- 1,307
- 127
How many deer do you think are left today in the state?
Isn’t the population from year to year really just a math equation?
I mean if you kill and lose less through predation, car accidents and old age than are born each year your population increases.
There was mention in another thread that saving 66 deer through tag reductions wasn’t significant. The math says that if those 66 deer are all does that those deer would become 1,993 deer in 5 years using a 1.5 birth rate and a 50/50 buck to doe birth ratio.
Same equation using 10,000 does you end up with 318,258 deer in the same 5 year period.
Even one doe saved on the farm I hunt could realize 40- 44 deer over a 5 year period.
None of these numbers account for predation, or loss through other causes, just simple math. However if the number was only half what the math shows it is still big growth numbers.
So if you had the answer to just 4 questions you could manage the population through harvest. With this data you could manage any size tract of land you choose.
How many deer are there currently? ("The Brock Factor")
Buck to doe ratio?
Birth rate average?
What percentage are lost each year through causes other than hunting? This in my mind is the big unknown
Example: State wide
500,000 deer
Buck to doe 50/50 = 250,000- does
1.5 birth rate = 375,000
Total deer = 875,000
20% loss through other than hunting = 175,000 - 700,000 remaining
Must kill 200,000 through hunting to keep population unchanged
Example for county
7,500 deer
Buck to doe 50/50 = 3750 –does
1.5 birth rate = 5625
Total deer = 13,125
20% loss through other than hunting = 2,625, 10,500 remaining
Must kill 3,000 through hunting to keep population unchanged
When you examine the potential for population expansion I think it obvious why the DOW expanded the doe harvest opportunities. These critters can expand population at a very rapid rate.
I just do not think that big changes are required to have a significant impact on the population.
A simple targeted small reduction in bag limits specific to geography would provide for a quick rebound in population in a very short time.
Isn’t the population from year to year really just a math equation?
I mean if you kill and lose less through predation, car accidents and old age than are born each year your population increases.
There was mention in another thread that saving 66 deer through tag reductions wasn’t significant. The math says that if those 66 deer are all does that those deer would become 1,993 deer in 5 years using a 1.5 birth rate and a 50/50 buck to doe birth ratio.
Same equation using 10,000 does you end up with 318,258 deer in the same 5 year period.
Even one doe saved on the farm I hunt could realize 40- 44 deer over a 5 year period.
None of these numbers account for predation, or loss through other causes, just simple math. However if the number was only half what the math shows it is still big growth numbers.
So if you had the answer to just 4 questions you could manage the population through harvest. With this data you could manage any size tract of land you choose.
How many deer are there currently? ("The Brock Factor")
Buck to doe ratio?
Birth rate average?
What percentage are lost each year through causes other than hunting? This in my mind is the big unknown
Example: State wide
500,000 deer
Buck to doe 50/50 = 250,000- does
1.5 birth rate = 375,000
Total deer = 875,000
20% loss through other than hunting = 175,000 - 700,000 remaining
Must kill 200,000 through hunting to keep population unchanged
Example for county
7,500 deer
Buck to doe 50/50 = 3750 –does
1.5 birth rate = 5625
Total deer = 13,125
20% loss through other than hunting = 2,625, 10,500 remaining
Must kill 3,000 through hunting to keep population unchanged
When you examine the potential for population expansion I think it obvious why the DOW expanded the doe harvest opportunities. These critters can expand population at a very rapid rate.
I just do not think that big changes are required to have a significant impact on the population.
A simple targeted small reduction in bag limits specific to geography would provide for a quick rebound in population in a very short time.