SB 4739 - Establishes the yearling buck protection program

[Death From Above]

16 minutes ago, stubborn1VT said:

Changes in the ratio of doe vs buck fawns is not a myth.  It varies for all kinds of reasons.  In all my years of watching deer, I have never seen anything close to a 1:1 ratio of doe to buck fawns in the hills of Vermont.  I spent a summer on Martha's Vineyard, where they deer density is extremely high, and saw all kinds of young bucks.  I'm all for science, but not when it goes directly opposite of first hand observation.

Sure, and in my area the 6-8 trail cameras I run for a good portion of the year, and all the time I spend on stand, makes me think that we see a higher number of doe fawns born in my area.  Luckily, for both of us, there is a lot of money spent to study this by extensive field observations and dissection of road kill does to evaluate and study fetus genders and conception rates.  They don't study just one area or two, they tend to try and find a broader sample size, yet the conclude its close to 1:1 just about every time.  I think that our personal observations don't always tell the truth.  Not sure I enjoyed my college statistic class back in the day, but I can't argue that large the sample size the easier it is to find a more significant and reliable mean. 

 

[tuckersdaddy]

Weird. I have been involved for 5 years now and that isn't the approach I have seen. And actually National isn't currently supporting this legislation. Some branches are choosing to. 
Where are you located Tuc?

7m.... And I can tell you the only reason there is an AR push here is someone or group has the ear of our state senator... Who happens to be one of the cosponsors of the bill. Ive seen more rack taken out of this area in the past 5 yrs then in the previous 30 combined. Are problem is an overpopulation issue compounded by access issues. The DEC has been addressing this with some good effect but by putting over half of the buck population off limits to those willing to fill tags with 1 1/2 yr deer is completely counter productive.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[tuckersdaddy]

I see it differently. They are more dense with memberships down there by NY is one of the fastest growing member lists.

So can I conclude that since NY is the fastest growing segment, that NY offers the greatest revenue growth potential?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Four Season Whitetail's]

3 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I see it differently. They are more dense with memberships down there by NY is one of the fastest growing member lists.

Worst place in the country to Hunt

Worst place in the country to live

Fastest growing numbers?  Strange........

[wolc123]

The doe:buck fawn ratio conversation is interesting.   My own personal observations, mostly in WMU's 9F and 6C, have shown more than 2 buck fawns for every doe fawn.   In 35 years of hunting, I have killed approximately a dozen buck fawns, including my first deer with a gun and a bow.  I have also been blessed with another half dozen or so road-kills (fortunately struck by others).  I have only had a taste of a single doe fawn, that a friend killed on our farm more than 30 years ago.   She had no spots, but was small enough to fit into the game bag on the back of my hunting jacket.  I remember helping him butcher her.  We used my mom's old kitchen grinder on the scraps, giving us each one tender hamburg for dinner, when we finished the job. 

I see 3 possible explanations for this skewed ratio.  First, there really are more buck fawns born than doe fawns.  Second, I always target the largest deer when filling DMP tags, so the momma (if present) gets the first shot, followed by the largest fawn.  A buck fawn is typically larger, making "little sister" the most likely to escape in that scenerio.    Third, the brain probably develops faster in female deer, much as it seems to in humans, again making them more likely to avoid being killed by predators, hunters, and automobiles.         

I don't run any trail cameras, but extensive field observations also indicate significantly higher numbers of buck fawns.   Up in the Adirondacks, where antlerless deer are off limits during gun season, I have had many walk up real close.  It is almost like they know they are safe then.  More than 75 % of the fawns that I have seen up close were button-bucks.  The same ratio holds at home in 9F, watching them grazing in the clover plots with binoculars.

Anyone would have a tough time convincing me that bucks and does are born at a 1:1 ratio, because that is in direct conflict with my own personal observations.        

[Culvercreek hunt club]

So can I conclude that since NY is the fastest growing segment, that NY offers the greatest revenue growth potential?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I did t say it was THE fastest but one of the fastest. It sounds like you have an issue with something about the group. I know why 4 seasons does because of his deer farming business. I'd be curious to hear yours.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

7m.... And I can tell you the only reason there is an AR push here is someone or group has the ear of our state senator... Who happens to be one of the cosponsors of the bill. Ive seen more rack taken out of this area in the past 5 yrs then in the previous 30 combined. Are problem is an overpopulation issue compounded by access issues. The DEC has been addressing this with some good effect but by putting over half of the buck population off limits to those willing to fill tags with 1 1/2 yr deer is completely counter productive.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

My main hunting is in 8 H. Similar issues but they are considering excluding us from AR for some reason. I can't speak for any of the other branches but I do know that many of them including the one I am part of do a lot. This issue is not the main focus. Have you seen the push for the poaching legislation?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Worst place in the country to Hunt

Worst place in the country to live

Fastest growing numbers?  Strange........

I can't think of a season that I haven't enjoyed and aside from the taxes and the crap government I consider myself lucky to have grown up here and raised my family here. I guess we all measure life using different rulers.

[stubborn1VT]

They may be right on a VERY large scale about the buck/doe ratio, but I can't think of a way to reconcile it with what I've seen in real life.  Even if bucks have a higher mortality rate, it doesn't make sense to me.  If they're born at the same rate, then why is the composition of the herd so drastically different?  I run a similar number of cams, also year round.  A neighbor had 24 doe behind his house in July and August.  Some could have been button bucks/ buck fawns.  I just don't see how fawns born at a 1:1 ratio can lead to the herds that I've seen my entire life.  Sure, we shoot bucks during rifle, but plenty of does get taken during bow and ML.  I think in northern climates with harsh conditions, that more doe fawns are born.  You may be right.  It's awful hard to see the opposite and just accept a scientific theory as a fact in all cases.

[hunterdan44]

Buck fawns are pushed out by the mother , and are usually wandering alone during hunting season. That makes them more susceptible to being harvested by humans and other predators.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wolc123]

Those I see are usually still with their mothers, until their 2nd hunting season.  They are only alone, during the first one, if their mother gets shot.    

19 minutes ago, hunterdan44 said:

Buck fawns are pushed out by the mother , and are usually wandering alone during hunting season. That makes them more susceptible to being harvested by humans and other predators.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Edited March 25, 2017 by wolc123

[hunterdan44]

Their second season they would be 1-1/2 years old with some antlers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wolc123]

To clarify, most of the button bucks I see are still with their mothers.  The only ones I see without their mothers are those who's mother has been killed.    I have never seen a mother "disperse" her buck fawn prior to or during hunting season.   I am guessing that the "dispersal" you are referring to usually occurs around late spring when the next fawn is born, regardless of sex.

[hunterdan44]

No my experience has been If a fawn is alone I assume it's a buck fawn. Of course this is been my observations of 40 years. I believe NYS DEC mentions this somewhere in the hunting magazine they publish each season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

2 hours ago, wolc123 said:

To clarify, most of the button bucks I see are still with their mothers.  The only ones I see without their mothers are those who's mother has been killed.    I have never seen a mother "disperse" her buck fawn prior to or during hunting season.   I am guessing that the "dispersal" you are referring to usually occurs around late spring when the next fawn is born, regardless of sex.

 

I believe that the dispersal you are referring to is when a young buck, either before his first rut (typically at 1.5), during the rut, or after the rut leaves his home area.  He disperses on his own to look for greener waters and has already learned he is not top dog in that area.  He knows the does well and they don’t necessarily want him around them either, and have demonstrated that quite often I am sure.  It is a great way that nature used to mix up the genetics so they don’t continue down the same path.

Adult does kicking button bucks out of the group is something different, as they stay in the same area generally but don’t hang around the does.  Just watch them feeding and watch the adult does come in and pester him.  Dispersal refers to bucks voluntarily leaving the area, while most button bucks stay put due to familiarity.  Once the rut starts I don’t often see button bucks with does, as they have been kicked out.  By late season they seem to still stay separated mostly.  This is what I have seen in my observations for the most part.

[Death From Above]

6 hours ago, wolc123 said:

The doe:buck fawn ratio conversation is interesting.   My own personal observations, mostly in WMU's 9F and 6C, have shown more than 2 buck fawns for every doe fawn.   In 35 years of hunting, I have killed approximately a dozen buck fawns, including my first deer with a gun and a bow.  I have also been blessed with another half dozen or so road-kills (fortunately struck by others).  I have only had a taste of a single doe fawn, that a friend killed on our farm more than 30 years ago.   She had no spots, but was small enough to fit into the game bag on the back of my hunting jacket.  I remember helping him butcher her.  We used my mom's old kitchen grinder on the scraps, giving us each one tender hamburg for dinner, when we finished the job. 

I see 3 possible explanations for this skewed ratio.  First, there really are more buck fawns born than doe fawns.  Second, I always target the largest deer when filling DMP tags, so the momma (if present) gets the first shot, followed by the largest fawn.  A buck fawn is typically larger, making "little sister" the most likely to escape in that scenerio.    Third, the brain probably develops faster in female deer, much as it seems to in humans, again making them more likely to avoid being killed by predators, hunters, and automobiles.         

I don't run any trail cameras, but extensive field observations also indicate significantly higher numbers of buck fawns.   Up in the Adirondacks, where antlerless deer are off limits during gun season, I have had many walk up real close.  It is almost like they know they are safe then.  More than 75 % of the fawns that I have seen up close were button-bucks.  The same ratio holds at home in 9F, watching them grazing in the clover plots with binoculars.

Anyone would have a tough time convincing me that bucks and does are born at a 1:1 ratio, because that is in direct conflict with my own personal observations.        

 

I agree that personal observations make it hard to always believe studies that are brought up.  Like you I see more buck fawns I'd say while hunting, but I think that is probably due to seeing the same deer more often in my case.  When I look at camera evidence, or count numbers in groups of deer, then it makes me think there are more doe fawns in my areas.  All that said, I think that fawn genders are likely random, 1:1 like most studies would say, but as I said personal observations can often make me question this.  Here is how I rationalize the fact that I see a of buck fawns...

I think that groups of does typically contain adults.  These adults certainly feel the safety in numbers, and benefit from more eyes, noses and ears for sensing danger.  Meanwhile, adult bucks have spent lots of time alone, and seem to prefer the solitude when the fall comes around (for many reasons).  They are wary and don’t often hang out in groups like the does are. 

Doe fawns hang around adult does more and in my opinion pick up quickly on the fact that does are always nervous and on the lookout from both danger and bucks.  Buck fawns, kicked out by their mothers, seem oblivious to all of this quite often.  They don’t spend as much time with does once man has entered the woods to hunt them or when bucks are on the prowl.  They don’t get the education that doe fawns get.  For this reason they are typically the first deer out feeding, the most predictable deer on a pattern or area, and I see them much more often then other deer while hunting.  They don’t know how to be wary in comparison to the doe groups, and they just walk around everywhere it seems throwing their lack of caution to the wind.

While I have no idea about the brain idea that you suggest (you may be spot on), I do think that doe fawns get a much more thorough education from the adult does.  Buck fawns get more of a lesson on staying away from the does, and learn to be on their own because of it.  A deer that is on its own and hasn't been alive for a year yet doesn't always display a lot of caution or awareness of what is going on around them.  Potential danger is not as much of a concern as figuring out why that strange creature is now in his presence, and they seem to need to come check me out if they figure out I am there.   Enter the second fall of a bucks life with his first set of antlers and raging, hormones, and once again a poorer education from the older deer the fall before…now you have a deer that is highly available for harvesting by hunters. 

[wolc123]

53 minutes ago, Death From Above said:

 

  Once the rut starts I don’t often see button bucks with does, as they have been kicked out.  By late season they seem to still stay separated mostly.  This is what I have seen in my observations for the most part.

That is interesting, and is something I have not often seen.   Two seasons ago, in WMU 6C, on Thanksgiving weekend (post rut), I watched a doe with a set of fawns walk by, about 50 yards away.  One or both may have been buck fawns.   Soon after, another large doe, with a single fawn in tow, approached from the same direction.  The doe did not notice me, in full cammo, sitting at the base of a tree, and that fawn walked to less than 10 yards away, allowing me to see that it was clearly a buck.   He then followed after his mother.    This past season in the same area, I still-hunted within 40 yards of a BB and a doe in early October.  That doe offered me a "chip-shot" with my ML, but I had already filled my antlerless, early ML tag a few days prior (see 2016 ML harvest thread).   This particular region, in the NW foothills of the Adirondacks, has some mixed hardwood forests that have been selectively logged, mature evergreens, and scattered ag fields, including some standing corn.   I have seen very few, lone antlerless deer up there.    

At home, in WMU 9F & 9A,  in Western NY, the terrain is flat as a pancake and consists mostly of abandoned & overgrown Ag fields, small blocks of mature hardwood forest, and working Ag fields including hay, corn, and soybeans.  These zones are extremely overpopulated with deer and it is very rare to see the antlerless ones alone.   Almost all of the BB's I have harvested here were taken after I or someone else took their mother.    We turned that around this fall with my buddy taking the BB in the morning and me taking the doe that afternoon when she showed up at the gut-pile at milking time.   The mother was with the BB in the morning but he was not able to get a clear shot at her then.    SZ opening day is peak rut time.           

Edited March 25, 2017 by wolc123

[Death From Above]

4 hours ago, stubborn1VT said:

They may be right on a VERY large scale about the buck/doe ratio, but I can't think of a way to reconcile it with what I've seen in real life.  Even if bucks have a higher mortality rate, it doesn't make sense to me.  If they're born at the same rate, then why is the composition of the herd so drastically different?  I run a similar number of cams, also year round.  A neighbor had 24 doe behind his house in July and August.  Some could have been button bucks/ buck fawns.  I just don't see how fawns born at a 1:1 ratio can lead to the herds that I've seen my entire life.  Sure, we shoot bucks during rifle, but plenty of does get taken during bow and ML.  I think in northern climates with harsh conditions, that more doe fawns are born.  You may be right.  It's awful hard to see the opposite and just accept a scientific theory as a fact in all cases.

 

I have often thought about the same question when considering our current ratio (low buck to doe) in most of our state, when the birth ratio is 1:1.  But lets look at it for a minute, and like you said lets take out all other factors that might cause a higher mortality rate for bucks.  Lets assume they all live to old age, and the only impact is harvest numbers.  Of course I have no idea how accurate harvest numbers can possibly be, but we will go with it for discussion sake.

Using a base of harvest rates provided by the DEC, versus the ratio of 1:1 that has been suggested, and we somehow started with an even herd of 1 buck to 1 doe, we know that there are approximately 30,000 more does than bucks (males) in the herd at the end of a typical season.  To start off that means we have 30,000 more does the next season.  Once again, if they die off at the same rate naturally, and year two we once again average shooting 30,000 more males than females.  There is another extra 30,000 females, totaling 60,000 more after two years.  Using this math after five years we have an extra 150,000 females when compared to males.  If we continued on this pattern, or relatively close to it, you can see how we are building a larger population of females.  Even when taking in the higher mortality rate of bucks, this increase is still occurring.  Imagine what this would look like after 10, 20 or 30 years. 

Once again, I am not implying these figures are typical or close to what we have currently (remember I started at 1:1 and did not imply a starting herd number).  I am using it simply to show how our harvest rates in NY can build a female dominate herd even with the 1:1 birth ratio that I am suggesting.

[ManicOutdoorsman92]

 

I have often thought about the same question when considering our current ratio (low buck to doe) in most of our state, when the birth ratio is 1:1.  But lets look at it for a minute, and like you said lets take out all other factors that might cause a higher mortality rate for bucks.  Lets assume they all live to old age, and the only impact is harvest numbers.  Of course I have no idea how accurate harvest numbers can possibly be, but we will go with it for discussion sake.

Using a base of harvest rates provided by the DEC, versus the ratio of 1:1 that has been suggested, and we somehow started with an even herd of 1 buck to 1 doe, we know that there are approximately 30,000 more does than bucks (males) in the herd at the end of a typical season.  To start off that means we have 30,000 more does the next season.  Once again, if they die off at the same rate naturally, and year two we once again average shooting 30,000 more males than females.  There is another extra 30,000 females, totaling 60,000 more after two years.  Using this math after five years we have an extra 150,000 females when compared to males.  If we continued on this pattern, or relatively close to it, you can see how we are building a larger population of females.  Even when taking in the higher mortality rate of bucks, this increase is still occurring.  Imagine what this would look like after 10, 20 or 30 years. 

Once again, I am not implying these figures are typical or close to what we have currently (remember I started at 1:1 and did not imply a starting herd number).  I am using it simply to show how our harvest rates in NY can build a female dominate herd even with the 1:1 birth ratio that I am suggesting.

You cant do accurate math without accurate numbers, so you're "formula", says nothing

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

31 minutes ago, ManicOutdoorsman92 said:

You cant do accurate math without accurate numbers, so you're "formula", says nothing

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk
 

 

Think I mentioned a few times that it wasn’t based on accurate numbers but only to show how the doe numbers can increase under our current harvest averages.  It was never based on accurate herd numbers of any kind.  It was based on harvest numbers provided by the DEC.  Estimates.  That is what  I said.  Did you even read it closely??? 

Simple math and understanding shows support for the example I provided.  In addition, I even added the fact that there are other factors that are not included yet further support the increase.  Never said it’s a true proportion for every area.

Your response says everything.  You just can’t comprehend it.  Or you don’t want to.  Doesn’t matter, its irrelevant.  I can’t help it if you can’t understand the theory, or the math. 

[Death From Above]

Well I misspoke...I should have said that I could help you understand the theory or the math, but I am sure that you don't want to be helped figure that out.

[ManicOutdoorsman92]

 

Think I mentioned a few times that it wasn’t based on accurate numbers but only to show how the doe numbers can increase under our current harvest averages.  It was never based on accurate herd numbers of any kind.  It was based on harvest numbers provided by the DEC.  Estimates.  That is what  I said.  Did you even read it closely??? 

Simple math and understanding shows support for the example I provided.  In addition, I even added the fact that there are other factors that are not included yet further support the increase.  Never said it’s a true proportion for every area.

Your response says everything.  You just can’t comprehend it.  Or you don’t want to.  Doesn’t matter, its irrelevant.  I can’t help it if you can’t understand the theory, or the math. 

Ok, thank you for stating that inaccurate math supports your example, therefore your " example" is irrelevant.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[ncountry]

Doe to buck ratio....

https://www.qdma.com/reality-doebuck-ratios/

Qdma article , but there are quite a few others out there that show the same math..

[ManicOutdoorsman92]

Curious how does an irrelavant example provide any evidence of whats really going on with the deer, afterall you stated yourself its irellavant. So how does a theoretic example, apply to actual numbers, and hows that any indication of whats happening and whats going to happen.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[growalot]

 

So I have to assume many on here must have a link phobia because a few have posted links that are totally ignored...Now when I see someone else's link that should be considered...I need to say ...open and READ here is ncountry's link again: Thanks for posting that.

https://www.qdma.com/reality-doebuck-ratios/