Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2012 5:30:39 GMT -5
I don't advocate eliminating nuisance permits... but why does someone with 2,000 acres who has a major problem with deer post their land for no hunter access? Guys out there looking for some private land places to hunt, some privtate land places posted against hunting have so many deer they feel need to shoot & bury them in August. Something doesn't seem right with that equation to me Probaly cause he has over 1,000,000 invested in that land, and pays yearly rent (taxes) of several thousand a year. Just saying
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Jun 4, 2012 5:50:20 GMT -5
well I can understand that... but if the day comes where most private lands are posted tight and hunting access is limited to mostly public ground, then what will we have? Summer kill programs replace sport hunting for the bulk of deer management?
Letchworth State Park ran a stealth program where they brought in a bait & kill team to shoot 150ish deer in February 2011 around their admin zone on the south end, a place that is closed for all hunting including archery. There are bonafide 170" - 200" bucks there in that sanctuary, along with high numbers of deer in general.
Why couldn't that state ground be open for restricted archery hunts at the very least? Why closed to all hunting, but then so many deer mandate spending taxpayers' dollars for a night-time kill on state lands in mid-winter?
It seems like there are dual mentalities of leased land for trophies by one group and no access to anyone by another group... and sometimes both overlap. I do know it is becoming impossible to get permission for deer, turkeys and even muskrat trapping in places where I grew up and know the family owners all my life.
Meanwhile, everyone wants me to join their leases because guys are dropping out due to the economy and not enough paid hunters to split the annual lease bill comfortably. Recreational land use has been headed in the wrong directions for years now.
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 6:33:00 GMT -5
I agree Austin and the others that talked of reducing damage permits and shorter gun seasons.I believe NY should do what other some other states have done and give tax breaks to land owners(farmers)to open their land to hunters and the only time nuisance permits should be issued is during hunting season and the tags given to hunters that utilize the property so that the deer do not go to waste.Farmers that plant food crops that don't allow hunting on there land shouldn't be issued damage control permits for deer in my opinion.I am not anti farmer either,I grew up working on farms and have family that farm and none of those farms use nuisance permits because family and friends are more than willing to take care of the excess animals.There are things that could be done,like tax breaks,that would give farmers incentive to allow hunting on their properties.Farmers also could make a little extra money if they were willing to lease the hunting rights to small groups to receive some kind of tax break or in lieu of the tax break be allowed to take up to a certain amount in lease dollars without having to claim it as income.The problem most farmers have is with slob hunters,one idiot can ruin it for a lot of other folks in the future.A guy leaving a gate open and allowing a group of calves or cows out can put a sour taste in a guys mouth real quick.
|
|
|
Post by inthewoods on Jun 4, 2012 8:43:36 GMT -5
Im with Walleyed on this topic. I love the fact he doesn't beat around the bush. A man after my own heart. -Dave
|
|
|
Post by fisherman on Jun 4, 2012 10:32:14 GMT -5
I have hunted northern Steuben County for the past twenty Five years; wmu 8P. This county historically has led the state in deer kill or been in the top two or three counties. I hunt with local farmers and I am grateful for their hospitality. In the past few years I have watched the deer herd drop dramatically, as Austin mentions down to a third of past years. I attribute that to predation of the fawns by an out of control coyote population and an out of control handing out of nuisance permits. I too do not advocate stopping nuisance permits, but I do strongly advocate an investigation by DEC before these permits are issued and much better management of them than is presently being practised. The same hold true with beaver kill permits. I'm sick and tired of hearing that they don't have the manpower to do that while our license fees continue to increase. I sympthasize with farmers with crop damage, but with the herd at present levels that many nuisance permits are not justified. Perhaps your herd has increased where you are AJ, but the reverse holds true in the southern tier. The other half of this equation are the coyotes. Let me say that my opinions about them are not those of NYSTA and I speak only for myself. Sure they are considered furbearers, but their numbers are out of control; so much so that if you shoot a deer in late day in Steuben County and don't follow up on it until next morning the odds are the coyotes will be there first. It has happened repeatedly. I predict that sooner or later coyotes are going to kill a child in New York State. Talk about black bear predation on fawns, they are not half as bad as the coyotes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2012 10:42:52 GMT -5
Fisherman, In my area of western NY, I will bet money, haybines kill more fawns then any coyote family. And it's still not enough.
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Jun 4, 2012 11:17:19 GMT -5
Al, I know the land you guys hunt and am still good friends with M. Deusey on the opposite side of those borders. He's a serious hunter know, got cameras out all over the place on his land and tells me the overall herd there is way down from when I lived = hunted there a decade ago.
fwiw he sold the dairy herd two years ago, is solely a grain = hay farmer now with +/- 1500 acres tilled and doesn't believe in damage permits. But for a number of reasons, the herd is way down. I'd say it's a combination of couple real harsh winters before the last one, greater bear & coyote depredation and more fawns dropped in alfalfa fields that get mowed over as AJ noted.
Many of those fallow fields and grassy sections from before have been cleared & planted with crops now. Deer are squeezed into tighter confines for fawning, and lots of them use hayfields because that's all they have left.
Farmers around north end of Letchworth mowed their first cutting on May15th this year, with some type of machine that mows it like a golf course and squeezes the moisture out thru rollers. This hay is grown for pellet manufacturing in Cuylerville. Anyways, my friend and I counted four different does wandering around those wide-open fields and two of the fields had turkey vulture groups out clustered in the middle.
Didn't take much to figure out what those birds were feeding on :<(
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 12:31:50 GMT -5
I agree that predation by bears,coyotes and I will add bobcats to the list,kill a lot of fawns.The only upside is I have gotten so many calls and requests to trap coyotes in the last 2 years that I have had to turn people down do to time constraints.I had a guy ask me the other day to come trap some dogs that were killing wild turkeys on his land.He was a little disappointed when I told him I couldn't because the season was closed,some people don't realize,or like the fact that there are seasons on coyotes.I would prefer they remain listed as a game animal myself but I don't believe for a minute that no seasons and aggressive tactics would eliminate them from the landscape.They would just get harder to kill is all...
|
|
|
Post by trappermac on Jun 4, 2012 13:25:12 GMT -5
You see, the problem I see with the current arguments that have cropped up on this thread is that nobody has fact to back up their “opinions”. Deer nuisance permits are out of control….why?....facts? Or is it because that is what is spewed in the deer forums? Who hear knows anything about how many are issued and to what extent? Who can show proof that this system is flawed?
Coyote out of control and taking too many deer….I’ve yet to see any proof (i.e. reports) to conclusively show the effects of coyote predation on deer herds. Guide me towards a sound biological report and I will read it and tell you how correct you are. There are many speculative reports out there, this I know. Give me proof that the coyote is out of control.
Anyone here know how much loss of revenue from crop damage affects a farmer (some of you may)? Unless you experience it you have only opinions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2012 13:29:56 GMT -5
You see, the problem I see with the current arguments that have cropped up on this thread is that nobody has fact to back up their “opinions”. Deer nuisance permits are out of control….why?....facts? Or is it because that is what is spewed in the deer forums? Who hear knows anything about how many are issued and to what extent? Who can show proof that this system is flawed? Coyote out of control and taking too many deer….I’ve yet to see any proof (i.e. reports) to conclusively show the effects of coyote predation on deer herds. Guide me towards a sound biological report and I will read it and tell you how correct you are. There are many speculative reports out there, this I know. Give me proof that the coyote is out of control. Anyone here know how much loss of revenue from crop damage affects a farmer (some of you may)? Unless you experience it you have only opinions. Well said
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Jun 4, 2012 13:31:40 GMT -5
Anyone here know how much loss of revenue from crop damage affects a farmer (some of you may)? Unless you experience it you have only opinions. I only take issue with farms being closed to hunting that complain about excess deer and file for substantial numbers of summer kill permits
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 13:32:41 GMT -5
Coyote out of control and taking too many deer….I’ve yet to see any proof (i.e. reports) to conclusively show the effects of coyote predation on deer herds. Guide me towards a sound biological report and I will read it and tell you how correct you are. There are many speculative reports out there, this I know. Give me proof that the coyote is out of control. All you gotta do is is read some studies. White-tailed Deer Predator-prey relationships between the white-tailed deer and the coyote have been extensively studied. The coyote is a significant predator of deer fawns. Studies in Texas have shown that the coyote’s diet consists of 70% fawns during June and July. Sheep predation by coyotes is known to drop drastically when fawns are born around the first of June. The synchronous birth of fawns in June allows the numbers of fawns to overwhelm the predators, and although a large number of fawns are taken during the first month of the fawns’ lives, they become relatively secure after about one month. During winter predation again picks up and deer again become the main diet of coyotes. Although the coyote takes healthy adult deer during the winter, winter killed and wounded deer as well as carcasses and offal from hunting season probably make up the bulk of the winter diet. In areas, such as West Virginia, where deer populations are abundant, coyote predation may benefit deer health by reducing the deer herd and providing more nutrients for the remaining deer. Coyote predation also has the potential to have significant negative effects on deer herds. In some northern states, deer herd densities are relatively low and their habitat consists of vast wild areas with severe winter weather. In Maine, food habitat studies showed that white-tailed deer made up 50-60% of the coyote’s diet, and this predation had the potential to have significant negative effects on the deer herd. Coyote predation in the high mountain areas of West Virginia with lower deer populations and severe winters is likely to have more effect on the deer herd than in areas with higher deer populations. In Texas, fawn survival in a coyote proof enclosure was significantly higher than outside the enclosure; however, as deer populations in the enclosure exceeded their carrying capacity fawn survival from 6-12 months was greatest outside the enclosure because the fawns were in better physical condition. This demonstrated that coyote predation in a deer population that exceeded the carrying capacity of the habitat could increase survival of older fawns. In a fawn survival study in Centre County Pennsylvania during 2000-2001, 218 fawns were radioed and followed with telemetry equipment. Of these fawns, predators killed 22 percent, the leading source of mortality. Of the fawns killed by predators, most were killed by coyotes (49%) and bears (43%). Nearly 50% of all mortality occurred during the month of June, with 18 percent and 16 percent in July and August. It was interesting to note that 84 percent of fawn predation occurred on one of two study areas. This probably illustrates the difference in predation rates due to localized coyote populations.
|
|
|
Post by Itrapny on Jun 4, 2012 13:42:28 GMT -5
The most recent studies conducted here in NEW YORK about coyote/ deer predation show that they ARE NOT consuming living fawns at an excessive rate. The study did find that fawns killed by farm machinery or road killed animals were consumed quite commonly however. They study is just being completed and the results haven't been published as yet, but there have been breifings/updates about the studies given at the NYSTA Spring meetings as well as BOD meetings.
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 13:43:13 GMT -5
Anyone here know how much loss of revenue from crop damage affects a farmer (some of you may)? Unless you experience it you have only opinions. I only take issue with farms being closed to hunting that complain about excess deer and file for substantial numbers of summer kill permits X2
|
|
|
Post by fisherman on Jun 4, 2012 13:55:54 GMT -5
Thank you clt. I do not pretend to be a wildlife biologist but I know what I have been observing. As for agricultural mowing practises they have been around for years and yes they do kill some fawns, but the fact remains that the herd has dropped significantly in the past few years. Where I hunt the farmers raise potatoes, corn, and soy beans. There is no early spring mowing. Thank you again for the studies. My property in Pennsylvania is located in Clearfield County, just west of Centre County. I also hunt in Elk County. Interesting that 92% of fawn mortality is due to predation from coyotes or bears. Add to that the uncontrolled damage permits and it is becoming more and more of an uphill battle for the deer. For me coyotes are as bad as housecats when it comes to predation of birds and wildlife.
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 14:00:58 GMT -5
The most recent studies conducted here in NEW YORK about coyote/ deer predation show that they ARE NOT consuming living fawns at an excessive rate. The study did find that fawns killed by farm machinery or road killed animals were consumed quite commonly however. They study is just being completed and the results haven't been published as yet, but there have been breifings/updates about the studies given at the NYSTA Spring meetings as well as BOD meetings. Of course not they have to be dead for them to consume them. ;D I'm sorry but a coyote is a coyote is a coyote.They have been studied in many areas for many years as far as predation on deer and deer fawns.You have to be careful with studies and you have to examine the individuals conducting them and who is funding or behind the study.There is a concerted effort amongst AR groups to re-establish and or increase the number of predators because their view is that predators can take the place of hunters and hunting in controlling game animal populations.It is beneficial in their eyes to protect predators and create false impressions as to the actual effect they have on game animals.Our eastern coyotes have been shown through DNA studies to contain a high percentage of wolf DNA and that means larger animals than western coyotes,more aggressive and more pack oriented in hunting situations.My point is to examine those who are leading and funding such studies and examine their literary history and looking at their personal opinions and motivations.There are many in the system who are not friendly to the hunting and trapping community and we don't exactly live in a conservative state.These are just my personal opinions.My feelings on the other hand are that coyotes,bears and bobcats kill a significant portion of fawns,one species on it's own may not be a significant impact over all but combined, I believe based on what I have read and understand, that they have a significant impact on fawn recruitment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2012 14:02:48 GMT -5
You guys who don't want anything or anyone to kill a deer so YOU can hunt them on land YOU DONT OWN make me laugh. No one should have to open the land they own to the general public to defend it from wildlife, period.
Get a solid deer managment plan in place.
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 14:06:27 GMT -5
fisherman,I used to work on a farm and mowed hay,we used to kill two or three fawns a year on the 80-100 acres of meadows we mowed,we missed some also though.If a doe got up and ran we got where we would stop and walk around to try and find the fawn.Sometimes you would find them sometimes not.
|
|
austinp
#3 Newhouse
the next fur season is never far from our minds :)
Posts: 3,008
|
Post by austinp on Jun 4, 2012 14:08:28 GMT -5
Get a solid deer managment plan in place. in your opinion, what would that be? how would it impact recreational hunting and license sales = P.R. act tax revenue for wildlife?
|
|
|
Post by Itrapny on Jun 4, 2012 14:10:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 14:26:29 GMT -5
You guys who don't want anything or anyone to kill a deer so YOU can hunt them on land YOU DONT OWN make me laugh. No one should have to open the land they own to the general public to defend it from wildlife, period. Get a solid deer managment plan in place. I agree, a solid deer management plan would be helpful but when the state issues doe permits for a WMU they do it based on deer numbers in that area.If they issue 5,000 permits for does and only 2500 permits are filled due to lack of access,then is the management plan flawed or is it an issue of hunter access?It used to be around here you could hunt where ever you wanted for whatever you wanted,you always asked out of consideration but access was always given.Much different now,most either just plain don't allow hunting or they have a relative that hunts there once in awhile so no.I personally don't rely on farmers because of this,I belong to a large club to avoid all the hassle that comes with trying to find good hunting by permission.Killing deer just to kill them is a waste of a public resource.JMO
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 14:46:32 GMT -5
Itrapny,I have read a lot of that before.My problem is with the fact they are using collared coyotes and using a lot of estimates and educated guesses to make their determinations.If they want to find out how many fawns are killed by predators they should collar fawns and track them.A lot of good studies have been done with collared deer/fawns and shown that predation is a factor in fawn recruitment.
I am a little surprised at their estimate of coyote population also,seems a little on the low side to me.?
|
|
|
Post by clt on Jun 4, 2012 15:08:12 GMT -5
Here's another good article,little long but good.
New research at Fort Rucker shows heavy predation of fawns. By Daryl Kirby Originally published in the November 2011 issue of AON Coyotes may be killing enough deer to keep herds from recovering from overharvest. Deer managers and hunters now know for certain coyotes in Alabama and other southeastern states are taking a bite out of fawn numbers. Top deer researchers, including the team at Auburn’s Deer Lab, have studied fawn mortality and found survival is significantly lower than it used to be. Coyotes are the primary fawn killer.
A recently published study on fawn survival at Fort Rucker showed there was hardly any survival to speak of. At Fort Rucker and in other recent studies in the Southeast, fawn survival ranged from 20 and 23 percent, and that is translating to low recruitment rates of 0.2 to 0.25 fawns per doe. Recruitment rate is the number of surviving fawns per adult doe in the pre-hunt population. In a healthy deer herd, recruitment rates should be 0.6 to 0.8., and the fawn survival rates should be at about 50 percent.
A decade ago, you’d have been scoffed at for saying coyotes kill a significant number of fawns in the Southeast, but it’s a fact backed by the latest research. Now, there is growing evidence coyotes are actually limiting deer populations. Even more shocking is that fawn-eating coyotes, when combined with overharvest of female deer, may be causing a deer-management black hole called a predator pit.
In the predator-pit scenario, if a deer population is reduced past a certain point by hunter harvest, it will then get hammered even more by coyotes to a point the population is so low the coyotes won’t let the deer herd recover.
Dr. Steve Ditchkoff, an Auburn professor and a top whitetail researcher who heads up Auburn’s respected Deer Lab, talked to AON about the predator-pit concept, which has come to the forefront as researchers examine fawn mortality at several locations where deer populations are usually low.
“We’re guessing at this point — trying to make an educated guess — at what is going on and why. This predator-pit model really describes, I think, what we’re seeing,” Steve said. “If a predator pit is occurring, essentially what it’s telling us is we can harvest does, and that’s an important part of a deer-management program, but we just have to be careful not to push it ‘too hard.’ I put too hard in quotes because I don’t know how to describe that any better.”
The general consensus in Alabama and other southeastern states was that it was nearly impossible for hunters to kill too many does. Either-sex days were liberalized, and limits for antlerless deer were practically deemed unnecessary in the minds of many deer managers.
Now it appears coyotes are a wildcard that could dramatically change the deer-management game on some tracts of land.
“If you keep a deer population above a certain threshold level, the deer population will rebound back to high deer numbers,” Steve said. “But if you push it below a threshold level, then coyotes are able to pull it down further to a second point of equilibrium.”
Once the deer herd gets to that point — mired in a predator-pit scenario — reducing hunter harvest isn’t enough to bring the deer population back up. The coyotes won’t let the herd recover.
The Fort Rucker Situation
Too many deer, time to whack some does. That was the thinking in the late 1980s at Fort Rucker, a 63,100-acre Army facility located in Dale and surrounding counties in the Wiregrass region of southeast Alabama. Fort Rucker has a rich history of great hunting and fishing, thanks in large part to on-staff biologists and good management practices.
Like many tracts of land in the mid to late 1980s, the deer herd at Fort Rucker flourished a bit too much. Low weights and heavy parasite loads indicated an overpopulation of deer. Antlerless harvest was increased, and dog drives were allowed so more deer could be killed. It worked.
The record harvest at Fort Rucker was 633 deer in 1987, which was the first year hunters killed more female deer than male deer. Five years later, the harvest had dropped to 338 deer. Two years later, in 1994, the harvest was down to 162 deer, and the antlerless harvest was reduced and dog drives were stopped. The next season only 74 deer were killed, including only three female deer. But even with reduced antlerless harvest, the herd never recovered as it should have. The highest harvest in subsequent years was 189 deer in 2000. Last season only 50 deer were killed at Fort Rucker.
Something significant was going on. The wildcard was at work — coyotes.
On Aug. 6, Auburn University published a graduate thesis written by Angela Jackson titled “Survival Estimates of White-tailed Deer Fawns at Fort Rucker, Alabama.” Angela and other researchers, under the direction of Dr. Ditchkoff and with the help of Fort Rucker biologists and volunteers, radio-collared and monitored 14 fawns in 2009 and 2010. The low deer density that made Fort Rucker a prime location to study fawn survival also posed a problem. There were so few deer they couldn’t get enough for a larger sample size.
Does were trapped with cannon nets over areas baited with corn. The does were sedated, and vaginal implant transmitters were inserted. When a doe gave birth, the transmitter was expelled, and researchers could move in and find the fawn, which was fitted with a telemetry collar.
According to Angela’s thesis, “Of the 14 fawns, only three survived to 6 months of age. Six of seven predation events were attributed to coyotes based on examination of bite patterns and remains left at the site.”
The study estimated the probability of fawn mortality at Fort Rucker due to coyotes to be 65 percent.
“This study, like other recent studies in the Southeast, has found that low fawn recruitment seems to be driven by greater levels of coyote predation than originally believed,” Angela wrote.
The Fort Rucker study was the first in the Southeast to look at both fawn survival rates and coyote densities.
“Presenting both of these estimates creates a baseline for comparison with future studies and could help to elucidate our understanding of the interactions between these two species,” Angela wrote.
How We Got Here
In the late 1980s, deer populations were at all-time highs after making a remarkable comeback. Restocking efforts in the 1950s worked, and enforcement of game laws limited the harvest of does.
Too many deer meant it was time to kill some does, and deer management in Alabama and other southeastern states quickly went from little antlerless harvest to hunters killing about as many and in some cases more does than bucks. About the same time, the concept of quality deer management (QDM) took off. Fewer deer meant better quality.
“With the QDM push, it did a good job of educating the hunters about the need to harvest does,” Steve said.
Deer management in the late 1990s and the next decade seemed to be on auto pilot — the herd had been restored, liberal doe days and limits allowed for plenty of antlerless harvest to keep overpopulated areas in check, and bigger bucks were being grown.
Hunky-dory in the deer woods.
“Cruise control is a real good description of where we were. I pretty much felt that same thing, and 15 years ago we would have been on cruise control,” Steve said. “But the thing we started to push was — harvest does, harvest does, harvest does — not realizing that you possibly could push populations over the edge.”
Coyotes, the wildcard, have changed the game. The idea that it’s possible to kill too many does may have seemed ludicrous to some deer managers, but it’s a concept that’s now on the table at least for discussion and study.
“We’re realizing it is possible to push a population down too far in some cases,” Steve said. “We don’t know if this is common, but there have been a couple of populations that have been studied that show that you can push a population to the point where you have very low recruitment rates, and as a result that population has a very difficult time rebounding.
“Now we’re essentially saying, ‘Whoa, you can shoot too many does.’ The scary part from a deer-management perspective is that hunters could go too far back the other way and not shoot any does.”
Hunters were the first to sound the alarm that they were seeing drastically fewer deer. As far back as 2006, the Conservation Advisory Board (CAB) heard enough complaints from hunters that coyotes and doe days were the subjects of a discussion during a CAB meeting.
“Some of them were seeing considerably lower deer numbers, and I think others were just seeing less deer,” Steve said. “The one thing I’ve always said is, the whole reason we increased doe-harvest numbers was to drive deer populations down. If our goal was to reduce a population by 20 percent, then we should see less deer, No. 1. But No. 2, if you reduce a deer population by 20 percent, your deer sightings probably go down by 50, 60 or 70 percent, and most people don’t realize that. So it’s difficult to gauge hunter observations.
“Three things we’ve documented,” Steve said. “One, coyotes are here. Two, we’re documenting greater rates of predation on fawns. Three, we’ve documented if you reduce predator numbers, you can get increases in recruitment rates. I don’t think that’s a solution to the problem, but it may play a role in management in some form or fashion.”
As hunters who also want to best manage their property, what do we do about the coyote wildcard?
“I think what this means is, take a more conservative approach, No. 1. But two, I think it requires us monitoring our deer population a little more carefully. More specifically, what I’m saying is we need to understand what recruitment rates are. If we have recruitment rates that are like .2 to .25 fawns per doe, then we need to be very, very, very cautious. But if our recruitment rates are .5, .6, .7, then we can shoot some does. Hunters have considered themselves managers for years. They read the QDM magazines, watch TV and try to do everything — well, they just need to do a little bit more.”
That little bit more should focus on getting a handle on the recruitment rate of deer on their property. Fortunately, there’s a tool many landowners already have that is helpful for determining recruitment rates — trail cameras.
“Camera surveys can provide a decent estimate if done at the right time and the right way,” Steve said. “Essentially, you can’t do it on bait. If you run your surveys on bait, depending upon the time you do it, your numbers can be significantly inflated or may significantly under-represent the number of fawns that are out there. Do them on trails. You start to get an unbiased estimate of what’s out there. Here in Alabama, you don’t want to do it in August and September — you’ll under-represent the fawns. Go out in October and November and throw a camera out there on a trail,” Steve said.
Getting a feel for the recruitment rate will help guide your antlerless harvest, but that’s only half of the equation. If your property has already fallen into the predator-pit scenario, reducing your doe harvest isn’t going to help much. You’ll have to deal with the coyotes. Fighting back against coyotes is something we covered most recently in the June 2011 issue of AON, and we’ll continue to provide information on hunting and trapping coyotes.
Deer management always seems to be evolving. In Alabama, the rapid expansion and growth of coyote numbers in our deer woods has changed the game yet again.
|
|
|
Post by Itrapny on Jun 4, 2012 15:50:12 GMT -5
The study was MUCH broader than a few collered coyotes...they only conducted the study with a limited number of collers due to cost. They did a lot of field work checking scats as well as denning and kill sites. You also can't compare coyote studies done is different habitat's as a western coyote acts different than an Eastern coyote which at's differently than a Sounthern coyote etc., etc., etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2012 16:29:59 GMT -5
You guys who don't want anything or anyone to kill a deer so YOU can hunt them on land YOU DONT OWN make me laugh. No one should have to open the land they own to the general public to defend it from wildlife, period. Get a solid deer managment plan in place. I agree, a solid deer management plan would be helpful but when the state issues doe permits for a WMU they do it based on deer numbers in that area.If they issue 5,000 permits for does and only 2500 permits are filled due to lack of access,then is the management plan flawed or is it an issue of hunter access?It used to be around here you could hunt where ever you wanted for whatever you wanted,you always asked out of consideration but access was always given.Much different now,most either just plain don't allow hunting or they have a relative that hunts there once in awhile so no.I personally don't rely on farmers because of this,I belong to a large club to avoid all the hassle that comes with trying to find good hunting by permission.Killing deer just to kill them is a waste of a public resource.JMO Instead of spending your money on a hunt club, buy some land, then open it to the general public so they can hunt deer as well.
|
|