DNR and the estimated 285,000 deer taken!

[Zakker]

Again, it never ceases to amaze me how modern we have become, yet resolve to such primitive methods when estimating our whitetail harvest. The DNR watches cars go by with deer "parts" sticking out of them? Please. Non-mandatory deer check stations, a joke. Processor contacts? Pellet counts? The list goes on.

If we really want to get a handle on our herd, something must be done about these haphazard guestimations. Anyone can grab a number out of the air and that is EXACTLY what they are doing! What about the guys who shoot deer (legally) behind their house (as with a majority of southern MI hunters)? Many of us do that, days, weeks, and possible up to a month before these guys even establish a deer check station. To state that via statistical methods, the deer kill was XXX,XXX is totally bogus and irresponsible. Frankly, at this point, I am not concerned with "stepping on toes" as I am more concerned about the resource.

Though it may be a hassle, mandatory check-ins I would support. I do not relish the idea of bringing my deer in, loading it into the truck and carting it off to the check station, but heh, if it helps in managing the resource so be it. If this were instituted, the only guestimation would be on the number of illegally killed deer (which happens as it is). At least us law abiding sportsman could lend a hand in providing accurate data.

[Huntsman27]

the lights on at the check station. The DNR took that weekend off [Thankgiving weekend] I made a few attempts to drive to the unoccupied checkstation. I want to get my free gas voucher.

[lostmale]

I feel the DNR could care less about the deer herd and use the few check in stations as a front to make you think they are interested.After seeing these statistic I feel that the insurance companies are determining where the deer need wiped out with the help of the DNR.
1994-2003 14.6 billion more miles driven with an increase of 1/2 million more drivers.and 1.1 million more registered veh. 94-96 deer crashs steadly increased since 96 the have decreased. Now the DNR tells us the deer herd is the same yet with the increase of registered drivers and increase of miles driven and loss of habitat for deer why isn't the deer crashes increasing at the same rate.
http://www.michigantrafficcrashfacts.org/doc/2003/10yr_1.pdf
http://www.michigantrafficcrashfacts.org/doc/2003/10yr_4.pdf
http://www.michigantrafficcrashfacts.org/doc/2003/10yr_11.pdf
http://www.michigantrafficcrashfacts.org/doc/2003/deer_4.pdf
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153--29594--,00.html

[jimmyboy]

Remember, figures don't lie - but liars figure. Or how 'bout, tell'em lies and feed 'em candy. Ever wonder how these truisms came about? The DNR just keeps on keepin'-on and nothin's gonna change but the weather,which by the way, is the current excuse for the past gun season's results.Ain't it funny how their figures are always nice and round.If they was real smart they'd throw in some odd last few figures to baffle us boobs with. At least they could tell us how the grand current reliable system operates, and beats any ol' fuzzy math check-in way of counting and having correct totals promptly. Just goes to show they ain't got a whole lot on the ball to begin with. Or is it that they just don't give a tinkers damn? Till they figger out it's broke they ain't 'bout to fix it.--- and the beat goes on-and on-and on----.

[mecheadSR]

Hearing rod clute last night on michigan outdoors tell us how they try and estimate how many deer are "in cars" is an absolute joke in my opinion, just as is counting the amount of deer coming over the bridge on top of cars.

[Sib]

I wonder how many deer were counted while bringing the deer in from the backyard? I was on the road all of about 100 yards, the difference from my driveway to the driveway to the back forty.

[Adam Waszak]

C'mon do you guys really thibk that the DNR doesn't know what they are doing when estimating the deer harvest? These people are professionals here and Rod Clute is the best there is when it comes to making the people (insurance companies) happy and ensuring the future of our herd and hunter numbers. This is a joke we all know it and there is nothing we can directly do about it short of boycotting the seasons which they and we both know will never happen. I don't know about your areas but one of my areas is shi! for the next few years i would say thanks to their "management" decisions. How can they really think that they have a handle on the population of deer in this state with these counting methods and harvest "estimations" every year the same old story on the harvest numbers and every summer the population numbers are about the same as well. I never favored mandatory check in but i agree the time has probably come but that doesn't answer the overall population estimations. :dizzy:

[Zakker]

It would probably be a "good" job to have however.

"Hey, how many deer do ya think we got?"

"Let's ballpark it and go with a good round number of 285,000"

"Sounds good to me, maybe we outta throw in an odd number to make it sound real?"

"Nah, that'll just make the math that much harder. Now let's get lunch, all this figgurin is making me hungry!"

Job done.

[marty]

Hey swanny baby look into my crystal ball or do they use tarot cards?? :lol:

[Linda G.]

now this is NOT me, so don't send me hate mail...but I remembered once what he said about turkeys, years ago. Now, he says, it applies to all of our wildlife, even our elk herd. They haven't done a regulated herd survey in years.

They close their eyes, twirl around in circles, take their finger, and point... ;)

[Joe Archer]

Hearing rod clute last night on michigan outdoors tell us how they try and estimate how many deer are "in cars" is an absolute joke in my opinion, just as is counting the amount of deer coming over the bridge on top of cars.
I watched that show too, and went away with the feeling that they AT LEAST have a system. For example they poll hunters at deer check stations to see how many transport their deer hidden from sight, and adjust the deer count at the bridge accordingly. Also, they survey hunters each year to see where they hunt and what times of the year deer are harvested and incorporate this into their calculations. Anyway, I was surprisingly impressed that there was some scientific merit to their estimations. On that show the DNR official stated straight out that the majority of the Michigan deer herd is now in the southern portion of the state and that Northern numbers are way down. In any case, it is easy to be critical of DNR's methodology. Unless we know EXACTLY how they base their estimates, it is hard to be accurately critical. Also, any error involved is just as likely to have an impact on one year as it it the next which would make their relative estimations a bit more substantive. <----<<<

[Swamp Monster]

Like Joe says, the statistical data they gather is used to come up with the numbers. Someone posted some links once before on how they come up with the statistical data, and then some info from outside sources that verified the accuracy and acceptability and accuracy of those statistics (based on info gathered). And I believe other states use similiar data to come up with their figures, obviously no bridge count but you know what I mean. It was quit interesting really. I'm not a stats person, and neither are most folks, so I have a difficult time blindly bashing these stats and our DNR without some concrete knowledge concerning the entire process.

I don't think things are perfect, far from it, but this mindless bashing isn't going to have much of an effect. Write a letter, and be professional about it, call your local game biologist or stop into his office. Give your input and observations in a way it can be effective. Don't expect them to take you seriously or give you the time of day if you walk in ready to blow your top etc. Gather every peice of info you can so you know the system inside and out and then be prepared to question it it you must, nothing wrong with that. Venting on here is fine, but it's just that, venting, don't expect miracles (even thouhg many of them follow these sites).

[mecheadSR]

Joe Archer, what system, should it not be done on a consistent basis to be called a system. The deer check station where I hunt was not even open the first week, so how many deer went buy in cars that week that were not counted. Not a very good system in my eye's.

[backstrap bill]

I spoke to a DNR officer at the buck pole in the thumb while my buddy was having his deer checked. I mentioned to him that I didn't see him the night before at the pole and he replied that the DNR didn't want to pay the overtime. Un f**kin believable! :mad:

[Swamp Monster]

So now we have to have a CO at every buck pole??? Thats ridiculous let alone impossible. I say make each license $50 a pop, doe tags $25 and then maybe money won't be an issue! Ofcourse many will freak because they think it's already to expensive. Boy the glass is half empty around here it seems!

[Zakker]

I have talked with some dnr officials in the past. Lip service. I will quite venting with one final note,

Insurance companies and Farmers control the herd and the dnr. :banghead3

[Ranger Ray]

Boy the glass is half empty around here it seems!And if it wasn't for you it would be totally empty. Thanks for covering our ineptitude. ;) :lol:

[giver108]

The MDNR's methods of estimating the deer kill has to be the most half assed in the entire country or close to it. How many people actually take their deer to a check station when it isn't mandatory? I have never known one person in my entire life who has ever taken a deer to a check station. As far as counting deer from freeway overpasses, the DNR has got to be kidding. There can't possibly be a more inefficient method than perching individuals on a bridge and telling them to look at every car that drives by and see if they have a deer tied to their roof. I have been traveling from the NLP down to either the Lansing or Detroit area at least twice every year during firearms season for the past 13 years. Having been aware of this deer kill estimation "technique" for at least the past 8 of those years, I have made it a point to try my best to try and observe someone doing such. Not once have I ever seen someone sitting near a freeway (I-75, US-23, I-96) looking like they might be trying to count something.

The point Clute made last night about trying to proportion the amount of deer that are inside a vehicle based on how many come into the check station is another joke. This type of statistical analysis might hold some water if every vehicle is counted. Without doing so, how can they come up with an estimate? In order for a ratio to be determined one must take a count of the total number of vehicles first. This wouldn't even bring into consideration on whether or not each vehicle is a hunter or someone going to the mall, etc.

A simpler way to get a much more accurate deer count could be accomplished by having gas stations, convenience stores, etc. pass out tags to hunters who have bagged a deer. You could just pull up to the store, someone could come out, look over your deer, note whether it is a buck or doe, and hand you a tag verifying your deer was counted. The DNR could have a law that says you three days from the day the deer was killed or however long to obtain such a tag or you could get a fine. I'm sure stores would be interested in providing this service as well. Hunters would probably also buy a pop, snacks, or cigarettes making it a viable option for the store owner. At the end of the deer season, the stores would submit to the DNR their final tally of how many tags they issued. Although it is still not a perfect answer to providing an estimate, I'm sure it would be much better than what we have now. The DNR could even save money by not having to pay their personel to man check stations or God forbid, sit on an overpass trying to stay awake counting deer on top of cars.

[Jacob Huffman]

OK here's my 2 cents.Why not have the DNR mail out a survey card to every person who bought a deer license,or have one given to them when they buy a license(this way they save on postage)and have the hunter fill the thing out at the end of the season wiht the number of deer taken and maybe even the number of deer seen?This would give them a pretty good estiamte of number of deer in a certain area and the number of deer harvested.Sounds to simple to actually work but thats my 2 cents.

[Ranger Ray]

You have one month after hunting season to summit your info by mail, phone, or email to the DNR. The info is than put into the DNR system. When you go to buy a license next year your SS number is ran thru the computer system and you better have submitted your kill results. If this is your first license the info would show you never have purchased before. Anyone caught giving false info is not allowed to hunt for 5 years. It is so simple with the modern tech we have today that I just can't understand why they are not doing it.

[Bwana]

You have one month after hunting season to summit your info by mail, phone, or email to the DNR. The info is than put into the DNR system. When you go to buy a license next year your SS number is ran thru the computer system and you better have submitted your kill results. If this is your first license the info would show you never have purchased before. Anyone caught giving false info is not allowed to hunt for 5 years. It is so simple with the modern tech we have today that I just can't understand why they are not doing it.
Hmmmmmmmmm!!! You obviously do not remember the 2000 Election (re: Florida) and the tried and true method of putting a metal rod through the hole (in the paper) of your choice:lol: :lol: :lol:

I like the concept but can you say....circus in progress :yikes:.

[Whit1]

Take a look at the following URL. It will take you to a page from the Wisconsin DNR's website where you will find tables that detail how many deer were killed in each DMU in the archery, firearms, and muzzleloader seasons in 2003.

Wisconsin has a mandatory deer check-in. It isn't complicated and it is easy for hunters to comply. Check-in is done at party stores, taverns, gas stations, convenience stores etc. Each county has several, easy to find and get to businesses that do this. It gives a more accurate count of the kill (by a few percentage points according to statistics gurus, but what is more important it gives the kill in each management unit, something MI's system does not do.

I tried to post one of the tables, but this format will not allow the data to display properly.

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/hunt/deer/harvest03.htm#Gun

[Ranger Ray]

Hmmmmmmmmm!!! You obviously do not remember the 2000 Election (re: Florida) and the tried and true method of putting a metal rod through the hole (in the paper) of your choice:lol: :lol: :lol:

I like the concept but can you say....circus in progress :yikes:.Yes, but remember in the ballot of deer vs man the losers have been killed. DON'T EVEN GO
THERE! :lol: :lol:

[backstrap bill]

Take a look at the following URL. It will take you to a page from the Wisconsin DNR's website where you will find tables that detail how many deer were killed in each DMU in the archery, firearms, and muzzleloader seasons in 2003.

Wisconsin has a mandatory deer check-in. It isn't complicated and it is easy for hunters to comply. Check-in is done at party stores, taverns, gas stations, convenience stores etc. Each county has several, easy to find and get to businesses that do this. It gives a more accurate count of the kill (by a few percentage points according to statistics gurus, but what is more important it gives the kill in each management unit, something MI's system does not do.

I tried to post one of the tables, but this format will not allow the data to display properly.

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/hunt/deer/harvest03.htm#GunThat is WHAT WE NEED HERE! But It will never happen. Makes too much sense.:dizzy:

[andy capp]

How can thry get an accurate # when our grouph ad a trailer full? We did get them checked though. They said 10 deer for 4 people WOW! The best they had seen and thanked us for bring them in. You couldnt see half of them.

[Bluegill Bob]

Also note that the WI stats in all types of hunting the antlerless kill is larger than the antlered kill. That don't jive with the MI guesstamates.

[bentduck]

I can't believe how bad of shots we hunters have all become since the Farm Bureau threatened the DNR with a lawsuit. :evil: The FB should sue us hunters for our incompetance while in the field. Here we have 1.8 million deer roaming around and we can't even put a dent in the herd :confused:

Come on guys, start aiming a litter better will ya'.

:D

[TnRidge]

Take a look at the following URL. It will take you to a page from the Wisconsin DNR's website where you will find tables that detail how many deer were killed in each DMU in the archery, firearms, and muzzleloader seasons in 2003.

Wisconsin has a mandatory deer check-in. It isn't complicated and it is easy for hunters to comply. Check-in is done at party stores, taverns, gas stations, convenience stores etc. Each county has several, easy to find and get to businesses that do this. It gives a more accurate count of the kill (by a few percentage points according to statistics gurus, but what is more important it gives the kill in each management unit, something MI's system does not do.

I tried to post one of the tables, but this format will not allow the data to display properly.

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/hunt/deer/harvest03.htm#Gun


Tennessee has the same mandatory check in system . It works well .Sure you are going to have a small percentage of hunters that do not check in deer ,but there will be violators with any system you go by .
With Michigan's statistical deer harvest estimate ,there are too many variables to get an accurate count .

[mecheadSR]

Listening to our big game guru the other night just shows me how far behind we are in this field. Listen I am sure they get some kind of a count they think is right but bottom line is they do not have an idea, let's do something like Wisconsen or Nebraska or other states who get an even better count by having stores and gas stations check deer througout the year, at least it would give more hard data than what we have right now. Guessing how many deer are "IN" cars as they go by, Holy Sh#$ you got to be kidding me. I do not want to blame anybody because I am sure there jobs are hard enough, but I think we need a new direction here in michigan. Also If it would help programs get started buy bumping up licenses to 20$ I am all for it, whatever it takes to get this thing on track.

[Joe Archer]

How many people actually take their deer to a check station when it isn't mandatory? .
First, I am not saying I think the DNR estimates are accurate, only that they have scientific validity. Here is a brief example of what I am talking about. To answer your question directly, if DNR polled 500 successful hunters and 50 of them had their deer checked at stations they would conclude that about 10% of the deer harvest are recorded at check stations. This could be broken down by counties, or regions of michigan in any way you wanted to look at it. In the end if dnr checked 1000 deer, they could estimate that there were 10,000 harvested.
The bottom line is I think their estimates of gross number of deer in Michigan may be a fair estimate. I think they really need to do a lot more on a per county estimate to help out those of us who hunt in areas that have been over-harvested in past years. <----<<<

[farmlegend]

it gives the kill in each management unit, something MI's system does not do.


Actually, Whit, this is not true. Michigan's system provides kill data for each DMU.

Follow the link to the 2003 Michigan Deer Harvest Survey Report, and take a look at Appendix A.

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/1,1607,7-153-10371_10403_10408---,00.html

[Whit1]

FL,
I found it. Finally! Thanks!

Again, these are based on estimates which, according to statistical data are accurate + or - 5% (is that right?).

Given all of this, I still feel that a mandatory check-in would give a more accurate count. If that is not true then a mandatory deer check-in would give the hunting public a reason to have more faith in the deer harvest data. Right now that "faith", if not belief, is sorely lacking. Perception is all too much a part of reality and the perception of the average Joe Hunter in the MDNR's harvest estimates is one of disbelief.

I'll still give more credence to WI's deer harvest total than I do ours.

In order for the average Joe Hunter to begin to come around to implementing the proposals of our whitetail wildlife (deer) biologists' recommendations said hunter must first believe the data. If they don't, for whatever reason, such data becomes a detriment to the implementation of hunter based deer management. Plain and simple.

Part of the problem is that we are dealing with statistics and the vast majority of the population, hunting and non-hunting does not understand stats.....me included......it is too wrapped up in math, etc.

[7MM Magnum]

Hmmmm,.... this is all kind of amusing! :lol:


They (DNR) have already given their estimates for the amount of deer harvested and I JUST received my Michigan Deer Harvest Survey in TODAY'S mail ! :cwm27:

I guess they really don't need my information :tdo12:

I'm going to send it to them anyhow. They are having a drawing for a FREE Firearm or Bow donated by the Safari Club International,... maybe I'll get lucky. :rolleyes:

[Swamp Ghost]

I bet most don't know the difference between a deer harvest estimate and a hunter harvest survey. Just TWO of the many other variables that are plugged into a final estimate.You will never, I repeat, never have anything other than an estimate as your final "count"/"number".

[Bwana]

I'm going to send it to them anyhow. They are having a drawing for a FREE Firearm or Bow donated by the Safari Club International,... maybe I'll get lucky. :rolleyes:
They probably already had the drawing too. :lol: Good luck!

[Isaac_62]

I think the dnr is nuts to try and estimate that number... i feel that there are less deer than what they claim... and that a doe a day lisence should be ceased...

[mal]

other than michigan, i've hunted in ohio and kentucky, both states that have mandatory check-ins. in ohio you must take your deer to a check station, which where i hunt in athens county is a sporting goods store. an employee of the sporting goods store registers your deer, asks about five questions, and replaced the temporary kill tag with a metal permanent tag. by the time the season is over, they have an exact count by county of the deer harvest. i'm sure there are a few locals that forego the check station for the home butcher shop, but at least there is a system.

in kentucky (it's been a few years) i had to call a deer registration number and punch in some data about my kill and some numbers from my tag. if memory serves me right, i was then given some type of confirmation number that i had to write down on my tag.

why there is no formal system in michigan defies explanation. i should mention that in both of the above states the penalties for not checking a deer are very steep...so steep that one would have to be an idiot not to take the half fifteen minutes for check-in.

[bentduck]

One would think that if the Michigan "estimate" system was as cutting edge and accurate as the DNR says it is, other mid-western states would be doing the same thing. After all our system is a lot "cheaper" right?

Yeah our system is the best around and Dan Rather had no political motives either..give me a break :mad:

[Swamp Ghost]

Why doesn’t the Game Commission have check stations in Pennsylvania?

Pennsylvania has had a mandatory deer harvest reporting system in place for decades, but each year, many hunters do not report taking deer, a violation of law. We know compliance would still be a problem even if mandatory check stations were established here, because in states currently using check stations, significant numbers of successful hunters still don’t check or report their harvests. For whatever reason, many hunters fail to report taking deer. That's why the Game Commission calculates hunter reporting rates each year. The information is collected during annual examinations of harvested deer. Even if check stations were started, the Game Commission would still have to collect data at other locations, such as butcher shops, to determine how many hunters weren't going to the checkpoints. Thousands of deer would have to be checked in addition to those processed at check stations to develop an accurate and valid reporting rate. This information, essential for computing annual antlerless deer license allocations, is vital to the deer program. While other states use check stations, their harvest numbers are only those that are reported and they typically do not have any measure of noncompliance, hence they are minimum estimates. Many states also assume that compliance rates are constant from year to year. Based on more than 400,000 records from deer processors over the last 10 years, we have documented that reporting rates vary by year and by antlered and antlerless deer. Finally, check stations would be an expensive proposition, no better than the system in place, and an inconvenience to hunters.

Here is a possiblity:

http://www.wildlifemiss.org/news/columns/2001/03-12.html

[TnRidge]

Tennessee has a very good mandatory check in system ,and the non complience rate is low .You are going to have violators either system that do not tag a deer .
Our mandatory check in breaks down the harvest by county , buck and doe harvest , number of antler points , WMA deer ,and the quadrant the deer was killed within the county .

I would bet the Michigan estimates couldn't accuratly determine how many 6 points ,8points ,10points or better , spikes ,does ,etc. that were taken in each county ,and adjust antlerless quotas according to the harvest numbers for each county ?

[jimmyboy]

In KY it's illegal for deer processors to accept a deer without a telecheck confirmation nomber accompaning the animal.

[mecheadSR]

TnRidge, that is the whole problem with this anterless deer harvest they try to sell, the only place they know where they need a reduction in doe's is in the southern lower, every place else is a guess. Every county has to be looked at more closely to try an get a more accurate count of deer in an area. I feel you need to get a more accurate of deer in an area to have an idea of how many doe permits to hand out in that area, and right now they do not do that.