BigJ71

With all this talk about herd management I got to thinking......

What would happen if we didn't try to kill off all these does? What would happen if we just left this process to natural selection?

Don't get me wrong, I too have been out killing does trying to get the numbers down. But the more time I spend out hunting (and thinking) I can't help but wonder what's the harm of just letting them self populate.

After all, if the deernumbers get too much for the land to hold they will die off right? Then the numbers would be right for the area. This cycle would continue (theoretically) as the years go by. I know ALL the deer won't die, for the most part just the weaker deer, so what's so wrong with that?

What's our goal here anyway? I'm starting to question it myself. Perhaps we should just hunt what we like and let Mother Nature take care of the rest? As long as we as hunters don't kill off the population (I think we are the deer populations main threat), I find it hard to believe they will kill themselves off, I don't think that's even possible.

Your thoughts?

Germ

I really do not want to find out. In Mid 90's we lost 250,000-300,000 of our deer herd in MI. It was natural selection by nature. But are deer management practices TDM(traditional) caused the over browsing of the yarding areas and population. So if we were not shooting just bucks it would have never been as bad as it was.

Nature is not selective, only we are.

It's not just the deer that suffer in over populated areas, it's the entire eco system. Parts of the UP sill have not recovered. It's been 13 years[&:]

BigJ71

What was the cause of all those deer dying?

Germ

Harsh winter and not enough food. Deer had completely ate them selves out of food source. It was way worst than it should have been. We caused it, nature took care of it.

GMMAT

Big John.....my answer is probably about as "feel good" as you're ever gonna hear from a hunter. In "MY" head....I think I'm doing the herd good.....(overall) by killing the few I take. I think it makes it easier on the MANY. If the land here will only carry (______) deer.....and we have (_____+10)......I think I'm helping by taking the 10 out of the equation.

I may be TOTALLY off base with how I go about what I do.....but I have a good reason as to WHY.

I'd rather kill 10 out of here a year.....than I would to wait 10 years to see 100 starve in one.....and see them dwindle, in poor health, up to that point.

I've had this talk with Dan_, before. He beats me up on this topic....lol.

huntingson

Sure, nature would figure it out if we truly left it to her devices. However, do you really see that happening?

I will answer your question with a question. What if everyone just shot the first deer they could until their tags were filled? Wouldn't that, through the law of averages, lead to a balanced herd?

BigJ71

Germ,

Do you know the numbers of deer taken in Michigan by chance? I'm interested in bucks taken vs does taken.

What I'm getting at is even though people hunt for bucks, I'd be surprised to find out more bucks are killed each year than does.

If those deer died due to disease then so be it, maybe it happened for a reason? Maybe in it's own way it made the overall herd stronger. Sure the numbers would be low for a while but then they would rebound...they always have. We had deer at the brink of extinction at some areas by the turn of the century but they bounced back...once we as hunters were held in check.

Jim_IV

As Germ said before, once the carrying capacity has been stretched to its limit bad things happen. Mother nature won't just kill the "few" weak ones, she will kill many as most of them are most likely malnourished. Not to mention with deer populations at an extreme high the chance for a disease to spread with dramatically increase.

GMMAT

VERY interesting...............I need to think about that one.

Why? I believe that to be true in NC.....or....I think it was before they passed the new law (more liberal doe tags).

True...but isn't this what we're trying to thwart with REAL deer management?

BigJ71

Probably would, I don't see a problem with that as long as we as hunters aren't the cause of the population decline. I think the different states bag limits do this already..why the need to try and do more?

These are just questions that I have....... even I can't answer them.[&:]