Habitat Blocks; Creating Separate Zones or Areas for Deer?

Mennoniteman

Well-Known Member
I'm in the process of designing/ making what I call "Habitat Blocks" on a relatively new property after doing it successfully on a former property, and I was interested in hearing if anyone else is doing, or has done work like this, or if anyone has any ideas or observations for me.
"Habitat Blocks" are separate deer zones or areas within a property that are developed as individual units with distinct boundaries that are clearly defined. The primary goal is to hold individual doe family groups on the block without ever moving off. These "Blocks" are somewhat similar to how it would be to have separate landowners and boundaries within your property.

The size of these blocks can vary from 5 to 150 acres, with 20-40 acres being the norm. The things that could define the area of a block might be the terrain, the resources available, or the hunting plan and number of hunters on that specific property.
I try to design every "Habitat Block" to have one big destination field, usually planted Lickcreek style, an adjacent microplot, a water source (although they are sometimes shared), fruit tree planting, a mineral site, multiple bedding areas off the field, and some other thick cover, with the idea being to clump this stuff together in the middle of the block as much as possible, and the cover being progressively more open towards the edges. So, to illustrate, a property with 3 fields would possibly have 3 "Habitat Blocks".

The boundaries can be blacktop roads, woods roads, driveways, powerlines, creeks, ravine bottoms, ridgetops, mowed strips, or just level open stretches in mature timber. Boundaries between blocks are used for lanes of travel to move around the property, and travel onto each block is limited to dead end roads going directly to the fields and hunting stands off the lanes of travel.

"Habitat Blocks" can be connected to each other via dogghr style random clusters at strategic corners for huntable travel corridors.
These individually named blocks will have multiple hunting stand sites, but are limited to one hunter at a time, and are often rested for a week in between hunts.

The negatives are the added cost of the extra management, and getting the necessary work completed. It seems that there's always something more that could be done to improve one of the blocks, and instead of managing just one property, you're now managing multiple properties. And drawing lines, some areas just naturally define themselves, while others continue to baffle with all of the possibilities. With "Habitat Blocks" you don't want to start wrong, because working the wrong spot can be very counterproductive after a change in your plans moves the core area to a different spot.

The positives are, you have multiple prime hunting spots at any given time. And, when you divide your deer into specific areas, it can be easier to find that certain deer that you are looking for.

Creating a Habitat Management Plan can be confusing, and this system brings order to my planning, so that I'm not just going out and randomly doing habitat work that could end up being in conflict with the prior work I've done, or doing things and making areas that don't work with the way I acess my hunting spots.
My current dilemma is to figure out why one of my biggest and best blocks was underperforming last fall, and a diagonally adjacent block was overpopulated? With my experience thus far I se this as an anomaly, because my blocks are usually very well balanced. There's also the possibility of multiple outside factors at play here, such as predators, and poachers.

P.S. I realize that not everyone has multiple destination plots, I do think that this principle can work on smaller properties with only a micro plot as the anchor feature for a block, although it won't have the same power to hold individual doe family groups right there without wandering further like the bigger blocks can.
 
Last edited:
My property is set up to have five complete habitat areas something as you describe where each area has everything a dominant buck would want so that area meets all of his needs. However the lines are not all clearly defined by roads, fields or any hard boundaries and as expected there is overlap. Each area has a good size food plot and surrounding bedding sections, water, a deer trail system and browse areas. Steve B came up with the design for me with the idea of holding more mature bucks. I was familiar with the concept and had it loosely in place using existing open areas for my plots. With Steve's design I had to bulldoze in new plots to create additional and more distinct areas which made hunting more predictable and lower impact. It is a bit of work to set up and maintain but what's nice is that once a known buck is taken hunting emphasis can be moved to another habitat area where another mature buck hangs out. The habitat areas here are not well balanced in their activity levels but each area varies in how complete or incomplete they are setup. Some areas have more predictable movement than others. I'm relying on rut movement around bedding areas for encountering bucks and not any sort of normal bedding to food plot movement so the quality of the bedding areas is probably one of the reasons for some areas outproducing others. Each habitat area is almost as unique as different parcels of property might be.

Ag fields throw off the equality of it all as well. One end of the property borders an unhunted forty acre alfalfa field while the other end two miles away borders a road and mostly closed canopy woods. The center of the property from east to west has 35 acres of our tillable which is normally planted to grains. Thus the alfalfa end and the center tends to hold the most amount of deer. And neighbor activities legally done on their land can shutdown day activity and even reduce night activity in a hurry for areas bordering such.And logging was done over a three year period so that differentiates the browse and cover growth in different sections.

Destination plots on neighboring lands are large and plentiful but deer travel to them seems to be mostly a night time event with the deer returning to "their" areas usually but not always in the predawn hours.
 
Sounds like an excellent idea Mennonite. The only draw back perhaps was what you said in the 5th paragraph as I was thinking here goes more work for me. I think it could be done on even smaller properties and the results might be even better. It has the potential to hold multiple bucks at home a few more hours.
I think indirectly I do similar with varied sanctuaries around my place. And I tend to cater to doe bedding areas in hopes of attracting the buck. But I don't, as you plan. have all ingredients from food plot to water, yet my mental wheels are churning and I think its doable to a lesser degree on an acreage like mine. It does go against my land management in that I tend to try to manipulate deer travel across my property, forcing them to move seeking food safety and sex, hoping to intercept them.
I've read that even sanctuaries should have defined boundaries as you describe such as a road, power line, clear cut, etc to make the area most noticeable to the deer as a safe zone.
Negatives....deer/bucks may be more homebodies in those areas making it harder to intercept at other locales on the property. Their travel may become more limited or even less predictable elsewhere if they have all the kitchen and bedroom at their feet. Access could be an issue especially on smaller properties like mine <100 ac. And finally as said, I'd maybe have to quit my day job to have time to get this done.
Interesting concept and I like it, and do believe I'll put a form of this into practice. Keep us posted.
 
I like your idea. To some degree I have this without me really designing it. A branch divides two bedding areas, and deer come from both bedding areas to the destination plot at the edge of the branch. Both areas also have a pond and access to fruit trees and good cover. In the evenings I see deer coming out from both areas. However, in the late summer and early fall, I gain lots of deer and they just bed everywhere. The cedar fence rows surrounded by NWSGs are popular spots.
 
Too much intensive intrusion spread out through out the whole property that will counter the advantages that you have with a larger property.

G
 
Too much intensive intrusion spread out through out the whole property that will counter the advantages that you have with a larger property.

G
No, you've got the wrong impression from your read, maybe I did a poor job of conveying what I'm doing. Its exactly opposite from intensive intrusion. The type of improvement work that I do to these areas is mostly once and done, besides the field work with a tractor, which I don't consider intrusive. The whole idea with habitat areas is to minimize pressure, from humans, and especially from deer to deer. I only make one area a year, and after a day to make the bedding areas are I try not to go back into them at all. I've got 80 acre blocks that haven't had a human footprint in a year, besides the 5 ac. plots, unless a random trespasser that I didn't catch.
 
My uncle has been wanting to implement something similar on his land. He wanted to just plant 1/4 to 1/2 acre kill plots we have a 6 acre destination plot already and are planting the kill plots this spring we cleared last summer. He has bedding areas all around his land (very rural and only family lives near) adequate water and old logging roads, well used deer trails.this brings me to my question is it better to do fewer kill plots and go with the blocks or would a combination of both have the same effect. We would like several stands that can be used to lighten pressure and for different winds.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
 
Perhaps it was my math that was the problem for me. When you wrote 20- 40 being the norm I divided 740 acres by 30 and came up with 24 and 2/3s destination plots, 24 2/3s mineral sites, and 24 2/3 dead end roads.

How big was your former property, how many blocks did you have, and how did you measure your success?

G
 
My uncle has been wanting to implement something similar on his land. He wanted to just plant 1/4 to 1/2 acre kill plots we have a 6 acre destination plot already and are planting the kill plots this spring we cleared last summer. He has bedding areas all around his land (very rural and only family lives near) adequate water and old logging roads, well used deer trails.this brings me to my question is it better to do fewer kill plots and go with the blocks or would a combination of both have the same effect. We would like several stands that can be used to lighten pressure and for different winds.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
It sounds like you are on the right track. Without seeing the property I would say that the combination sounds like the best plan. The way that I would envision it is that each kill plot would be the central feature of a habitat block, with the other features in close proximity, with the idea being to concentrate the deer in the center of each block.
 
Yes we have a 5 year old cuttimg (appx15 ac.) And are thinking of dozing some of it for kill plots with the saplings for funneling. The biggest problem we face is moose browsing small saplings, have yet to see them eat any food plots.is there any other way to screen/ steer deer with a taller grass or crop that's relatively cold hardy? I always like your posts Mennonite man how long have you been managing for wildlife?

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
 
Perhaps it was my math that was the problem for me. When you wrote 20- 40 being the norm I divided 740 acres by 30 and came up with 24 and 2/3s destination plots, 24 2/3s mineral sites, and 24 2/3 dead end roads.

How big was your former property, how many blocks did you have, and how did you measure your success?

G
Your math is good, but habitat is difficult to quantify with numbers. I was misleading in stating that the average habitat block might be 20-40 acres. I used those numbers because that's the average size of of the habitat blocks of people whom I'm acquainted with. Since I'm working on a larger scale than most others, I didn't want to discourage anyone, or make it sound like I'm bragging about my large areas when I know that the principle works well on a smaller scale. My larger areas just have more wasted perimeter acres, which I'll mention later.

If you are asking yourself if making habitat blocks is right for you, ask yourself this question; do I know roughly where a specific deer is to be found on my property? If the answer is no you may want to consider "habitat blocks".

My former place had 3 blocks, 25, 45, and 85 acres. At my new place I have an eighty acre block, a 120, 84, 60, 70, and 20 acres, plus some still undesigned and undefined. These numbers are approximate, as the actual acre numbers matter very little to me, the outside perimeter areas of these blocks contain many acres of what I consider buffer zones, marginal land that I don't want to hunt and don't want to do work there because I don't want any deer to be spending time there more than traveling through.
Again, the size of the blocks is relative to many other factors; I have a smaller place 2 hours away that I have split in two zones, 11 acres, and 23 acres. Due to much thicker cover and much more food available, these smaller blocks work very similar to my bigger blocks.

On the new land right now I am actively hunting 5 blocks, each of which is at various stages of completion, so 5 mineral sites, 5 big fields, 7-8 micro plots, 10 plus permanent stands, etc.

How do I measure success? My answer to this question would easily fill a book, but I won't bore you. Success from making habitat blocks is measured against what the status quo was for that property before vs after, as in, now there are more deer in more groups, with each group concentrated on a smaller area, more daytime feeding, more bigger racks on the wall, less long range deer movement, and hopefully, less work for me when it's all finished. But we all know that's a myth, habitat work is never finished. I've had friends who were always working, and friends who didn't work at all unless they had to. I try to strike a balance to those two extremes. When I'm not enjoying habitat work anymore I go do something more fulfilling.
And ultimately, success is coming to the end of life and facing God with no regrets. Habitat management is a hobby, not the most important thing in my life, helping other people in a real way is what I enjoy doing the most.
 
Last edited:
Setting boundaries for differ groups of deer. I do find this very effective and believe if the boundaries are better defined it will lessen the stress on different deer groups. Certainly a way to take it to the next level
 
Years ago, Dr. Kroll had described this method as intensive habitat management. The smallest he broke the habitat blocks down into was 160 acres.
 
I have a stream that divides my 23 acre property. It is very amazing to me how the deer keep separated from one another.
My doe groups of 5 to 7 used less than 15 acres for security
 
Last edited:
Ben, that was a pretty new concept as far as I know back in 1991 when DR.Kroll published that in his book "Practical Guide to Producing and Harvesting White-tailed Deer" which I was surprised to see the other day is still on the market and on Amazon. I'm guessing that smaller properties weren't so much a norm then and the intensive management concept he presented may not have been fully tested on areas smaller than 160 acres. One of the many things I respect about Kroll was he tests things to the hilt before concluding anything. I have not tried the area procedure on smaller properties exactly but fully expect it worth a try in many certain applications. For example in one of my areas which is only in the twenty acre range I and the cameras regularly see mature bucks that are not seen elsewhere on the property. The twenty acre area borders a neighbors forty acre alfalfa field that we have seen hundreds of deer sightings in during hunting season with up to 56 deer at a time during daylight and hunting season. In thirty years though we have not seen a single buck in that field during the day. They prefer the staging plots we have just inside the brush for their daylight movement. So in that case "our" buck kingdom area there utilizes the neighboring property. The twenty acres has water,food plots, apples,pears, lots of browse, released nut trees and eighteen acres of bedding cover and a virtual 40 acre food plot in the form of the neighbors alfalfa field and it is one of our most active buck areas early and late in the season.
 
Last edited:
Chainsaw, yes, he was dealing with some larger properties and lots of timber companies in east Texas at the time. I think it's become more recognized and encouraged to shrink down core areas. The smaller core areas are especially prevalent in heavily fragmented areas (like residential areas). I think by doing what most of us are striving to do, which is providing excellent habitat, we do shrink down core areas. But, we still must be cognizant that deer will leave our properties at some time, and they may even have multiple core areas throughout their entire home range.
 
Chainsaw, yes, he was dealing with some larger properties and lots of timber companies in east Texas at the time. I think it's become more recognized and encouraged to shrink down core areas. The smaller core areas are especially prevalent in heavily fragmented areas (like residential areas). I think by doing what most of us are striving to do, which is providing excellent habitat, we do shrink down core areas. But, we still must be cognizant that deer will leave our properties at some time, and they may even have multiple core areas throughout their entire home range.
I believe a buck will sooner have multiple core areas, but not a doe group. I've observed doe groups that if they had everything they needed, their core area was smaller than 5 acres, and you could almost set your clock by their movements from bedding to plot to water to plot and back to bedding.
 
Yes we have a 5 year old cuttimg (appx15 ac.) And are thinking of dozing some of it for kill plots with the saplings for funneling. The biggest problem we face is moose browsing small saplings, have yet to see them eat any food plots.is there any other way to screen/ steer deer with a taller grass or crop that's relatively cold hardy? I always like your posts Mennonite man how long have you been managing for wildlife?

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
I've been managing habitat for maybe 20 years, but I learned more growing up on an amish farm than I ever did making habitat.

I just love moose! On my plate that is.
WP_20161113_002.jpg
Seriously, I'm not sure of a cold zone screen, maybe Norway Spruce would be a good choice. I like cut over, the best whitetail habitat I've ever seen was thicker than hair-on-a-dog.
 
Spruce sounds like it would work our soil works well for hemlock and spruce trees. Would feathering edges of old logging roads and clear cuts be better to establish edges or row planting 3 or 4 rows wide to break blocks up? Water is a non issue wherever there's a drop in elevation of more than 20 feet theres vernal pools or springs.it always amazes me that people put more faith in men that live in hotel rooms and sell camoflauge products than farmers that have lived off the land for generations. Then knowledge the older men you grew up with about the land seems like it would fill it's own encyclopedia series. Also moose is some of the finest meat after bear, the tags are almost non existent in our zone and there almost a daily sight where I live. Hopefully one day well get to have a larger bag limit.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top