Deer Feeding, is it worth it???

[gveire]

I want to have bigger healthier deer im willing to help them with using a feeder but is it worth the cost for deer feed and a feeder??  I hunt in southwest Minnesota where there are lots of fields for them to graze.  I know about the 10 day no bate law but Just would like to see what you all have to say about this??

[Mayfly]

You aren't going to help your deer in SW by feeding them. There is plenty of deer down there and there is plenty of food. I think the management is out of whack and am actually heading down there this Friday to do an interview abut just that! I will let you know when and where you can see the interview. It may give you some insight as to what is happening down there.... Is it bigger bucks you are looking for?

[gveire]

yes you would think with all the food they would have nice racks but to many hunters go by "if its brown its down" and hard to find them 3 year old bucks.  Hope after last years late harvest they will come back this year a bit better..

[deadeye]

MNO is probably right, you have enough food in SW MN.  Probably the one thing you will know from feeding is what is actually there.  Concentrating the deer near feeding stations.  I assume you would plan to feed in winter.

[gveire]

I would feed year round if i was to invest in a feeder.. i do agree that they have a buffet in the SW im sure it would help in the winter months but is that going to help the heard to grow better horns??

[bonecollecter82]

gveire Where you hunting in SWMN town or county??? MNO an interview with who and where kinda intrested in this. There are big deer around the area. But I suppose its easier for me to find them since I live here. 
 

[Mayfly]

yes you would think with all the food they would have nice racks but to many hunters go by "if its brown its down" and hard to find them 3 year old bucks.  Hope after last years late harvest they will come back this year a bit better..

I think you, in a way, answered your own question. I'm not sure what area you are in but in the area my friends hunt there are no doe tags except a few for youth. So... you get a bunch of adult deer hunters down there that can't shoot does they will end up shooting anything with Anlters.

Here is a good read regarding Southwest Minnesota (a friend wrote this):


Much of what we bow hunters discuss in Southwest Minnesota centers around the difficulty that we face with respect to regulations.  In regard to “deer management” Minnesota hunting regulators have prioritized total deer population as the main objective.  I’ve often heard many hunters say that “the DNR doesn’t know what the heck their doing”.  Well, they actually may know exactly what they’re doing.  The section that we hunt in is area 288, formerly 449.  In 288, along with many other areas in the state, all adult hunters (Firearms, Muzzleloader, and Archery) are restricted to bucks only for 2009!  The reasoning behind this comes out of the belief that this is an appropriate step in increasing the deer population in these areas.  Will this work?  Let’s look at some numbers and you can decide.
 
I’ve never found the DNR’s published pre-fawn deer density maps to be of much use, particularly in the SW because the legend tells me that there are 1-10 deer per square mile.  1 deer per square mile vs. 10 per square mile is a rather impressive variance.  I digress.  Allow me to make an assumption on my own.  There are 625 square miles in 288.  I’m going to assume that 288 averages 4-5 deer per square mile, which would give the area a total of roughly 3000 adult deer.  Now we are getting somewhere.  Call me crazy, but I have actually plugged the harvest report numbers into a spreadsheet from 2001 to 2008, yes that is 8 years and there is more math coming…
 
The low harvest in this time frame was 699 (total) in 2007, and the high was 1134 in 2006.  The mean taken in these 8 years is 907 deer per year.  In all 8 years, the number of adult bucks harvested outweighs the number of adult does taken.  Of total adult harvest, the percentage of adult bucks harvested is 59%, 63%, 61%, 62%, 58%, 51%, 68% and 74% respectively.  Okay, back to 3000 deer, and let me make the math easier by weighting the average harvest to an optimum 1000 deer per year.  So, assume that we harvest 33% of the heard every year.  Now let’s add this up…
 
I’ll make another assumption, and if you don’t agree by all means use your perceived numbers.  Let me assume as generously as I dare that we have a sex ratio of 2 does to 1 buck.  That would mean 1000 males and 2000 females.  Can you see the moral of my blog yet?  Year after year over 60% of our adult harvest is male deer.  Furthermore, and more dramatically, most of these animals are killed during a firearms season prior to peak breeding activity.  A ratio of 2:1 has now become 3:1 or worse for breeding.  The result of this is unnecessary pressure on the remaining adult bucks that breed does in a second and third rut, and a low success breeding season.  So let’s say the pre-rut ratio is 3:1, leaving us 750 adult bucks and 2250 does.  A pre-breeding concentrated harvest of average proportions leaves us with a ratio of 7:1.  Where is this going?  Well, if the goal is to manage total population, than we are doing an excellent job in Southwest Minnesota.  We have open season on bucks and limits on doe harvest, causing a circumstance were we will have more does that simply don’t get bred.  But then again, we will achieve a higher population that isn’t likely to have wild swings because there simply isn’t enough bucks to breed all the does.  Alas, a manageable total number year after year.  Maybe the DNR does know what they are doing.  But is it fair to the deer?  You decide.

Ultimately, I think there are two things we need to lobby for to start the correction of this mess.  But before that (for my firearms friends), I’m not against party hunting, and I don’t think antler restrictions are practical in this area due to the tradition of walking and “jumping” deer during the firearms season. Number one, we need to move the firearms season into the last week of November or later, after the rut has occurred.  Second, move the Muzzleloader season up into September or early October, when does can be harvested prior to breeding.  If we want to manage deer, we need to pay more attention to adult sex ratio than has been given.  If I could add a third it would ultimately be to issue both doe and buck permits for firearms on the basis of spring fawn counts.  The objective of any management program ought to be to find a sustainable number for a given area based on habitat, and then subtract in the fall what was added in the spring.  Now that adds up.

[MTCOMMER]

VERY GOOD READ!   
-- I would think feeding wouldnt hurt, keeps the deer around your area, plus it would help the deer out (especially the really young and really old) if its a rough winter!

[gveire]

Bonecollecter82 I from Ivanhoe MN. lots of farmland. I would love to see the season pushed back to the end of November. maybe the blood bath of inmuture deer would end someday you would think with all that food for them to eat they would get HUGE RACKS!! they still have a good size body but are 1 1/2 to 2 year old deer with basket racks..

[dakids]

The best way to get bigger racks is to give the bucks a chance to put on the one thing that grows big racks and that is AGE.  Very few 2.5 year old deer are bigger than 125 inches.

Instead of wasting your money on food spend your money on improving your habitat.  PM landdr on this website and ask him how to get the gov to pay you to do it.

[bonecollecter82]

I got cha your in one of the screwy areas. I dont understand what the point of shoot almost only bucks. What do you see the population as around your area for deer poor fair good???

[beeker]

my thought would be to offer the deer something new or different that the deer aren't getting. maybe some minerals.. or if everything is corn.. give em something different. not sure what else to put in a feeder but there has to be something

[deadeye]

Here is an interesting article on Buck to Doe ratios.

The buck to doe ratio over much of the United States is probably somewhere around 1 buck per 3 to 6 adult does. This ratio is considered satisfactory for good production and recruitment of white-tailed deer if one is interested in a quick turnover in the herd. Basically, a sex ratio in favor of does can increase the size of the deer herd very quickly. As a result, many young bucks and does of all ages are available for harvest each year. This is good for maximum production, but is not necessarily beneficial for optimal quality production.

Ideas on the ideal buck to doe ratio can be quite varied and controversial in some cases. Depending upon the part of the country you are located, the age of the person you are talking to, and a person’s general management philosophies, you will most likely get different answers from every individual you ask. But you know what, they may all be correct. There is no single correct answer for every property out there. However, there are some good rules of thumb that could help you out.

If you want to harvest a high number of deer each year, then maintaining many more does than bucks will definitely get you there. For example, let’s just say your hunting property is 500 acres. Assuming the proper carrying capacity for this land is roughly 50 deer (1 deer/10 acres) then a buck to doe ratio of 1:4 would mean your deer herd is comprised of 10 bucks and 40 does. If you have an overall fawn crop of 50%, meaning 20 fawns survive through the summer. With this in mind, you must now remove an excess of 20 deer on your property come fall hunting season to keep the overall population size in check with the available habitat.
You must harvest 10 bucks and 10 does each year to maintain a sex ratio of 1:4 and keep the deer population and the proper density. This sounds great, but it will limit the number of mature bucks you will have in your population and result in you shooting a lot of does each year.

If you want to maintain some better quality bucks and have an improved buck age structure, you may want to lower your buck to doe ratio possibly to 1:2. This would put your hypothetical herd on your hypothetical 500 acres at 17 bucks and 33 does. Now, an overall fawn crop of 50% puts your fawn production at 16 animals. You can maintain this sex ratio by harvesting roughly 8 bucks and 8 does each year. It also allows you to leave some older bucks out there while also maintaining a proper deer density.

In order to promote an even better age structure in your buck herd, you may want to go consider a 1 buck to 1 doe sex ratio, 1:1. Let’s go back to the hypothetical ranch. The 50 deer on the ranch would now consist of 25 bucks and 25 does. A 50% fawn crop means about 12 fawns. This may look scary compared to the other numbers, but keep this in mind. To keep your deer numbers in check, you only need to remove 12 deer, 6 bucks and 6 fawns. This makes your deer management program a bit easier just because you don’t need to remove as many deer, but another great thing happens as well.

Remember, with a ratio of 1:4 you had to remove all of your adult buck herd to maintain the proper number of deer on you ranch, but with a 1:1 ratio you only have to remove 6 of the 25 available bucks. This means instead of shooting 10 yearling bucks under a 1:4 ratio, you are shooting 2-3 mature bucks, a couple of middle-aged cull bucks, and a couple of low quality young bucks.

With an improved sex ratio, the quality of bucks on your property will improve because on an improved age structure and maintaining your deer numbers will become easier.In short, sex ratios make a difference!

[deadeye]

This QDMA article basically proves you cannot get the buck to doe ratio out of whack (more thatn 1:3) even by taking only bucks.  Makes sense to me.


Adult Sex Ratios

By: Kip Adams

Hunters often ask about the sex ratio of the deer herd where they hunt and then compare that ratio to herds in other areas or states. There are a lot of misunderstandings regarding sex ratios and this article will help clarify some misconceptions. First, what is a sex ratio, what animals are used to determine it and when is it measured? The sex ratio is a number describing the number of adult females for each adult male in a population. The number includes deer 1.5 years and older (all deer except fawns) and describes the population immediately preceding the hunting season. When comparing ratios, make sure you are referring to pre-hunt adult sex ratios. These are the ratios biologists most often refer to, and they should not be confused with observed or post-hunt ratios as the latter are nearly always heavily skewed towards females.

I often hear hunters, outdoor writers, and even biologists refer to 10:1 or 15:1 doe:buck ratios. These cannot be pre-hunt adult ratios because as long as the deer herd is reproducing and recruiting fawns, the ratio cannot become more skewed than about 5 does per buck. The biological maximum is about 5:1 because even in the absence of female harvest, 15-20% of adult females in the population will die each year from old age, vehicles, disease, predators, etc. Also, about 50% of fawns born each year are male, thus the sex ratio gets an annual correction when fawns are recruited. This concept is easier to understand with an example.

Let’s say a hypothetical population contains 120 adult deer (fawns not included).
Pre-hunt population = 100 does and 20 bucks (this is a 5:1 ratio)
During the hunting season let’s say hunters kill 90% (18) of the bucks and 0% (0) of the does.
Hunting mortality 0 does and 18 bucks
Post-hunt population = 100 does and 2 bucks (50:1, heavily skewed after the hunt)
Natural mortality gets added next. Since there are very few bucks left in the population, very few will die from other causes. We’ll say 1 of the 2 remaining bucks dies. However, 15-20% of the does will die from natural causes. We’ll be conservative and use 15% (15 does).
Natural mortality 15 does and 1 buck
Remaining population = 85 does and 1 buck (85:1, the ratio is still heavily skewed)
For simplicity, we’ll say each doe recruits one fawn. This isn’t the number of fawns born but the number that survive to about six months of age. It’s important to realize this is a liberal recruitment rate as the national average is slightly less than one fawn per doe. The most reproductive herds in the country only recruit about 1.2 fawns per doe. For our example there will be 85 (about 43 buck and 42 doe) fawns. These won’t be added to the adult population until the following year but last year’s fawns get added this year. For simplicity, we’ll assume last year’s population had the same number of fawns and immigration and emigration are equal.
Recruitment 42 does and 43 bucks
Pre-hunt population = 127 does and 44 bucks (this is a 3:1 ratio)
This example is simplified but it demonstrates that pre-hunt adult sex ratios can’t become as skewed as many think. However, from a biological perspective, a 3:1 ratio is heavily skewed and reflects poor management on the deer population. This 3:1 ratio could lead to hunters observing 10 or more antlerless deer (females and fawns) per buck.

The sex ratio by itself however, can be misleading. When discussing sex ratios it’s important to determine the age structure of the buck population. For example, you can have 2 populations that both have 2:1 ratios. Let’s say one population has only yearling bucks and the second has bucks from 1.5-5.5 years making up the ratio. Which population is better managed and which would you rather hunt? Just because a herd has a good sex ratio doesn’t mean it is properly managed. Prior to antler restrictions and liberalized doe harvests, Pennsylvania was considered to be among the poorest managed states in the country. Even then, Pennsylvania’s state-wide sex ratio was <3:1. The deer population was skewed towards females but an even bigger problem was nearly all of the bucks were yearlings. Pennsylvania’s new seasons are designed to tighten the sex ratio and increase the age structure of the buck population. You may never get a 1:1 ratio but well managed herds will have <2 adult does per adult buck. The state of New Hampshire has a successful deer management program and its statewide deer herd has approximately 1.5 adult does per adult buck with nearly 60% of the bucks being 2.5 years and older.

Two goals of Quality Deer Management are to balance deer herds with the habitat (i.e., reduce herds by removing female deer) and have all age classes of bucks represented in the population (i.e., pass young bucks and allow them to mature). By accomplishing these goals you obtain good sex ratios (<2:1) with good age structure on the buck side. So, the next time you ask about sex ratios, be sure to follow that question up with another about the age structure of the herd.

Kip’s Korner is written by Kip Adams, a Certified Wildlife Biologist and Northern Director of Education and Outreach for the Quality Deer Management Association (QDMA). The QDMA is an international nonprofit wildlife conservation organization dedicated to ethical hunting, sound deer management and preservation of the deer-hunting heritage. The QDMA can be reached at 1-800-209-DEER or www.QDMA.com.

Read more at Michigan-Sportsman.com: Buck to Doe ratio - The Michigan Sportsman Forums http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=256197#ixzz0xZR7JBUQ

[gveire]

I don't see the 10:1 or 15:1 ratio at all.. guessing thats what the bucks only program is in affect trying to increase the heard.  but if you kill all the young bucks A; they cant bred B; they cant get old.  they need to push back the season.  or end the party hunting, ouch did i say that....

[Go Big Red!]

I think the easiest way to increase bigger bucks is to implement a point restriction.  This was a topic from an earlier post (started out in Pennsylvania?) and in the beginning, hunters were fighting it tooth and nail.  It wasn't part of tradition and it wasn't right to tell hunters what to and what not to shoot, yadda, yadda, yadda.

And now, they seem to be in favor of it because they are seeing the older and bigger bucks.... something you are looking for.  Just my two cents.

[Cody Gruchow]

it does help in the winter to help those bucks get thought the tough winters, and its very critical during the spring to help the bucks reach full potential, with the right minerals and forage. but if the genetics are not there then they wont ever develop past a basket rack.

[LandDr]

I was at a DNR training one time up north and the DNR instructor expressed that deer don't need food plots or feeding...that all that food plot stuff on the market is a gimic and waste of time.

I agree that deer do not "need" food plots and feeders...there is usually sufficient food.  Key here is "deer".  If you just want to sustain the existing population and let Mother Nature take it from there, then do nothing and the local deer herd will go up and down based on those variables.

Me on the other hand...I want as many does as I can get on my property and as many doe groups as I can get.  I know the more does and does groups I have...the more bucks and more dominant bucks I will have on my property.  I want to create a LADIES NIGHT on my place!

PLM formula...1 doe group = 1 dominant buck.

It is not uncommon for my 160 acre demonstration farm to have 7 or more doe groups on it and 5 to 7 dominant bucks.  I have approximately 20 acres of corn and beans along with another 5 acres or so of Brassi Buck and Peas & Oats scattered thruout the property.  Ultimately I am creating a BED & BREAKFEST for my doe groups and therefore their homeranges are very small...I keep them on the property.  That said, I also keep the bucks on the property...for me to harvest or for me to pass on so they get older.

So...no, you don't need to feed deer...but if you want more does, more doe groups and more dominant bucks...then it is a requirement to get to that carrying capacity.

[Mayfly]

I was at a DNR training one time up north and the DNR instructor expressed that deer don't need food plots or feeding...that all that food plot stuff on the market is a gimic and waste of time.

Take a look at the Minnesota deer herd... Do you really want to take advice from our DNR about whitetail management?? 

[22lex]

I was at a DNR training one time up north and the DNR instructor expressed that deer don't need food plots or feeding...that all that food plot stuff on the market is a gimic and waste of time.

Take a look at the Minnesota deer herd... Do you really want to take advice from our DNR about whitetail management?? 

Weird, down here in the southeast region such as Whitewater, we see standing corn in some spots that are obviously left there year round for the deer. This is in Jan/Feb when we see this hunting for 'yotes on state land around Whitewater state park and well within the boundaries of the park. Must be a different standard for farm country.

[Outdoors Junkie]

I don't see the 10:1 or 15:1 ratio at all.. guessing thats what the bucks only program is in affect trying to increase the heard.  but if you kill all the young bucks A; they cant bred B; they cant get old.  they need to push back the season.  or end the party hunting, ouch did i say that....

It is amazing how different two states can be.  I live in western SD and hunt in the black hills.  I grew up in MN and continue to deer hunt every year in northern MN.  The Game Fish and Parks manage the deer in SD.  When you buy a license here, you get a doe tag and it is a lottery for a buck tag.  In MN it is the opposite.

[LandDr]

I have come to the conclusion the MN DNR either doesn't think we can manage our own deer on our property or we are too ignorant to manage the deer on our property.

Question...if MN gave a doe permit to every hunter, what do you think it would do to the deer population in MN?

I know if there was a buck lottery, there would be less bucks harvested and more bucks getting older...and bigger!  But I would sure hate to be the one that did not get a buck tag.   

SD is a little different than MN however...a lot more open land and a lot less people.  If you had MN's population in SD, what would the hunting pressure be like?  How much more land would be covered with hunters and what would the harvest numbers be like?

[JECAMERON]

Maybe there should be an age restriction on deer that can be harvested. They could offer classes to teach folks how to estimate a deers age. I'm guessing the MN deer population would flourish if nobody could shoot a deer under 2 years old. 
Of course this is very impractical as "estimating" a live deers age isn't exactly black & white and judging a does age could be difficult. However, I think the results would speak for themselves.

[FireRanger]

Something else to think about is trying to get the insurance companies away from lobbying the DNR to get the numbers down. They wine because they pay so much money in car-deer accidents. Another reason our deer population is being toyed with....or so I've been told .

[Mayfly]

Something else to think about is trying to get the insurance companies away from lobbying the DNR to get the numbers down. They wine because they pay so much money in car-deer accidents. Another reason our deer population is being toyed with....or so I've been told .

I've heard that as well but do not believe it.

[beeker]

 make a buck lottery for out of state hunters. except for wisconsin all of our neighbors make it vertually impossible to get gun buck tag.

[Mayfly]

make a buck lottery for out of state hunters. except for wisconsin all of our neighbors make it vertually impossible to get gun buck tag.

Haha... What out of state deer hunters in their right mind would want to come to Minnesota?? Unless its a tradition or they have an awesome lease on some prime ground whats the point.

[beeker]

 out of state deer hunters only makes up 2% of purchased licenses.. which is like 15,000. (in 2009). 

I know, this would benefit nothing but my own frustration when I try to hunt in other states and have to purchase points by paying the full license fee up front. 

[HUNTER2]

The DNR told me not to feed corn in the winter, because there is to much sugar in it and they can't digest it as well. They said not to feed the deer. They also said if you have to feed, you should use hay. i would say put out lots of minerals to grow bigger racks.

[JECAMERON]

The DNR told me not to feed corn in the winter, because there is to much sugar in it and they can't digest it as well. They said not to feed the deer. They also said if you have to feed, you should use hay. i would say put out lots of minerals to grow bigger racks.

I was told NOT to feed deer hay... I could have been misinformed but I'm fairly certain I read it here...