Managing White-Tails in Louisiana

Volume 2

June 2009, first edition

Published by Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries
Office of Wildlife
Written by Scott Durham, David Moreland and Emile LeBlanc
Cover art: Donald "Duck" Locascio 3
 Contents

acknowledgements 6
introduction and background 7

chapter 1 | Deer Habitat, Management and Growth and

Development Trends in Louisiana - by Scott Durham 8
Bottomland Hardwood 9
Upland Hardwood 12
Swamp Hardwood 13
Northwest Pine/Hardwood 15
Historic Longleaf 16
Southeast Mixed Pine/Hardwood 17
Longleaf Flatwoods 19
Coastal Prairie 20
Coastal Marsh 21

chapter 2 | Breeding Activity and Reproductive

Characteristics of Louisiana White-tails - by David Moreland 23
The Rut in General 23
White-tail Breeding Biology 23
Breeding Schedules of White-tails by Hunting Area 24
Hunting the Rut 26

chapter 3 | Diseases and Parasites - by Emile LeBlanc 28

Hemorrhagic Disease; Cutaneous Fibromas; Nasal Bots 28
Liver Flukes; Arterial Worms; Other Intestinal Parasites;
External Parasites; Miscellaneous Viral and Bacterial Diseases 29
Chronic Wasting Disease; Exotics and High Fences 30
Hogs 31

chapter 4 | Harvest Management - by Scott Durham 32

chapter 5 | Herd and Habitat Monitoring - by Scott Durham 34

Life Tables 34
Sighting Indices 34
Camera Surveys 34
Browse Surveys 34
Track/Pellet Counts 35
Population Reconstruction 35
Harvest Data 35

4 Table of Contents
chapter 6 | Deer Program and Technical Assistance - by Scott Durham 36

chapter 7 | Trophy Deer in Louisiana - by David Moreland 38

Louisiana Big Game Records Program 38
Where are the Trophy Deer in Louisiana? 38
Louisiana Trophy Deer Records 38

references 42
appendix A 44
appendix B 45
appendix C 46
appendix D 47
wildlife regional offices 48
Louisiana Department of
Wildlife & Fisheries
P.O. Box 98000
2000 Quail Drive
Baton Rouge, LA 70898
225-765-2800

Bobby Jindal, Governor

Robert J. Barham, Secretary
Janice Lansing, Undersecretary
Randy Pausina, Assistant Secretary
Jimmy Anthony, Assistant Secretary

Division Administrators
Kenneth Ribbeck, Wildlife
Gary Tilyou, Inland Fisheries
Karen Foote, Marine Fisheries
Bob Love, Coastal & Nongame
Resources
Winton Vidrine, Enforcement

Wildlife and Fisheries

Commission
Patrick C. Morrow
Stephen Sagrera
Earl P. King
Frederic Miller
Robert Samanie III
Stephen J. Oats
Ann Taylor

This public document was published at a total cost of $17,021.33. 15,000 copies of this public document were published in the first printing at a cost of $17,021.33. This
document was published by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, 2000 Quail Drive, Baton Rouge, LA to provide sound information on Louisiana’s herds of
white-tailed deer and to promote the best management possible of this native species. This material was printed in accordance with the standards for printing by state agen-
cies established pursuant to R.S. 43:31. Printing of this material was purchased in accordance with the provisions of Title 43 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes.

Table of Contents 5
 Chapter 1
Deer Habitat, Management and Growth
and Development Trends in Louisiana

Louisiana has some of the most diverse landscapes and tract may not have to consider. The deer management
habitats in the nation. Because of this rich diversity, we are objective on WMAs is to manage for long-term maximum
among the nation's leaders in wildlife resources. There are sustained yield. Very often the residual herd may be lower
10 deer physiographic regions defined in Louisiana (Table than observed on some private lands where higher deer
1). Each is unique in soil and vegetation characteristics. numbers are desired. However, this management style
Most are forested, but some are wetland grassland or agri- offers the highest harvest potential over time, promotes a
cultural based. Of the deer habitats in the state, about 26 balanced sex ratio, and keeps the herd in balance with the
percent are high, 24 percent are moderate and 50 percent habitat, allowing LDWF to meet other species habitat
are low in deer productivity. It is important to remember requirements at the same time.
that deer habitats are always changing according to the
amount of sunlight reaching the forest floor (forest condi-
tions), plant succession, moisture conditions, seasonal
changes (temperatures, day length) and browsing pressure.
Therefore, managers must realize that the carrying capac-
ity for deer is always changing as well. Harvest manage-
ment objectives should reflect these changes.
A great deer may come from anywhere in the state. For
example, in 2007, a new typical Boone and Crockett (170
B&C) buck was produced on pine dominant public land in
Grant Parish, and another came from Natchitoches Parish.
B&C deer have also been taken in Winn and Livingston
parishes. But the majority of very large bucks (140+) are Table 1. Statewide deer habitat
produced in the bottomlands or hardwood dominated areas
associated with the alluvial soils of the Red River and Percent DMAP WMA
Habitat Total Produc-
Mississippi River basins. A realistic goal for hunters in of State Acres Acres
Type Acres tivity
moderate to high productivity areas with a good mast com- Habitat (2006) (2006)
ponent is a buck scoring 125 net inches as measured by the Bottomland
25% 4,250,000 589,561 325,410 High
B&C antler scoring system. For most people, this is a tro- Hardwood
phy deer. The Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute NW Pine/
18% 3,060,000 139,964 137,091 Moderate
reported that in south Texas the average B&C score for 5 Hardwood
1/2+ bucks was 128. In the Mississippi Delta soil region, 5 Historic
17% 2,890,000 141,657 200,531 Low
1/2+ bucks average a gross B&C score of 136 (Demarais Longleaf
et. al., 2008). Louisiana delta deer have similar potential. Coastal
In the following sections of this booklet, deer harvest 14% 2,380,000 182,927 127,300 Low
Marsh
data is presented for Louisiana Wildlife Managemet Areas Coastal
(WMAs) and private lands enrolled in the Department’s 8% 1,360,000 2,187 0 Low
Prairie
Deer Management Assistance Program (DMAP). These Swamp
two sources of data provide some of the primary herd Hardwood
6% 1,020,000 52,943 161,483 Low
health data for making deer management decisions across
SE Pine/
the state. Although the format of this booklet lists and Hardwood
5% 850,000 62,783 15,515 Moderate
compares the data in the discussions that follow, the two
land types and harvests may be very different due to pro- Longleaf
5% 850,000 19,661 796 Low
Flatwoods
ductivity, soil quality, management history, and manage-
ment potential. WMAs are managed for many game and Upland
1% 170,000 46,528 13,307 High
non-game species, healthy forest regeneration, diverse Hardwood
plant communities and outdoor wildlife oriented recre- Streambot-
ation. Managing a large, remote, bottomland WMA for tom Hard- 1% 170,000 867 0 Moderate
diverse public use and long-term forest sustainability has wood
many challenges that a smaller, privately owned DMAP Louisiana 100% 17,000,000 1,239,078 981,433

8 Chapter 1
 Bottomland hardwood
The bottomland hardwood physiographic region is one of
the most productive in the state. It includes the Mississippi
River and Red River alluvial valleys. Portions of Caddo,
Bossier, Red River, Natchitoches, Rapides, Avoyelles, Point
Coupee, West Baton Rouge, Concordia, Catahoula, Tensas,
Franklin, Madison and East Carroll parishes are included in
this physiographic zone. Of the 186 Pope and Young bucks
taken in Louisiana, 62 percent have come from the bottom-
land hardwoods. Of the 64 B&C bucks taken in Louisiana, 48
percent have come from the bottomland hardwoods.

Important Plant Species

Logging operation part of an overall forest management plan.
As in other habitats, diversity, quantity and quality are
important. A deer browse plant such as a leather flower
(Clematis sp.) may be found in 90 percent of the rumens
sampled on a managed hunt (S. Durham, pers. obs.). Yet, the
volume of forage that such a plant species may provide is
likely fairly low because it is not a dominant plant across that
landscape. However, this plant obviously is very important
because deer are selecting it and eating what is available. It
may provide a particular micro-nutrient (vitamin or mineral)
that few other plants provide. Further research is needed in
this area, and we hope to gain nutritional values for native
plants that are currently unknown.

Trees:
Nuttal Oak Water Oak
Willow Oak Overcup Oak
Bitter Pecan Persimmon
Honey Locust Sugarberry
Elms Sweet Pecan
Shrubs/Midstory Trees:
Arrow Wood Hawthorns
Deciduous Holly Mulberry
Elderberry Swamp Dogwood Forbs:
Group selection hardwood cut.
Woody Vines:
Smilax spp. Rattan Vine
Honey Suckle Trumpet Creeper
Poison Ivy Pepper Vine
Vitis spp. Dewberry
Eupatorium spp. Aster spp.
Elephant's Foot Bog Hemp
Sanicle Geum sp.
Poke Salad

Management

Bottomland hardwood management could be considered

Basal spraying method of chemical application to target non-
desirable species.
one of the more challenging forested habitats to manage.
Prescribed fire is not an option, and chemical herbicides are
difficult to use because most of the ones that control invasives
and undesirable plants also affect the plants that are to be
maintained and regenerated. This means that herbicides often
must be applied by hand, creating high labor costs.
The moist soils normally associated with bottomland
hardwoods are very conducive to growth of invasive species
such as Chinese privet and tallow. Frequent or seasonal back-
water flooding and poorly drained soils can impede forest
management, regeneration and harvest prescriptions.
Managing forested habitats for optimal deer production
and development requires timber harvest occurring on a regu-

Deer HabitAT, Management and Growth & Development Trends 9

 Chapter 2
Breeding Activity and Reproductive
Characteristics of Louisiana White-tails
The rut in general
Most deer hunters are familiar with the word "rut," and
would define it as the time when bucks are chasing does for
breeding purposes. Every year, numerous articles are pub-
lished in the popular hunting magazines advising hunters
about the rut, hunting the rut, when the rut will occur in their
area, etc. Deer hunters know that this is probably the best
time to be in the woods because the adult bucks with the
larger racks are on the move in pursuit of does.
The word "rut" is actually a broad term describing the
breeding activity of deer. The American Heritage Dictionary
defines it as "an annually recurring condition or period of
sexual excitement and reproductive activity in male deer."
Some biologists will break the rut down into various phases
such as pre-rut, primary rut, secondary rut and post rut. For a
buck, the rut begins when its antlers become hardened. As
testosterone levels increase, antler growth ceases, the velvet
is shed, and the buck is ready for the does. However, based
upon DNA research at Mississippi State University, it is the
doe that controls the date for when breeding will occur. While
a buck is ready to breed when the antlers harden, unless a doe
is having an estrus cycle, there will be no breeding.
Since the genetic make-up of the doe determines the
actual breeding schedule (dates) of a deer herd, understanding
breeding activity in Louisiana requires one to examine the
history of deer restocking in the state. Hunters still talk about
the Wisconsin "blue-bucks" released in the state. Restocking
of Wisconsin deer occurred in the 1950s. Actually, most of
the restocking effort in Louisiana involved deer that came
from three locations in the state: the Red Dirt Game Preserve;
the old Chicago Mills Game Management Area in Madison
and Tensas parishes; and deer captured with the aid of air-
boats from the marsh habitat on the Delta National Wildlife
Refuge at the mouth of the Mississippi River. By the late
1960s, restocking efforts were completed and by 1973, most
of the state was open for deer hunting.
During the restocking period, biologists did not consider
the breeding activity and schedule of the deer in their release
methodology. Consequently, deer from several trapping sites
were released within the same parish. This has resulted in
some parishes having different breeding schedules (dates) in
various areas within the parish. This first came to light in the
1966 breeding study by Roberson and Dennett. In their study,
they examined the breeding activity of the herd on the
Jackson-Bienville Game Management Area. This area was
restocked with deer from Tensas Parish, and the calculated
dates for Jackson-Bienville corresponded to those calculated
for the deer in Tensas Parish.
Moreland (1986, 1990, 1996) found this to be the case
with two deer herds in East Feliciana Parish. The southeast
Breeding Activity & Reproductive Characteristics
portion of this parish, east of LA 67 and south of LA 10, was
stocked with deer from the Red Dirt Preserve. Breeding dates
established for herds on Camp Avondale and in the Blairstown
area correspond to the breeding dates established in 1966 for
deer on Red Dirt. An area in the northwest portion of this par-
ish, west of LA 67 and north of LA 10, was stocked with deer
from the Delta Refuge in 1969. Breeding dates calculated for
the deer on Beechgrove Plantation correspond with the breed-
ing dates for the Delta Refuge in the 1966 study. Anderson
(2001) and White (2002), along with special collections con-
ducted by LDWF, identified similar situations in Bossier,
Caldwell, LaSalle, Richland and Webster parishes.
The breeding date schedule determined from these
research studies in Louisiana has provided information for
establishing hunting season dates. Seasons are set to corre-
spond with breeding activity. Adult bucks are more active
during the period of peak breeding. Since many hunters today
are interested in quality deer management (QDM) and
increasing the number of adult bucks on their property, sea-
sons are set so that hunters can reap the benefits from their
management efforts. Some states take a different approach
with their hunting season schedule by not allowing gun hunt-
ing during the peak breeding activity. This is another tech-
nique for increasing the number of adult bucks in the popula-
tion.
White-tail Breeding Biology
Breeding dates are established from fetal measurements.
This technique was developed by Cheatum and Morton (1942
and 1946). Armstrong (1950) also developed an aging key for
northern white-tails, while Hamilton (1985) developed an
aging key for white-tails in the southeast. This work has
served as the standard guide for reproductive studies con-
ducted in the southeastern states.
The 1966 Louisiana study used the aging key of
Armstrong. The work done in East Feliciana Parish in the
early 1980s utilized the Armstrong key along with studies
conducted in Mississippi by Noble (1974) and Jacobson
(1979). Studies since that time have used the fetal scale key
developed by Hamilton. Both aging keys appear to produce
similar results, although some variation in breeding dates is
likely. Peak breeding dates established Nov. 1-15 for the 1966
Red Dirt deer herd study, Nov. 6-26 for the 1983 Camp
Avondale study and Nov. 8-21 for the 2000-2001 Red Dirt/
Blue Tick Hunting Club study in north Bossier Parish.
Breeding studies require the collection of pregnant does.
This is usually accomplished by special collections that also
examine other herd health conditions such as kidney fat,
blood parameters, internal and external parasites and browse
species consumption, along with testing for several specific
23
diseases. Road-kill animals, along with deer killed by other
natural mortality, are good candidates to examine as well. It
is usually best to target does that are two to four months preg-
nant. Female reproductive tracts are collected, and the embry-
os or fetuses are removed from the uterus. The fetuses are
measured on a fetal scale. The age of the fetus (number of
days old) is then backdated from the harvest date to obtain the
breeding date.
Ovaries are examined to determine if corpora lutea are
present in the evacuated egg follicles. A corpus luteum is a
An ovary with
yellowish colored body that develops in the follicle following corpora albicantia
ovulation. Corpora lutea aid in the production of hormones (reddish brown
and this helps maintain the pregnancy. If fertilization does not scar) from the
occur, the corpus luteum will begin to disintegrate and the past fawning
season.
doe's body begins preparing for the next estrus period. When
the corpus luteum degenerates after the doe gives birth, a
reddish-brown pigmented scar remains on the ovary at this
site and is known as a corpora albicantia. The corpora albi-
cantia is very prominent after fawning and remains distinct up
until the onset of estrus at the next breeding season. A count
of the number of corpora albicantia in the ovaries prior to the
current season ovulation can provide information about the
past years' breeding success.
Examination of female reproductive tracts during the
entire deer season provides information about the breeding
Examination of
activity of a particular herd. Prior to ovulation, ovaries will ovaries reveals
appear normal, with some large follicles having a clear gel information about
substance. Once ovulation occurs, a rupture site will be visi- breeding activity.
ble on the outside of the ovary. This rupture site is where the An ovary with a
corpus luteum.
egg was ejected from the follicle. The corpora lutea then
develop in these follicles, which would indicate to the biolo-
gist that a doe had cycled. This observation does not provide best in herds on habitat with good nutrition and where the
any insight as to whether the doe had been bred. It takes sev- herd is kept in balance with this available habitat. Productivity,
eral weeks for the embryo to become implanted and visible in as well as animal growth and development, will be poor in
the uterus. This is why it is best to wait a couple of months those herds that are over-populated or occupying poor habitat.
after the end of the deer season to examine does. Ovary Poor productivity includes factors such as low fawn produc-
examination does provide an estimate for ovulation dates, and tion of adult does and poor fawn survival.
these dates should correspond somewhat to the actual breed-
ing dates established from fetal measurements. The gestation Breeding schedule of white-tails
period for a white-tailed deer is about 200 days (seven by Hunting Area
months).
Most hunters have observed bucks following closely Area 1
behind does. Bucks begin to sense when a doe is approaching In 1980, Area 1 comprised all the parishes bordering the
estrus and will usually follow her and stay with her for a short Mississippi River from Madison Parish southward to
time prior to actual breeding. Such chases can be intense and Plaquemines Parish and included the parishes in the
may often include several bucks. For the hunter, this can be Atchafalaya Basin. The area of southeast Louisiana referred
an exciting time. to as the Florida Parishes were grouped together as Area 4
The actual time that a doe is receptive is about 24 hours. (excluding West Feliciana Parish) and St. Bernard Parish was
If a doe is not successfully bred, another estrus cycle occurs listed as Area 7.
28 days later. It is generally best to have does bred during the The Area 4 designation and the early deer season for this
first estrus cycle. Does bred during the second and third estrus area may have been based upon the idea that this habitat was
cycles will give birth to fawns later in the summer. This cre- similar to that of Area 2 (pine/hardwood). Studies in East
ates growth and development problems for the deer herd, Feliciana, Tangipahoa and Washington parishes have estab-
especially on marginal or poor habitat sites. lished a much later breeding schedule than that of Area 2.
Hunters benefit from these studies by knowing when Area 1 today consists of the parishes along the Mississippi
breeding occurs in their area and can adjust their hunting River from Madison Parish southward to Baton Rouge and
schedule to include this time period. These studies also pro- includes that area north of I-12 from Baton Rouge eastward
vide insight into the health of the deer herd. Productivity is to the Pearl River at the Mississippi state line. The parishes in

24 Chapter 2
 Chapter 5
Herd and Habitat Monitoring
There are many ways a hunter or deer manager can
gather information to determine appropriate harvest rates as
he gains experience and becomes more familiar with the
habitat and the deer herd. Any manager or group of hunters
can keep basic data with minimal expense. The more tools
that you use, the better the information you will have to make
management decisions.
Life tables
These are relatively simple tables (Appendix C) derived
from harvest data over a period of years. They provide a
minimum population and/or recruitment estimate. Data
required includes ages (pulling jaw bones) for all female deer
taken over a period of years. Each year after the ages are esti-
mated, the number of females born in a particular year (age
cohort) are inserted into the appropriate column (an Excel
spread sheet works well for this). After a number of years, the
known minimum crop of female fawns born can be added,
and an average can be calculated across a number of years. It
then can be assumed that this represents 50 percent of recruit-
ment, as in a normal deer herd on good habitat, males and
females are born at 1-to-1 ratio. If you are averaging a mini-
mum of 35 fawns recruited per year with no apparent reduc-
tion in your residual herd, you may assume that you are har-
vesting no more than one-third of the herd (remember the
25-40 percent potential annual recruitment). Therefore you
may estimate a deer population of more than 100 deer. By
observing the mean recruitment over a number of years, a
manager can determine the productivity of the habitat and use
this information on other tracts of similar quality. The weak-
ness in this technique is obvious. The more deer you harvest,
the higher your population appears to be. It takes a number of
years to harvest an entire cohort of females available, and
thus provide the minimum estimate for that year's reproduc-
tion. This tool should be used along with other indices to
understand deer population levels on a particular tract.
Sightings indices
Although this technique (Appendix D) will not produce a
population estimate, it will provide one of the simplest and
easiest ways to index deer numbers. By recording deer sight-
ings, a manager or hunter can determine the number of deer
observed per hour, an index to population density. For exam-
ple, on well managed mixed pine hardwood habitat, hunting
a woods stand in the forest interior, an index of greater than
one deer per hour may indicate populations that are too high
(S. Durham, pers. obs.). The doe to buck and doe to fawn
ratios can also be estimated. If a manager consistently
observes doe to buck ratios of more than about 3-to-1, he
should consider reducing the female segment of the herd.
Recent Texas research has shown that on average, most suc-
34
cessful bucks (those that bred at least one doe that had a fawn)
breed only about three does per season (Sumners et. al.,
2007). This research illustrates the importance in maintaining
a balanced sex ratio in a deer herd. Again, observe three-year
running averages and trends. These data points are very
important and, along with herd health data and habitat moni-
toring, all you need to make simple harvest management deci-
sions.
Camera surveys
This technique was developed at Mississippi State
University (Demarais et. al., 2000) and is basically a sightings
index where a camera does all the work. It is probably the best
tool we have for the regular hunter to provide a reasonable
deer population estimate. The Deer Program performs several
of these each year now in various parts of the state, and so far,
there is a good correlation between the camera estimates and
the results of the browse and habitat surveys we do. The cam-
era surveys have supported the harvest recommendations that
LDWF has historically made and continue to make on DMAP
lands or other tracts where technical assistance has been
requested.
Browse surveys
LDWF has long been a proponent of doing regular
browse surveys to monitor deer numbers and browsing pres-
sure on native habitats. Moreland (2005) described the tech-
nique in detail. With practice and dedication, any focused
manager or hunter can learn the indicator plants that tell the
story of what is happening on the landscape. Learning as few
as 25 woody plants can give the manager the tool to under-
stand what kind of pressure is being put on the native plant
community. This is perhaps the most critical and important
LDWF Acadian region manager performing a transect survey,
an important technique for habitat monitoring.
Chapter 5
tool that a manger can use to make habitat and harvest man-
agement decisions. It takes practice and dedication of a cer-
tain amount of time. Anytime a hunter or manager is out in
the woods scouting, doing stand work, cruising timber or just
looking around, he should be aware of what is going on
around him (Richard McMullen, pers. comm.). A must for
advanced white-tailed deer management is to understand
browse availability, quality and utilization. Technical assis-
tance through the Deer Program is available to land managers
to learn and understand browse and habitat work.
Track/pellet counts
Another good technique that can be done to monitor the
habitat and/or deer density, is to walk a series of transects
through the woods. All that is needed is a compass, a four-
foot stick that can be punched into the ground at a center
point, and a piece of small rope. At regular intervals deter-
mined by pacing off a number of steps, a count of deer pellet
groups is performed within a certain radius (Eberhardt and
Van Etten, 1956). The surveyor could also document the plant
species availability and browsing within the plot to perform a
combination habitat evaluation and deer density index. This
technique could be performed once a year prior to the hunting
season to monitor trends, or could even be done before and
after the season to compare the results after a number of deer
have been harvested.
Track counts can be performed in areas where tracks can
be easily observed, such as fire lanes, food plots or roads.
Simply count the tracks once a year in the same area or in a
given length of fire lane as a sample. Do it at the same time
each year to monitor trends.
Population reconstruction
Many states estimate minimum deer populations at coun-
ty, regional or state levels. Population reconstruction methods
(Downing, 1980) use harvest data taken from managed hunts
or mandatory deer check stations where deer data is collected
and ages are estimated. The age and sex of each animal is
needed to place it in a "cohort." Mortality and survival rates
are determined based on the numbers of deer that remain
within each cohort through successive years. Assumptions
concerning natural mortality, recruitment, immigration and
emigration are model variables that affect the accuracy of the
population estimate.
Chart 1 shows a 10-year population model from 1997-
2006 based on a sample of 1.2 million acres of consistent
DMAP club harvest data and extrapolated for the 17 million
acres of deer habitat across the state. The 10-year average is
just over 700,000 deer for the state of Louisiana. It is impor-
tant to remember that these are minimum population esti-
mates based on harvest data. It is interesting that the average
harvest estimate from the annual mail surveys during the
same period is about 230,000 deer or roughly about 33 per-
cent of the population estimate for the same 10-year period.
This indicates a stable population. Chart 1 shows a popula-
tion peak of 821,933 in 1999 and a relatively flat line in
Herd and Habitat Monitoring
Chart 1.
Louisiana minimum deer population estimates
based on consistent DMAP harvest data, 1997-2006.
recent years with a population estimate around 600,000 (one
deer per 28 acres statewide). Harvest estimates in recent years
have been around 200,000 deer. This shows that there are
plenty of deer in the state, and that they need to be managed
according to habitat quantity and quality, which are changing
all the time according to land use patterns of development,
agricultural trends and forest management practices.
Harvest data
The physical conditions of deer taken during the season
are important indices to deer herd health. Serious deer hunt-
ers/managers will pull a jaw bone to age the deer, take accu-
rate antler measurements, check does for lactation and weigh
each deer. The physical condition of the deer herd is an indi-
rect measurement of habitat quality and deer density. Average
weights, main beam lengths, number of points, percent lacta-
tion and age structure are fundamental data that a manager
needs to make decisions about future harvests and habitat
management. These indices (10-year means) have been pre-
sented in Chapter 1. They can give managers base line stan-
dards to compare with their deer in the respective deer phys-
iographic regions. Deer data can fluctuate substantially as
environmental conditions and habitat quality changes, and the
manager needs to remember the many variables that affect
deer quality. Growing season conditions (temperature, rain-
fall, soil moisture), mast crops, insect populations, disease
incidence, deer density, sex ratios, age structure, agricultural
influence and many other variables affect deer quality within
soil regions.
Taking antler
measurements, weighing,
ageing, and checking for
lactation are basic deer
harvest data that must be
kept for managing deer
herds.
35
Appendix E.
Baton Rouge and Regional offices

- Technical assistance questions (phone and email).

- Phone interviews.

LDWF Technical Assistance Contacts:

Website: www.wlf.louisiana.gov

Region 1: 1401 Talton, Minden, LA 71055 318-371-3050

Region 2: 368 Century Tel Dr., Monroe, LA 71203 318-343-4044

Region 3: 1995 Shreveport Hwy., Pineville, LA 71360 318-487-5885

Region 4: 261 Wildlife and Fisheries Rd., 318-757-4571

Ferriday, LA 71334-1640

Region 5: 1213 North Lakeshore Dr., 337-491-2575

Lake Charles, LA 70601

Region 6: 5652 Hwy. 182, Opelousas, LA 70507 337-948-0255

Region 7: 2000 Quail Dr., Baton Rouge, LA 70898-9000 225-765-2360

Deer Program: 2000 Quail Dr., Baton Rouge, LA 70898 225-765-2351 & 225-765-2344

Forest Stewardship Program: 2000 Quail Dr., 225-765-2354

Baton Rouge, LA 70898-9000

48