LEAVE THE DOES ALONE

Open Discussion - for our Readers, Islanders, and Web Site Visitors alike. Discussion regarding any and all aspects of Beaver Island are welcome here. Also a place for general Beaver Island conversation and discussion.

Moderator: Gillespie

Post Reply
MerryRoe
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:13 pm

LEAVE THE DOES ALONE

Post by MerryRoe »

I'd like to suggest we have a vote on Beaver Island for the hunters to STOP Doe Season, or we'll have no does left. The Game Club should pursue this with the DNR with results. True hunters know what's going on.

Karl Heller
JFPowers
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 8:15 am

Post by JFPowers »

Karl

I posted the same thing to the wildlife club members, I got some blow back however. I trust your opinion. I hope that you can come to our meeting when we discuss this with the DNR this winter.
JPike
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 11:34 am

Post by JPike »

This was my reply to the topic at hand to the BIWC membership:


One other point of reference/parrallel......how many does were shot on Garden Island during the "Hay Days" after prescribed forestry? Minimal to almost none is the answer....what is the likely decline of the herd there? Habitat degradation, social imbalance (doe to buck ratio) and predation. When the herd is out of social balance it extends the rut as a few bucks have to breed the entire doe population, therefore putting the bucks at a greater risk of winter mortality due to weakeness/malnutrition. The herd will be a product of the environment.....for better or for worse..... I look forward to furthering this discussion, perhaps we could have deer biologists/habitat experts weigh in with their expert views/opinions/recommendations for BI. It is an important topic, and we should get the correct answers before we proceed.


"All,

With all due respect, the point of having a balanced herd (QDM/Scientific Based Management) is to have as equal of a buck to doe ratio as possible.....the reason that the deer herd is down in hard winters is due to lack of nutrition/young successional forest....not taking does for 2 more years would take the herd from roughly 4 to 1 doe to buck ratio.....to what? Not closer to the goal. If we want more deer per square mile....more food/browse per square mile is needed....more science based forestry needs to be done...more food plots, agriculture, mast bearing tree plantings, etc. I have said it before and I will mention it again, we found zero winter mortality(also confirmed by Mark Valente who traps on our property) on our place the past 2 years and have at a minimum of 13 fawns (3 sets of twins and 1 set of triplets, with some singles as well) on our 160 acres in 2015....6 trail cams are really on only 40 acres of the 160. We have attributed that to having 12-13 acres of food plots with winter carry over plantings of: turnips, brassicas, field corn, rye grain, sugar beets and planting of over 100 (not bearing yet) late dropping crabapples/pears.

If we are going to limit doe harvest, perhaps we should limit the number of bucks taken as well?

I think it is fair to say that not too many does have been taken thus far, this season correct? Jacque can you confirm?

The plan is working....the deer herd is what the habitat can currently sustain, the biggest bucks in the history of BI have been taken this year, the rut is shorter and more intense, meaning that we should see an earlier fawn drop in 2016....this winter has been predicted to be a more mild winter, therefore also increasing chances of survival for next year. Having more deer than what the habitat can sustain will only exacerbate the peaks and valleys of the deer population....feast and then famine.....

Just my 2 cents, however, I think limiting doe harvest is a step in the wrong direction.....

Best,

Jared"
Jared Pike
conanconnor
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:48 pm

we better do something

Post by conanconnor »

I hunt throughout the entirety of bow season and into december season. I usually only take one deer if even any a year. So far this year I have seen a dwindled population, both from my eye's and from my 1,000 dollars worth of trail cameras around this island. As i work in the hardware i continue to hear from hunters who have been hunting here for upwards of 20 some 40 years about our meager population. many havnt bothered shooting anything this year and just enjoyed the wildlife we do have and a few beers at their camps with friends and family. yes much of the reason for few young deer the past 2 years was from the harsh winter and late frosts. I have seen more young ones survive this year, which is great. however its still not an improvement in our population. as one of the very... very few, young, active, outdoorsmen of this island. I would enjoy someday after many of you are long gone (not to sound rude) , to take my children hunting as many of you have taken your children.
King Conan
dtritsch
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:12 am

Post by dtritsch »

Here is a comparison of Traditional Deer Management and Quality Deer Management. Traditional management worked when there was a lot of logging here, which in turn provided browse for the deer. The island has not been logged for years and I suspect that the herd is nearly at capacity given the amount of nutrition available. There is an ongoing effort with the DNR to turn that around. Several years ago the BIWC petitioned the DNR to put a 3-point rule in place here. It is working, this year there was a record buck harvested on Beaver Island. Consider another approach to managing the deer herd.
Don Tritsch

Subject: QDM Article-Kip Adams...edited.
Quality Deer Management (QDM) is a household name to modern day deer hunters. You canâ??t pick up a hunting magazine, watch outdoor television, or talk to the guys at camp without seeing or hearing the letters QDM. The rise in popularity of QDM is a good thing for deer, other wildlife species, habitats and hunters. While todayâ??s hunters are more educated than ever before, there are still many who donâ??t fully understand how QDM differs from traditional deer management. The following information compares and contrasts the two management strategies using seven measurable variables.

Traditional Deer Management
Under traditional deer management, any antlered buck is harvested, regardless of age or antler quality, and few does are harvested. Deer researcher Dr. Grant Woods refers to traditional deer management as â??Maximum Buck Harvest Management.â?￾ This is the strategy that every state in the country used and some continue to use today. This strategy may work when the deer herd is below the habitatâ??s carrying capacity but fails when the herd equals or exceeds the carrying capacity.

Quality Deer Management
Quality Deer Management is the approach where young bucks are protected from harvest, combined with an adequate harvest of female deer to produce healthy deer herds in balance with existing habitat conditions. QDM is first and foremost about having the biologically appropriate number of deer for the habitat. If a habitat will support 20 deer per square mile, QDM says put 20 deer per square mile on it. If a habitat will support 30 deer per square mile, put 30 deer per square mile on it, but donâ??t put 30 deer on habitat that can only support 20. (Of course, habitat can be improved so it can support more deer). QDM also improves age structures by allowing bucks to reach all age classes â?? not just 1½ and 2½ years. QDM accomplishes this by not shooting the majority of yearling bucks each year.

Acreage Requirements
â?¢ None for traditional deer management
â?¢ Varying acreage requirements for QDM

Buck Harvest
â?¢ Shoot mostly young bucks in traditional deer management
� Shoot mainly 2½- to 4½-year-old bucks in QDM

Doe Harvest
â?¢ Shoot few if any in traditional deer management
â?¢ Shoot an adequate number in QDM

Adult Sex Ratio
â?¢ Generally heavily skewed toward does under traditional deer management
â?¢ More balanced ratios in QDM, though still favoring does

Deer vs. Habitat
â?¢ Deer herd often greater than habitatâ??s carrying capacity in traditional management
â?¢ Deer herd in balance with habitatâ??s carrying capacity in QDM

Influence on Habitat
â?¢ Moderate to severe habitat damage in traditional deer management
â?¢ Minimal habitat impact in QDM

Deer-Human Conflicts
â?¢ high deer-human conflicts in traditional deer management
â?¢ reduced deer-human conflicts in QDM

The seven items above show how the different management strategies affect our deer herds and habitats. Both strategies are unique and shouldnâ??t be confused with the other. Both have their place in deer management, but evaluation of the deer herd and habitat is necessary to correctly choose the strategy that will be most effective at producing a healthy deer herd and healthy habitat. Traditional deer management works when the deer population is below the habitatâ??s carrying capacity, and the goal is to increase the deer herd and provide recreational hunting. QDM works best when the deer population is at or exceeding the habitatâ??s carrying capacity and the goal is to improve the health of the deer herd and balance it with available habitat.
dtritsch
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:12 am

Post by dtritsch »

Here is a link for more information about Quality Deer Management. Take a look.
Don Tritsch

https://www.qdma.com/articles/qdm-frequ ... -questions
JFPowers
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 8:15 am

Post by JFPowers »

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/outdo ... /26694397/


Here is an article on what is happening in the Upper Peninsula
dtritsch
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:12 am

Post by dtritsch »

~1200 hits on this post since Nov 23. =>There is a lot of interest in deer hunting on Beaver island. It is important and should not be dismissed.
esalveter
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:16 pm
Location: Coldwater, MI

Post by esalveter »

I am not a wildlife biologist, and I am not an avid deer hunter, but I am a forester, and here is my 2 cents worth.

I purchased property on Beaver Island that was logged in the mid 90's. Normally maple is an aggressive seeder, but the only thing that grew back after logging was beech. I think the numerous deer at the time ate all the maple seedlings. Many people say the deer did not suffer from the severe winter 2 years ago, but ever since that winter, the island has been covered with a blanket of maple seedlings. I think it is because there are less deer now, and there are more maple seedlings than the reduced number of deer can eat. The island and the deer herd should be healthier now. It appears that the deer herd is finally in line with the carrying capacity of the island.

In summary, maybe the doe harvest should be curtailed for now, but in the long run, the harvest of does is needed, probably at a higher rate than has occurred in the past.
Ed Salveter
JPike
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 11:34 am

Post by JPike »

Again, just my 2 cents comparing BI and the UP....some common and obvious facts:

1. BI doesn't have wolves. When the UP started the wolf repopulation, some experts said that a successful reintroduction of wolves would be a poplulation of 200 wolves.....there are reports that there are well over 800 now.

2. BI doesn't have cougars/mountain lions....

3. BI doesn't have black bears....

4. BI doesn't have Lynx....

5. BI doesn't have moose or elk.....

For the first 4 bullet points....they all take a great toll on the fawn recruitment, as one of their food sources in the spring is white tailed deer offspring. In regards to wolves, they prey on deer year round, not just fawns. BI has a much higher fawn recruitment percentage than the UP due to the fact that we have 4 less "apex" predators (coyotes DO have an impact on fawn recruitment as well, and their management is another subject worth discussing). An extended rut, therefore fawn birthing period was discussed earlier in this thread....if a bolus of fawns are dropped in the same period of time, predators simply cannot kill enough to hurt fawn recruitment.....if the fawn birthing is over an extended period of time, a consistent food source is provided for predators, and puts late dropped fawns at a disadvantage for the upcoming winter months. Beaver Island has no shortage of fawns, according to most hunters/landowners/trail cam data in 2015.

The reason I have also listed moose and elk as listed species is a simple one...they are taller than deer, and have a different browse line than do white tailed deer...simply put, deer cannot reach food at the same levels that elk and moose can.

Another point of reference, according to USDA, Beaver Island is in Zone 5b (the lower the number the greater the winter severity index), most of the UP is in Zone 4 or lower....generally harsher/longer winters, with a shorter growing period for browse and crops.

Like the previous poster, I am not a wildlife biologist....but I would certainly like to hear what a Ruffed Grouse Society or a QDM Biologist has to offer as an opinion on the state of the BI forests/habitat and carrying capacity. Perhaps the BIWC could host one during an
upcoming meeting to hear what they have to say?

As was stated, this is an important topic that deserves well thought out, science based solutions. A wrong decision can have long reaching impacts to the future herd and habitat.

Best,

Jared
Jared Pike
Post Reply