Hinge Cuts and Deer: What One Paired Camera Study Found

Our search turned up one published camera comparison of bedding blocks treated with hinge cuts: a 2025 conference abstract from University of Tennessee researchers. Their four locations were in Tennessee and Mississippi plus Pennsylvania. On treated ground, daily deer detections averaged 2.4 before cutting and 5.9 afterward during fawning, with hunting-season averages changing from 9.8 before treatment to 17.4 afterward. Untreated ground showed corresponding changes from 4.7 before treatment to 4.4 afterward and from 12.9 before treatment to 9.8 afterward. These comparisons cover the same seasons during 2022 and 2023. Cutting methods are missing from the abstract. Advice from Maine, Oklahoma and Purdue Extension also differs about when hinge cuts belong in habitat work.

The abstract was published in the proceedings of the Southeast Deer Study Group's 48th meeting, which took place in February 2025. University of Tennessee researchers Thomas Rovery and four fellow authors established four study locations during 2021. At every location, they paired a 5-acre treated portion with a 5-acre untreated portion. Each contained four camera traps, giving a total of 32 cameras. Before cutting, cameras gathered observations beginning in February 2022. Treatment occurred between February and May 2023, according to the abstract, and cameras continued operating until December 2023. The researchers state that deer use of bedding blocks created by hinge cuts had received no previous evaluation.

During the fawning period, which ran May to July, treated portions had daily detection averages of 2.4 for 2022 versus 5.9 for 2023. Corresponding untreated averages were 4.7 versus 4.4. During the October to December hunting period, treated averages increased from an initial 9.8 to a subsequent 17.4, while untreated averages declined from an initial 12.9 to a subsequent 9.8. Expressed as percentages, treated portions gained 146 percent during fawning and 78 percent during hunting season. Untreated portions lost 6 percent and 24 percent, respectively.

Reading these results requires attention to two points. Treated portions began with fawning detections roughly half those on untreated ground, comparing 2.4 with 4.7. Their hunting-season starting level was roughly three quarters of the untreated level, comparing 9.8 with 12.9. Following treatment, the treated-to-untreated comparison reached 1.34 during fawning and 1.78 during hunting season. Meanwhile, untreated detections decreased in both periods. Differences between years might account for that decrease, but the abstract offers no test of that possibility. In the table, we divide the treated portion's postcut-to-precut ratio by the equivalent untreated ratio. This provides a rough comparison with changes that might have occurred without cutting.

Elsewhere, the abstract gives a 48 percent increase in daily detection averages following treatment (p<0.001). It leaves the included months and study portions unspecified. Its listed seasonal periods account for just 6 months out of 12. We could not reproduce 48 using those seasonal figures, so our comparisons rely on the individual seasonal averages. Dividing the ratios yields 2.6 during fawning and 2.3 during hunting season. Published averages have been rounded to one decimal place. That rounding could place the fawning comparison anywhere from 2.5 to 2.8, and the hunting comparison anywhere from 2.3 to 2.4. These ranges reflect rounding alone. Statistical uncertainty for these ratio comparisons is absent from the abstract.

Vegetation measurements also increased following treatment. Visual obstruction describes vegetation's ability to block a view; it increased 154 percent. The number of midstory stems counted per acre increased by 33.7 percent. Those woody stems occupy the space below the canopy and above ground level. Researchers measured both features during September 2024 within a radius of 37-foot around every camera. Together, the four sampling plots occupy 7.9 percent of each 5-acre portion.

The reported daily averages count detections, but the abstract leaves a detection undefined and does not explain whether it excluded repeated appearances by individual deer. These figures therefore describe camera activity rather than the number of deer using a bedding block. Increased detections are consistent with greater use of treated ground. They supply neither a deer population count nor a survival rate for fawns. The abstract also omits forage findings, survival of treated trees and the duration of the resulting cover.

Three features of the design restrict how broadly these figures apply. Postcut observations come solely from 2023, beginning with treatment between February and May and continuing until December. The stated treatment period extends from February through May 2023, while the postcut fawning observations extend from May through July 2023. Both periods therefore include May. Finally, the abstract describes treatment simply as hinge cuts intended to lower overstory tree density. Without information on tree sizes, species or the canopy target, landowners cannot recreate the treatment. Treated portions measured 5 acres apiece, half the lower limit of Oklahoma's wildlife agency recommendation for bedding areas measuring 10 to 40 acres.

Purdue Extension describes hinge cuts as a tool for managing deer rather than improving a forest stand. Its stated advantages include immediate winter or early-spring food and shelter, along with altered deer movement. Listed drawbacks include hazards, browse frequently beyond reach, and surviving treetops that continue blocking sunlight at ground level. Purdue says completely felling trees or killing them with herbicide often produces better results than hinge-cutting. Purdue's reasons include greater sunlight reaching the ground, new growth accessible to deer, and the higher nutritional value of stump sprouts compared with hinged treetops.

According to Maine's wildlife agency, hinge cuts work best on small hardwoods measuring 3 to 6 inches in diameter, and only a few trees are needed to supply cover. Its food guidance calls for opening overhead canopy where trees have been laid down. It does not present hinge cuts as a main food supply. Oklahoma's agency suggests using hinge cuts in less mature woods to form a bedding area resembling a tent. In mature timber, it suggests felling trees and leaving them down, or thinning the canopy to 40 to 60 percent.

The guides address questions different from the camera study's question. Camera detections are the abstract's focus; Purdue considers deer nutrition and changes as a forest stand ages. Their conclusions can both hold true on a given acre. Our guide to early successional habitat presents Purdue's forage figures for different growth stages. It recommends starting by providing sunlight, then using hinge-cutting afterward.

Let the intended job determine the treatment. Following cutting, the study recorded increased detections within treated bedding blocks. That finding does not establish hinge cuts as the best habitat-building method. Apply the reported figures within the design that produced them.

This article is not intended to serve as a guide to cutting trees. Purdue identifies hinge cuts as hazardous, so obtain training in chain saw operation before attempting them.

We examined the proceedings PDF's abstract, compared its printed averages with the accompanying text, and checked all quoted sentences against the source, matching 29 out of 29. Our calculations produced the percentages and ratios from those published averages. Our search as of September 29, 2026 located neither a thesis nor a journal article about this study through the University of Tennessee repository, Crossref, Europe PMC, six searches online or that meeting's 2026 proceedings. Our checks did not extend to Google Scholar, ProQuest, ResearchGate or the authors. Publication by the authors could therefore change the figures. We leave out circulating figures beyond those in the abstract because we could not verify them against a primary document. Consult our leaf-on cover guide before relying on a summertime photograph to identify cover.