Luv2hunteup
02-02-2006, 07:40 PM
For some reason I couldn't copy paste the graphs and matrixes that Terry worked so hard to prepare. Here's the entire text of Terry Minzey's report. There is alot lost in the way this is being posted, I apologize for that. Thank you Terry for this report.
2005 EASTERN U.P. DEER CAMP SURVEY
Prepared by: Terry Minzey
January 26, 2005
Introduction
Over the past several years, biologists have been conducting a survey of deer camps in the central portion of the Upper Peninsula to get the hunters’ perspectives on conditions and success rates during the firearm deer season. In 2003, this survey was extended to cover the entire Eastern Upper Peninsula (EUP). There are currently 6 deer management units (DMUs) within the Eastern Upper Peninsula Wildlife Management Unit. Hunters’ experiences and success rates in four of these units (DMUs 017, 048, 049, and 117) are captured in this report. The remaining two EUP DMUs (021 and 121) are covered in the Western U.P. Deer Camp Survey.
Deer camps are casually recruited into the survey throughout the year. Each camp’s location and the name and address of a contact person are stored in a database. Camp survey forms and postage-paid envelopes were mailed to 135 contact persons prior to the 2005 season. In mid-December, a reminder letter was mailed to camps that had not yet responded.
Over the past 30 years, changes in hunting methods and technologies have altered deer distribution across the landscape (concentrating deer around some baited areas while substantially reducing deer activities in other locations) and generally rendered deer more vulnerable to the hunter. Philosophical changes (i.e. interest in QDM and/or trophy hunting) on the part of some hunters, on the other hand, appear to decrease hunter success rate as those individuals restrain from shooting the first legal buck they encounter. Collectively, these factors confound deer herd assessment utilizing traditional data collection systems. The Deer Camp Survey is designed to give hunters an opportunity to share, with the DNR, their personal experiences and attitudes toward the pursuit of the Whitetail in the EUP during Michigan’s firearm deer season. The information gained from this survey is not only shared back with the participants, but is also utilized by biologists as an additional tool in assessing deer herd conditions and making harvest recommendations.
Results: All Deer Camps Combined:
Participation Levels and Hunting Effort: A total of 98 camps occupied by 403 hunters participated in the 2005 Deer Camp Survey. On average, 4 hunters occupied each deer camp, and each person averaged 6 days of hunting during the 16-day firearm season. As usual, participation in the season was highest during the first few days and then steadily declined. However, there was a slight increase the weekend after Thanksgiving. Over half of the total hunting effort was completed in the first 5 days.
Buck Harvest and Opportunity: The portion of hunters harvesting a buck in the EUP during firearm season decreased slightly from 20% in 2004 to 19% in 2005. Hunters were either more proficient or less selective in killing bucks. Twenty-five percent of buck observations (82 of 322) resulted in a buck kill in 2005. This compares to 22% of the buck observations (80 of 358) resulting in a buck kill in 2004. Only 4 of the 403 hunters (1%) reported harvesting 2 bucks during the 2005 firearm season. This is nearly identical to the portion of hunters killing two bucks in 2004 (4 of 398).
Antlerless Harvest: Six percent of the hunters reported harvesting an antlerless deer during 2005. This is double the percentage of hunters that reported killing an antlerless deer in 2004. None of the hunters reported taking more than one antlerless deer in 2005. Antlerless deer made up 22% of the total deer harvested by participating camps.
Deer Observations for Entire Season: Hunters recorded seeing an average of 10 (1 buck and 9 antlerless) deer per hunter during the entire 2005 firearm season. This is similar to the number of deer sightings reported by hunters in 2003 and 2004. (Note: unidentified deer were considered antlerless in the analysis of deer sighting data.) However, as will be discussed in the next few paragraphs, deer sighting rates were strongly impacted by migrational movements in 2005.
Deer Observations per Day: The number of deer observed per day by hunters was 1.7 (0.1 bucks and 1.6 antlerless deer per hunter day). This represents a slight increase from the 1.5 deer (0.1 bucks and 1.4 antlerless deer per hunter day) reported in 2004. Although there was a slight increase in the average number of deer sighted per hunter day, there was a wide range of variation in this statistic.
Nearly half (47%) of the camps reported seeing 1 deer/hunter day or less. Meanwhile, 6% of the camps reported sighing rates in excess of 5 deer/hunter day including two camps reporting more than 20 deer/hunter day.
Daily Observation Trends: In 2005, a Thanksgiving Day snowstorm triggered a strong migrational movement by deer from the more northern portions of the region. This accelerated deer activity is clearly visible in the daily observation trends. The highest deer observation rate in 2005 (2.9 deer per hunter day) occurred on November 26th
Four camps in particular (3 in DMU 048 and 1 in DMU 017) recorded substantial increases in deer sighting rates during the migration. Collectively those four camps recorded a deer sighting rate of 1.1 deer/hunter day prior to the migration and 10.3 deer/hunter day during the migration; nearly a 10 fold increase.
Fawn to Doe Ratio: Hunters reported 1331 fawn and 2213 doe sightings in 2004—a ratio of 60 fawns for every 100 does. This is an increase from the 56 fawns per 100 does in 2004.
Doe to Buck Ratio: The number of adult does observed per adult buck on opening day was 4 does per buck. As the season progressed, and more bucks than does were removed from the population, the sex ratio became more skewed toward females. Additionally, does and fawns generally migrate to the winter yards before bucks. As a result, observations of migrating deer toward the end of the firearm season produced in a huge disparity (20 to 1) between the number of adult does and adult bucks.
In contrast, the doe to buck ratios at the end of the 2003 and 2004 seasons were about 6 to 1.
Deer Herd Trend: Nearly 2/3rd of reporting camps (65%) felt there were fewer deer in 2005 than in 2004. Twenty-eight percent of camps felt deer numbers were similar between years and 7% thought there were more deer in 2005 than in 2004.
Rating of the Season: Camps were asked to rate the 2005 season. The majority (56%) of the camps said the season was “poor,” 27% said “fair,” 15% said “good,” and 2% rated the season as “excellent”
Furbearing Mammals: Camps were asked to report sightings for a number of furbearing mammals. As in the past, Coyotes topped the list of furbearers seen by deer hunters (52 observations). This represents a 25% reduction from the 68 sightings in 2004. Wolf sightings increased 20% from 2004 to 2005 (40 and 48 sightings respectively) and ranked 2nd for the second straight year. Marten, fox, and bobcats were also well represented in the reported sightings.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: In 2005, buck sighting rates decreased approximately 30% in DMU 017 as compared to 2004. However, hunters in 2005 were more efficient at capitalizing on their opportunities to kill a buck. As a result, even though fewer bucks were seen, the hunter success rate for bucks increased from 13% in 2004 to 17% in 2005. Contrary to buck sighting rates, the 2005 antlerless observation rates increased about 20% from 2004. Antlerless animals constituted 31% of the total deer harvest in this unit. The Fawn to Doe ratio has shown a downward trend over the past three years.
Deer Distribution: Deer do not appear to be evenly distributed among camps within the DMU. While, on average, camps reported seeing 1.7 deer for every hunter day, 47% (15 camps) reported seeing 1 or fewer deer for every hunter day. On the high end of the scale, one camp reported observing 13 deer per hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: Although not quite as dissatisfied as in 2004, hunters remain highly negative regarding their firearm season experience with 91% of the camps rating the season as fair or poor. General concerns expressed by DMU 017 hunters include low deer numbers, too many antlerless permits, QDM (pro and con), high predator numbers (especially wolves), the two buck rule, and the continued practice of hunting over bait.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: In 2005, buck sighting rates increased nearly 20% in DMU 048 as compared to 2004. Hunters in 2005 were also slightly more efficient at capitalizing on their opportunities to kill a buck. As a result, the hunter success rate for bucks increased from 21% in 2004 to 23% in 2005. The antlerless observation rates increased substantially from 2004. A large portion of this increase was related to the migratory movements in the later portion of the season. Using the dates of November 24th and 26th we can illustrate the impacts of migration on antlerless sighting rates. On November 24th, hunters reported seeing 0.6 antlerless deer/hunter day. On November 26th, 4.7 antlerless deer/hunter day were observed. This is a nearly 8 fold increase in antlerless deer sightings between the two days. The Fawn to Doe ratio increased about 10% from the 2004 level.
Deer Distribution: The average sighting rate for DMU 048 was 2.3 deer/hunter day. The early migration confounded our ability to assess relative distribution of deer sighitngs within DMU 048. Regardless of that fact, 38% (9 camps) saw 1 deer or fewer per hunter day. On the high end of the scale, one camp reported observing 21 deer/hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: Hunters were largely disgruntled in 2005 with a slight increase in the portion of camps rating the season as fair to poor (83%) compared to 2004 (79%). Only a few camps expressed specific concerns in DMU 048. Those concerns include low deer numbers and buck age structure.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: The 2005 buck sighting rate in DMU 049 was nearly identical to the 2004 level. However, hunters in 2005 (26%) were more efficient at capitalizing on their opportunities to kill a buck as compared to 2004 (21%). As a result, the hunter success rate for bucks increased from 16% in 2004 to 20% in 2005. Antlerless observation rates decreased about 8% from 2004, but antlerless deer accounted for 25% of the reported harvest. The Fawn to Doe ratio increased about 20% from the 2004 level.
Deer Distribution: The average sighting rate for DMU 049 was 1.5 deer/hunter day. However, deer sightings were not evenly distributed between the camps. Fifty-two percent (13 camps) of the camps reported observing 1 deer or fewer per hunter day. On the high end of the scale, one camp reported seeing 23 deer/hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: Although still unhappy, hunters were less disgruntled in 2005 (72% rating the season as fair to poor) compared to 2004 (88% rated the season as fair to poor). Camps expressed numerous concerns including Native American hunting, wolf numbers, QDM (pro and con), antlerless harvest and lack of deer. Two camps announced they would quit hunting after this year, and one camp complained there were too many deer.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: The 2005 buck sighting rate in DMU 117 was down nearly 30% from the 2004 level. Additionally, hunters killed only 21% of the bucks they observed in 2005 as compared to 35% in 2004. The role played by mandatory spike antler restriction in this statistic is unknown. As a result of the reduction in both buck sightings and the capitalization rate, the hunter success rate for bucks decreased from 41% in 2004 to 17% in 2005. Antlerless observation rates remained constant from 2004 to 2005. Antlerless deer accounted for 31% of the reported harvest. The Fawn to Doe ratio increased about 23% from the 2004 level.
Deer Distribution: The average sighting rate for DMU 117 was 1.5 deer/hunter day. Deer sighting rates were fairly uniform within the DMU. While 47% of the camps reported seeing 1 deer per hunter day or fewer, only one camp reported seeing more than 3 deer/hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: The level of dissatisfaction amongst DMU 117 hunters remained fairly constant from 2004 (84% rated the season as fair to poor) to 2005 (82% rating the season as fair to poor). Camps expressed concerns regarding low deer numbers, QDM (pro and con), too many antlerless permits, and wolves.
Summary: Camps in each of the surveyed DMUs, have indicated a high level of dissatisfaction in the outcome of the 2005 firearm deer hunting season. Camps in DMU 017 were the most disgruntled.
Although hunters did indicate an increase of nearly 15% in the average daily deer sighting rate, nearly half of the camps reported seeing 1 or fewer deer per hunter day. Two camps reported sighting rates of over 20 deer/hunter day and one camp reported a sighting rate of 13 deer per hunter day.
The overall buck hunter success rate declined slightly from 2004, but that is largely a reflection of the substantial decrease that occurred in DMU117. In DMU 117, buck sighting rates, buck hunter success rates, and buck capitalization rates all decreased. Each of the other units recorded increases in buck hunter success rates. The confusing factor here is that of those other units, only DMU 048 reported an increase in the number of bucks seen per hunter (and per hunter day). In DMUs 017 and 049, the buck sighting rates actually decrease from 2004 levels. In those units, the rise in hunter success rates, in reality, reflected the fact that hunters were more efficient at killing bucks compared to 2004.
DMU 048 recorded the highest average daily deer sighting rate, the highest buck hunter success rate, the lowest percentage of camps recording 1 or fewer deer per hunter day, and the lowest percentage of camps rating the season as poor. This data seems to defy logic as DMU 048 is the northern most unit in the EUP and contains the lowest deer density of the surveyed units. We believe this situation has a two part explanation. First, there is absolutely no doubt that deer migration in the later part of the season substantially elevated deer sighting rates. Second, the hunter density (and therefore the bait pile density) is lower in DMU 048 than in other portions of the EUP. As such there is less competition for the limited number of deer. Hunters are able to attract the animals from longer distances, thereby artificially elevating the deer density around their bated blinds. Even though the overall deer density is lower than in other units, the relative number of deer per hunter is higher, thus the elevated sighting and success rates.
Parting Shot: Over the past years, the Deer Camp Survey has provided the DNR with a useful tool for understanding herd conditions and hunter attitudes during the firearm deer season. Each year we try to learn something new from the data you, the participants, provide to us. For example, in 2004 we began looking at what I have called capitalization rates (the percentage of time that an observed buck becomes a killed buck). Recognizing how much this statistic can, and does, fluctuate has given us a new factor to consider in our data analysis and population modeling. This year, we decided to look at deer sighting rates from a new perspective. As you read through this report, I’m sure you saw the graphs indicating the percentage of camps that saw very few, if any, deer. We were not at all surprised to see that not all camps experienced the same level of deer sightings. However, by creating those graphs, we’ve gained a better understanding of just how highly skewed the deer distribution is during the firearm deer season. I promise you this has already been a topic of discussion in our deer management conversations. As we move toward the 2006 firearm deer season, I’m sure other questions will arise that can be answered through the data provided in the deer camp survey. I look forward to working with you again next year to advance our understanding of deer and deer hunting in the EUP.
Until then, Happy Hunting.
2005 EASTERN U.P. DEER CAMP SURVEY
Prepared by: Terry Minzey
January 26, 2005
Introduction
Over the past several years, biologists have been conducting a survey of deer camps in the central portion of the Upper Peninsula to get the hunters’ perspectives on conditions and success rates during the firearm deer season. In 2003, this survey was extended to cover the entire Eastern Upper Peninsula (EUP). There are currently 6 deer management units (DMUs) within the Eastern Upper Peninsula Wildlife Management Unit. Hunters’ experiences and success rates in four of these units (DMUs 017, 048, 049, and 117) are captured in this report. The remaining two EUP DMUs (021 and 121) are covered in the Western U.P. Deer Camp Survey.
Deer camps are casually recruited into the survey throughout the year. Each camp’s location and the name and address of a contact person are stored in a database. Camp survey forms and postage-paid envelopes were mailed to 135 contact persons prior to the 2005 season. In mid-December, a reminder letter was mailed to camps that had not yet responded.
Over the past 30 years, changes in hunting methods and technologies have altered deer distribution across the landscape (concentrating deer around some baited areas while substantially reducing deer activities in other locations) and generally rendered deer more vulnerable to the hunter. Philosophical changes (i.e. interest in QDM and/or trophy hunting) on the part of some hunters, on the other hand, appear to decrease hunter success rate as those individuals restrain from shooting the first legal buck they encounter. Collectively, these factors confound deer herd assessment utilizing traditional data collection systems. The Deer Camp Survey is designed to give hunters an opportunity to share, with the DNR, their personal experiences and attitudes toward the pursuit of the Whitetail in the EUP during Michigan’s firearm deer season. The information gained from this survey is not only shared back with the participants, but is also utilized by biologists as an additional tool in assessing deer herd conditions and making harvest recommendations.
Results: All Deer Camps Combined:
Participation Levels and Hunting Effort: A total of 98 camps occupied by 403 hunters participated in the 2005 Deer Camp Survey. On average, 4 hunters occupied each deer camp, and each person averaged 6 days of hunting during the 16-day firearm season. As usual, participation in the season was highest during the first few days and then steadily declined. However, there was a slight increase the weekend after Thanksgiving. Over half of the total hunting effort was completed in the first 5 days.
Buck Harvest and Opportunity: The portion of hunters harvesting a buck in the EUP during firearm season decreased slightly from 20% in 2004 to 19% in 2005. Hunters were either more proficient or less selective in killing bucks. Twenty-five percent of buck observations (82 of 322) resulted in a buck kill in 2005. This compares to 22% of the buck observations (80 of 358) resulting in a buck kill in 2004. Only 4 of the 403 hunters (1%) reported harvesting 2 bucks during the 2005 firearm season. This is nearly identical to the portion of hunters killing two bucks in 2004 (4 of 398).
Antlerless Harvest: Six percent of the hunters reported harvesting an antlerless deer during 2005. This is double the percentage of hunters that reported killing an antlerless deer in 2004. None of the hunters reported taking more than one antlerless deer in 2005. Antlerless deer made up 22% of the total deer harvested by participating camps.
Deer Observations for Entire Season: Hunters recorded seeing an average of 10 (1 buck and 9 antlerless) deer per hunter during the entire 2005 firearm season. This is similar to the number of deer sightings reported by hunters in 2003 and 2004. (Note: unidentified deer were considered antlerless in the analysis of deer sighting data.) However, as will be discussed in the next few paragraphs, deer sighting rates were strongly impacted by migrational movements in 2005.
Deer Observations per Day: The number of deer observed per day by hunters was 1.7 (0.1 bucks and 1.6 antlerless deer per hunter day). This represents a slight increase from the 1.5 deer (0.1 bucks and 1.4 antlerless deer per hunter day) reported in 2004. Although there was a slight increase in the average number of deer sighted per hunter day, there was a wide range of variation in this statistic.
Nearly half (47%) of the camps reported seeing 1 deer/hunter day or less. Meanwhile, 6% of the camps reported sighing rates in excess of 5 deer/hunter day including two camps reporting more than 20 deer/hunter day.
Daily Observation Trends: In 2005, a Thanksgiving Day snowstorm triggered a strong migrational movement by deer from the more northern portions of the region. This accelerated deer activity is clearly visible in the daily observation trends. The highest deer observation rate in 2005 (2.9 deer per hunter day) occurred on November 26th
Four camps in particular (3 in DMU 048 and 1 in DMU 017) recorded substantial increases in deer sighting rates during the migration. Collectively those four camps recorded a deer sighting rate of 1.1 deer/hunter day prior to the migration and 10.3 deer/hunter day during the migration; nearly a 10 fold increase.
Fawn to Doe Ratio: Hunters reported 1331 fawn and 2213 doe sightings in 2004—a ratio of 60 fawns for every 100 does. This is an increase from the 56 fawns per 100 does in 2004.
Doe to Buck Ratio: The number of adult does observed per adult buck on opening day was 4 does per buck. As the season progressed, and more bucks than does were removed from the population, the sex ratio became more skewed toward females. Additionally, does and fawns generally migrate to the winter yards before bucks. As a result, observations of migrating deer toward the end of the firearm season produced in a huge disparity (20 to 1) between the number of adult does and adult bucks.
In contrast, the doe to buck ratios at the end of the 2003 and 2004 seasons were about 6 to 1.
Deer Herd Trend: Nearly 2/3rd of reporting camps (65%) felt there were fewer deer in 2005 than in 2004. Twenty-eight percent of camps felt deer numbers were similar between years and 7% thought there were more deer in 2005 than in 2004.
Rating of the Season: Camps were asked to rate the 2005 season. The majority (56%) of the camps said the season was “poor,” 27% said “fair,” 15% said “good,” and 2% rated the season as “excellent”
Furbearing Mammals: Camps were asked to report sightings for a number of furbearing mammals. As in the past, Coyotes topped the list of furbearers seen by deer hunters (52 observations). This represents a 25% reduction from the 68 sightings in 2004. Wolf sightings increased 20% from 2004 to 2005 (40 and 48 sightings respectively) and ranked 2nd for the second straight year. Marten, fox, and bobcats were also well represented in the reported sightings.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: In 2005, buck sighting rates decreased approximately 30% in DMU 017 as compared to 2004. However, hunters in 2005 were more efficient at capitalizing on their opportunities to kill a buck. As a result, even though fewer bucks were seen, the hunter success rate for bucks increased from 13% in 2004 to 17% in 2005. Contrary to buck sighting rates, the 2005 antlerless observation rates increased about 20% from 2004. Antlerless animals constituted 31% of the total deer harvest in this unit. The Fawn to Doe ratio has shown a downward trend over the past three years.
Deer Distribution: Deer do not appear to be evenly distributed among camps within the DMU. While, on average, camps reported seeing 1.7 deer for every hunter day, 47% (15 camps) reported seeing 1 or fewer deer for every hunter day. On the high end of the scale, one camp reported observing 13 deer per hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: Although not quite as dissatisfied as in 2004, hunters remain highly negative regarding their firearm season experience with 91% of the camps rating the season as fair or poor. General concerns expressed by DMU 017 hunters include low deer numbers, too many antlerless permits, QDM (pro and con), high predator numbers (especially wolves), the two buck rule, and the continued practice of hunting over bait.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: In 2005, buck sighting rates increased nearly 20% in DMU 048 as compared to 2004. Hunters in 2005 were also slightly more efficient at capitalizing on their opportunities to kill a buck. As a result, the hunter success rate for bucks increased from 21% in 2004 to 23% in 2005. The antlerless observation rates increased substantially from 2004. A large portion of this increase was related to the migratory movements in the later portion of the season. Using the dates of November 24th and 26th we can illustrate the impacts of migration on antlerless sighting rates. On November 24th, hunters reported seeing 0.6 antlerless deer/hunter day. On November 26th, 4.7 antlerless deer/hunter day were observed. This is a nearly 8 fold increase in antlerless deer sightings between the two days. The Fawn to Doe ratio increased about 10% from the 2004 level.
Deer Distribution: The average sighting rate for DMU 048 was 2.3 deer/hunter day. The early migration confounded our ability to assess relative distribution of deer sighitngs within DMU 048. Regardless of that fact, 38% (9 camps) saw 1 deer or fewer per hunter day. On the high end of the scale, one camp reported observing 21 deer/hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: Hunters were largely disgruntled in 2005 with a slight increase in the portion of camps rating the season as fair to poor (83%) compared to 2004 (79%). Only a few camps expressed specific concerns in DMU 048. Those concerns include low deer numbers and buck age structure.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: The 2005 buck sighting rate in DMU 049 was nearly identical to the 2004 level. However, hunters in 2005 (26%) were more efficient at capitalizing on their opportunities to kill a buck as compared to 2004 (21%). As a result, the hunter success rate for bucks increased from 16% in 2004 to 20% in 2005. Antlerless observation rates decreased about 8% from 2004, but antlerless deer accounted for 25% of the reported harvest. The Fawn to Doe ratio increased about 20% from the 2004 level.
Deer Distribution: The average sighting rate for DMU 049 was 1.5 deer/hunter day. However, deer sightings were not evenly distributed between the camps. Fifty-two percent (13 camps) of the camps reported observing 1 deer or fewer per hunter day. On the high end of the scale, one camp reported seeing 23 deer/hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: Although still unhappy, hunters were less disgruntled in 2005 (72% rating the season as fair to poor) compared to 2004 (88% rated the season as fair to poor). Camps expressed numerous concerns including Native American hunting, wolf numbers, QDM (pro and con), antlerless harvest and lack of deer. Two camps announced they would quit hunting after this year, and one camp complained there were too many deer.
Deer Harvest and Observation Rates: The 2005 buck sighting rate in DMU 117 was down nearly 30% from the 2004 level. Additionally, hunters killed only 21% of the bucks they observed in 2005 as compared to 35% in 2004. The role played by mandatory spike antler restriction in this statistic is unknown. As a result of the reduction in both buck sightings and the capitalization rate, the hunter success rate for bucks decreased from 41% in 2004 to 17% in 2005. Antlerless observation rates remained constant from 2004 to 2005. Antlerless deer accounted for 31% of the reported harvest. The Fawn to Doe ratio increased about 23% from the 2004 level.
Deer Distribution: The average sighting rate for DMU 117 was 1.5 deer/hunter day. Deer sighting rates were fairly uniform within the DMU. While 47% of the camps reported seeing 1 deer per hunter day or fewer, only one camp reported seeing more than 3 deer/hunter day.
Hunter Attitudes and Concerns: The level of dissatisfaction amongst DMU 117 hunters remained fairly constant from 2004 (84% rated the season as fair to poor) to 2005 (82% rating the season as fair to poor). Camps expressed concerns regarding low deer numbers, QDM (pro and con), too many antlerless permits, and wolves.
Summary: Camps in each of the surveyed DMUs, have indicated a high level of dissatisfaction in the outcome of the 2005 firearm deer hunting season. Camps in DMU 017 were the most disgruntled.
Although hunters did indicate an increase of nearly 15% in the average daily deer sighting rate, nearly half of the camps reported seeing 1 or fewer deer per hunter day. Two camps reported sighting rates of over 20 deer/hunter day and one camp reported a sighting rate of 13 deer per hunter day.
The overall buck hunter success rate declined slightly from 2004, but that is largely a reflection of the substantial decrease that occurred in DMU117. In DMU 117, buck sighting rates, buck hunter success rates, and buck capitalization rates all decreased. Each of the other units recorded increases in buck hunter success rates. The confusing factor here is that of those other units, only DMU 048 reported an increase in the number of bucks seen per hunter (and per hunter day). In DMUs 017 and 049, the buck sighting rates actually decrease from 2004 levels. In those units, the rise in hunter success rates, in reality, reflected the fact that hunters were more efficient at killing bucks compared to 2004.
DMU 048 recorded the highest average daily deer sighting rate, the highest buck hunter success rate, the lowest percentage of camps recording 1 or fewer deer per hunter day, and the lowest percentage of camps rating the season as poor. This data seems to defy logic as DMU 048 is the northern most unit in the EUP and contains the lowest deer density of the surveyed units. We believe this situation has a two part explanation. First, there is absolutely no doubt that deer migration in the later part of the season substantially elevated deer sighting rates. Second, the hunter density (and therefore the bait pile density) is lower in DMU 048 than in other portions of the EUP. As such there is less competition for the limited number of deer. Hunters are able to attract the animals from longer distances, thereby artificially elevating the deer density around their bated blinds. Even though the overall deer density is lower than in other units, the relative number of deer per hunter is higher, thus the elevated sighting and success rates.
Parting Shot: Over the past years, the Deer Camp Survey has provided the DNR with a useful tool for understanding herd conditions and hunter attitudes during the firearm deer season. Each year we try to learn something new from the data you, the participants, provide to us. For example, in 2004 we began looking at what I have called capitalization rates (the percentage of time that an observed buck becomes a killed buck). Recognizing how much this statistic can, and does, fluctuate has given us a new factor to consider in our data analysis and population modeling. This year, we decided to look at deer sighting rates from a new perspective. As you read through this report, I’m sure you saw the graphs indicating the percentage of camps that saw very few, if any, deer. We were not at all surprised to see that not all camps experienced the same level of deer sightings. However, by creating those graphs, we’ve gained a better understanding of just how highly skewed the deer distribution is during the firearm deer season. I promise you this has already been a topic of discussion in our deer management conversations. As we move toward the 2006 firearm deer season, I’m sure other questions will arise that can be answered through the data provided in the deer camp survey. I look forward to working with you again next year to advance our understanding of deer and deer hunting in the EUP.
Until then, Happy Hunting.