Sample Plan

We do scores and cam census too.

Curious what the oldest doe you have seen bred? We killed a big doe for our area last year, 142lbs, late in the season that had two fetus. Based on our guess from the jawbone we think she was at least 8 but maybe older. Waiting on the biologist report.
 
I've been following this and there is a lot of good information. Keep it coming.
 
Bryant,
I could give you some BS and toss out a number, but it'd be just that. After deer get above 6.5, I don't trust my teeth aging skills at all, and I'm not going to guarantee that I'm not off by a year either way up to that point. At the same time, I do keep history on live bucks, but don't try to on does. there's one I named Hook Nose Kate that was apparently born with a birth defect that messed up her nose bad. I've got a pretty good idea on her, but, outside of cases like that, the rest are loosely classified and recorded as "fawn, 1.5, 2.5, mature and old (projecting somewhere over 6.5)." I can say that the lactation rates between mature and old tend to be pretty close, with the old group typically having a slight edge. I tend to believe that the "old dry doe" is more myth than reality. I'm not saying it never happens, ever, but nothing close to as many as some hunters claim.

In fact, old does tend to be the most productive at repopulating areas. They have had more years of experience in raising fawns and it shows with the edge in lactation rates. Sure, because their bodies have been beat up over the years, they may be more prone to dumping twins and singles, when they really get up there, as opposed to the occasional triplet or twins that a 3.5-6.5 tend to birth. They're just better at protecting their fawns from predation and such. Kicking triplets is great, but does no good when 2 of them are taken out by predators and the third is abandoned (though abandonment happens far more with the fawns from year and 2 year old mothers).

How we can use this is in areas where we're trying to raise deer numbers. Obviously, it's best in those situations not to shoot any does. However, if you are going to shoot a doe, make it a young one without fawns. Killing a doe with fawns anywhere in the Midwest or points north is extremely rarely an issue for the fawns, as they are old enough to survive without the birthing doe. I can count on 1 hand the number of fawns I've seen that are still nursing during hunting season. Unfortunately, their chances of surviving winter are very poor. The reason you want to target the young does without fawns is because they either lost their fawns or they have yet to fawn for the first time. Either way, they are inexperienced mothers and odds say their next spring's fawns face lower odds of survival than that mature or old doe's fawns...Just another way of playing odds.

On the flip side, if you're trying to drop deer numbers, all else being equal, you're better off targeting mature does with twins or trips (if they're nubbin bucks, even better). The fawns will be fine. It's just that she is apparently productive and skilled in rearing fawns.

I know I dumped more info than you were asking, but see below for why.

Thanks tooln. I'll try. Questions help a ton, in that they give me new directions to branch off to and reminds me that I haven't covered this or that yet.
 
Last edited:
We do scores and cam census too.

Curious what the oldest doe you have seen bred? We killed a big doe for our area last year, 142lbs, late in the season that had two fetus. Based on our guess from the jawbone we think she was at least 8 but maybe older. Waiting on the biologist report.


Bryant, here is a article about a deer study that was done in northern MN.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/volunteer/sepoct09/bounce_back.html

Here is a paragraph about does and fawns:

Conventional wisdom among wildlife biologists held that deer fertility hit its peak at about 8 years old, but DelGiudice and graduate student Michelle Carstensen documented does as old as 16 years giving birth to twins. During winter captures, they recorded pregnancy rates of 97 percent for does 2 to 7 years old, and 99 percent for does 8 to 15 years old. Most does annually gave birth to twins.
 
I've seen similar reports about does birthing well into their teens
 
West branch, cool article. Thanks for the link.

Steve, good stuff as usual. I am with you on aging jawbones. Really don't expect to get an age. Probably get something like 6 plus. I have a PowerPoint slide show I printed off that goes through 8.5 that we use for comparison on the old ones but we weren't convinced she wasn't past that. We are on what I guess you would call a maintenance plan as far as does go. But we do target what we think is the oldest does when that is an option. The last couple of seasons we have had nice distribution across age classes, but that is just luck IMO.
 
Sorry it's taken so long to get to this. I'm strapped for time.

It's pretty hard to show what a hinge cut bedding area looks like when it's time to do some maintenance. In a picture, it just looks like a tangled mess.
However, you should be able to get as good an idea as one can from this pic. This was about a 10 year old hinge cut. If you look close enough, you can see a couple of the hinged trees. Before the maintenance, it all looked like the area around the newly created opening.

Step 1 was to create an opening with a loppers (hand pruner for cutting saplings and branches). Cut the saplings off just under the ground, so you aren't asking deer to bed on spikes. I go for around 10 yards across, but this one is a bit smaller

Step 2 hinge some of the regrowth to create the ceiling

Step 3 create a 28" wide trail entering and exiting this new bedroom.

With maintenance every 2-4 ears, you can keep most of them going pretty much forever. I've got one that I still have access to/responsibilities for that's somewhere over 20 years old and it's still productive.

They just sort of morph in time. For example, instead of being a 1/2 acre area with a ceiling covering the entire thing and the ability to travel anywhere inside, it some become a thick mess with 2 "ceilinged" openings inside and 2 "sidewalks" serving as entrances and exits.
Doe bed upkeep.jpg
 
I just did a plan for a firearms only hunter. I get the impression that most here are bow hunters, but I'm sure many of you firearms hunt, as well (I know I do). If one firearms hunts exclusively, the way I create plans is different from when setting up for bow hunting, and I generally set plans for the bow hunting end, when one does both. After all, people (myself most definitely included) don't complain that the buck offered a 20 yard shot with a gun, instead of 100 yard shot.

That said, I've been remiss in not covering gun hunting here. This first image shows one stand setup I created for him. This is exclusively for gun hunting. Also, he wanted to keep tree cutting to a minimum. So, I skipped the "sidewalks," to help address his concerns. He also has enough land and this location is far enough back in and won't be hunting until November. So, I didn't add fruit trees at this location. The combo of those variables, along with being able to shoot 200 yards, makes it so they are not required, IMO, in that situation.

Firearms.jpg

The dark green line is 3 staggered rows of Norway Spruce to serve as a wind break
Green ovals are doe bedding areas
Bluish green strips are 50 yard wide, 200ish yard long food plots (5 yard wide swat of clover along the outside edges, with a rotation of brassicas (top seeded with cereal rye, oats and winter wheat) and a soybean, pea mix (top seeded with cereal rye, oats and winter wheat)
Blue dot is a water hole
Red dot is the stand
Blue arrows are the safe winds
black line is access.

In short, that's a real killer of a firearms setup, but would ultimately be thrilling, yet extremely frustrating bow hunting.

Now, one can and should alter this, if they want a primary firearms stand that could also be bow hunted. Here's what I would do for that scenario in the exact same location. All I did different was blockade (green line) a little around the stand to offer safer close range hunting and a partial blockade along the center strip, to encourage closer deer activity, while still getting some cutting for gun hunting towards the end. Then, I added some fruit trees to further suck them down towards the stand and because hunting would begin in Sept. The scrape tree (black dot) is also to suck the deer down and position them for a shot.

Firearms bow.jpg

Now, the second option still isn't a "perfect" bow stand, but it does balance creating a primary firearms stand with being able to effectively bow hunt it. I should have included something like this sooner. It just slipped through the cracks.
 
Steve I really like the "wheel spoke" look of those food plots. I do hunt with a firearm but I'm not a fan of sitting in a stand on the edge of a large field. This type of setup would make me feel more like I'm "in" the woods. And I'd bet daytime activity is much higher in this setup compared to one wide open field.
 
In a remote area like this (it's about a 30 acre island in the middle of a swamp), if he hunts it like I suggested, all but abandons his interior trail system and generally leaves this remote island alone, it won't even be fair to the deer. This is going to sound odd to most, but I actually got a little giddy putting this one together. I'm that confident this will be that good.

So long as those deer feel safe, and there's no reason for them not to in this situation, none at all, they will be feeding and cutting across those fingers at all time of day, including the old timers. The general area is hunted hard, but deer are so local specific, in that they feel safe or threatened based so much on what goes on here and what doesn't go on there. I never guarantee anything as it applies to deer hunting, but I'll come as close to guaranteeing this will be a 10 out of 10 stand as I can.

I see a variation of what I'm referring to play out on hard hunted public land all the time. Within those undisturbed pockets, deer move freely, but just the other side of the swamp, river, steep ridge, deep gully, whatever it is that stops other hunters from crossing, you are hard pressed to find a youngster that will move freely during light. Creating those undisturbed areas, where deer feel safe to move, is a huge part of achieving all you can through habitat and deer management. As I wrote above and told the client, so long as you follow through on this approach, this won't even be fair.

As I also told him, the catch is that he will believe he has a lot more deer than he really does. Before, with the way the place was being hunted, they were lucky to see 5-10% of the deer on that property on any given day. Now, they're going to likely see 60-70% (with the number of hunters he has, how they are spread out and the types of stands they're hunting). They're going to believe they have a lot more deer than they really do. He will have to show trigger restraint, if he wants his deer numbers to grow to a healthy level.

I know that's off topic, but it is an important point for those doing things like this. When you put together and implement a good plan, you are going to see a much higher % of deer than you did before. That's often going to make you believe you have drawn in/have many more deer than you really do. On a setup like I did for this guy, you can really hammer the deer numbers. Let the habitat use tell you how many deer need to be shot, not seeing 10 a sit on a food plot, when you used to be lucky to see 1 a sit. that's not a good judge of deer numbers, just a good indication that your improvements are working to give you more encounters.

P.S. I'm NOT saying that everyone can setup their properties to see 60-70% of their deer more days than not. I'm saying that I feel pretty safe in saying this guy can, with the number of hunters he has, how his property naturally lays out AND with the firearms setups he is going to create. There's a reason I felt a bit "giddy" doing his particular plan (for those who watch Parks and Rec, picture Ron Swanson upon hearing the government would be slashed by 80%). Everything just fell together so perfectly.
 
Last edited:
Steve-How about adding some late Oct. early Nov. dropping apples to both set ups?

I would add earlier dropping apples also to establish a habit of visiting the area all fall.
 
Art, that's what I would have done in the bow hunting example. "Then, I added some fruit trees to further suck them down towards the stand." I didn't elaborate, but, in that scenario, I'd suggest early, medium and late dropping apple trees, at least 2 of each, 4 would be better.

In this guy's scenario, for gun hunting only, he doesn't need them. Frankly, I believe they'd do little to no good for him. His place is in the middle of swamp country, with no ag for miles. The surrounding areas are hunted hard, but lack any food plots (he has one small one in a different area). No matter what he plants, he's going to be drawing deer to the food plots already, particularly since there are very, very few oaks in the area. I'm all for diversity (I did that with the planting suggestion) and offering deer candy, but I just don't see the big pay off for him, as I am confident his food plots will draw just as powerfully without apples as they would with them. Drawing deer to quality food plots, when they have no other high quality options, is easy.

Frankly, in this exact scenario, if it were going to be bow and gun hunted, the only reason I'd add them is to encourage the deer to enter bow range. It wouldn't be to draw the deer to the plot, as they'll already be drawn about as powerfully as they can be by brassicas, beans, peas, oats, winter wheat, clover and cereal rye. In fact, this is a case where one could make a strong argument that's too elaborate of an offering. I suggested it merely to have a rotation that offers year round nutrition, but dropping the peas from the equation wouldn't hurt a thing. Drawing deer to food plots is easy, when you're the only grocery store in the county.
 
Thank you, Steve. I understand the situation.

Just a finger of fall rye works well if you are in the big woods.
 
I did a variation of a post like this last year, on the other site, showing how I often let the weeds go on smaller bean plots until the soybeans have become established enough to both canopy the ground and withstand deer browse far better. This year, I'll show a virtually guaranteed way to establish clover plots.

The first thing I need to point out is that I can't remember the last time I broke ground to plant clover, despite having somewhere over 30 clover plots going every year. For what I do, clover is a real workhorse and time saver. About half the plots I don't bother cutting each year (I only cut clover to control weeds and only do so when they are really getting out of hand), I spray around half of them for grass each year (grass is an enemy, where as weeds generally aren't a horrible thing) and can get 5-10 years out of clover plots, so long as I frost seed every other year or so to fill in dead spots or thin areas. Add it all up and it is about the cheapest, lowest effort food plots I put in, while offering great nutrition for around 8 months a year in the northern states and 10-12 months in the Midwest.

The other way I use clover is to create a 10 yard wide ring around many other plantings (brassicas, corn, beans, peas) where they are edged by brush and trees. Many plantings don't do well close to trees and brush, due to their shade and nutrient and water theft. Clover generally does fine there. So, creating those buffer strips helps keep costs down, while adding another attraction to the plot and creating even more food in often limited space (instead of having corn stalks without cobs, or massively stunted and thin brassicas, peas or beans along the woods, it provides decent-good clover growth).

One more thing I should point out is that I almost always use Antler King Trophy Clover mix. I know it's not "cool" to use BOBs (it's the only straight BOB I use...I also use their Honey Hole (a brassica mix), but I add radishes to that and then far more often than not top seed with 4 parts cereal rye and 1 part oats). I've just had consistently great luck with that blend over many, many years and could never match its drought tolerance, germ rates and deer desirability combo in other BOBs or blends I've put together myself (and I've tried hard).

That said, use whatever you want for clover. The approach I use has worked with any clover combo I've tried. In fact, the real reason I mention the brand is because it contains rape as a 1st year cover crop. Not only will that show up in a pic below, but it also serves to dispel that you can't frost seed brassicas, as some frost seed very well, and that doing so can give the tonnage your plot produces a huge boost and it serves as a great cover crop for clover that first year.

With all that out of the way, frost seeding is a thing of pure beauty and, so long as you have seed to soil contact, is the closest to a guaranteed thriving clover plot as it gets. As mentioned to begin this post, I just don't break ground for planting clover anymore at all. I merely apply the clover at about 125% the suggested rate.

Each time I establish clover, I'm either doing so in an in-woods plot I cleared that winter with a dozer or somewhere that I'd had in other annual crops (brassicas, corn, beans, peas, oats, cereal rye or a combo of those plantings) the fall before. When following annual plots, that gives me a chance to work in lime, assuming it's required, the year before. If it calls for more than 2.5 tons per acre, I'll do 2.5 tone before planting the annual and apply the rest, up to 2.5 tons, after frost seeding/before the final spring thaw (if at all possible). On plots without breaking ground, I just apply before the last thaw and then repeat in late summer, if needed.

I only mow if I absolutely have to that first year. I don't want to stress the clover by mowing or setback the rape's production (it can handle high mowings, but it does impact production). I want it to use that first year for the individual plants to establish robust root systems and also produce as much of its own seed as practically possible, all while minimizing the amount of dirt directly exposed to the sun. Sure, the weed competition places somewhat of a stress on the rape and clover, but nothing compared to mowings and baked dirt. Also, many weeds provide feed for the deer and also can help protect the young clover and rape growth from deer browse.

Now, that said, going into fall, if the weeds are really thick and considerably higher than the clover and rape, that can hinder feeding. One can either mow high (8-12") or simply drag over the plot. If I feel I have to do that (maybe 10-20% of all plots I feel I have to, at most), I let the quality of rape determine whether I mow or drag. If the rape has already been decimated by the deer (which happens to me more often on the in-woods plots), I'll drag with a log or section of chain link. In that case, all I'm trying to do is lay the weeds down. A cultipacker will inflict more damage on the clover.

Grass is another story. Though weeds seldom are thick enough to choke out clover or rape, grass can be. If that looks like it may be an issue, I won't hesitate to spray for grass.

From the second year on out, all I typically do for maintenance is mow if the weeds are thick and spray to control grass, if they look like they may become an issue. I'll also fertilize a 0-0-## (40 to 60) at 200 lbs an acre, right before a predicted heavy rain if the plot isn't producing the growth rates I want. If on sandy soil, I'll test for pH every couple years, every 4-5 on heavier soils, and top spread lime when required. Finally, when the stand is getting thin or there are bare spots, I'll frost seed more clover the following year (about a 50% rate if thin, 125% on bare areas).

If you're happy with your clover plots, by all means keep doing what you are doing. If not, give this a try. It's the most fool proof method I've found. I honestly can't even remember the last time I've been disappointed in a new clover plot, when using this method (and I use this method 5-15 times every year)...and it's a lot cheaper/less time intensive than planting buckwheat a couple times over spring/summer to control weed growth for a fall planting of clover, with a cereal rye cover crop.

Pic 1 shows what a typical in-woods plot looks like when done clearing it with a dozer
Pic 2 shows the clover in the same plot in August (in IL)
Pic 3 is a bigger pic of the same plot, showing what I mean by "weeds getting bad"
Pic 4 shows what it looks like after dragging it, knocking the weeds down to give the clover a jump on being even more established by fall/increasing the feeding even more, now that it can handle it (the deer wiped out what was a great germ rate on the rape, as happens more often in in-woods plots for me)
Pic 5 shows what I typically get for rape production using this method when frost seeding into last year's annuals (that pic was taken around Sept 5th in WI....look at that tonnage of winter forage that rape produced!)
Pic 6 shows what the grasses look like in the spring, when I decide to spray them...It also shows what those weedy first year plots look like in their 2nd year on.
1.JPG
2.JPG
3.JPG
4.JPG
5.JPG
6.JPG
 
Last edited:
There's so much hype in every aspect of deer management and habitat improvement. I thought it'd be nice to give a more realistic glimpse. Here are pics from 2 average sized pieces of ground in WI (one is 80 acres and the other is 120). Neither of them are in areas known for producing great bucks or overly high deer numbers. Both have heavy to average hunting pressure surrounding them. I've managed both for just over 2 years, now. Neither had a 3.5 yr old buck on them when I began.

Here is what I got from the 1st chip swap of the year. Three come from one property and one on the other.

Now, I'll be honest and tell you all that I'm happy with these results (and the clients are thrilled). I'll be equally honest and tell you that this is a fair representation of what these properties can produce. They are good bucks, all 3.5+, but not one of them hits 150". Every now and then, I expect them to produce one that breaks 150", but there will also be about as many years that neither produces a buck that breaks 130".

My point is that these are realistic expectations for these areas. Neither are going to have Booners to hunt very often, and there is a good chance that they never will. Even on the 1000+ acre pieces of prime hunting grounds I manage, there isn't a Booner behind every tree. In the best settings, one would be very lucky to have 10% of the bucks on that ground ever achieve Boone, no matter how much food is produced for them or how old one gets them, and most ground would be lucky to have a 5% cap. For example, all 4 of these bucks are "good" bucks, but I believe only one of them would stand even the slightest chance of ever hitting Boone, and I'd bet against that one hitting it (last pic).

Have realistic expectations and don't buy into the hype that all you have to do/buy is ______________ and you'll have multiple Booners to hunt every year. No doubt, all of this stuff we do helps and can make a very significant positive impact on what we have to hunt on our grounds. As was the case on both these properties. They started with nothing over 2.5 (and they'd never killed anything over 2.5 in many years of both owners and their families hunting these grounds) and now have good bucks to hunt. However, they may never have a Booner to ever hunt on their grounds, and I'd bet that they won't have one over 150" to hunt considerably more years than not.

It's not a "sexy" thing to say and doesn't sell products and/or services, but be realistic and you'll be a lot happier with the results!

IMG_0048.JPG
IMG_0186.JPG
IMG_0227.JPG

IMG_0715.JPG
 
Last edited:
I would call that a successful turnaround. I know I've read studies that show it's darn impossible to really manipulate the genetics on a free-range herd so you have to be happy with what you have even if they will only get so big after 3.5. I think having a quality hunt on improved ground should override the desire for more antler inches anyways and I would say they should have that now. I'm sure something can be tried to add more bone to these guys but at some point you hit the law of diminishing returns.
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure he's talking bout age. With intense hunting pressure bucks have a hard time getting old. Besides a couple exceptions your not gonna see booners all over when there are 4 guys hunting on every 40 acres.
 
I guess I understood the post to mean regardless of the hunting pressure they are only going to get so big. I've seen plenty of large bucks on high pressured ground and I would qualify and area like Buffalo County as high pressure. Mind you in some areas a 3.5 year old can still score 160+. If fact I had one on my property last year and I would consider my area high pressure.
 
What Dipper is posting is most definitely a major factor in how many Booners are running around. You see hunting pressure impact this in both high grading (consistently killing the best of the best 2.5 & 3.5s, when managing for 4.5s, for example) and even in killing those 4.5s that would have jumped at 5.5, 6.5 and I've even seen a few that jumped at 7.5. When that 4.5 happens to be mid 150s and he has a 20" jump in him somewhere down the road or a cumulative 20 inch jump in him coming in several years, you just shot a potential Booner.

That said, Shawnv's interpretation is what I meant. All bucks are born with a genetic cap on what they can potentially produce for antler sizes, just like we're all born with a cap on how tall we can grow. Hitting Boone is really not much different than us hitting 6' 6"+. Most of us couldn't grow to 6' 6" no matter what mom did while pregnant or fed us growing up. Most wild bucks can't hit Boone, period. The reason you see so many in high fence settings that use breeding programs is because they are essentially mating a 7'+ male with a 6'+ female. Do that and you aren't getting short or average height kids.

Now, look at a high fence that's built on all natural genetics. Whatever was inside the fence is what they have to work with and they don't have any kind of a breeding program matching the best bucks with the best does. They have a great deal of control over everything, outside of genetics for the area and dictating the breeding pairs. A lot of them produce some jaw dropping bucks that creep into the 200s. Many even shoot every buck that doesn't show potential at a younger age and allow those showing the best potential to get old.

The 2000 acre high fence that fits this description a buddy of mine manages doesn't shoot anything showing potential until 6.5, while killing everything that they can that doesn't, starting at 3.5. Now, because of the size and great quality of habitat inside the fence, they aren't able to kill even half of those they want to at 3.5 or 6.5, but they are able to control it far better than we can on free range, and those deer have a surplus of nutrition year round. That said, even with all of that going for them, more bucks than not don't break Boone there that hit 6.5+ years old, and, remember, they're aggressively removing those that don't show promise from 3.5 on.

I'm very good friends with the owners of the old Kisky farm in Iowa. It has about as good of wild genetics as I've ever seen. Heck, they sent me a pic last year of a 2.5 that was well over Boone. They control the hunting pressure to the point that no one here would consider the place as even being really hunted. What these guys own is somewhere between 2500-3000 contiguous acres (can't remember exact number). They pump obscene $ into leaving beans and corn for deer and, IMO, are way too aggressively killing does and no where near aggressive enough in killing bucks. In other words, the majority of bucks on that property live to old age and die of natural causes. They spend way more time patrolling it than hunting it. Right around 10% of their bucks hit Boone before they die.

The King Ranch in TX has about the best genetics TX has to offer, ridiculously low hunting pressure per acre and the ranch itself is larger than the state of Rhode Island. Far less than 5% of their bucks ever hit Boone in their lifetime.

I could give a lot more examples, including the large properties I've managed and many others I'm just very familiar with. The overwhelming majority of wild bucks just don't have it in them to ever hit Boone, no matter how old they get or what you feed them (something like steroids may do it, but I'm talking legal deer feed and minerals). It's something that isn't talked about much, because there isn't $ to be made from or members to be had by telling others that the overwhelming majority of wild bucks will never hit Boone no matter what you do.
 
Top