Mountain Deer Densities

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

We all know the CNF is very low on deer these days. Based on the current studies, the majority of fawns do not survive. About half die by predation (coyotes being number one and bears number 2), and the other half die from malnutrition and abandonment. But why are the densities not pretty similar across the NF.

We all see that cohutta has a much higher population than most areas (even though it’s still quite low) but what accounts for it? Chattahoochee and chestatee are a great example. These two wma’s are remarkably similar. In fact they share a border, but chestatee continually has a solid buck kill, whereas chattahoochee is nearly void of deer.

Same with areas like swallow creek and the tray mtn wilderness. Then we have warwoman with a significantly higher number.

The deer numbers are obviously much higher in the low elevation stuff where you have agriculture, edge habitat, etc but does anybody have any idea why it is so different in the high places? It’s not habitat because chattahoochee actually has some really good deer cover. Any thoughts?

 

[Marsupial]

Where are you finding the stats on deer per square mile for these different wmas? I remember seeing them in reg book like 20 years ago but haven’t seen recent numbers

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

Im just speaking from personal experience, success rates, and what I hear from others

 

[Raylander]

I disagree. I absolutely believe it is habitat. Like you said, the deer use and prefer the edge habitat. Having one stale, forest where all the timber is the same age (mature) is no bueno. There are some transition lines in the forest, IE young poplar regen and storm damage that helps, but not enough of it. Couple that with the residential development across NGA that is perfect for deer and they are gonna use what’s best and safest.

When there is a heavy red oak crop they will be there late in season- as you see this year. When there is not good mast, they will stay low on the hayfields. If the mast is there they will be there. The density is nowhere near the rest of the state, but what it lacks in #s it makes up for in age class. Another thing is that the MTNs are tough to hunt, every critter is EARNED.

Just my .02- I don’t have near the experience as some folks on here. But I cover my share of ground.

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

No, Im asking why certain areas still hold deer whereas others are just about totally empty. The chattahoochee/chestatee thing is what I find particularly odd.

 

[Joe Brandon]

Yeah one thought is Cohutta is over 92k acres and all the other are but about a quarter of that or less.

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

But that doesnt factor into success rates. Stuff like this just fascinates me.

 

[Raylander]

No, Im asking why certain areas still hold deer whereas others are just about totally empty. The chattahoochee/chestatee thing is what I find particularly odd.

Can’t speak to that specificity. My MTN deer hunting is done further west

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

Gotcha

 

[bany]

I think chestatee has a good amount of farm or country property around compared to chattahoochee

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

That could be a big factor for sure. Ive not spent much time on it to know. I definitely tend to see a lot of deer on the low ends of places like swallow creek where it joins fields

 

[deerpoacher1970]

I think the big fire on Cohutta has helped the deer population,just my opinion.

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

Could be also. But we have giant tornado areas on chattahoochee going back ten plus years now. But no deer.

 

[across the river]

Pull up the satellite image of both and it will tell you a lot. It is habitat. I can take you to a place now well south of the mountains that is seemingly void of deer, and then take you to a place five miles that is absolutely loaded with deer. It is all about habitat and stick count.

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

Could you explain? Chestatee and chattahoochee are extremely similar

 

[Marsupial]

Are those hunts held on exact same date? If not, you’ll see better deer movement on one than other and have different success rates. If they are same general area, same exact habitat and same amount of pressure I don’t believe there would be any more deer in one than the other.

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

There is a gun hunt next week on the 10-13 on both. Watch and see the difference

 

[Sautee Ridgerunner]

Buckman and treecutter can probably speak best on this. Ill be interested when they chime in.

Again, we dont have long term studies on this but the fact that half of all fawns are being lost to malnutrition/abandonment is kind of shocking.

Im from PA. In the 90s we had 100 deer per square mile everywhere and the habitat was horrendous

 

[tree cutter 08]

Hooch has some of the best habitat in the mountians. If you don't think so go ride and walk it. Very diverse from old growth, to burns, to clear cuts to tornado damage. Problem with hooch is it has the highest number of bears and is a breeding ground for them. Sows don't travel that far so that explains higher number of bears. With that said they wear the fawns out in the summer. That study is being done in the wrong area in my opinion. It's not a great example as to what's taking place as a whole. The bear population isn't quite as high in that area. Predator pit is number 1, habitat is number 2. won't change my mind until someone can show me a area which high bear and high deer population. It doesn't exist in North ga. I'm no biologists but I do spend way to much time in the woods.

 

[tree cutter 08]

It may take years to prove but hogs also have something to do with deer population.