Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
Tag Archives: quality deer management
Patriot LWM Outdoors is proud to announce that raffle tickets for the Western Chesapeake Watershed Branch of the Quality Deer Management Association NASCAR package are available for purchase from our online store! BUY YOURS HERE! All proceeds go to the Western Chesapeake Watershed Branch!
Talladega NASCAR Race Package for Two
This unique NASCAR package includes two premium tower seats on the finish line for the Talladega Superspeedway race on October 23rd, 2011, two “Talladega Experience” pre-race pit passes, and signed memorabillia from racing legend and QDMA member, Tony Stewart. There’s also a great chance you will get to personally meet Tony prior to the race (subject to schedule). See sparks fly as the best drivers in the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series jockey for position in the Chase for the Championship on one of the fastest tracks in the nation! 100% of proceeds to benefit WCWB-QDMA.
Check out some members of the Patriot LWM Crew as they volunteer their time as part of the Western Chesapeake Watershed Branch of the Quality Deer Management Association. 2 seperate events were mentioned in the June / July 2011 issue of Quality Whitetails, a publication of QDMA. One being the first WCWB Lecture Series and the other being the 2011 Maryland NRA Show, both spreading the message of Quality Deer Management.
Digging through stacks of old pre-hd mini-dv cassettes is always entertaining, especially when your talking about this group of individuals. 30+ fully loaded tapes later we have about a years worth of boredom crushing midnight editing sessions when staring at the ceiling tiles gets old. Holding true to form here is the first yet certainly not the last in a series of old school videos. In this vid Joe Brown of Patriot LWM gets after a management 8 point on his property in Southern Illinois. This is day 7 of a long 10 day bow into shotgun trek. Although at points times were tough, in the words of good ol’ Joe Dirt, “You can’t have no in your heart.”
*This entry is a repost from the Patriot Land & Wildlife Blog*
The Maryland Department of Natural Resources has confirmed that a White-tailed Deer harvested in Maryland has tested positive in laboratory testing for Chronic Wasting Disease. A hunter in Allegany County reported taking the deer on November 27, 2010 in Green Ridge State Forest. Maryland is now one of 20 other states and Canadian provinces with CWD documented in deer, elk or moose.
Many details of the disease are unknown, but below our some links and a great video from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources on CWD.
*This entry is a repost from the Patriot Land & Wildlife Blog*
On the last day of January, as another Maryland hunting season came to a close, being a passionate wildlife manager I found myself anxiously awaiting the final test of Patriot LWM management strategies. Thorough analysis of hunter harvest records and observation logs is what drives our measure of success or failure, and what guides our management objectives for the following year. Although hunters under Patriot management must log harvests into our online database within 24 hours, the laundry list of other tasks to accomplish during the season does not afford us the opportunity to really look deeply into the numbers.
Observations logs completed by hunters after each hunt include information like:
- Location Hunted
- Weather Conditions
- Number and Sex of Deer Seen (Does, Bucks, Yearlings, Unknowns)
- Predators Seen
- Other comments
Harvest data collected by hunters includes information like:
- Sex of the animal (Doe, Buck, Button Buck)
- Approximate Age (Utilizing Tooth Wear and Replacement)
- Approximate Weight
- Presence and number of any fetus’(Generally appear later in the season)
- Presence of Milk (Does)
- Antler Measurements (Bucks)
Each aspect of the biological data collected could be a blog entry in and of itself (hint: each may very well be in the future) used to discuss the importance of the measurement and what it is telling the wildlife manager. For the purpose of this blog entry, I only wish to present the case study of the Patriot Land and Wildlife 2010-2011 management season and allow readers to begin to see how the data collection relates to measures of a management program.
Patriot LWM Hunter Management
Patriot LWM organizes, qualifies and provides oversight for a volunteer hunting group known as the Patriot Whitetail Removal Team (PWRT) for use with large or small scale management efforts on properties that demand both discretion and production.
Patriot LWM also provides hunter management for our recreational leasing and property management clients to insure their wildlife management programs are carried out in conjunction with the recreational enjoyment of the land.
Patriot utilizes the principles of Quality Deer Management to educate it’s hunters in deer biology and administer harvest quotas and techniques to be carried out by both sets of hunters.
Brief Analysis and Discussion
The total management area for Patriot LWM was 5000 acres. PWRT and Lease Members harvested a total of 345 deer on that acreage.
The PWRT accounted for 220 of those 345 deer. 96% of the total harvest were does (females), 3% were button bucks (.5 year old males) and less than 1% of the total harvest were Bucks. Of the 7 button bucks killed, many were the result of late season body size increases which made them mistakenly targeted for harvest as does. Of the 2 bucks that were harvested, one was a 3.5 year old buck with only ¼” small velvet nubs where antlers should have grown, again causing this buck to be targeted as a doe. The other was a 4.5 year old mature buck with an antler score of 149 total inches, 7th largest crossbow harvest in Maryland ever, obviously meeting our ideal harvest standards.
PWRT members averaged 1 deer harvest for every 2.5 hours spent in the treestand which is a testimate to both their hunting ability as well as their maximization of the effort vs. result equation (the manner in which effort is applied has a direct correlation to the result realized). Most female deer possess reproductive potential by 1.5 years of age, with older deer accounting for the highest reproductive potential, often bearing twins and in some cases triplets.
Therefore the targeting of this upper age structure in a population will further expand on this effort vs. result scenario. Harvesting 3 deer of lower reproductive potential is not as effective as harvesting 3 deer with a high reproductive potential, although the exact same amount of effort is expended in both cases. 62% of the 220 deer harvested by PWRT were 2.5 years old or older, 23 % were 1.5 years old and only 15% of the total harvest were less than 1.5 years of age.
According to the Maryland Annual Deer Report, during the 2009-2010 season, 66% of the total state hunter harvest were antlerless (deer without antlers) and 34% were antlered bucks. When you factor in the total number of button bucks (male antlerless) that were recorded during this time, the actual female deer harvest is 52%, with males making up the other 48%. These numbers are a far cry from the above 96% needed to realize a population reduction as is recommended by many State wildlife managers.
Although not quite as precise, a similar situation unfolded on recreational leases under Patriot LWM oversight. Lease members accounted for 125 total deer harvested, 89% were does, 8% bucks and 3% were button bucks. Of the 10 bucks killed, 4 were harvested due to the fact they had been severely wounded on adjacent properties and needed to be put down out of proper ethics. 3 bucks were harvested by youth hunters (16 years or under) and 3 were harvested as meeting the mature buck requirements.
Measuring the reproductive potential of a population is an inexact science; many factors weigh into the debate including herd health, climate, weather conditions, predators etc. For demonstration purposes we will only make a few assumptions so that readers can better visualize how specific harvest requirements weigh in to the effort vs. result we talked about. If we assume that based on our age structure, some deer would have had triplets, some twins, others 1 or none at all, the following are an example as if the reproductive aged does would have had twins. The combined harvest of these 345 deer, plus their reproductive potential which was not realized accounts for up to 989 deer that will not be there in the spring of 2011 to feast on agricultural crops, landscapes or ground nesting bird habitat. An adult deer consumes on average 1.5 tons of forage a year, so 345 deer harvested immediately results in 517.5 tons saved and up to 1483.5 tons saved for 2011.
In later blog entries we will take a look at specific results as they relate to agricultural yield data and economic relationships to effective deer management, stay tuned!
*This blog entry is a repost from the Patriot Land & Wildlife Blog*
When the idea of planting food plots for white-tailed deer rolls across your tongue in front of concerned community members or agricultural professionals fed up with deer damage, the response is often the same. “You want to plant what??? The last thing we need around here is more deer, and feeding them will surely do just that.”
This statement is not far from the truth but the reasoning behind why it’s a good management decision may surprise you.
The Origin of a Concept:
When Patriot LWM first began management efforts on a 250 acre tract with 132 acres of crop production agriculture and the remainder in timber and other cover types, the deer damage issue was at a breaking point. Hunter harvest practices were the first issue to get a facelift on the property including the increase in the reduction of adult female deer (does) and implementation of other techniques in line with the principles of “Quality Deer Management”. Initial population analysis identified the need for an extremely high number of female deer to be removed from the property, so much so that alternative harvest techniques needed to be considered.
Supplemental Food Plots:
A well rounded wildlife management program incorporates habitat and forage management into its population control measures. So as a wildlife manager I am somewhat partial to the idea of supplemental food plots as a way to create a year round nutritional program for the overall health of my white-tailed populations. Food plots of varying species (such as clover, chicory, cow peas, etc.) with varying maturation times can be installed to supplement existing food sources (row crops, acorns, etc.). They can also fill gaps in the deer’s diet after other food sources are exhausted, such as after crops are harvested or acorns are depleted. Depending on their intended use and location, it is very simple for supplemental food plots to double as a diversionary food plot as well.
Diversionary Food Plots:
My definition of a diversionary food plot is simply a plot installed for the purpose of diverting a deer’s feeding attention off of one source and onto another, such as off of row crops and into a clover mixture. Once again, your species selection along with its location will be the main determinate of the success of that diversion. Planting something deer have no intention of eating until late December will be of no comfort as the corn and soybeans get devoured in late summer.
For the purposes of our project, Patriot LWM worked with the farmer and
located a mutually beneficialsite on the property. 15-30 feet of field edge bordering existing tree lines were donated to the “diversionary food plot fund”, another fact which raises eyebrows in an agricultural community hesitant to give up tillable acreage to the wildlife battle.
Let’s take a closer look at the benefits of this technique.
Running the numbers:
- Low yield in these sacrificed rows already due to deer damage on edges and shading under the “drip line” of trees
- Reduced expenses on unused acreage
- Hunters gladly supplement the cost of food plot installation for own benefit
- Increased yield in the remaining acreage
- Increases recreational lease value of the property
- Supplemental food source for improved health of deer population
- Increased harvest opportunities
- Creates harvest location along edges when normal standing crops would hinder harvest
- Deer can be concentrated to particular areas for increased harvest
- Brings deer to the “staging areas” near fields earlier allowing for more harvest opportunities before light expires
- Keeps local deer populations on the property long after crops are harvested allowing hunters chances to increase harvest throughout the course of the regulated hunting season
- Attracts deer from neighboring properties which may not have effective management programs to allow their harvest during daylight hours instead of them entering onto the property to feed outside huntable hours.
- Provides space for hunter access to remove harvested deer while crops are up
In later blog entries we will take a closer look into the specific results of this project but initial findings are very positive. Diversionary food plots coupled with educated hunters practicing the principles of “Quality Deer Management” should be an option worth exploring for many landowners and farmers trying to win the war on deer damage. Stay tuned!