After The Crash

Here’s another decades old article I decided to edit and update as it addresses an issue that’s been in the news a lot of late, especially in some of the mid-western US states.

For years, it seemed white-tailed deer numbers were only going in one direction – up. No matter where one looked, deer populations were on the rise. In some parts of  North America, particularly the mid-west, the far west and in southern Canada, they exploded.

Hunting was fantastic. Each year new state or provincial harvest levels were reached and record book bucks were being taken everywhere. Deer hunters will talk about the turn of the century deer hunts for a long, long time.

But good times don’t last forever. In a growing number of locales, the recent story is more often about decline. In some areas it’s more akin to a crash. Except, it seems, in urban and suburban landscapes. Towns and cities everywhere increasingly report problems with nuisance deer.

In the northerly fields and forests, though, not so much.

Hunters are having trouble coping with the crash, in part because it’s a new experience.

Numerous factors can set off a population crash. Predation, disease, habitat change, weather and hunter harvest, usually in some sort of combination with one another, are commonly blamed. There’s always someone or something to blame when deer numbers stumble.

Winter

In northern forests, a harsh, severe winter can trigger a crash, but more often, it takes two or three successive bad winters to do in a herd.

Snow is a scourge for deer because it forces them to burn a lot of energy just to move around. Deep snow covers up the best food. Bitingly cold temperatures don’t help. Deer, weakened by snow and cold can get sick and are more susceptible to predators, disease and parasites. In deep snow, even healthy deer can be easy prey for packs of wolves.

In short, winters can be hard – very hard – on deer.

Historical Trends

Many areas of North America where deer have, in recent times, been common to abundant, historically had few deer. On northern and western ranges, for a variety of reasons, there’s been a general shift from large, herding species like caribou and elk, and sometimes mule deer, to the smaller and more solitary whitetail.

In many places, deer are essentially an invasive species.

Some of the best deer ranges in NW Ontario were formerly home to herds of caribou.

Since the appearance of whitetails, around a 150 years or so ago, the numbers of deer in any given area has typically been a series of contractions and expansions. The recurring pattern is mostly similar: numbers grow, then skyrocket, crash and rebuild. A complete cycle might take few decades to play out.

The late Patrick Karns, a great Minnesota biologist, postulated that deer – and moose – went through cycles of abundance and scarcity across vast landscapes every 40 to 60 years or so.

Cycles can sometimes be measured or timed by crashes. A crash is always a shock to hunters because they occur relatively infrequently. When hunters grow up during a period of mild winters, there tends to be a lot of deer and hunting is good. Sometimes, things just seem to get better and better.

But what goes up, eventually and almost always, comes down.

Ups and Downs

Contrary to the popular notion that nature is in balance, nature tends to be in a constant state of flux, and mostly out-of-balance. Deer, in a constant struggle for survival, are adept at taking advantage of favourable conditions, and quick to exploit an opening. So when conditions are good, deer flourish. But when conditions deteriorate, deer decline. Occasionally, a tipping point is reached that sees the population crash. It’s all very normal.

When deer numbers are high for extended times in forested habitats, they can literally eat themselves out of house and home. But as long as winters are relatively snow-free, deer numbers can stay high. With little or no snow, deer can thrive even if food is scarce – sometimes the best food might be leaves from trees like poplars that fall to the forest floor.

On arid, western ranges, deer may rely on brushy draws, coulees and river bottoms for browse when snow cover is extensive. But when successive winters are relatively snow-free, deer have access to thousands of acres of open range to feed.

A long string of exceptionally mild winters, on ranges where long, snowy winters are the norm, is both a blessing and a curse for deer and hunters. Deer initially thrive and hunting can be great – but as deer numbers climb, habitats take a beating. Often, the average size of individual deer declines and health problems become prevalent. Antler size diminishes.

I took this deer in the fall of 2014, after another severe winter. A prime buck of at least 4 1/2 years, it had relatively small antlers.

Hordes of hungry deer can virtually strip the range of everything that’s edible. Towards the extreme, shrubs that deer like to eat begin to disappear, gnawed to nothingness. Even tree seedlings fail to establish. Prolonged periods of abundance can mess up habitat for a long time.

When food becomes limiting trouble lies ahead. When a severe winter does come along, there’s not enough food to go around. How bad the losses are to the deer herd will vary, but losses as high as 90% have been recorded.

By the end of a long, cold, snowy winter, deer are in poor condition.

Despite declines in hunting success, most biologists look at a crash as being more good news than bad – although the deer and most deer hunters probably wouldn’t agree.

The good news is that a setback where deer numbers fall gives damaged feeding habitats a chance to recover. For the remaining deer, food will be more abundant and nutritious. Plus, many of the smaller, weak, sick and very old deer will have perished, leaving only the most fit individuals. That’s good for the overall health of the herd as well as improving the genetic make-up of the herd.

But there’s no doubt a crash is devastating.

In some cases, deer recover from a crash at a snails pace. It’s estimated it took almost two decades for deer to recover following a historic deer population crash in northern Maine. In parts of northeastern Ontario, deer have never recovered to former levels of abundance after being slammed by a series of bad winters in the late 1950’s and early 60’s.

After the initial crash, deer populations typically experience further declines. A major factor can be predation by wolves (including coyotes).

Wolves can exacerbate deer decline.

At first, predators cash-in from a crash. A lot of weak, sick and starving deer can make hunting easy. In fact, a hard winter with high deer mortality sees wolves get through the winter fat and happy.

But trouble looms.

In the immediate aftermath of a crash, predator populations are still more or less at the level they were with the bigger, before the crash, deer population.

So with a lot fewer deer, the still abundant wolves are on the hunt. Many of the remaining deer get gobbled up. Eventually, wolves run out of deer, and their numbers drop too. Before that happens, there can be a lot of carnage. It’s especially bad if the next winter or two are also ones with a lot of snow.

That’s not all.

From what I have observed in Ontario, I think some packs of wolves actually concentrate on finding and killing big bucks. And it makes sense – big bucks are weakened after weeks of sparring and fighting and wooing and mating. And they are smelly, so are relatively easy to find.

In the aftermath of a crash, and for several years thereafter, or at least until wolf numbers take a hit, it can be really, really tough for hunters to find a big (old) buck.

Because no two years are the same, estimating over-winter deer loss is a bit of a guessing game. However, research by folks like Louis Verme and John Ozoga shed light on what counts most, and their findings from years ago have been integrated into many of the models deer management practitioners use regularly today. Amazingly, it takes very few environmental measurements to get a good estimate of over-winter deer mortality.

Years of study distilled mountains of evidence to produce some basic truths – for one, it’s generally acknowledged deer are in trouble once snow depths reach about 18 inches, or 50 cm. The longer the snow hangs around, the worse it gets – as a ‘rule of thumb’, when there’s 50 cm of snow or more on the ground for 50 consecutive days, deer mortality will be substantial.

Sometimes, like in Maine and northeastern Ontario, deer populations take years and years to recover. But on these and many other northern ranges, the failure of deer to quickly recover to former levels of abundance is a sign of a bigger problem.

Although it’s subtle, long recovery times are usually linked to changes at landscape level.

Across a wide swath of North America’s deer range, tens of thousands of acres of once great deer habitat, created by decades of land-clearing and extensive logging, are now reverting back to a more mature forest.

With the collapse of the pulp and paper industry there’s a lot less logging in northern forests. Newspapers were what consumed vast swaths of forest annually, but those days are gone, the victim of bits and bytes.

Logging practices elsewhere have also changes. Selective cutting of trees, rather than clear-cuts, are now the norm over much of deer range. Less and different logging practices don’t provide deer with the abundance of good deer habitat that was once the norm.

Logging methods have changed over the years and there is much less of it as well.

In poor quality habitat, predators – especially wolves – can really keep the lid on deer herds. It a phenomenon David Mech and Patrick Karns identified in the Lake Superior Forest of Minnesota way back in the 1970’s. Similar results were documented in Algonquin Park, Ontario, about a decade earlier.

But these lessons were almost forgotten in the early years of the 21^st century when winters were mild and deer numbers grew and grew and grew. But winter, the Grim Reaper, did return. Deer numbers are way down now.

The Good News

A population crash does have its silver lining. Fewer deer let over-browsed habitats recover, so over time, deer have more food and it’s yummier.

What a crash does is re-set the clock. If the range still has the fundamentals – a suitable mixture of food and cover – deer populations will recover.

Recovery is the stage of a cycle when deer are healthiest. It can also be the best time for hunters aiming for the trophy of a lifetime.

Keep in mind a buck doesn’t have to be old to produce a trophy-sized rack. Granted, most bucks are programmed to achieve their greatest antler growth in their fifth or sixth year, but that’s not a hard and fast rule. The late Ian McMurchy, the biologist who examined Milo Hanson’s world record Saskatchewan buck, told me he estimated Milo’s buck was maybe only 3 ½ years old, and certainly no more than 4 ½. Milo’s buck, taken near the town of Biggar, is like much of the Canadian prairies. Forest cover there is minimal and winters are frequently brutal. As a result, deer numbers are normally relatively low. Deer that do survive are big and healthy and whenever snow is minimal, the bounty of food is almost limitless. Antler growth can be phenomenal. In forested habitat with similar circumstances – a population below carrying capacity and abundant and nutritious food – expect to find trophy-sized bucks at relatively young ages.

Especially after a mild winter or two or three.

Me holding the re-mounted Tome Degere, buck, a huge buck (net B&C score is 246 ^2/8ths) was taken in NW Ontario in the 1940’s, during a time of low snow depth winters and a newly expanding deer population.

Closer to Home

In recent years, my home hunting grounds of northwestern Ontario gained a reputation as a deer hunting Mecca. Deer were everywhere, and hunters streamed in from across the continent, even from Europe. Many a hunter harvested their dream buck of a lifetime. Bag limits were liberal, and freezers were filled.

What happened was deer reached unbelievably high densities over wide areas, largely owing to consecutive and abnormally mild winters. There was also a bit of luck, as when deer first became abundant, and a deep snow winter came on schedule, deer didn’t take a hit like they normally would have. Coincidentally, the woods were full of arboreal lichens, a favourite winter food on northern ranges. A spruce budworm epidemic had just finished off killing millions of balsam trees, which had became encrusted with lichens as they died. Lichen abundance peaked the winter deer needed them the most.

An abundance of food can help deer through even a severe winter. A favourite food on northern ranges is the arboreal lichen Usnea, also known as ‘Old Man’s Beard’.

Over the course of several more years and more mild winters, deer numbers burgeoned. Although they managed to vacuum up all of the lichens, food wasn’t much of an issue as long as snow cover was minimal.

But trouble was brewing. Starting with the 2007-08 winter, the pattern of low snow winters stopped. In the years since, most winters have been long, cold and snowy. And although a deer decline – even a crash – was evident by about 2015, wolf numbers remained stubbornly high.

By 2009, the pattern of easy winters in NW Ontario had ended. Over-winter mortality became substantial.

Deer numbers, following the winter of 2022-23 that hung on into May, have now bottomed out here in northwestern Ontario. From what I see and hear and read, it’s the same in northern Manitoba, north-eastern Minnesota, parts of Wisconsin, and elsewhere.

Will deer numbers return to their former robust levels?

I don’t know. There’s a famous quote by many, including the great Yogi Berra that says: “It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.”

But there will still be deer.

And hopefully, not only in our cities and towns.

Urban Deer

Ten years ago, I wrote a story about urban deer for Ontario Out of Doors magazine. I edited and updated it, but not a lot has changed, either in the article itself or the urban deer situation. One thing that has changed, at least here in northern Ontario, is that while urban deer remain abundant and for many, a nuisance, the populations of wild deer herds in the neighboring forests have collapsed. Hard winters, lots of wolves and a decline in habitat quality have driven deer numbers down drastically. But they continue to thrive in towns and cities.

The white-tailed deer is one of the most revered big game animals in the world. They’re smart, elusive, tasty and can grow massive, trophy antlers. Plus they are common and live in many different environments, everything from dense forests to open prairie. In recent decades, many deer herds have found a new home – right in towns and cities alongside humans.

It’s a trend around the world – large mammals, including many species humans like to eat, are today living in small and large cities. Whether they are Ibex in Spain, reindeer in Norway or white-tailed deer in North America, deer and antelope can be found playing with the people.

In the United States and Canada, deer, mainly white-tailed deer and mule deer, are now a common sight in thousands of cities, towns and villages. This has been a mixed blessing. Although this shows these animals are ensuring their survival by adapting to new habitats, urban deer can be a nuisance and a menace. They chow down gardens, stomp on pets, and are terrible traffic hazards.

“You’re not a wolf! You’re just a dog on a chain!”

 On a more positive note, many like seeing deer in town because they love animals and seeing deer brings them closer to nature.

Managing the phenomenon of town deer has resulted in a plethora of policies, rules and regulations, including hunting.  Hunting town deer is proving to be  . . . interesting.

It shouldn’t be too surprising that deer have adapted so well to civilization. Suburbs in particular provide close to ideal conditions – lots of nutritious food, courtesy of fertilized lawns and gardens, cover and few predators. Mortalities from road kill can be substantial, and there are other hazards, but they don’t negate all the positives from the deer’s perspective. For one, deer, unlike many animals, seem to learn how to deal with vehicular traffic. Some learn that the safest place to cross a road is at an intersection where there are signs or lights.

While whitetails and, in the west, mulies are the common deer seen in cities and towns, some of the mountainous parts of the continent have to contend with urban elk.  Anchorage Alaska has urban moose in good numbers.

Still, urban deer are a bigger and more widespread phenomenon. There are several reasons behind the deer explosion in built-up areas and why they can be such a huge headache for municipalities.

Where’s the escalator?

One explanation for the surge in urban deer numbers is that as the human population has expanded, we’ve simply moved into areas where deer live. So it’s ‘our fault’. That may be true in some situations, but I think it applies more to other species than it does to deer. It seems to me that in many instances, deer are actually moving into city limits, and finding conditions to their liking. But whatever the reason, once a deer population is established in an urban environment, it seems they’re there to stay.

City deer can cause a lot of trouble. This buck has got tangled up in netting that someone had hoped would help protect plants. It didn’t work . . .

Addressing deer over-population is hard because deer look so darn cute. Lots of people simply adore them, so any attempt to ‘manage’ deer, especially if it involves killing some, evokes high emotions. Like many wildlife management issues, the biggest obstacle to managing deer is managing people.

Deer are taught how and where to survive during their first year of life, from their mother. Once a deer has survived in an urban environment long enough to give birth and raise a fawn, that behaviour has been learned. Given a doe will often return year after year to the same spot to give birth, and her offspring often choose to live close to where they themselves were born and raised, it’s easy to see that it doesn’t take long for an urban deer population to develop. Especially since under ideal conditions a fawn can give birth to a fawn herself at one year of age, and a two year old or older doe commonly bears twins and even triplets. That’s a lot of deer over a few short years.

A tasty lawn!

Tasty fruit !

In addition to access to food and cover, there are other factors behind high deer populations in residential areas. Take these examples from my home province of Ontario – Sifton Bog in London, the National Capital Commission lands near Ottawa and the Rouge Gorge in Toronto – it’s their proximity to parks and protected areas, where there isn’t any hunting, few natural predators and lots of hiding cover that are the primary factors that have led to high numbers of urban deer.

.Sometimes deer problems can be linked to over-reaching municipalities. Municipal boundaries often extend well past built-up areas and include large chunks of relatively undisturbed land, places with relatively little development and where wildlife is common to abundant. While provincial hunting rules and regulations generally apply, municipalities, bowing to what amounts to anti-hunting sentiment, sometimes pass wide-sweeping no discharge of firearms by-laws on lands within their jurisdiction.

With little or no hunting pressure, ideal habitat, and once again, few natural predators, deer numbers in these ‘protected areas’ can surge. Although some municipalities are scaling back the extent of their no-discharge of firearms legislation in response to nuisance deer problems, it may not be enough. For one, although municipalities may now be more responsive to seeing hunting within their boundaries, many WMU’s allow only bow and arrow deer hunting.

Archery only hunts limit the harvest – it’s hard to kill a lot of deer using only bows and arrows. But at the end of the day, even allowing hunting with shotguns and muzzleloaders might not be enough to reduce deer numbers to the degree desired when urban deer populations are high.

In part, that’s because many landowners aren’t supportive of hunting, meaning deer ‘sanctuaries’ abound. But even more importantly, there’s evidence that hunting is not as effective in controlling deer populations as previously thought. A recent article in the Journal of Wildlife Management suggests that in areas where deer populations are high, the habitat suitable and predators are rare or absent, hunters alone are probably incapable of reducing deer populations to low levels.

Time for a picnic.

If hunting isn’t the solution to reducing the problems associated with over-abundant urban deer, what can be done?

The best solution is to not let the problem develop in the first place. Liberal hunting seasons and bag limits and other options designed to keep deer from running amok on the landscape can help. Luckily, that’s been the trend in much of Ontario in recent years. There have been allowances for Sunday hunting, longer deer seasons and through draws and tags a hunter can harvest multiple deer. In fact, the ‘possession limit’ for deer in Ontario is seven – a person can have more deer in the freezer than they can walleye.

But once the genie is out of the bottle, it’s hard to put it back.

There are remedial options, but all have serious limitations.

Although hunting may not be the total solution, it’s one of the best tools available for at least keeping things from getting worse. While the ability to hunt with guns may need to be curbed in densely populated areas, sometimes the fear of guns seems over the top. Americans don’t seem as reticent about firearms.

A friend of mine, Dave Havill, has hunted in the burbs of Minneapolis, MN, where he could see from his assigned tree stand dense residential areas, a mall, and other commercial establishments.

“We could use buckshot or archery equipment” he said.

As an aside, Soo Michigan has (or at least used to have – I haven’t checked recently) a special, 1 day goose hunt every fall that takes place in school football and soccer fields and other open areas well within city limits. I can’t imagine a similar hunt ever being allowed anywhere in Ontario.

Interestingly, southern Ontario seems to be more tolerant of hunting close to built-up areas than some cities in the north. It’s the logical outcome when likeable wildlife become pests.

Commonly suggested solutions to dealing with over-populations of urban deer, particularly by those who don’t want to see deer harmed, are sterilization or other birth control, trap and transfer or simply ‘driving’ deer out of the city. These have been tried but are problematic and not very effective.

Birth control, including sterilization, is expensive and difficult to do – you have to capture large numbers of animals and/or administer tightly controlled and expensive drugs, both of which are fraught with problems.

Trap and transfer is also expensive, time-consuming and not easy to do. Deer learn to become trap-shy, and because they are highly strung, can become badly injured or even die simply from the stress of the experience.

In some western Parks, ‘drives’ have been successfully used to herd deer out of towns, but this only works when there are distinct boundaries between built-up areas and natural habitats. That’s not a common situation in most places.

Those who really want to see deer disappear from city limits often suggest culling – killing deer using ‘hired guns’. That might work, but is a difficult option to actually put into effect.  Where culling in urban areas has been suggested, the public backlash has often been considerable. Such reaction seems to be the norm.

There are actions individual landowners who are fed-up with marauding deer can do but while such remedies can help alleviate some stresses, they are unlikely to reduce the overall, urban deer population.

Urban deer herd.

At the end of the day, both the public and deer managers usually agree that hunting by licenced deer hunters is the most effective and reasonable management method to address issues associated with too many urban deer. Hunting may not totally resolve the problems, but it’s probably the best tool available. But it has its limitations – especially if hunters are limited to archery equipment. It’s relatively ineffective, plus some don’t like hunting with bows and arrows, or feel uncomfortable hunting in and around built-up areas.

What can really help though,  is Mother Nature.

Long, cold, snowy winters will almost always result in deer population declines.

Plowed and shoveled out paths, roads and laneways make it easier for deer to cope with deep snow winters.

As far as what the future holds, it’s anybody’s guess.  “Climate change’ could hbe a help, a hindrance or be neutral with respect to urban deer herds. Predicting the future is a mug’s game. Some deer research biologists have suggested that “tolerance towards overabundant populations could sometimes be the only possible option.”

Like rats and raccoons, urban deer are here to stay. Best we get used to it.

RR lines in towns and cities are clear of snow, making walking – and feeding – easier. Sometimes there’s spilled grains as well as the exposed natural vegetation. Just avoid the trains!

Hunting Urban Deer

Hunting deer in the ‘burbs is not a whole lot different than hunting deer in other areas. Still, there are differences.

For one, you may be hunting parcels of land that are very, very small, perhaps as small as a couple of acres. Small acreages can be challenging, especially when hunting with archery equipment. It’s not unusual for a deer shot with an arrow to run off, and the distance they run can be considerable. If you shoot a deer and off it goes, you don’t automatically, at least in the majority of places, have the authority to track on lands where you don’t have landowner permission.

Don’t assume land that’s not in private ownership is open to hunting, even if it’s not posted. Hunting may be permissible, but there may be no-discharge of firearm by-laws that apply to specific parcels, such as municipal parks.

Don’t assume urban deer are tame and easy to hunt. Deer seem to know individual people in their territory, and although they may be trusting of those they see regularly and are familiar with, they often view strangers with suspicion.

On the plus side, urban deer can be numerous. Lots of deer certainly increase your chances of success.

Parks and woodlots in and adjacent to urban areas can attract a lot of deer!

And some urban deer live long enough to become trophy-sized.  Burt Myers, former OOD Editor, told me that he sees a lot of big deer on US hunting shows are taken in built-up, residential neighborhoods.

So if a trophy deer is your goal, you might want to consider the urban hunt. Scouting is relatively easy.

If you do hunt in and around where there are a lot of people, always be on your best behaviour. There are eyes and ears – and cameras – everywhere.

Ruffed Grouse

I like photographing and watching ruffed grouse as much as I like hunting them. So I thought I’d post a few of my better photos and babble a bit about my favourite game bird.

I’ve hunted ‘ruffies’ since I was 6 years old, so that means more than 6 decades of chasing ‘the king of upland game birds’ in the forests of Ontario. In Ontario, ruffed grouse are often called ‘partridge’ or ‘chickens’.

Grouse on a gravel road. In both spring and fall, grouse often ‘display’ on roads. It also means a female grouse is close by.

Ruffed grouse come in two main colour phases, grey and brown.

For many years, most of the ruffed grouse I shot were taken while walking gravel roads. Often the grouse were themselves on the road. In northern Ontario, this has traditionally been how the vast majority of hunters shot grouse. This is still commonly done, although hunting regulations that forbid shooting down, across or from a maintained road are now being enforced, and the practice is now only legal on road – like logging roads – that have been abandoned and are not maintained. Still, there are many thousands of miles of such roads in the northern forests.

Wingshooting ruffed grouse are a challenge.

For the last 20 years or so, most of my ruffed grouse hunting is done with my dog(s). My dogs are Wachtelhundes, a German breed that flushes, retrieves, tracks and trails. The Europeans use their Wachtels for driving big game – including boar and moose – but I use mine mostly on upland game. My first dog, Heidi, like to hunt moose, but these days moose are scarce in my neck of the woods.

Many of the grouse my dogs flush alight in trees.

Not all the flushed birds are shot on the wing. Many fly up into a tree and although I used to try and flush them again for a shot, I now tend to pot them if I spot them. Ruffed grouse are just too good as table fare to pass up.

Ruffies can be hard to spot – great camo!

They are hard to photograph inflight!

Not every year is a ‘good’ year for grouse. Numbers can fluctuate wildly from year to year. A cold, wet June plays havoc on brood survival and there is some evidence that populations are cyclical. Numbers tend to peak about every 10 years, then crash. However, in many areas where grouse are not doing as well, like southern Ontario, grouse just seem to exist at low levels. Poor habitat conditions and high predator numbers likely are the culprits that keep grouse numbers low.

Ruffed grouse can run and hide and even fly in only hours after hatching.

They are cute!

When the season opens in mid-September, some grouse can still be found in family groups, but many are already off on their own. Some think that in a ‘good’ grouse year, grouse can have two broods. However, I believe this is false. If the nest is found and the eggs are eaten by predators before any have hatched, they may re-nest, which is why some grouse are still very immature when hunting season opens.

A family group. Although clutch size is often 10-14, mortality of chicks is high.

I take very few grouse after the middle of October, even though the season runs through to the end of December. There are two main reasons for this: 1, trapping season opens, which means I have to be very carful about where I hunt with my dogs. These days most traps are instant kill traps and may be set in and around culverts, beaver dams or in baited sets – all prime places for a dog to sniff; and 2, once there is snow on the ground, the birds seem to spend a lot of time in trees and are hard to find.

Ruffed grouse grow ‘snowshoes’ on their feet in winter, which helps them walk on the snow. On cold winter nights in deep snow winters, they will plunge into the snow to roost.

During late fall, winter and into spring, grouse will often fly into white birch trees late in the evening to ‘bud’. In 5 or 10 minutes they fill up their crop and then fly off to roost.

Grouse like frozen berries, including crabapples.

Apparently, ruffed grouse have been heard ‘drumming’ during every calendar month. Personally, I have never heard one drumming in the depths of winter.

Ruffed grouse have a mating behaviour that includes a phenomenon known as ‘drumming’. Males seek out a log, or a rock, or a mound of some sort where they sit and do a stationary wing ‘roll’, which produces a loud drumming sound that attracts females.

I’m already looking forward to the fall!

Patience is (sometimes) a Virtue

I had this published a few months ago, but a busy autumn and a forgetful mind meant it was late to my blog. With the 2023 deer season done and gone, I can report . . . no harvest success. I did have two different 8 pt bucks come to my decoy, but until the last few days of the season, I generally pass on bucks that aren’t obviously at least 3.5 years old. Just my thing . . .Deer numbers have crashed in most of the areas I hunt. However, lower deer numbers might be a good thing looking ahead a couple of years. I’ll discuss this further in a future blog.

A buck worth waiting for . . .

Sitting and waiting. Watching. Listening.

Waiting . . . 

Being on stand waiting for a deer to come by is by far the most commonly used hunting method in Ontario and many, many other jurisdictions. Each year, tens of thousands of deer (and a lot of moose and bear) are taken by hunters who’ve been waiting in a stand.

A claim made by many hunters – and something most hunters regard as general knowledge – is that chances of success are highest the first time or two one goes to a particular stand. Having a number of stands is viewed as a good thing as the more stands one has to hunt in, the more opportunities one has for first time success.

A takeoff tactic on having a number of stands from which to hunt deer that’s been successful for me is ‘run and gun’. Frequently changing hunt spots– sometimes two or three times a day, for days in a row – and taking watch where convenient, can be an effective and efficient way of finding unaware deer.

However, ‘run and gun’ doesn’t always work. In recent years I’ve had success by becoming a more patient hunter.

Rather than constantly changing stands, doing drives; or running around willy nilly, I’ve been making the decision to pick one stand and stick with it.

The hardest part of sticking to a stand day after day is psychological. As OOD Art Director Tamas Pal – an avid deer hunter – says, ‘after two or three days, you really start to question your stand location’.

You may be only sitting and waiting, but your mind might be in overdrive, filling up with self-doubt.

The nagging thoughts that whirl around inside your head can be endless permutations of “Is my stand location wrong? Have the deer patterned me? Do the deer know I’m here?” and other negative thoughts.

Unfortunately, the answer to one or most of your doubts about the stand can be spot-on. Your stand location may well be poor. Deer may have you patterned. They may know when you are in your stand.

But don’t dwell on the negatives. Try and stay positive.

Picking a Stand

It will be a lot easier to stick it out in your stand if you have confidence in it and you’re comfortable..

Obviously, a good stand location overlooks an area deer frequent, such as travel lanes, a feeding area (including bait) or a spot where deer socialize (e.g., there’s evidence of scraping or rubbing).

Feeding areas are good spots to watch. Power line corridors can be a good choice, especially in remote spots that don’t have a lot of hunting pressure.

A good stand location also lets you arrive and leave with minimal disturbance. It can help if it’s an integral part of the landscape (e.g., a permanent blind).

How Deer Behave

Although deer may have been initially alarmed by your presence – they may have heard you go to the stand, maybe they scented your presence, perhaps they saw you – over time, they may become habituated with your presence.

This buck was initially alarmed by my presence, but did not high-tail it. He stayed for a few days around my stand. I like to think his presence let other deer believe the spot was safe.

Habituation is a learning mechanism.

It explains the difference in behaviour by deer living in urban areas as compared to deer living in more rural settings. Frequent human/deer encounters habituate deer to become highly tolerant of the human presence. On landscapes where there are far fewer people, deer aren’t, as a rule, people friendly.

By sticking it out on a stand, you are increasing the chances deer will become habituated to your presence and let down their guard.

It’s absolutely vital to stay alert and maintain a positive outlook when on a long vigil.

Don’t let thoughts of ‘that buck saw or sensed me early on! The buck has me patterned and avoids this spot if there’s any chance at all I might be here!’ clog your brain.

Again, don’t think too much about that, regardless of the fact it might well be what’s happening. Because deer can recognize humans – particularly hunters – as a threat, they can become overly cautious in avoiding them. Biologists call this type of animal behaviour ‘sensitization’.

But deer highly sensitized to hunters may not stay that way. In addition to becoming habituated with your presence, deer learn by watching how other deer (and other animals) behave and adjust accordingly. The less you alarm deer, or other animals, the better.

If you’re not perceived as a threat by the birds and animals in your surroundings, your presence will be increasingly tolerated.

A buck in my yard. Rather habituated to me . . . .

Deer Movements

Keep in mind deer can move great distances.

Bucks in particular can materialize from who knows where.

During the many weeks of the rut, bucks criss-crossing the countryside often find themselves in unfamiliar places.

This buck showed up about 10 days after I started hunting from this particular stand.

With a love them and leave them attitude to does, a mature buck can successfully mate with a number of does in relatively short order. But does aren’t everywhere and not all are receptive to amorous bucks.  Bucks on the prowl search long and hard to find friendly females.

Although hunters, often with the aid of trail cameras, can pattern specific bucks and their movements, it’s not uncommon for bucks they have never seen before to suddenly show up. Many big bucks – bucks from afar – are taken each year by hunters with no prior knowledge of their existence.

On a recent hunt, I spent almost 14 consecutive days (I missed one day because it was storming) in my stand, often for more than 4 hours a day, before a good buck showed up, a couple of minutes before the end of legal shooting. I had never seen the buck before. The buck was trailing a doe.

This is the buck that was trailing the doe. A 14 day vigil rewarded!

Wolves are Always Hungry

Well, another post about wolves. The articles I write for magazines, like this one for Ontario Out of Doors, are usually approved through a process by which I submit queries and the editor, or editorial team, picks and chooses. There seems to be an inordinate affinity for stories about wolves, at least from me. Oh well, if that’s what they like….

So enjoy. As usual, this is the story as I submitted, without their edits. And bonus photos again!

A timber wolf on a deer hide bait.

An apex predator, the wolf is a valuable component of a healthy ecosystem. Wherever they’re found, they do a reasonably good job of keeping wildlife populations from running amok and they weed out the old, the diseased and the sick. Despite some good attributes, wolves aren’t the heroes of the woodlands.

Wolves – which in the broadest sense include Coyotes, Gray or Timber Wolves, Brush Wolves, Algonquin Wolves and many other permutations in Eurasia and elsewhere – are, in some respects, all the same.

A coyote. Note the upper right of the photo!

For one, all wolves are canids. And all wild canids, wherever they occur, are ravenous predators – with a diet that is mainly meat.

The wolf evolved as a successful predator of big game by becoming a lean, mean, fighting machine. They don’t put on fat – they’re always hungry. They are recognized as being intelligent, agile and fleet of foot. Wolves are like a population of professional athletes.

But catching food that can run away and often fights back is very, very hard work. To survive, wolves can and will scavenge.

Food that can’t be eaten all at once is food to be eaten next; food that’s found is bonus.

The hunger that keeps wolves alive is also the wolf’s Achilles heel – hunger can make wolf the hunter, become wolf the hunted.

Baiting

Given their propensity to scavenge – it’s no surprise that baiting is one of the best and most efficient ways to hunt a wolf.

Baiting can work as a wolf hunting tactic no matter the season.

In summer and autumn, wolves supplement their diet with vegetation like berries and gut piles from road kill and hunter harvest. Baiting still works, but during warm spells, bait has a short shelf life.

Conversely, a bait site in winter can be effective for weeks with minimal refreshing.

In winter, it’s easier to have a set-up where you can watch the bait at a distance that lowers the risks of being detected by wolves and still provides good, clear shooting opportunities.

Unless you plan to hunt the site immediately, a bait station needs to offer enough incentive for wolves to re-visit the site; too much easily obtained bait, though, can be counter-productive. Make it so the wolves will have to gnaw, dig and scratch for their reward.

A big paw!

My late friend Gary Gehrman often used his spring and early autumn bear baiting stations as wolf baits in late fall and into and into winter. Gary would put meat chunks, scraps and bones in his secured bait barrels that had a heavy gauge mesh wire on the open end.

A technique preferred by generations of wolf hunters is to freeze carcass parts into ice-covered waters and wait for wolves to cross the ice.

Often, pre-existing stands or blind for deer, moose or bear are suitable stands for wolf hunting.

If you don’t have a pre-existing stand, you’ll need to improvise.

Baits and Set-up

The best baits are the remains of what forms the wolf’s dietary staple – parts and pieces of legally harvested animals like deer and moose. Roadkill and furbearing mammal carcasses – especially beaver – are also top-notch baits. Possession and use of carcasses for wolf baiting that come from sources other than animals you yourself legally harvested, including roadkill and fur-bearers from trappers, may require notifying MNRF and/or obtaining a free of charge Notice of Possession. Check with the local MNRF office for details.

A trapper skinning a beaver. Beaver is an excellent wolf bait.

Most wolf hunters secure the bait.  Bear bait barrels, as mentioned, can work. On icy water, cut a number of wedges large enough to freeze chunks of carcass, hides and large bones. Puncture through to water; pack and freeze the bait in with slush.

Scatter some extra bait around the site. Bits and pieces of blood, flesh and bone will saturate the spot with scent and attract ravens, eagles and other scavengers.  The squawking of birds will alert any nearby wolves that’s something’s up.

A hunt can be done as soon as the bait is out, but waiting and – if necessary re-baiting – is also an option.

If you use trail cams and are patient, photos can provide useful information such as the number of wolves visiting the site, the timing of their visits and more.

I’ve found that wolves have tended to visit my bait every 7 to 10 days. Studies have shown wolves make regular patrols of their home range, often encompassing many miles.  

If a bait station has been used before, the wolves will know about it and will be on high alert on their approach. But a new bait pile the wolves don’t know about will have the same result.

Ensure new blinds blend in. Wolves have excellent eyesight and will easily spot anything that seems out-of-place.

When and What

The most likely times wolves visit bait is dawn and dusk. It’s the way of the forest. However, they can show up at any time.

A deer is happy….

Wolves travel in packs of various sizes, but there are also many lone wolves. Wolves, including coyotes, are commonly seen in pairs. If it is a pack that comes to the bait, it’s highly unlikely they will all show up at once.

Wolf hunters require an Outdoors Card, a Small Game Licence and proof of firearm accreditation when hunting with a gun. In some areas a specific wolf tag may be required and in those areas, there is no party hunting.

There is a large area, which includes Algonquin Provincial Park, where hunting wolves is generally not permitted owing to concerns regarding the Algonquin Wolf.

The Worldly Wolf

Here’s an article I had published in the Spring 2023 Issue of ‘Lake of the Woods Area News’, a local Northwestern Ontario stewardship association magazine. Some of the photos in this blog were not a part of the published version.

A wolf pup, roadside in the early hours of dawn.

Wolves occur in North America, Europe, Asia and North Africa. According to some, there are three species and close to 40 subspecies of wolf. Others believe there is only one species of wolf – the Gray (or Timber) Wolf (Canis lupus). As all three wolf species and sub-species are believed to be able to interbreed and produce viable offspring, I’m in the camp that says there is only one species of wolf.

There is widespread acceptance that wolves and coyotes (coyotes are only found in North America) are separate species, although the situation is not cut and dried. For example, weights of adult Gray Wolves are reported to be between 40 – 175 lbs (18 – 80 kg), while coyotes tip the scales from 20 – 40 lbs (9 – 18 kg).  Wolves in the 40 lb range are often referred to as ‘brush wolves’.

Gray wolves are typically gray in colour, but black, white, creamy coloured and reddish-brown wolves are not uncommon.

A typical gray-coloured wolf, licking its chops after a meal of road-killed moose.

A light, cream coloured wolf, with a few porcupine quills on its face.

Coyotes are distinguished from wolves by their smaller size and having a more slender, pointed snout.

A lot of people have an interest in wolves. It’s not surprising, nor should it be. Wolves have a long relationship with humans – our pet dogs are their direct descendants.

Wolves are carnivores that rely upon meat (but not exclusively) to survive. Sometimes wolves – and coyotes – kill people.

Nowadays, wolves seldom attack people. But in Old World history, wolves often attacked and killed people. In France there are about 9,000 recorded wolf attacks between the 17th and 19th centuries. Between 1764 and 1767, about 100 men, women and children fell victim to something called the Beast. The Beast is presumed to have been a wolf; some say it may have been a werewolf.

Wolves (Ma’iingan in Ojibwe; Mahihkan in Cree) are prominent in North American Aboriginal cultures. For some, their relationship with wolves is sacred; in others, wolves are treasured as a brother or a sister. In general, Aboriginal people tend to not hurt any wolf.

There is a belief that the wolf was the creator of the world and a guardian of the underworld. Part of Ojibwe culture has their fate and that of the wolf intertwined. It’s been said “As the wolf goes, so go themselves.”

In Inuit mythology, the gigantic wolf spirit, Amarok or Amaroq, is often described as a giant wolf that devours hunters reckless enough to go out hunting alone at night.

Note the shining eyes of a second wolf.

Wolf numbers decline

Overseas, wolves were feared and were a nuisance for those who raised livestock; Europeans and their neighbours hunted wolves relentlessly. In Britain, it’s believed wolves disappeared sometime in the 1700s, following centuries of persecution.

Unrelenting hunting pressure took a toll. By the End of World War II, wolves had been extirpated from all of central Europe and most of northern Europe.

Europeans brought their distaste of wolves with them when North America was colonized. It’s thought that about 2 million wolves once roamed North America, but by the 1960s they were gone from all the lower 48 except for Michigan’s Isle Royale National Park and parts of Minnesota. They were still common in Alaska; in Canada wolves remained common, but did become absent or rare in large swaths of countryside

In the 60’s, public sentiment about the environment began to shift. This included a much more tolerant attitude towards wolves. Worldwide, many countries enacted tougher legislation and regulations on hunting and trapping that helped provide wolves with opportunities to recover.

Unequivocally, wolf populations are recovering. Still, they currently occupy only about two-thirds of their former, historic, worldwide range; a meagre 10 percent in the continental USA.

Here in Northwestern Ontario, wolf populations continue to thrive, despite decades of hunting, trapping and poisoning. Hunting and trapping is still permitted; however, rules and regulations have been tightened considerably and wolves killed by humans are much reduced from the days of airplane hunting.

Today, the resident attitude about wolves is largely positive, interspersed with reasonable trepidation.

In the 1960s, the Department of Lands & Forests, the precursor to the Ministry of Natural Resources, often used poisoned baits to try and kill wolves.

New times

The wolves in this region survive largely on a diet of deer, moose and when available, beavers. Further to the north, caribou are a favoured prey. Of course, wolves catch and kill other animals, including bears. As detailed in Farley Mowat’s fictional book Never Cry Wolf, even mice might do in a pinch.

Wolves consume blueberries and other types of foods that aren’t meat, in moderation.

Some wolves turn to scavenging. They can be regular customers at dumps and landfills, spending time and effort scrounging for scraps.

Wolves are of concern to local livestock and to much dismay, seem to be particularly fond of (hu)man’s best friend.

Such traits are not particularly endearing. It’s very distressing to see or hear about a much beloved family pet being snatched by a wolf when out for a walk. Such attacks may be somewhat uncommon, yet consistently recur.

While less traumatic, it can be unnerving and menacing to see a wolf in the yard or on the street. People think these are places where wolves don’t belong.

Having been given a chance, wolves are adapting to living in close contact with people.

But living in close proximity to wolves is not without risk.

It was recently reported that the European Commission’s President Ursula von der Leyen’s prized horse Dolly, was killed by a wolf just 300ft from her home in northwest Germany.

While unpalatable to some, regulated hunting and trapping of wolves appears to be necessary to keep wolf numbers in balance with societal mores.

Ups and downs

Wolf populations tend to fluctuate with prey abundance.

When white-tailed deer numbers exploded in Northwestern Ontario several years ago, wolf populations followed suit. Wolf sightings by deer hunters, reported on Ministry of Natural Resources postcard surveys, increased by more than 500% in less than 10 years.

In addition to the abundance of prey, wolf numbers are kept in check by wolves themselves. Studies have shown that wolves are pack animals with territories they defend. A pack can be as small as 2 animals; large packs may have more than 30 members! About a dozen is the average.

Most wolf packs consist of two parents and their puppies, including one to three year old offspring that have not yet headed out on their own. David Mech, a well-known wolf researcher, called pack leaders alpha animals in his early research, but later recanted on that theory.

Most now believe the adults are in charge simply because they are the parents of the pack.

Wolves leave the pack for a variety of reasons. One is to look for a mate and establish a pack of their own. Wolves may kill other wolves to claim territory.

Some move great distances. In four months, one left the Algoma area and went east 2,500 km to establish a territory in Quebec. One collared in Michigan travelled 6,800 km in a year and a half. It passed through Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota, Ontario and finally Manitoba, where it was shot (legally) in the Whiteshell.

Other radio-collared wolves have been tracked moving between Riding Mountain National Park in Manitoba and the Boundary Waters in Minnesota, traversing Lake of the Woods.

For interesting, locally pertinent information about wolves, check out https://www.voyageurswolfproject.org/.

We may not like everything about a wolf, but the presence of wolves makes the world a better place.

A pure white wolf – but not an albino.

Georgia Quail

In March, I travelled to Georgia to hunt Bobwhite Quail. It was my first quail hunt – I had wanted to do a quail hunt for many years, but for a number of reasons, a hunt just never happened. This time it all came together and a finer hunt could not have been found.

I enjoy upland game bird hunting – I shot my first ruffed grouse with a bolt action .22 rimfire within days of my 7^th birthday, and now, more than 60 years later, the enjoyment and satisfaction I get from a good bird hunt has not diminished.

The Trip South

Georgia is a long ways from where I live in Northwestern Ontario. The plan was for me to drive to Winnipeg, Manitoba, then fly to Toronto, Ontario where all four of the hunting party would meet. From Toronto, we’d drive to our hunt destination, the Wynfield Plantation in southern Georgia that’s “located in the heart of Bobwhite country”.

We spent two nights on the road before arriving around noon on the third day, with plenty of time to get ready for the afternoon hunt.

The first day our truck and crew had to contend with snow – the whole day. We watched the snow accumulate in the woods and had to watch out for snow removal efforts in service pullovers. But, the roads stayed clear and didn’t seem to hinder the drive.

As a child, I’d been through upper New York State, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine, but otherwise I’d not seen the true splendour of the Appalachians.

My description for the first part of the trip is that there were long stretches of real hilly country, carpeted in a dense forest of mostly large size hardwood trees, and there was a lot more forest than there was agricultural and industrial land. For the most part, we avoided population centres but where we did stop, everything seemed to me to be nice and clean. Overall, I found the scenery to be marvelous and not at all what I’d been expecting.

For the second day of our journey south it was better weather – no snow – and again very scenic. It was less hilly, but once again not near as ‘settled’ as I had been expecting.

Finally, we were in Georgia. The weather was nice – sunny, a bit cool, very little wind. Perfect for hunting!

The Hunt

Wynfield Plantation is 2000 acres of mostly an open forest of long-leaf Georgia pines, with some swampland, managed intensively as Bobwhite Quail habitat. It’s surrounded by dozens of other ‘plantations’ which are also managed for quail and cater to hunters.

After registering at the main lodge, we were shown our clean and comfy cabin and were told our guides would pick us up at 2:00 pm for the afternoon hunt.

Right on time, the guides showed up, in two jeeps, modified to take hunters, guns and dogs. Apparently, Wynfield has about 90 hunting dogs; English Pointers, English Setters and English Cocker Spaniels. I think we had five or six dogs with us for the afternoon.

Our guide was Jake Harris, who was in his first season guiding.

After an exchange of pleasantries, Dennis and I piled into the jeep and with Jake and the gundogs we were off and into the quail woods.

After a few short minutes we stopped and the hunt was on. While Dennis and I retrieved our shotguns Jake let out a couple of setters and a little cocker spaniel called Sadie; she’d be with us for the entire hunt.

While not mandatory, the preference – mostly for safety reasons – is for hunters to use break-action, double-barreled shotguns.

Months earlier, I had purchased a Huglu (pronounced hooloo) 301D O/U 28 gauge. I had, however, only put four rounds through it so had no idea what was going to happen. Guy, our group leader, had done up many boxes of 2 ¾” #8 reloads for me and Kinu, who had brought along a 28 gauge as well as a 20 gauge. Guy and Dennis had 20’s and a 16 gauge to choose from.

It did not take long for the dogs – both of the setters – to go on point.

Jake then told us to load up and instructed us as to where to set-up.

“Safeties off! Get ready!”

“Find the birds, Sadie!”

Tail wagging, Sadie pushed her way into the undergrowth. Suddenly, with a whir of wings, several quail burst into the air. Shots were fired.

To tell you the truth, I can’t recall whether I actually killed a quail on that first flush. I think so, but I know I also missed, as I didn’t get a double!

That afternoon we found, flushed and shot at many coveys and a few single birds. By the time the hunt was over – 5:00 pm – we had bagged 20 birds and missed many more.

Guy and Kinu were already at the cabin by the time we arrived. Their afternoon had been similar and the hunting had been as good as ours had been.

Time for a celebratory cocktail!

With the first (half)day hunt done and gone, we had two and a half days of hunting to go.

Morning hunts started at 9:00 am and ended at noon. Afternoon hunts – 2:00 to 5:00. It’s said that quail hunting is a gentleman’s hunt and that’s what it was. Almost leisurely, but enough walking to keep you busy.

And great shooting!

I wound up shooting 4 doubles, with the last one being two quail with a single shot. When shooting at coveys of quail, it can be tricky not to ‘flock shoot’. Pick one bird and stay on it. The double – 2 with one – I got when I put the bead on the pair that were together, so it was deliberate and not flock shooting. But still lucky, of course.

I was very pleased with the performance of the Huglu (a Turkish gun) and our guide Jake was likewise impressed – not because of my shooting skills (not bad, but certainly not great, as the number of empty hulls exceeded the number of bird bagged by a considerable margin) – it was the look and feel of the gun he liked, to the point where he said he was going to try and find one for himself!

On the last hunt Jake took us to a haunt called ‘Quail Valley’, which really did live up to its name. Coveys, big and small, were everywhere and the shooting was fast and furious. On that hunt Dennis took his Stevens 555 Silver 20 gauge O/U – an extremely light gun with an aluminum receiver – and with it had his best shooting of the trip.

I never did get to hunt with Guy or Kinu, but that was okay. Dennis and I and our guide Jake got along great, as did Guy and Kinu and their guide.  

One of the joys of the hunt was the dog work. The pointers and setters (especially Rocky) were very well-trained and were continuously finding us birds and fetching the ones we downed. Not once did they ‘break’ point. But our favourite dog was Sadie. She was likewise tireless, obviously loved to hunt and was a real little cutie.

Wynfield was awarded the “Orvis Wingshooting Lodge of the Year” in 2005, a fact they are very proud of. According to their website, Orvis is an American family-owned retail and mail-order business specializing in fly fishing, hunting and sporting goods. Each year, for the last 36 years, Orvis has given awards to the Fly-Fishing Lodge of the Year, Wingshooting Lodge of the Year, International Destination of the Year, Fly-Fishing Outfitter of the Year, Fly-Fishing Guide of the Year, Fly Shop of the Year, and Lifetime Achievement recipient.

Unlike me, Guy and Dennis and Kinu had hunted quail before, including a stay at Rio Piedra Plantation, another southern Georgia quail hunting paradise and a 3 time Orvis Wingshooting Lodge of the Year winner. They had only good things to say about Wynfield (and had high praise for Rio Piedra as well), so that speaks well to the hunting, accommodations and meals (the Chef would come out to talk to us during dinner, a nice touch).

I loved the hunt and was very happy to have finally met up with Bobwhite.

Someday, I hope to do it again. Maybe at Wynfield . . .  

Deer Hunter Vocabulary

It’s a blizzard here today – I haven’t even gone out the door yet. While waiting for the snow to at least subside, I thought I’d post another of my columns I had published in Ontario Out of Doors magazine last summer.

At some point, I also need to do a post on a recent quail hunt I was on, in Georgia. It was GREAT!

Aayway, hope you like this column.

Hunters like to hear details of the hunt, including what was harvested, or seen, during the most recent hunt. Or a hunt long past or a hunt yet to come. There’s always some hunt to talk about.

But if you can’t quite comprehend the following, you just might not be a deer hunter.

“Our camp had a great hunt. Got a Big Doe, a Dry Doe, a Spindly six and even one Mr. Big! We passed on a couple of Jackrabbits, Cheese Sticks as well as an Up and Comer. Still hoping someday someone will get real lucky and tag a Booner.”

Unsurprisingly, deer hunters use specific words or phrases that only make a lot of sense to other deer hunters. Even if you’re talking to yourself, it helps to have common terms and descriptors that help describe a deer hunt accurately.

Deer Talk

To delve into deer talk, let’s begin with the phrase “a Big Doe”. Those three words have a lot more going for it than the simple and obvious.

‘A Big Doe’ is more than likely a mature doe. Hunters can recognize a fawn; and there’s a consensus that any deer older than a fawn is a mature deer. At least that’s the way deer harvest is usually recorded: deer harvest has traditionally been recorded as a fawn (male or female), doe, buck or ‘unknown’.

Ergo, a female deer that’s not a fawn is a mature doe. Because even ‘big’ fawns are almost always smaller than any older doe deer, describing the harvested animal as “a big doe” tells everyone it wasn’t a fawn.

So the description makes inherent sense. Plus, taking a big doe is akin to catching ‘a big fish’, so while the deer in question may not have been particularly big – but definitely not a fawn – describing the deer as ‘a big doe’ adds to the bragging board, for those who are so inclined. In fishing and hunting world, big is almost always better than small.

If it’s not ‘a big doe’, and it’s not a buck and it’s not a fawn, then what is it? A ‘small doe’? Possibly, but for many hunters there can be a hesitancy to describe the harvested deer as ‘small’, except – maybe – in a derogatory fashion (and why some hunters call fawns ‘Jackrabbits’).

Luckily, there’s a handy alternative that’s often available.

Most small does are likely a yearling. It’s also likely a yearling doe – a fawn the year previous – was never bred.  A doe showing no sign of having nursed is often described as a ‘dry doe”. 

Of course, ‘a big doe’ can also be ‘a dry doe’ (although almost all female deer older than fawns are bred every year, doe lose fawns to predators, disease, etc.). 

If the deer is both ‘a big doe’ and ‘a dry doe’, that’s quite a bit of information, with relatively little said.

Buck Categories

Let’s shift focus a bit.

One of the best ways to describe a deer is by its antlers.

Most deer hunters are interested in bucks and commonly categorize buck deer by the size and configuration of their antlers.

In addition, deer hunting licences and tags are typically based on whether or not deer have antlers.

For a buck to be a ‘legal’ buck, at least one antler needs to be a certain length (3” or 7.5 cm in Ontario).

Buck fawns with little nubs, but with little to no measureable length, are commonly called ‘Button Bucks’, or sometimes ‘Jackrabbit Bucks’

Bucks with larger, hardened antlers with a single point are ‘Spikers’ – if they have a small branch at the end they are ‘Forkhorns’. Both are usually legal, although not always. Typically, these deer are yearling bucks. Some collectively call these little bucks ‘Cheese Sticks”.

Actually, the hunters I know that coined this term actually say ‘Cheese Dicks’. But in magazine world, the editors thought this terminology was inappropriate.

Then there’s ‘Mr. Spindly’; a buck with a curved and wider rack than the Cheese Stick. It regularly has two or more distinct points per side, but little apparent mass, as both main beam and points are thin. Headgear looks . . .  spindly. Mr. Spindly can be a yearling, but is more likely 2 ½ or 3 ½ years old.

Another buck deer category is the ‘Up and Comer’. The Up and Comer is a mature buck, usually with a rack sporting at least 8 points that looks solid or has some other redeeming feature, such as very long brow tines – but it’s not a monster buck. The Up and Comer is older than a yearling, but more information is needed for an age determination.

Yet another buck is the ‘Shooter’. A ‘Shooter’ is a more variable category of deer because it’s a subjective determination. For most hunters, a Shooter is a mature buck with a rack that’s suitable for display.

Let’s not forget ‘Mr. Big.’

Mr. Big makes a deer hunter pause and reflect. Typically, Mr. Big is a big-bodied buck that in Ontario will field-dress out at 200 lbs+. In November, it has a thick swollen neck, and a heavy, multi-tined rack. Simply put, Mr. Big is a monster buck.

A ‘Booner’ is also a monster buck, with a focus strictly on antlers. A Booner has antlers that when ‘scored’, make it eligible for the Boone & Crockett record book. A Booner is obviously a mature buck, but may not be overly large with respect to body size.

The Tom Degare buck. A real B&C!

Real deer hunters are well-versed in deer hunter vocabulary – an enlightened, entertaining and informative way to communicate.  

Climate Change and Cervids

It’s been a while since I’ve done a post. There never seems to be enough time.

This post is an article I had published in Ontario Out of Doors magazine. The published version is much reduced – it was originally written to be a ‘feature’, but it wound up being one of my columns, which are only about half the length of a feature. I like the long version better.

What Happens to the Populations of the Cervids if the Climate is Rapidly Changing?

Climate change.

Some days it seems to be what everyone is talking about. In the mainstream media there’s always something about climate change, sometimes nothing but. On everything Internet, it’s inescapable.

How Ontario’s cervids – white-tailed deer, moose, elk and caribou – respond to a rapidly changing climate is of great interest to hunters.  Cervids respond quickly to changes in their environment – a big winter dump of snow can see thousands of white-tailed deer perish. Although forest fires are often described as catastrophic, Ontario’s cervids are (except on agricultural and urban landscapes) dependent on forest fires in creation and maintenance of suitable habitat. 

Although there’s no specific definition as to when weather becomes ‘climate’, there’s somewhat of a consensus that 30 year time periods are the minimum lengths needed to look for trends possibly indicative of climate change.

30 years is also plenty of time to see drastic changes to cervid populations – often attributed to weather – as many hunters can attest to.

For hunters, what happens to the deer because of climate – weather – is always a concern. Fewer tags are issued, opportunities decline.

Responding to population shifts often means changes to how hunting is managed. The ways and means by how licences are issued, how many tags are available, who gets a tag and more has seen a lot of changes over the past 30 years, especially for deer and moose, by far our most hunted cervid species.

If 30 years is short term that leaves a lot of room to roam around in to try and define long-term.

Wildlife biologists and cervid scientists turn to geological time periods when looking at how species evolved and adapted to changing environmental conditions, changes that let some species flourish while others sank into oblivion.

Geological times are time periods measured in millions of years.

The Distant Past

The late, world renowned Dr. Anthony (Tony) Bubenik wrote that antlered deer, including the cervids, first appeared during the early Miocene epoch, beginning about 30 million years ago. Epochs have the shortest time periods of geological time; epochs typically last more than three million years.

Over the ensuing millions of years, antlered animals thrived and prospered, but during and in the aftermath of the Pleistocene epoch – a time period from 2.5 million years ago to less than 12,000 years ago, a noticeable uptick in species extinction occurred, including many deer and closely related species.

A feature of the Pleistocene was a climate with repeated periods and cycles of glacial advances and retreats.  

Presumably, the changing climate – especially the ice and cold – played a major role, although the how and why of the extinctions remains in dispute.  Some believe excessive human hunting was a contributing factor.

For example, populations of Irish Elk – some had racks with a 12 ft spread! – began to die-off about 12,000 year ago, with the last gone from the wilds of Russia only some 7,700 years ago, long after the glaciers had melted.

Imagine hunting Irish Elk!

The Present and Recent, Past Trends

Today, when the talk is about climate change, there’s not much discussion or concern about imminent glaciation, although that fear did surface in the 1970’s. Mostly, it’s all about warming, a rise in sea levels and more extreme weather events, such as heat waves, hurricanes and snow storms.  

Extreme weather events are known to be hard on cervids, particularly white-tailed deer.

For example, severe winters of prolonged and deep snow wreak havoc on whitetails. Weeks of 50 cm of snow or more on the ground see deer die of starvation and succumb easily to predation. Fawns don’t make it. Even rack size diminishes.  

Short-term climate changes are linked closely to whitetail population explosions and collapses in Ontario.

In the 1983 MNR publication “The White-tailed Deer in Ontario”, the great peak of deer numbers around the end of WW11 and the subsequent crash is attributed to a number of factors, including the fact “the climate changed. The long-term warming trend that began at the turn of the century ended in the early 1950’s, and winters became colder with deeper snow”. 

Interestingly, what came later – starting in the late 1980’s – was a time of great winter warm-ups that coincided with deer numbers that reached the highest population levels and range occupancy ever seen in Ontario.

More recently, winters have tended to be cold and snowy and deer have declined – a lot. Deer hunting has suffered.

In parts of Ontario, particularly in the northwest, moose populations similarly grew and then collapsed; again, with strong linkages to climatic shifts. 

The Future

Given weather and weather patterns are known to have impacts on cervids – elk and caribou included – changes in the frequency and intensity of weather extremes (temperature, rainfall, snowfall, etc.) over the short term will impact cervids and hunters. Long-term impacts will follow.

Should populations increase, I think it’s safe to say hunting opportunities will also increase. If populations decline . . .

Keeping climate change simple, the following general trends commonly discussed, with accompanying potential impacts to cervids, are:

• milder, shorter winters

In general, white-tailed deer populations, moose, elk and caribou will experience population increases

• longer, hotter summers

Difficult to assess. Hotter, drier weather can go hand in hand with drought, forest fire, insect infestations and more. Short-term and long-term habitat impacts can differ.  

• more frequent, bigger storms

Generally negative for all.

There are numerous caveats: some of the caveats with milder, shorter winters include;

• With a spate of mild winters, deer populations will increase. But more deer support more wolves, a problem for slower reproducing, moose, caribou and elk. 
• High numbers of whitetails can be a disease threat to other cervids. Whitetails suffer little from a parasite known as the meningeal, or brain worm, but it’s extremely lethal to caribou and will often kill moose. Elk are somewhat more resistant to brain worm than moose. Dr. Murray Lankester, Lakehead University parasitologist, says moose suffer when deer populations exceed about 5 deer/km². 
• Other parasites, e.g., winter tick on moose, are likely to increase, with negative implications.

Hotter, drier summers could:

• See an increase in size and frequency of forest fires and a surge in moose populations; moose population explosions following big fires are well documented.
• Benefit elk, as they are known to thrive on hot, dry landscapes.
• Would likely have a negative impact on caribou.  For one, woodland caribou in Ontario prefer to winter in large, even-aged conifer stands of fire-origin; frequent fires could lessen the area where stands grow to old age before burning again.
• Whitetails can thrive in hot, dry climates. For reasons previously explained, more deer can be bad for other cervids. However, it’s worth noting that in western Canada, high numbers of deer, moose and elk can co-exist because the intermediate host of the meningeal worm – terrestrial slugs and snails – can’t survive. It’s simply too hot and dry for them.

More and bigger storm events are likely mostly harmful and negative.

• Even if winters are shorter, huge dumps of snow could still be disastrous to all the cervids.
• Extreme droughts can reduce food quantity, quality and overall habitat suitability for all.
• Floods and ice storms can be devastating to cervid populations.

Final Thoughts

Obviously, there are a multitude of possibilities afforded to climate change and what might happen to cervid populations in Ontario.

In the words of baseball legend Yogi Berra, “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future”.

Keith Munro, OFAH Wildlife Biologist, believes good management practices are essential, no matter what the weather and climate sends our way.

“Predicting impacts of climate change is challenging, but if cervids are kept at ecologically sustainable levels with quality habitat, populations are more resilient to change. For example, overabundant deer that exhaust their available resources are less prepared for extreme winters than are properly managed populations.”

Cervids are remarkable and adaptable animals. Hundreds of studies have detailed their abilities to survive and thrive over a wide range of climatic conditions.

With proper management, Ontario’s cervid populations are likely to continue to survive and thrive for many, many years to come; good news for hunters.

Proposed Changes to Lake of the Woods Walleye Angling Regulations

Recently, after months of rumours, The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) unveiled proposals to change the walleye sport fishing regulations for Lake of the Woods (LOW).

Lake of the Woods is an International waterbody with a total surface area of about 385,000 ha. About 64%, or 246,800 ha, is in Ontario. A small part is within the Province of Manitoba; the remainder is within the borders of the USA.

Presently, the walleye catch and possession limit for residents of Canada on LOW is 4 per day, 4 in possession (on a regular Sport Fishing Licence). Only 1 can be greater in total length than 46 cm. For non-residents, the daily catch limits are 2 walleye per day, 4 in possession. Size limits are the same as for residents.

Proposed changes to the regulations are (no changes to the present open season for angling are proposed):

Preferred option: for residents, reduce the resident catch limit to 2 per day, 4 in possession, no change to non-residents; all anglers have a daily limit of 2 walleye. For all anglers, size limits change: walleye that can be kept must be less than 43 cm or greater than 70 cm and not more than 1 greater than 70 cm. For possession limits, walleye (4) must be less than 43 cm or greater than 70 cm and not more than 1 greater than 70 cm.

Alternate option: for residents, reduce the resident catch limit to 2 per day, 4 in possession, no change to non-residents; all anglers have a daily limit of 2 walleye. For all anglers, size limits change: walleye that can be kept must between 35 cm and 43 cm or greater than 70 cm and not more than 1 greater than 70 cm.

My take on these proposed changes?

They are ludicrous.

For one, my sources tell me the goal is to reduce harvest of walleye by more than 40% from current levels.  

Targeting resident anglers, who account for less than 20% of the recreational anglers, will not help achieve that goal in the slightest. More than 80% of the anglers on LOW are Americans (source: Ontario Waters of Lake of the Woods Fisheries Management Plan Part 1 – Recreational walleye plan Draft for consultation).

With respect to the impact on the proposed slot-sizes, I believe they will actually result in an increase in walleye mortality from angling.

1. By reducing the catch limit to 2, anglers will try to ensure the fish they catch are as large as permissible; fish close to 43 cm in total length (both options). Fish greater than 70 cm certainly exist, but are relatively uncommon and many anglers are not as keen on eating large walleye.

This means a lot of smaller fish (e.g., 30 to 40 cm), which under present regs anglers often and normally keep, would be released. But many won’t survive.

Why won’t they survive?

Because on LOW, walleye angling is commonly done in water that’s in the 30 foot range (or greater).

A quick Google search suggests that many experimental studies have shown that walleyes caught in 30 ft. of water had about an 8% chance of perishing, while fish from 40 ft. had 18% mortality; fish from 50 feet 35% mortality. So for each additional 10 ft. of depth mortality roughly doubled. Further, some studies suggest that most fish caught in 30+ feet of water will likely die after release if water temps are at their peak (i.e., mid-summer). Further, small fish have much higher mortality rates than older fish.

Walleye do not have good pressure equalizing capabilities. Brought up from deep water, the air bladder expands and there are other issues as well.

In other words, LOW is not a good place for extensive use of catch and release for walleye, which will no doubt increase dramatically with the proposed regulation changes.

2. Many anglers discouraged by the reduced catch limits on LOW are likely to target other, nearby waters to go fishing. Given LOW receives about 60% of the angling pressure in the Kenora District, this is not an inconsequential consideration. A robust ‘pulse’ fishery on the smaller, accessible lakes will likely see walleye stocks quickly reduced.

3. A substantial portion of the walleye harvest on LOW is by Aboriginal and Metis, who are not subject to recreational harvest regulations.

4. The commercial walleye harvest fishery, which is theoretically regulated, is generally acknowledged to be in disarray. No changes to that allocation or its management have been proposed.

Other Issues

Management of walleye, without accounting for how other fish species on LOW are managed and their impact on the walleye fishery is, in my opinion, very irresponsible.

For example, present regulations currently protect virtually all muskellunge from harvest and restrict the harvest of northern pike to fish that are less than 75 cm in total length (muskellunge and northern pike together are believed to have the same allowable yield on LOW as walleye).

This has resulted in large and growing population of big fish predators in LOW.

What do these fish eat? For one, a lot of walleye. Other fish too, of course, but a lot of walleye. No harvest of large northern pike is ridiculous (muskellunge are important too, but are vastly outnumbered by pike; at least a 90:10 ratio in favour of pike).

The other issue is the great protection smallmouth bass (and to a lesser extent, largemouth bass) get. Except for very small bass, a large bass cannot be kept until July. Neither bass species are endemic to LOW.

And bass do very well with catch and release, as almost all bass are caught in relatively shallow water.

When Val Macins was LOW Assessment Unit Fisheries Biologist – (a fisheries assessment unit that no longer exists, I believe) – he used to say every bass caught should be killed. Maybe an extreme position, but Val believed – knew – bass compete directly with walleye for resources. Multiple studies show that walleye populations decline whenever bass are present and are most abundant in waters where bass don’t exist.

Yet now bass get extreme protection on LOW.

Another point to ponder – how bad is the walleye angling on LOW? Apparently, fishing in 2022 was excellent. No one I know had any complaints. Catching a limit of walleye was pretty easy. A friend of mine said the last weeks of the ice fishing season (March, April) was the best he had ever seen  – and this is basically within city limits. He was catching a range of fish sizes.

Even the MNRF says the walleye fishery in the south sector, near the USA border, is in good shape. The Americans claim their side of LOW is doing great.

As far as I know, no creels were conducted during the last couple of years.

It’s hard to trust the MNRF. For one, the walleye fishery was closed on Shoal Lake in 1983, to protect a dwindling walleye population. Since then, the fishery has recovered nicely – my MNRF sources tell me it has one of the healthiest walleye population of any large lake in Ontario.

Yet the walleye fishery remains closed to recreational angling.

Why?

No one admits to anything, but I suspect the government has acknowledged this is an allocation to Aboriginal people without actually doing it. But by not re-opening the recreational fishery, the end result is the same.

It is also highly suspicious that despite saying there would be  public discussion opportunities in early November with respect to the walleye regulations being proposed, there was no public announcement regarding the ‘open house’ held in Kenora on Nov. 23. Rather, it was posted on the MNRF Facebook page and Twitter. Less than 10 people apparently showed up – only 1 person I know was at the meeting – and he received a phone call from MNRF advising him of the meeting.

Did you get a call from MNRF? I certainly didn’t.

The ‘advice’ MNRF received came from a 21 member advisory council MNRF appointed. Who are these people?

If you’re as unhappy and dissatisfied about the proposed changes as I am, be sure to let Kenora MPP Greg Rickford ( Greg.Rickfordco@pc.ola.org , 807-467-2415, Toll free 1-800-465-8501) and MNRF Minister Graydon Smith ( Graydon.Smith@pc.ola.org,  705-645-8538,  Toll free 1-888-267-4826)  know.

And please provide comments on the EBR posting (https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-6067). This consultation closes at 11:59 p.m. on: January 9, 2023.