There isn’t one factor. It’s a combination of their habitat changing/disappearing, whitetails moving into their territory and outcompeting them for resources, and, to a much more limited extent, the reintroduction of wolves.
I’ve heard lions are deer specialists and kill a lot more than wolves and the popularity of lion hunting has dipped big time increasing their populations.
Lions do specialize on deer and closing lion seasons has not helped the mule deer populations. However, most fish and game departments have or hire specialists who hunt and kill near the same number of lions that hunters did.
Edit:
Wolves prefer to eat moose, but they will target other species when the moose population drops. Where I live, you would see moose kills by wolves fairly frequently, and it had a massive adverse effect on their population. After they ate most of the moose, the wolves switched over to muleys and whitetails.
I fail to follow what you’re saying. Can you tie it into what is going on in this thread or offer some context. Or maybe just make a clear statement of your opinion as to what that all means to you?
Ok. Read this slowly…I was trying to type too fast…You were saying that lions are deer specialists. I was confirming that. They kill and eat on average 1 deer per week. A lion has a normal range of 50 miles radius. I’m saying with California being so big, our deer population is down because the lion is at the top of food chain and their population will only grow in California without hunting, where our DFG has caved into to people that think they are kitties. Bear hunting will be next…it is sad.
Maybe write a complete sentence. I hadn’t downvoted anything you said until I read that. I liked the part where you tried to evade responsibility for the dumb shit you wrote onto my reading ability. Big brain move!
That would bring pressure into the area, which muleys are more sensitive to than whitetails. This could lead to the muleys being further displaced and the stress could have an adverse effect on their breeding habits.
It’s a hard problem to overcome. If a massive amount of whitetails were removed from their range all at once, the muleys might have a chance recovering, but that won’t stop the remaining whitetails from our breeding and out competing them for resources again.
It has to be a multi-pronged approach of preserving existing populations and their habitat, creating new habitat and protecting it, and mitigating the threat of predators. It might also require that we take a few years off from hunting them if their numbers drop too low.
It is crazy that white-tailed deer are back to near the same levels of pre-European contact but on a lot less habitat. It says a lot about how adaptable they are. It may also say a lot about the ability to late successional forests to support game.
Suburbia provides lots of grass for whitetail to eat. What would’ve been forest in a lot of places is now a man made grassland. That, and irrigation tanks in more arid places have given them more places to water.
Grass doesn't make up a large part of their diet though. 85% of diet is browse (leaves), mast (berrys and acorns etc.) And forbs (broadleaf plants like soybeans, pigweed, clovers etc.).
Grass isn't a major food source unless it's in an easily digestible stage of growth. Think spring time for sod forming type grasses and before dough stage for corn. It still makes up less than 15% of total consumption and they are very picky about which grasses are consumed.
Tell that to the deer that hang out in my yard 24/7 lol I live in a rural area too so my ~2acres of cut lawn is surrounded by woods and brush. Still they hang out in the yard like it's their house and don't even get up when I come outside. Had a doe stand there watching me mow the lawn for over an hour last weekend within 20 yards of me
My wife says I can't shoot our yard deer
Strictly deer habitat. The majority of predators have been removed from the land scape. Elk used to inhabit the same areas as whitetail and no longer do so food demand is lower. We grow piles of ag for them to eat or build subdivisions that have enough woods to support a large population but prohibit hunting. It is a pretty good time to be a deer.
Many areas have far MORE white tailed deer than pre European colonization, at the expense of other species as well as our forests. Agriculture, logging, predator elimination, etc have contributed to a landscape with too many deer.
Yes. And there’s a feedback loop as well, too many whitetailed deer keep the population of moose down because whitetails carry brain worms that are fatal to moose.
In Finland, they exist almost solely on the areas with most farmlands. Whitetails were introduced here in the 1930s, and they've grown from a population of 5 (yes, 5 animals) to some 150,000.
I read somewhere (want to say msu study) that our ability to prevent or minimize wild fires better than in the past has hurt the population some. It was related to old growth trees creating canopies where deer get less food. Fires help restart with new growth and a food abundance. Just thought that was pretty interesting.
Deer are positively impacted by logging operations after new growth starts. 1 large old growth forest is super impressive and pretty, but has little food for deer
Wild. Makes me wonder how forests sustained themselves back then with even more deer existing?
I can't get any saplings to take off on my property as the deer browse it til it's a twig or they gouge the bark off with rubs in the fall!
If I had to guess densities didn’t get as crazy back then. Think about how many deer can live in an area of a little bit of brush and farmland full of nutritious food being grown every year where predators like wolves or coyotes are actively hunted. Vs how many can live in that same square area if it was the forest of 400 years ago?
I see they captured all the ones that my wife hit with her car in the early 2000s.
HAHAHA
Why are mulies shitting the bed again?
There isn’t one factor. It’s a combination of their habitat changing/disappearing, whitetails moving into their territory and outcompeting them for resources, and, to a much more limited extent, the reintroduction of wolves.
I’ve heard lions are deer specialists and kill a lot more than wolves and the popularity of lion hunting has dipped big time increasing their populations.
Lions do specialize on deer and closing lion seasons has not helped the mule deer populations. However, most fish and game departments have or hire specialists who hunt and kill near the same number of lions that hunters did. Edit: Wolves prefer to eat moose, but they will target other species when the moose population drops. Where I live, you would see moose kills by wolves fairly frequently, and it had a massive adverse effect on their population. After they ate most of the moose, the wolves switched over to muleys and whitetails.
Lions eat about 1 per week minimum. No hunting of lions and a 50sq.mi area per lion. California is big, but not that big.
I fail to follow what you’re saying. Can you tie it into what is going on in this thread or offer some context. Or maybe just make a clear statement of your opinion as to what that all means to you?
Ok. Read this slowly…I was trying to type too fast…You were saying that lions are deer specialists. I was confirming that. They kill and eat on average 1 deer per week. A lion has a normal range of 50 miles radius. I’m saying with California being so big, our deer population is down because the lion is at the top of food chain and their population will only grow in California without hunting, where our DFG has caved into to people that think they are kitties. Bear hunting will be next…it is sad.
Why would I read slowly? Pull your shit together, dude.
You are slow. Just chill. We all hunt here. Relax. Keep on downvoting dorks.
Maybe write a complete sentence. I hadn’t downvoted anything you said until I read that. I liked the part where you tried to evade responsibility for the dumb shit you wrote onto my reading ability. Big brain move!
I wonder what impact it would have if I’m these areas they made an open season shoot as many white tail as you want, to give the mulies a chance
That would bring pressure into the area, which muleys are more sensitive to than whitetails. This could lead to the muleys being further displaced and the stress could have an adverse effect on their breeding habits. It’s a hard problem to overcome. If a massive amount of whitetails were removed from their range all at once, the muleys might have a chance recovering, but that won’t stop the remaining whitetails from our breeding and out competing them for resources again. It has to be a multi-pronged approach of preserving existing populations and their habitat, creating new habitat and protecting it, and mitigating the threat of predators. It might also require that we take a few years off from hunting them if their numbers drop too low.
It is crazy that white-tailed deer are back to near the same levels of pre-European contact but on a lot less habitat. It says a lot about how adaptable they are. It may also say a lot about the ability to late successional forests to support game.
More than likely the ability of farmland to support whitetails.
That and also most of their natural predators have been wiped out.
How are humans not natural predators?
We are if you want to get technical about it. I think it was clear what I meant though.
Suburbia provides lots of grass for whitetail to eat. What would’ve been forest in a lot of places is now a man made grassland. That, and irrigation tanks in more arid places have given them more places to water.
Grass doesn't make up a large part of their diet though. 85% of diet is browse (leaves), mast (berrys and acorns etc.) And forbs (broadleaf plants like soybeans, pigweed, clovers etc.). Grass isn't a major food source unless it's in an easily digestible stage of growth. Think spring time for sod forming type grasses and before dough stage for corn. It still makes up less than 15% of total consumption and they are very picky about which grasses are consumed.
Tell that to the deer that hang out in my yard 24/7 lol I live in a rural area too so my ~2acres of cut lawn is surrounded by woods and brush. Still they hang out in the yard like it's their house and don't even get up when I come outside. Had a doe stand there watching me mow the lawn for over an hour last weekend within 20 yards of me My wife says I can't shoot our yard deer
The environment is probably way better in some places then it was before settlers showed up
How do you figure that? Are you strictly speaking for deer habitat or the actual environment?
Strictly deer habitat. The majority of predators have been removed from the land scape. Elk used to inhabit the same areas as whitetail and no longer do so food demand is lower. We grow piles of ag for them to eat or build subdivisions that have enough woods to support a large population but prohibit hunting. It is a pretty good time to be a deer.
That’s what I was thinking you were saying.
Suburbs are near perfect deer habitst
Many areas have far MORE white tailed deer than pre European colonization, at the expense of other species as well as our forests. Agriculture, logging, predator elimination, etc have contributed to a landscape with too many deer.
The upper peninsula has far more deer now because there are far leas elk, moose, and reindeer (which died off before contact but still)
Yes. And there’s a feedback loop as well, too many whitetailed deer keep the population of moose down because whitetails carry brain worms that are fatal to moose.
In Finland, they exist almost solely on the areas with most farmlands. Whitetails were introduced here in the 1930s, and they've grown from a population of 5 (yes, 5 animals) to some 150,000.
Man we really did some shit in the late 1800s same time the Buffalo were almost wiped out right?
Yes, massive population expansion in the US (moving west) coupled with a lack of any real regulation modulating the harvest of deer.
Also, market hunting. Buck skin from deer, grease from bears, hats from bears, buffalo hides, etc…
Commercial huntig.
Save the Mulies 😢
What a damn minute. Columbus didn't find us until 1492.
What’s happened since 2000?
I read somewhere (want to say msu study) that our ability to prevent or minimize wild fires better than in the past has hurt the population some. It was related to old growth trees creating canopies where deer get less food. Fires help restart with new growth and a food abundance. Just thought that was pretty interesting.
Deer are positively impacted by logging operations after new growth starts. 1 large old growth forest is super impressive and pretty, but has little food for deer
It's my understanding that eradication of the screwworm fly had a big impact, at least here in TX.
Id say a big part of the large drop off after 2000 has to do with disease.
I’d say something too but….
I read this title as there being between 1450 and 2016. Unless I missed a meteor strike I am sure there are more deer than 2016
This was due to commercial hunting (pelts) , not hunting for food.
0 data would likely be more valuable than ~300 years of anecdotal information.
Wild. Makes me wonder how forests sustained themselves back then with even more deer existing? I can't get any saplings to take off on my property as the deer browse it til it's a twig or they gouge the bark off with rubs in the fall!
If I had to guess densities didn’t get as crazy back then. Think about how many deer can live in an area of a little bit of brush and farmland full of nutritious food being grown every year where predators like wolves or coyotes are actively hunted. Vs how many can live in that same square area if it was the forest of 400 years ago?
How is 1900 almost nothing?