Sample Plan

[Steve Bartylla]

Sorry I've let this slide for a while. Frankly, I'm just struggling with keeping all the balls in the air. I just submitted the last article I was technically behind on (still have 2 due the 1st, that I've yet to start and the book due the 30th, but that means I have a couple days where I can pretend I'm actually caught up).

Here are a couple more additions to the Habitat Improvement Box of Tools



Selective Thickening is nothing more than hinge cutting the smaller trees to provide the appearance, security and advantages of a "thicker" woods. Simply by hinging all the small trees, one does get a slight boost in browse production. Though not as effective as creating the doe bedding, you'll also often get increased bedding activity within. However, the primary benefits can be found in making bucks feel more secure in their travels and forcing them to waste more time searching for does.

That's why I most often do this on hill and ridge sides, though it can work in many other settings, as well. In both these locations, before the selective thickening, all a buck had to do was glance down into the valley below and he knew if there were any does moving through or bedded below. In less time than it took to write that last sentence, he could determine the area held nothing of interest and move on to the next. For those trying to hold bucks on their property for as long as practically possible, keeping them from their neighbor's bullets and arrows, that's not good. Every daylight minute we can encourage a buck to waste time on our property is one less minute he is in danger of being shot somewhere else. After this selective thickening, both are approximately a couple acres in total areas, he now must waste time to check it, either by circling downwind or physically searching the hinge cut area.

At the same time, it provides chased does an area to better lose their pursuit. In open areas, does have the tendency to blow straight through. When headed for the neighbors, that's less than ideal. However, in areas such as this, they'll often run around in circles and even try to hide, all in an attempt to lose their pursuit. Again, this helps up the amount of time a buck wastes on our ground.

This, like so many things illustrated in this thread, is not a guarantee that Mr. Big won't leave our property. It's merely stacking odds in our favor. the more little things we do to stack more and more odds in our favor, the greater the chance one or a combo of them will be the difference maker we need to either give that buck another year or make it so we are the one killing him.


I've purposefully saved creating buck beds for towards the end, as I believe making buck beds is generally one of the least beneficial things we can do and an overall low priority. Still, they may make a small difference in further encouraging a buck to bed where he would have wanted to, anyway. That is the key, in my experience. It would take someone far more skilled than I to consistently get bucks to bed in areas they naturally wouldn't want to. In fact, I don't believe it is possible. However, one can improve natural buck bedding locations and may be able to get them to bed there more than they otherwise would. That's my goal in creating buck beds.

In the pictures above, my Mathews hat is hanging inside a buck bed I just enhanced. The bed was already there, on the military crest of the point, offering a superior view of everything on the 3 sides below. As you can see, all I did was hinge cut a handful of trees at about chest level, creating entry and exit points from both sides of the tree, giving him a little more front, back cover and overhead. I never worry about scraping away all the leaves, humping in fresh sawdust or straw. Bucks bed on leaves all the time and I've yet to hear one complain about it.

When they aren't already bedding right next to a tree, I will sometimes cut a section of log for them to lean against. Most times I use the existing tree as the "headboard" or do nothing at all. When made where bucks are bedding or in locations that have all the traits a buck wants in a bedding site, they appear to work great. When made somewhere they don't and doesn't have the traits they look for (a combo of high visibility, ability to use the wind to cover their back side, difficult to impossible approach from the back side, edges of thick cover, humps in wet lands and so on), I don't have good luck with buck beds at all.

 

[bryant]

You mentioned the thickening hinges being on the sides of ridges. Is there a general location you prefer such as mid way up or down, closer to the top or bottom?

Our first hinging efforts have been those type cuts and we chose to do them just below the top and some along the top but those areas were also previously know travel corridors that we attempted to enhance. We have seen a lot of browse use, some bedding and the main area we did to enhance travel now has what could be confused for a cattle trail along it, right where we wanted it.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Hard to give a blanket answer to that ?, Bryant. It all depends on the situation. In the case of both those images, I have food plots above them. So, I began just far enough down the lip so that deer in the hinge cuts couldn't see me climb into the stands. I then ran it all the way to the bottom. However, I won't ever hunt in there and it doesn't matter in either of those situations how the deer travel through it. so, those weren't concerns in those specific cases, as they were for you. All I really wanted was bucks to have to waste time in there. Because of very poor access for stands and far better locations elsewhere, I won't hunt either side hill, ever. In situations where I'd want to, or if/when it was important to me how deer traveled through it, I'd do the cuts so they satisfied my desired outcome best, as you seem to have. What that meant would be dependent on the outcome I was striving to achieve....If that makes sense.

 

[wklman]

Just wanted to say thanks along with the others Steve. Men with character always get my respect and you have the utmost in my opinion. I just read threw this thread and the information you've shared is invaluable for the first time plotter all the way up to a seasoned veteran of many years.

 

[sandbur]

Steve- Do you have any comments on designing areas for bucks to waste more time searching for does-for us flatlanders?

Just make a patchwork of thick areas, or on flat land will bucks just travel the downwind side of a woodlot one time and be done?

I'm not sure I worded the above sentences correctly, but think you can figure it out.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Thanks wklman. I hope I'm worthy of that, but, if I am, my mommy deserves the credit. She raised my brother and me by herself, back when it wasn't the least bit "cool" to be divorced. You want to talk about character and a moral compass, that woman has both in surplus, and she did everything in her power to drill both into my head. Frankly, easily the best teacher I've ever had.

Good catch, Art. On sloped ground, because of the thermals combined with swirling winds, there are way more times that a buck can't effectively scent check an area with one pass than they can on typically more stable winded flat land. On flat ground IF you are only trying to get bucks to waste more time, as I was in both the pictured situations, I've found a bunch of seemingly random patches, spread over a much larger area, is more effective than one bigger one. The catch is doing that also makes it more difficult to predict where Mr. Big and does will hole up, in turn making hunting harder.

So much of this stuff is striving to hit the right balance to best match goals. Whether it's doing a couple acre patch on the slope, as I show, or a bunch of patches of flat ground, it makes pin pointing deer harder and has the potential to complicate hunting.

Let's look at the situations I did both of those deeper, though, as they happen to be essentially identical twin settings. In both, I have secluded kill plots above them that transition into large holding plots. They're both setup so that I have safe/low impact stands (a sharp ditch that deer won't use creates them in one case, a barricade of trees/brush from clearing the other plots creates safe stands in the other). So, this larger, unfocused bedding, cruising and general deer activity isn't going to hurt me in those spots. I'm confident that the deer feel as safe hitting those kill plots during light as they do running around in the woods, as they've been "trained" to feel safe in them and they're just 1-2 jumps from cover in both. With their shape, I could care less which trail they use to access, as they can't access where I don't want them too already AND the shape and size of the plots mean I'm going to have a shot at each one no matter what, if I want it. Finally, I have great in woods stands essentially leading in and out of these areas already (though they're a ways away, any buck cruising either of those messes I made could be plucked from the more slam dunk setups I have a distance away). so, I can afford to not care how they run around in those areas, as I essentially have the doorways covered.

When one considers all that, my hunting really isn't hurt much at all by not having focused movement/activity through here, but my goal of growing and holding deer is helped at a pretty decent level. In my mind, that makes the trade off well worth it. As I wrote, I view it all as a balancing act, trying to achieve each individual goal, while minimizing the potential cost to any other goal.

I guess that's part of why I always bristle when others say "this is how you want to do it, every time." In my experience, there are situations where it's best not to try to dictate focused deer movement, as focused movement takes them through faster. There are situations where you want deer activities to be very focused, as they tend to make hunting a lot easier on many levels. There's situations where I feel it's best to try to accomplish some of both at the same time (a good example is creating large 2-4 acre chase area, where you want the random movement/activities within, but are also trying to create slam dunk stands by hunting the trail around the edge, as well as creating intersecting trails through the chase area that dump out and in by your stand). Maybe they work for others, but I just don't see cut and dried, "this" is what you always do type rules to any of this. I feel that needlessly handicaps a person.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Couple posts from the other forum that I thought were decent additions:

The way I see it, every type of improvement listed in this thread (creating "sidewalks," for example) is a tool in the habitat managers' tool box, very much like all the tools in a carpenters' tool box. It'd be silly to try to use all the tools when making a shed, just for the sake of using them. Instead, you lay out your plan for building the shed and use the tools you need to build that shed. In a weird way, it's the same when building your habitat. I'm never going to plant in thermal cover, make a "sidewalk." put in a kill plot, create a chase area or anything else for the sake of doing it. I'm going to only use the tools I need to to build the property to match the plan. Doing anything more is most often counter productive.

it's also very important to remember that you don't need to look at it as EITHER I'm going to dictate movement on this property OR I'm going to get deer to waste time here, to grow more and bigger deer. One can and often should do both. A common scenario is what I described in the Selective Thickening post. I'm going to get them to waste time "here," but I can attempt to dictate/encourage how they enter and exit those locations. Frankly, outside of wasting time, what exactly they do/how they move inside is of no importance to me.

In both those locations, it's possible that they can enter or exit using other routes. However, most often they are going to use one of the funnels I have on either side or they will use the transitional kill plot between the holding plot and the time wasting select thickening cut. So, you're really getting the best of both worlds.
Based on the plans I've been sent for review &/or seen posted here many consultants seem to fall into either "dictate movements" or "time wasters." Regardless of which camp they fall into, they seem to pump the same generic plan out over and over. That's fine, I guess, and no doubt some of their clients are happy (which is ultimately all that really matters), but often I believe the best approach is doing both. Be flexible enough to see where each of these "tools" work best and when/where they will do the most good for at least one of your goals, while coming at a very minimal cost to any other goals you may have.

For example, do you really care that you don't know exactly where Mr. Big was cruising for does in the center of our property, if you are confident that he'll pass your stand when going to feed or checking the does on the food source a half hour before dark? Does it matter in the least, if you position two more general doe cruising areas on opposite sides of a low impact funnel stand that he is likely to pass when he is done checking the first general time wasting area and heading to the other? now, you have the kill plot for morning and evening sit, with the funnel being a slammer of a morning and midday spot.

It's great to get bucks to run in circles around the edges of your property. That often makes for low impact stands. Unfortunately, I don't care how good the circular movement corridor is, they aren't running those circles 24/7...Just isn't going to happen. Helping to encourage them to be on your ground when not on the Indy track is at least as important, for those trying to grow more and older deer. At the same time, trying to encourage movement for low impact/high odds stand sites is also extremely beneficial for most.

Don't look at it as an either or. Look at it as where does it fit my goals best to do either and how can I tie both together.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

If you want to increase deer numbers, you're almost always better off going with many bedding areas over a few bigger ones. That approach also lends itself to increased daylight movements and time wasting for bucks. The key is just splitting their creation between locations that they either don't hurt or they actually help hunting.

You also bring up a fantastic and critical point. I firmly believe, when trying to manage deer, the first goal simply must be to get numbers to your property's goal. If your numbers are well below goal, you aren't going to have many bucks to hunt, regardless of the age class you're after.

I know this is akin to swearing here, but forget about shooting does and more mature bucks, in that situation. Sure, if Mr. Big walks by, no one is going to blame you for killing him. However, what you really want to shoot to fill the freezer with are nubbin and 1.5 year old bucks, before they disperse. They cost your property nothing in terms of long term deer numbers, as they are going to leave anyway. Leave the does alone, regardless of where they live, are coming from or going.

Now, as you start getting closer to population goals, you can start taking out some does. At that point, one may begin by targeting those that go back and forth between you and the neighbors. That naturally lends itself to low impact hunting of the edges and promotes the removal of the potentially most troublesome does to your goals of saving/growing big bucks. You are concentrating does on your property, while reducing the temptations to cross the line. The bucks still will, but even deciding not to cross 1 time can make the difference between him living another year, you killing him or him being killed by the neighbors.

As the does start getting above goal, you can then begin to remove some interior does, targeting those with nubbin bucks. Doing so increases the odds of them staying on their birth range.

As all of this is going on, you are trying to get more bucks to an older age class, but you aren't overly concerned about their antler potential. You're really just trying to get the age structure and a good number of them. Getting that age structure is important, as bucks act much like inner city gangs. They tend to divide up the turf between themselves and generally stick to their areas, as most really don't want to risk potentially deadly fights more than they have to.

Now, I'm not pretending that they will never leave their areas, but I have become convinced that when there are higher numbers of mature bucks that they actually have a strong tendency to shrink their home ranges and become more the home body types than when the numbers/competition is low.

All through this building process, you certainly can hunt any big boys you have running around. It's just that it doesn't matter much what level of potential the buck has, as you have plenty of slots available for bucks to fill.

That changes when you get to higher deer numbers and start achieving a better buck age dynamic. At that point, you do have competition for limited slots that mature bucks can fill.

No matter how you setup a property, you will have a cap on how many truly mature bucks you can hold, particularly how many bucks that strive to be dominant. There's not a shred of doubt in my mind that you can hold more by creating sections that offer all a buck could want, as opposed to either one or two primary cover, watering or feeding areas...Or simply trying to lead them in circles around a property. Both of those approaches increase competition for limited/concentrated coveted resources (food/water/cover/does), as opposed to reduce/spread it out more.

So, once one starts getting closer to having more mature bucks than slots to fill, that's when you begin trying to manage more for potential than pure age. Let's say up to this point, your goal was 3.5 yr old bucks. Before you get to the competition stage, any and every 3.5 is fair game.

You've succeeded. You've got to the point where shooting a 3.5 is almost an expectation and some of them are now getting to 4.5 and even 5.5+ isn't out of the question.

That's when you finally start worrying about managing bucks for more than age. You set the top 50% of 3.5s off limits, trying to get them to 4.5. Now, you have the low end 3.5s and all the 4.5+s to hunt, and each of the low enders you take out increases the odds of bucks with the most antler potential filling the available slots in the dominance hierarchy, instead of getting pushed out to the neighbors.

Gauging potential is part art and part science. You will be wrong on occasion. Some 3.5s on the hit list that made it through will surprise you with a growth explosion and some you had high hopes for that got a free pass will underwhelm you.


That said, this 3.5 year old buck I shot never had good odds of being a slammer.


On the flip side, the 3.5 in the cam pic did. In fact, he blew up and exceeded gross Boone at 4.5, as you can see in the pic from the next year. You just keep playing the odds and you win a lot more than you would if you didn't have an odds stacking strategy.

I need to get to work. So, I'll tackle managing herds in areas with higher than goal deer numbers at a future date.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

another copy/paste...hence, replying to the phantom someone.

Thanks, Dave. I'm not going to BS you. The 3.5-4.5 made a really good jump. He didn't make the best I've ever seen, but it was a good one.

As I wrote, there are bucks that disappoint you. Below is a buck I named Heart Breaker, when I first got his pic at 3.5. Every time I got a new pic or saw him on the hoof, I'd marvel that if he only had good G2s, wow, the potential he'd have. I figured it was a decent bet that he'd kick a G5 on his left to match his right, add a little more tine length, some mass and start tossing kickers/junk.



In reality, as you can see, he lost his G5, added very little mass, a smidge of tine length and even lost the extra eye guard he sprouted at 4.5. I'd have shot him at 4.5, but he snapped both G3s at the beam and I didn't hate the idea of seeing if he'd make a jump from 4.5-5.5, anyway (though I would have rolled him if he hadn't broke).


Some bucks make a good jump from 3.5-4.5. Some make a good jump from 4.5-5.5. I've even had a few that had done little (just didn't get an arrow or bullet in them) that made pretty impressive jumps from 5.5-6.5 or 6.5-7.5. I've never seen one make a decent-good jump above 7.5, but I'm certain it could happen...I do know it's not a lock that they will drop. The last buck I posted below is a 9.5. He was on my hit list from 5.5, and I came close several times before that...His rack didn't change more than 10"s from 4.5 on. His 9.5 rack was as good or better than any before.

That's a long way of saying that some bucks make good-great jumps between any set of years past 3.5. Some never do. Just because you pass a buck doesn't mean he'll be bigger the next year.

Every buck is born with a genetic antler cap/ceiling. The most inches they can possibly, naturally grow is X (though if they shed hard and take a chunk out of their skull, the increased blood and hormones that rush to the area can and often does cause a freakish amount of antler growth on that side for 1 year). Because of various forms of stress and nutrition, most wild bucks never quite hit X, but it's a mistake to believe it's a given that any buck you pass will be bigger the following year. More than a few don't. Heck, if forced to put a number on it, I'd say somewhere around 40% don't do much (less than 10") past 3.5.

Taking it a step further, if forced to put a percent on it, I'd say a max of 10% of bucks in the Midwest would ever make Boone, no matter how old they get. Go further north or hit the mountains, where harsh winters and low over winter nutrition levels are a reality, and that % drops. That doesn't mean there aren't/can't be any jaw dropping Booners running around those areas. It's just that winter stress makes it harder to achieve.

I no doubt rambled on more than I should have/had too. I just don't want to set faulty expectations. I know you knew this, but I want to make sure everyone else reading this realizes that just because you pass a 3.5, it's no where near a lock he'll explode at 4.5.

Passing bucks comes with a risk. He may be shot, killed by a neighbor, die of disease, get killed in a fight or get a hair up his butt and shift his core area off your property. It's up to each person to decide what risk level they're willing to live with.

Some clients kill every buck at 3.5 they can, and I don't disagree with them for doing so in their settings. I'd do the same thing. Heck, I helped them ID/set the goals for their properties and follow the same rules when I hunt them. Some other locations, we try to get the bucks with the best potential through to 4.5. For a couple clients, 5.5 is the goal for the ones with the most potential (50ish% of 3.5s are on the hit list, 70-80ish% of 4.5s are and all 5.5+s).


Every time you try to get another year on a buck, the risk increases. The question is if it's worth the risk, and the risk is very real. I passed that 4.5 yr old Booner twice last year, and brought a vid camera the 2nd time and have about 5 mins of footage to prove it. I haven't seen or got his pic since Dec. He may well be dead, though I hope like !@#$ he isn't...That's the risk/price of poker to play these games. You can win big, but you can also lose big.

 

[sandbur]

Steve-I have appreciated your posts.

Two things came to mind.

1. Considering APR's in SE Mn., as deer numbers have dropped in some areas, I suspect the available number of bucks of all ages have fallen. Two of us were discussing this today. So the available numbers of mature bucks has also fallen.

2. The last few years I have developed a different perspective upon seeing a decent buck or any buck.. I used to worry about shooting it or not shooting it, because a neighbor might shoot it instead. Nowadays, I just try to enjoy seeing the deer and decide if it is the right time and place for me to fill my tag. If I pass on the deer, I made my decision and I let my neighbor make his decision for his day of the hunt. If he shoots the buck, shake his hand and move on. Too many of us worry about what the neighbor does and does not shoot in the pursuit of growing trophies.

Just my two cents.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Art,

If it wasn't for the view counts continuing to steadily increase after each post, I would have been wondering if you guys were bored with this thread and had switched it to "ignore" mode. I must confess. When I copied over the last couple posts, I was pretty confident you'd reply to one or both :p

1) I suspect I'm missing some more hidden meaning here. That said, I completely agree, but you already knew that from my post in the "future of QDMA" thread I made some time ago. I do believe APRs on a large scale carries with it all sorts of unintended consequences associated with them. That said, I believe a person can avoid most of in a non APR area, while managing for bigger bucks. The one area that MAY be a problem they can't avoid is the increased rate of spreading disease via more mature bucks. That may be a very legit concern. I'm leaning towards it being a legit concern, but not completely convinced yet.

2) More power to ya, and I couldn't be being more sincere or less of a smarta$$ in saying that. As we've both essentially posted many, many times, this stuff is supposed to be fun. If it's not, one should reevaluate what, why and how they're doing it. I'll be honest. though I've mellowed a lot in this area with age and enjoy hunting again at around the same level as when I was a kid again, I'm not to the point that I get overly excited about shooting a 2.5 yr old buck. I do enjoy watching them, but personally would get no excitement/fun from killing them. That DOESN'T mean others shouldn't or that I have any right in the least little bit to try to tell them what they should and shouldn't enjoy shooting!!!! It just means that I don't, and there's nothing more right or more wrong about me feeling that way than it is others finding joy in shooting them. It's what makes the individual happy/excited/have fun. So long as it's legal, more power to them, and I mean that.

I agree with most worrying too much over what the neighbor does and doesn't shoot. I just got off the phone with the guy that will be helping me on one of the properties. As I literally told him minutes ago, "We control what we can control. I expect you to do your best in helping me with issues we can control, but I don't want you wasting time or energy worrying about what we can't." That applies to food plots failing because of a lack of rain, deer dying from disease AND what the neighbors kill. Over the years, I've gotten a ton better at not worrying about or getting upset over what the neighbors do and don't kill. I'm not perfect yet, but within spitting distance of being there, in that regard.

That said, you can bet your last dollar that I am going to do what I reasonably can to see that the 2.5 I'm trying to get to 3.5, 4.5, maybe even 5.5 on a select property doesn't wander over to them. I can't stop him and I have no right to be upset if they kill him, but I sure can and will try to give him every reasonable incentive not to that I ethically can.

I'm pretty sure I posted this somewhere in this thread earlier, but God love most of the neighbors that would shoot that buck. More often than not, they're trashing their properties in the process and actually driving deer to the one I'm managing. Most often, they make my job a lot easier, not harder. If that costs me a rare buck every now and then, that's a steal of a trade, in my opinion. Ultimately, no matter how much time that buck was on the ground I'm managing, it never was "mine" to begin with. Unless you're raising deer behind a fence, you don't ever "own" them...you merely try to help babysit them during their younger years.

 

[sandbur]

I have been keeping up with this thread and am grateful for you updating it. I spend less and less time on other forums.

I know we have discussed these things in other places, perhaps some on this forum have not seen it.

Steve, I was not trying to contradict your statements. I think we see many things in about the same way. I have found that I can enjoy the hunt more if I do not worry too much about my neighbor and what he shoots. I did enough of that for 15 years. ( I do worry about 5 or 7 doe permits, though.)

 

[Steve Bartylla]

I never took it that you were trying to contradict me, Art, but I'd sincerely be fine with it if you ever do. I just figured you'd use those other posts to point out that fun doesn't have to involve obsessing over huge bucks. As I alluded to above, I'd have been disappointed if you hadn't.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

another copy/paste job

First, to try to answer what success I've had with this in the past. The first question really is, how does one judge "success" and what bench marks must be achieved to label one property a success and another a failure. Way back when, Duffy called me out for saying I've had around 80% success using this method. I'll still stand by that. On around 80% of the properties I've put the lower 50% of the 3.5s on the hit list, I've seen the standing stock improve beyond what I believe it would have without that buck management approach in place.

You can't count bucks moving into your area, as one has no control over that. That said, I've learned not to try to put this management style in place until I have a good number of mature bucks. On properties that do hold a good number of bucks, you don't have many new ones moving in. It happens, but it's pretty rare. By contrast, when EHD/BT hammered one of the properties I managed last fall, I sucked a bunch of new bucks in during late rut on through winter. In other words, outside of with yearlings, buck immigration occurs at very low to nonexistent rates, once population goals and densities have been met. It's emigration that's occurring and needs to be focused on trying to minimize.

That said, despite trying to create slots, sectioning to reduce competition and striving to create superior habitat, even on what I consider the most successful applications, you're going to lose some bucks to emigration/shifting core areas.

Social pressure is perhaps the most ignored and significant stressor in bucks' lives. When you get to goal, the grass is almost always going to be greener on the other side of the fence for a share of the 3.5s coming up. After all, you have competition that they can't overcome, where as the neighbors have less or none that a 3.5 driven to be dominant can't overcome.

On the bright side, if you can keep them to 4.5 they have a very high tendency of sticking. That's not to say none will never shift, but the odds just dropped very significantly. At that point they've now found a slot they value and are typically high enough up to defend it, as the higher bucks have their own areas they've claimed.

Of course, all of this is merely tendencies. There will be exceptions to everything.

If forced to define what I consider "success," I'd say getting somewhere over half of the 3.5s not on the hit list to keep their core area on the property. I expect somewhere over 70% of the 4.5s. When at buck density and age class goals, you're likely going to get around that 70% of 4.5s to stick anyway. However, your 3.5 yr old losses are generally going to be really high.

Also, I should point out that I'm not including the bucks that are killed by a neighbor chasing does and stuff like that. In this case, I specifically equate losses to bucks shifting core areas off your ground and onto another property. If you have a good scout cam plan/placement strategy, it's pretty easy to tell when bucks shift their core areas and when they just happened to go for a search at the wrong time. I'm not saying you're never wrong, but you're right way more than wrong.

When you can really see the "success" or failure is generally a couple weeks before the rut kicks in. That's one of the highest risk periods for emigration/bucks shifting core areas, as bucks are starting to really fight for their position in the buck hierarchy. Once at goal, those 3.5 yr old up and comers that desperately want to dominate a niche of their own often are getting their butts handed to them by the big boys and appear to get sick of getting pushed around, but refuse to be submissive. If you don't have an open slot, they're at a very high risk of being gone.

The properties this buck management approach works best on are those that can offer the very best of everything bucks want: food, water, cover and a feeling of safety. The 20% properties I've been disappointed in I haven't been able to beat their best options in the area. Specifically, primo bedding or the feeling of safety.

In one case, it was a cedar swamp. It received limited pressure because it was "too much work" for the neighbor to hunt (they were doing themselves a huge favor by being lazy). In another, it was the draw of ridges and bedding points, when my ground was flat low lands. In that case, the ridge also got virtually no hunting pressure. In both of those cases, I couldn't offer superior bedding and their existing bedding options received very limited to no pressure. At the same time, those neighbors picked off enough bucks to keep them from crowding out/emigrating.

In two more cases, the ground had everything one needs to pull the described management approach off, but pressure was the wrench in the engine. In one case, the owner laid out goals and guidelines he and the family weren't willing to abide by (they ran all over the place, which was 100% their right, just not stated intentions). In another the owner valued neighbor relations more than stopping them from using his ground as public land (again, 100% the owner's right).

In my final failure, I frankly believed I could transform a transition type property (a 60 acre piece originally offering very limited cover and used to travel between bedding and feed) into a deer holding property. I eventually succeeded, but was too quick to shift to trying to manage the bucks and not patient enough to wait for the added cover to do its job. I learned a valuable lesson on that one. Never try to manage bucks until you reach population goals. It's that property that really hammered that into my head. Others just reinforced it.

In all of those cases (including the one I was premature on, until it was finally ready), I found the most success by shifting to focusing even more on food, doe bedding and creating pass through stand locations that came as close to guaranteeing that a buck would pass these stands when "visiting" as practically possible. In other words, I did my best to make it so we'd pick off any and all 3.5+s when they made the mistake of visiting during daylight. Frankly, that approach is comparatively easy to pull off.

That's a pretty important point. When bucks aren't living on you during the daytime, once you conclude you can't change that, you're best served to setup a property to produce the highest odds of a kill every time a buck steps hoof on that property. You are going to have limited cracks at him. so, you better make them count.

One would assume you should always do that, but I disagree. There's a balance between setting up a property best for raising deer and one best for killing every roamer. When raising bucks isn't a practical option, you switch exclusively to drawing and killing them. When raising them is an option, you're often best served in the long run to balance the two.

No doubt, there are other scenarios where this buck management approach won't work. One thing I can tell you is that I've never seen where bucks leave properties (outside of some instances during fawning periods) because there are too many does or because the property is just too thick. I'm not foolish or arrogant enough to say it's never happened anywhere. I'm just saying I've never seen it on any of the properties I've worked on, ever. To date, by the time I'm done, every property I've worked on has more does than any of the neighbors and is most often contains some of the thickest cover around (edit: with the exception of 2 of the properties I mention above...I beat the doe numbers of the ridge, cedar swamp and on the transitional property, once I got the cover there, but couldn't overcome the hunting pressure on those other two).

The most important reason this wouldn't work that's not mentioned yet is when the owners/hunters just aren't interested. It's not for everyone and shouldn't be viewed as such. Again, as I've tried to stress throughout this thread, the goals of the manager are of the utmost importance. So long as they're honest and attainable, they're never wrong.

More than a few hunters/managers out there that could pull this off have 0 interest in passing the best 3.5 on their property, and they shouldn't, as getting that buck 20 more inches isn't as important to them as killing the biggest buck on their property each year, however old that buck may be. Others don't want to because they don't see the risk being worth it. There are probably 100 more reasons, all valid.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

another copy/paste...What started as a thread for you guys is getting taken over. Hope you don't mind/still find this useful. I really did intend it to be for here, with a mirror over there.


Took a quick glance at the property pics to start your thread linked in your signature. At a quick glance, it sure looks like you have the potential to pull it off. Take that with a grain of salt, as I wasn't able to jump on the net and review your neighbor's ground or the topography of yours. That said, I really like the way yours lays. By default, your property is going to naturally be a transition zone, even if you do nothing. As I'm sure you know, unless there's some weird topography thing going on that isn't showing on the aerial, you have a natural flow from N/S that dumps into the NWish corner of your property. Heck, you already have a stand in the area. So, I suspect it must live up to what it appears.

Also, because of the makeup of the property and how it lays in relations to neighboring properties, it appears at first glance that you are in a lot better position than most that own a 60, 58 to be precise.

From the little bit I read in the 1st 2 posts (sorry, don't have time to read the entire thread right now, though I plan to sometime in the future), it appears that you'd need some work on the sectioning aspect. I'd also look into creating edge access along the south, west and north sides, if you don't have it already, and do some funneling on the north and south for sure, maybe even the west, but I'd want to be sure I wasn't helping the neighbors back there. It appears it's be very high impact access for them to hunt back there to take advantage of it, but it would also be higher impact for you and it's an area I wouldn't want to hunt a ton. I'd need more recon/info to make that call.

Now, remember to take everything I just wrote above with a HUGE grain of salt, as a quick glance at an aerial is very helpful, but I really need to dig deeper to have a high confidence level in making suggestions. To put it in perspective, the quickest photo eval I've ever done took me more than 1 day and most take me 3-5. Obviously, it's not a money maker for me. I do them because I can afford to and I really get a rush out of putting together these types of jigsaw puzzles.

To actually answer your question, next to pressure, cover is the biggest key and water helps, as well. Speaking 100% on this management strategy (ignoring funneling and the hunting aspects) to pull this management approach off, food plots are great tools, but not the top priority.

What you're really shooting for getting mature bucks to create their core areas on your property. Core areas are where they are most of the daylight hours. If they're feeding in a farmers field after dark, so long as they return before first light, more power to them. That just saves $ and time by not having to feed them all night. Safety, water and browse are what bucks want most during midday.

Now, on larger properties and more than a few smaller properties, I strive to see that they have no reason to ever leave, but, as just explained, it really isn't a deal breaker if they do, so long as that's occurring after dark as much as practically possible. You're never going to keep them on a 60 24/7/365 anyway.

Again, grain of salt, but it appears you can section this to offer 2, maybe 3 sections. Now, if you can go 3, that doesn't mean it's a lock that you'll have 3 4.5+ bucks with core areas on your place. Do it right and you should have 1 most years, 2 a decent number of years and 3 on the very rare year. Unfortunately, you'll likely have some years with 0, as well, but they should be the "bad" years, not the average years. At the same time, with a little funneling and how the property lays, you should be in good shape to pick up roamers, on the down years. Remember, don't take any of this too literally based off a glance at a photo and also that I'm talking just averages/odds, here.

I won't BS you. A person has a heck of a lot more margin for error on 2000 acres than they do 58. Even if you do everything in your power to mess up on 2000, you have your work cut out for you to drive that buck out whose core area is centered on that property, where as it's comparatively quite easy to do that on 58 acres. You don't have the margin for error.

It's also a lot easier to get a buck to create his core area on the 200-300 acre sections you divide that 2000 acre property into, as opposed to 20-30 acre sections on a 60.

Believe me. I understand this. Though I tend to talk more about the 2000ish acre properties I manage, as they allow for incredible studying of complete home ranges and provide me with invaluable insight in those areas, I've done a lot more that are 120 or less.

That said, assuming the habitat either has the potential or can be transformed to, there isn't a deer cover/safety utopia near by AND the manager is willing to setup and treat a property in a certain way, one can make a positive difference with this buck management approach on even 40 acre...20 would be pushing it hard, but I suspect it'd be possible on the right 20.

You can make a case that it's more important for the smaller land owner. If you add in trying to "grow" a stud, I believe it really is actually more important for the smaller owner, but that's not a priority for everyone, and it shouldn't be.

As mentioned, the small/average owners don't have the wiggle room, and that also applies to number of slots to fill. Without modifications, the small/average owner will be lucky to have the characteristics a mature buck wants in a core area on their property to begin with. They'd be REALLY lucky to have it divided in a way that would promote 2 mature bucks establishing core areas there, and I mean REALLY lucky.

So, they have 0-2 slots that can possibly be filled. If it's filled by a bad tempered 120" 8, that's what you got. There's an awful lot of 120s-130s running around, even in IL, with bad tempers. They can really mess a property's potential up.

All that said, the part I like about this approach best for the smaller land owner is, even on down years, it gives that hunter/manager striving to produce 4.5s something to hunt and be excited about killing. It takes that guy or girl that felt bad about shooting a 120" 3.5 and makes them feel good about it. Much like putting in a new food plot, establishing a hinge cut bedding area or planting a bunch of trees, they just helped their property and can feel satisfaction in doing so, instead of feeling bad that they allowed the temptation of killing a 3.5 get the better of them, because they just couldn't connect on the 4.5 or he was never there to begin with.

On the surface, this approach appears to be all about producing gaggers and I am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that this approach helps do that on the properties that can be setup for this approach to work. The dirty little secret is that it's even more about increasing the "fun factor" and feeling of accomplishment/satisfaction for those hunters/managers that are striving to grow older bucks.

 

[Jeff23]

Steve, I have a pretty simple question, and I apologize if you've already addressed it. In my mind, based on my experience in my area, I feel like the sidewalks would become doe trails, and usually the older age class bucks don't use the same trails as the does. So, have you see the same things? If so, do you plan for it? If not, do you feel that the cover provided by the hinging is the key, or do you not see this phenomenon at all? If I find a trail that I determine to be a "doe trail", I generally hunt on the downwind side a bit, because that's where the older bucks are usually walking. Or is it that the sidewalks are creating an "edge", and deer can't resist travelling an edge? Hmmm... I think I'm raising more questions in my own mind!

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Jeff, that "simple" question isn't so simple, but it's a great/important one.

The "sidewalks" do have a high tendency to become doe trails (though even they won't use them much if they have no desire to go where it leads). The question on whether bucks use them or not really depends on if the buck wants to go from point A to B the sidewalk is connecting and if he has what he feels is a better option. Take a ridge setting, for example. Make a sidewalk along the crest of the ridge and you'll have does and young bucks use it like crazy, but Mr. Big will still have the very high tendency to travel just over the top on the upper side ridge. He can travel the downwind side of the ridge, have his nose alert him to anything of interest or danger up top, with his eyes scanning below. Extra cover generally isn't going to entice him to give that up.

Now, look at slight rise peninsula running into a swamp. Lets say the buck is bedding on the last dry land at the point of that rise, surrounded by 3 sides by swamp. When he gets up, he backtracks down the peninsula to the swamp edge and follows that edge to the farm fields to feed. Create a "sidewalk" running parallel to the swamp, out about 20 yards, he probably continues running the swamp edge and ignores it.

Let's pretend the swamp edge doesn't run to the field, though. Instead, he has to cut through a 100 yard section of open, homogenous woods and then cut through a 7 year old poplar slashing regrowth for 200 yards to hit the field. Now create a "sidewalk" from where the peninsula starts going back into the swamp to the slashing regrowth. At the slashing regrowth, create a 28" wide trail to the field. Now you have something he is going to have a high tendency to follow. It offers him superior security through the mature woods than he otherwise has. Then, it offers him easier travel through the slashing than he has anywhere else, while not costing him anything in the security dept.

I don't care how good someone thinks they are, deer just aren't always going to do what you want them to, even when logic says they should, but they do it a lot more in those situations. Will bucks ever walk the edge of the "sidewalk" instead of down the middle? Sure, and does will too. Will they ever parallel that edge, out around 20 yards? No doubt it happens.

Frankly, some of it depends on how pressured they feel. Deer are naturally drawn to security cover. However, the less pressure they feel the more willing they are to be "risk takers" and walk through that wide open woods. Heck, there's a remote 40 acre field near the middle of a really big property I managed up until 4 years ago. Bucks can go around the field and never leave cover, but all bucks are more likely to cross through the middle at midday on Oct 9th (or any other day), as they almost never get pressured back there. Outside of the farmer working the ground and sending the owner back there once or twice a season, max, and only when I need him to get a kill on a specific slob, there's 0 pressure and the deer feel perfectly safe.

In that setting, you better put that "sidewalk" right where Mr. Big wants to go or he isn't going to use it much. Apply what would be closer to a normal amount of pressure and you have a little more wiggle room. Apply heavy pressure and you have a lot more wiggle room.

All that said, if you go back to the original plan I posted, if you can read topography, you'll see that all the "sidewalks" I put in are where deer would walk to naturally travel, as opposed to try to get them to travel in a way they otherwise wouldn't want to. It's ALWAYS so much easier/more effective to get more deer to do what they would otherwise want to even more consistently than try to convince them to do something they naturally wouldn't want to do.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

Another copy/paste...I'll spare you guys the long rant I went on at the end of the last pasted reply below about "experts" not giving back and constantly pimping you guys for $. I probably made myself look like an a$$ doing it anyway.

Please, as I've said often in this thread already, take what I'm about to say with a big grain of salt. I don't have enough info to be confident in saying this, but it SOUNDS like, from your description, that you are nailing the correct general path. On more isolated, smaller properties such as you describe, it's going to be darn near impossible to hold 2 mature, dominant bucks, no matter how you section things. When 30 acres of cover is all they have, with no other cover really around there, they are going to bump into each other often, no matter what you do.

This does bring up an important point, though. Some mature bucks are perfectly content being submissive to another dominant buck. This is where personality types come into play. Some mature bucks show every sign of being just fine with being a patsy their entire lives. They typically will take advantage of breeding opportunities and even will search for them, but they will submit at the first sign of trouble from an equal or greater buck.

When that's the case, many (not all) dominant bucks will tolerate them just fine, often without really bullying them any more than giving a glance or a posture. So long as the other buck consistently submits without a struggle, fights are often avoid and they often very peaceably share everything but the girls. By that I mean if Mr. Nasty is near, she's his. If he's off somewhere, the mature submissive generally will take her, if he has he chance.

The added bonus to this is they tend to be able to share all season long. Meaning the approach you describe would work fine for housing both without issue. You just may end up with a bonus buck living on you, but 2 dominants sharing 30 acres, when they have no where else right nearby to get out of each others' way in, that may be asking for too much.

.............................

The way your property lays already looked great. What you just told me about being able to use the neighbor's field and a road that I can't see along the south side, WOW. That makes it even better. toss in the hidden creek and it's a cherry on top.
As a side note, that's exactly why I'm hesitant to make more definitive, specific statements in this thread. I just don't have all the info. For photo eval clients, I can study the photos at whatever zoom I want and have a topo overlay. Also, I have clients draw in a bunch of stuff, like access routes, roads, funnels, deer activity, all sorts of stuff, as well as answer questions on if they can use neighbors for access and a ton more stuff. I'm sure that explains why I preface most everything. I have a very small fraction of what I need here to create the plans I do....But, hey, this is free.

...................................

First, you are nailing it by focusing on access. Creating low impact access, most often along property lines, but not always, isn't a very sexy topic. However, it's often one of the most important steps. it's a foundation that everything else is built on.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

last copy/paste today

this is all way more of a loaded question than I'm sure you meant it to be. There is so much that can factor into this. I'm not pretending you guys aren't smart enough to follow it, because you all are. I'm just not sure how much justice I can do that in limited words, but I'll at least give it a shot.

I NEVER have hard and fast rules, when it comes to any habitat improvement/deer management topic. There are many things I tend to do a lot more than others, but I think it's incredibly limiting and ultimately harmful to your goals to be rigid.

So, I don't have any rules like always use property line access. Heck, I've had more than a few properties &/or client properties where property line access would have been way more harmful than going right down the center. Many properties naturally lay out so that a lot of bedding occurs along the boarders. Maybe it's a series of ridge points. In another case it may be overgrown brush/saplings/tall weeds/grass. It could be a swamp. Whatever. In any of those cases and so many more, it doesn't make a lick of sense to create access along your property boundaries. Though there are many other reasons/scenarios it doesn't make any sense to do it, in this one anyone that thinks it through realizes going through the bedding is pants on head foolish and they'd drastically hurt their property doing so.

In those cases, I often use the "mature oak" approach, where I access up the "main trunk" as much as practically possible and "branch" out from there to stands...taking that approach, I've sacrificed the "main trunk," but that's often a heck of a lot better than having 15 different main access routes going all over the property. In other cases I may have 2 "mature oak" approaches. In yet others, the best route may be having 15 different main accesses. Heck, I'm sure there is a set of bizarre circumstances out there somewhere that going through bedding is even the best route.

I know that's not what you are getting at, but I wanted to use that example to show that even something that basic can be incredibly harmful if you mistakenly believe you HAVE to cling to some silly "habitat management/design rule." with so many diverse situations out there, clinging to rules and trying to force plans into cookie cutter designs is just plain hamstringing the manager for no good reason.

The same applies to edge access and dead zones. I'm a big believer that dead zones are a too often underutilized and drastically undervalued tool in your habitat tool box. Take Phil's situation (6 acres, I think) or his friend that just bought 21 acres, though. Let's say they both leave a 100 yard dead zone buffer around their properties. What do they have left to play with? Phil would have nothing. Phil's friend could only hunt the very center of the property, somewhere around a 60'x60' area, if my approximation is close to correct (I could seriously be off, as I just ran the numbers in my head). Obviously, that doesn't make sense (I know you agree).

So, build a wall to screen you. Again, sounds awesome, but you better be raking it nearly daily during the fall if you think you're going to slip past a deer under 50 yards away on a calm day, even when they can't see or smell you...Or you're a lot quieter than I am (which many of you may be).

There just isn't a perfect answer for everyone. Heck, the perfect answer most often changes from area to area on a single property, based on all sorts of factors (not trying to be "cute," just honest).

Along that south road, I PROBABLY wouldn't create any bedding closer than 100 yards, but I can't even guarantee that. there are more than a few situations where I actually have. That said, most often it has really been trying to screen existing bedding so that the deer couldn't see what's happening on the road (or access trail), but still.

In your case, the best thing MAY BE to create a blockade/screen right along your side the road. In fact, that was one of first thing I thought of when you said you had a road there, sloppy hunting neighbors and not much deer traffic coming up from the south. Doing so MAY kill 2 birds with one stone: allow you to use more of your habitat/have less dead zone, while reducing the odds further of you feeding deer to your neighbors.

Take that with a huge grain of salt, though. No way I've got the data to say that's your best move.

Now, for someone with 200 acres, being able to use more of their ground may not be as important as it may be to someone with 58. On small properties, it's often a very important consideration, particularly when one is striving to section and stack as many bucks in as they can.

If it's a transition property (used just for travel), one may want the entire property, outside of 1 or 2 travel corridors, to be dead zones.

If it's a destination property (used for feeding and/or checking does, but bedding elsewhere), you MAY want to use darn near every square inch, setting up right on the edge on a main access/departure route or two.

Finally, if you have the protective cover, enough sanctuary set aside for deer to feel safe and even just 20 acres of security cover, deer within winding your neighbors isn't the absolute end of the world. So long as you make them feel safe and they have thick cover, smelling the neighbors on one side isn't likely to cause the deer to go blowing out the other side of the property on a death run. Sometimes, they'll actually eventually train them that human odors in that micro area is harmless. Most often, they just go a bit deeper into your property until they feel the threat is gone and return.

The way you describe your neighbors to the south, cherish them. They don't realize it, but they are your best friends/allies. You treat your property right and all their running around and sloppy hunting will keep driving deer to take up residency on your property all season long. So long as they follow the laws, bad hunting neighbors are good property managers best friends.

P.S. if the gentleman I was talking to about this topic via PMs a couple months ago wants to chime in, he had what I think may be a productive tool for providing a little extra browse along property lines, while keeping deer travels off. It was his idea, though. I think he just added another tool to for me to pull out of the box sometime in the future, but he deserves to be the one to post about it, as it was 100% his idea. When read this and even question if it was you, it was.

 

[sandbur]

Steve-somewhere in the above posts, you mention some stands being difficult to approach because the deer can hear you approaching.

I have 3 comments.

!. some stands are only afternoon stands or maybe a rare early morning windy location. I know I need to approach with a wind to cover my noise and might wait until mid morning or mid afternoon for an evening hunt. Deer have often moved past at the end of an evening hunt.

2.I have had luck approaching stand on a quiet morning by mimicking a squirrel rustling in the leaves. Take a stick and dig at the leaves, stand still, take a slow approach and sound like a squirel looking for acorns.

3. Run to the stand with a stop or two on the entry. Especially during the rut.