There are a lot of teeth in the woods these days. Across the upper Midwest and the West, wolf populations are at all time highs. In some areas, a pack of wolves can nearly wipe out an entire deer herd in a few months, then when the reward for their efforts diminish, they move to another area and start over. Wolves kill adult deer and, in some cases, they can wipe out an entire fawn crop.

Black bear numbers are increasing throughout the United States, especially in the formerly marginal areas of the East and Southeast. While bears don’t specifically target fawns, they do come across some, and they contribute to fawn mortality as opportunists.

Bobcat populations are stable to rising in some areas, increasing their numbers most notably in farm states such as Iowa, Illinois and Missouri. Bobcats have a small impact on fawn mortality compared to some other predators, but their impact contributes to the overall drop in fawn recruitment.

Coyotes learn to hunt and kill fawns in great numbers, and across the U.S. coyotes are the No. 1 predator on whitetail deer. Some studies have shown that high coyote populations are to blame for dismal fawn survival rates, and in some areas they take up to 80 percent of the fawns each year. Coyote populations have expanded greatly across the eastern U.S., with established and thriving populations found where there were no coyotes just a couple decades ago. In addition, coyotes are uniquely adaptable and are able to live in close proximity to humans as well as in wild areas. You will find thriving coyote populations from the mountains of the West to the suburbs of all cities in the nation.

State game agencies are alarmed that fawn recruitment rates have been steadily dropping over the past decade. Fawn recruitment rates are one of the most important measures of herd productivity. These rates offer important data to deer managers who are setting the harvest levels for antlerless deer, and for the number of bucks we can realistically have in the population.

 

By the Numbers

In order for deer populations to remain stable, the population must recruit one fawn for each adult doe. That means a fawn recruitment rate of 1.0-1.2 is ideal to have a healthy deer herd. Yet fawn recruitment rates are below 1.0 in most states, which means deer populations are dropping. According to the Quality Deer Management Association (QDMA), Florida, Virginia and Arkansas are reporting fawn recruitment rates of only .40 and .41. Oklahoma had a dismal rate of .30 in 2015. South Carolina, Maryland, Wisconsin, Maine and Illinois are also seeing significant declines in fawn recruitment.

This news is not good for deer hunters who desire a thriving deer population and good hunting opportunities into the future. The biggest factor that influenced fawn recruitment rates is predators. So in short, the predators are eating your venison.

No one who cares about a balanced ecosystem wants to completely eliminate predators. But high predator populations are a sign of an ecosystem that is out of balance and needs some adjustment. There isn’t much we can do about the large numbers of wolves in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan at this point because the courts have trumped sound wildlife management by taking the ability to manage the wildlife out of the hands of the managers and putting it in the hands of the emotionally charged public debate. We must work hard to overturn these court rulings so we can effectively manage predator populations in a way that benefits all wildlife and a balanced predator-prey relationship.

With the issue of growing bear, coyote and bobcat populations, there is more we can do. States with increasing bear populations need to issue more tags to keep the numbers of bears in check. Wisconsin recently added to the number of bear tags available in some areas of the state, a big step in the right direction. Minnesota has been reducing tags as the bear population surges, and only in 2016 did they add a few more tags in some zones. This state needs to add more tags again in 2017. States also need to be aware that they can allow practices that help increase hunter success rates. Severe restrictions on baiting is not the way to go, for example. Success rates in Minnesota for bear hunters is only at about 30 percent. The state needs to take steps to increase that by increasing the length of the preseason baiting and putting more bear hunters in the woods.

Winter is a tough time for whitetails, and high predator populations are capitalizing on these hardships. Reducing the number of predators can be a big help in getting more deer through the winter.
Winter is a tough time for whitetails, and high predator populations are capitalizing on these hardships. Reducing the number of predators can be a big help in getting more deer through the winter.

The growing coyote populations are largely due to poor fur prices. Trappers don’t put in as much effort when the value of coyote pelts drops. But deer hunters who care about the deer herd need to take steps to reduce coyote populations by trapping and hunting the predators themselves, hiring trappers to take coyotes off their property, or offering other incentives to kill coyotes. In areas where large coyote populations are particularly troublesome, especially on public land, bounties should be offered by state and county wildlife agencies. Coyotes are the easiest of the major predators to control, and hunt clubs, landowners and governments need to get on the ball in doing so.

So yes, there are a lot of teeth in the woods these days. If we are going to enjoy the quality of deer hunting that we have for the past few decades, something must be done about it. Each deer hunter must do his or her part.

Images by Bernie Barringer

What's Your Reaction?

Like
Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

7 thoughts on “Why Deer Hunters Should Care About Predator Numbers

  1. Many of the statements are dubious. Fawn/doe ratio below 1.0 does not mean population must be dropping for example. That’s just bad math. But here’s the main point: What study ever showed that increased coyote hunting increases deer densities? Good luck with that. Pennsylvania managers refused to have coyote bounties precisely because there is no evidence that they work. We know coyote hunters constantly talk about their helping the deer hunters out, but they never point to evidence.

    1. Rork,, Depressing coyote populations are a localized event, dispersers always fill in the blank places on the map. That said it will have a localized if temporary influence on fawn survival. I’d recommend a peek at Leopold’s Game Management again. The chapter on predator management in particular.

    2. Click on the link in the fourth paragraph and do some research on the impact of predators on fawn recruitment rates.

      1. I am already familiar with all but one of those, even though you don’t really link to the papers. The common result is that removing predators can increase prey species, but for coyotes, the effort required makes it impractical.

  2. MN deer population has rebounded nicely after suffering two consecutive tough winters 12/13 and 13/14) and we still have wolves, bears and coyotes taking their fair share. Predators may have local impacts, but as a whole, all this article does is cater to fear. Predators will not wipe out deer herds.

  3. “Bounties”?? Are you nuts?
    This article is so biased against predators and the epitome of fear mongering. Looks like the author himself has taken more than his fair share of WTD.
    Sure, declare war on wolves and coyotes and watch what happens to the supposed declining deer herds. Likely nothing. And please be sure to update in a year or so to confirm my suspicions.

  4. This may be one of the most uninformed articles I’ve ever read. Lots of inaccurate statements throughout. Recruitment rate DOES NOT directly equate to population trajectory. Ask any biologist and they’ll tell you that adult doe mortality rate is more important to population trajectory than recruitment rate. In nearly any situation, regardless of how poor recruitment is, you can steer a population up or down just by increasing or decreasing antlerless harvest. If it were true that deer had to maintain a recruitment rate >= 1 for population stability, deer would have gone extinct a long time ago! Come on outdoorhub, does anyone not proof these articles?! (Source: I’m a biologist)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *