thing Mike.

[ Post made via Android ]

[stash59]

I'm thinking the cattails definitely have something to do with the lack of sign since the river bottoms likely have good cover as an alternative to the less desirable marsh grass.

Do you think the white oaks in the river bottoms are a big enough draw to pull the deer out of the upland areas that pretty much just have red oak? Those islands, though isolated, are pretty much only holding red oaks.

Also, I think I may have underestimated the draw of red brush since it not only offers the thick bedding cover but also a preferred browse. These islands had little, if any, red brush on or around them.

I guess overall the one thing that still stumps me is the fact that the trails through the marsh grass are about 2 foot wide and very noticeable on Google Earth year after year. Tracks aren't evident only because the trails are through the marsh water. These trails indicate to me that the deer must be using this area heavily at some point during the year. ???

Might need to put up some cameras!

[youngbuck917]

I have found that unless the ground is frozen they won't bed in strictly cattails. They want some kind of structure and of course lack of human intrusion. My question is would the marsh grass to cattail transition provide enough structure to have a place to bed? Sorry for the hijack.

[ihookem]

I think marsh grass hold a lot of deer if it grows tall enough and there is red dogwood and maybe some brush. In areas with just marsh grass , there is not a lot of deer sign. When ya get close to the dogwood/ willow ( brush) the deer sign improves a lot. Sometimes marsh grass gets high enough to grow over brush . This creates all kinds of ( tents) or places to hide. Where I hunted tonight , they are everywhere. If a deer is in there and it doesn't move, you won't see it unless you look into the hiding spot. At about 4:45 tonight a nice size doe came out. Then a really big buck came out . It was huge. As it streched out to smell the doe, the thing was 8' long when stretched out. They were in the high marsh grass , mixed with dead elm that falls over and then the high grass grows over it.