-
The forum has been upgraded to support both light and dark themes. Click here for directions.
Amazing
- Thread starter Bullwinkle
- Start date
We don't have that here...
Chainsaw
Well-Known Member
It's nice to get the scoop about the property the Crop Tree Management study was done on. I'm not surprised to hear it is a well balanced eco-system. Their methods are so deer friendly and deer habitat friendly yet also provide for making timber cash. The crop tree system is so simple, it really is common sense yet it has taken many decades to be figured out. I agree with that the mistakes of the past should not be ignored but I guess I am not looking at the current activities on Bullwinkle's area as mistakes; It is the mistakes of the past that have created the current over populations.
It's pretty cool that you are backpacking in that area right now.
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
It just might work. At least he's trying something.
Last edited:
Gator
Well-Known Member
I'd say it will work to get high stem count if the fence can be maintained. All it would take is a couple of break ins and it will all be for nothing and he'll be back to square one though. Assuming he makes it past that stage, once he takes the fence down, there will almost instantly be a browse line throughout the whole area but as long as the trees are well above that level, they should continue to live and keep the high stem count until they start out competing one another years down the road.
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
A browse line is the result of too many deer of course, however another main factor almost always present where there is a browse line is not enough sunlight hitting the ground. In a large clearcut its going to take a tremendous deer herd to outnibble new green growth in the summer. Browse line? Time to let some sunshine in with a chainsaw.
Bullwinkle
Active Member
I agree. My woods needs to be cut but it's in a DNR plan that I have to abide by
If the deer where hurting they would not have 2/3 fawns per doe. I personally think this is a more important measure of the health of the herd than a browse line. Nature knows and rules
If the deer where hurting they would not have 2/3 fawns per doe. I personally think this is a more important measure of the health of the herd than a browse line. Nature knows and rules
Chainsaw
Well-Known Member
Bull, we saw the same thing here when we were over populated;the deer just kept raising mostly doubles and as many triplets as singles. And the deer were plenty healthy. What was going down hill was the habitat--less and less diversity. Luckily everyone seemingly suddenly got on board with shooting does which was followed by five feet of snow for two consecutive months. The browse was buried so our herd got a rapid adjustment.
We were lucky because it happened before the habitat was completely shot. Nature knows and rules but it may not always do it in our best interests or as in our case sometimes it does. And you are probably 100% right;your deer are likely not hurting yet.
We were lucky because it happened before the habitat was completely shot. Nature knows and rules but it may not always do it in our best interests or as in our case sometimes it does. And you are probably 100% right;your deer are likely not hurting yet.
Bullwinkle
Active Member
Good point Chainsaw. I understand what you are saying
I only have browselines on less that 20% of my property. It's where the does bed. I also have neighbors who pound deer. I just want to be smart with managing this. If the deer are healthy and I have some over browsed areas it doesn't bother me, I bought the land for deer hunting. I also have wolves. If I begin to see too many does vs bucks or unhealthy deer that's when I'll take action. It's amazing how stable my deee sightings and ratio of bucks to does I see
I know too many people who have overreacted on shooting does and regret it and know 0 who have showed restraint on does and regret it
I only have browselines on less that 20% of my property. It's where the does bed. I also have neighbors who pound deer. I just want to be smart with managing this. If the deer are healthy and I have some over browsed areas it doesn't bother me, I bought the land for deer hunting. I also have wolves. If I begin to see too many does vs bucks or unhealthy deer that's when I'll take action. It's amazing how stable my deee sightings and ratio of bucks to does I see
I know too many people who have overreacted on shooting does and regret it and know 0 who have showed restraint on does and regret it
IkemanTx
Member
That is probably your biggest limiting factor. I bet if you could thin out the whole place to get good sunlight over every square foot of forest floor, your deer wouldn't be able to come close to keeping up with the place.with a closed canopy, a browse line really only occurs on the woods edges, because there is no browse in the interior to chew on anyways. It only makes sense that the whole population hits the few acres that ARE cut as soon as the greens get going.
What you need to break the cycle is yes, less deer, but more importantly the ability to cut a larger percentage of your place than the DNR plan allows.
Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
So right Ikeman. You have almost totally summarized browse lines in about the least amount of words possible.
I am so glad I don't use any tax payer funded subsidies that would keep me from doing what I want, when I want, and how I want on the property I own and pay taxes on...If I want to cut every tree tomorrow I can...Bulldoze it all, no problem...light it on fire, go for it...Every single thing on all of our places is subsidized out of the wife and my pockets...
If you can't cut trees because you are awaiting "approval" then the next thing is to thin the herd...
If you can't cut trees because you are awaiting "approval" then the next thing is to thin the herd...
Reagan
Member
I agree.
This is the difference between living in a free state versus a high tax socialist state.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
Or as you are saying; Us Americans value our freedom very highly and don't need the government to tell us what and when to plant and harvest. See how that works out in Russia....... Many gave their life so that those of us following can be "free"
dogghr
Well-Known Member
Sad part is the DNR is advocating indirectly a deer poplulation above the holding capacity and in the process destroying habitat needed for more than just one animal population. Certainly that might be from political or social pressure in that area but still they have a responsiblity as land and animal managers.
I disagree that heavy timbering on one property like that would make a diff. An overpopulation of browsers will selectively eat the best of the growth, leaving less desirables to take over the growth. Hence why we here tend to have MFR be prominant in logged areas. The deer know what is best to eat, and leave the other that then allows only shade tolerant plants to eventually form the canopy. Unless the animal numbers are managed across the area, then Bull is cursed to do anything signifacantly successful on his own. Simply done by EAB or concurrent doe season with very limited buck harvest. Guarantee with a few years of learning curve, those hunters will put more doe on the ground when backed into a corner.
I disagree that heavy timbering on one property like that would make a diff. An overpopulation of browsers will selectively eat the best of the growth, leaving less desirables to take over the growth. Hence why we here tend to have MFR be prominant in logged areas. The deer know what is best to eat, and leave the other that then allows only shade tolerant plants to eventually form the canopy. Unless the animal numbers are managed across the area, then Bull is cursed to do anything signifacantly successful on his own. Simply done by EAB or concurrent doe season with very limited buck harvest. Guarantee with a few years of learning curve, those hunters will put more doe on the ground when backed into a corner.
Kabic
Active Member
The MFL program (which I assume Bull is talking about) is not a DNR program. It is all about the timber industry, not wildlife.
Nothing forces a person to stay in it.. you can pay back the tax saving (I think recent changes made this less harsh of penalty) and opt out
You can also change your management goals
Terrific_tom
Member
Since Walker has been Governor the Wisconsin DNR has been stripped of most of it's power. The DNR is run by politics not sound scientific reasoning. Bull has stated many times that his neighbors hammer does so he lays off of them. Bull only shoots a couple does a year. By not shooting does his land becomes a haven. With over 300 acres of land he should be shooting more than a couple does a year. He isn't even keeping it a level population but allowing it to expand. I also agree that the DNR should not be cost sharing his fence project as this is encouraging him to increase the deer numbers even more. I also agree the MFL program that Bull is in to allow timber growth, in return for super reduced property tax is being abused by Bull and guys that allow high deer numbers on their properties. They are using it for recreational purposes and it should be taxed accordingly. They could give a crap about what their timber produces.
