Michigan Sportsman Forum banner

dnr numbers down

6K views 60 replies 38 participants last post by  12970 
#1 ·
For those that don't get e-mail

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Dec. 3, 2009

Contacts: Brent Rudolph 517-641-4903 or Mary Dettloff 517-335-3014


DNR Preliminary Estimates Show Firearm Deer Harvest Declines 10 to 20
Percent from Last Year

Initial estimates indicate Michigan firearm deer hunters killed 10 to
20 percent fewer deer this year than in 2008, according to the
Department of Natural Resources. Decreased harvests were most noticeable
in the Upper Peninsula and less apparent in the southern Lower
Peninsula.

Weather -- both a harsh 2008-2009 winter and unseasonably high
temperatures during most of the firearm season -- likely contributed to
the decreased harvest, wildlife officials said. Although weather across
the state was good to ideal for hunters to sit in the woods, it was less
than optimal for encouraging deer movement.

DNR biologists estimate the harvest was down by 20 to 30 percent in the
Upper Peninsula, 15 to 25 percent in the northern Lower Peninsula, and 5
to 10 percent in the southern Lower Peninsula.

*The season has gone pretty much as we expected in the Upper
Peninsula,* said DNR deer program leader Brent Rudolph. *We set
antlerless quotas lower in anticipation of a smaller deer herd following
last winter. We may have had fewer hunters in the Upper Peninsula. If
you have fewer deer, fewer hunters, and deer moving less than usual,
those factors are going to have an effect on your deer harvest.*

Biologists were a little surprised by the size of the decrease of the
harvest in the northern Lower Peninsula, where a more modest decline was
anticipated.

*Check stations reported a lower than usual percentage of 1*-year-old
bucks in the Upper and northern Lower Peninsula, an indication of poor
survival of last year*s fawns,* Rudolph said. *Antler development
was below average as well, another indication of the impact of last
winter*s severity.*

In southern Michigan, a cool summer that caused corn to mature late and
a wet October put the corn harvest far behind schedule, providing
additional sanctuary for deer in many areas.

*The corn harvest was around 35 percent by Nov. 16,* Rudolph said.
*In an average year it*s 80 percent. So it*s likely that some deer
never left the standing corn. That may become apparent during the
muzzleloader season.*

Rudolph emphasized the preliminary estimates show a wide range in the
harvest because of changes in data collection this season.

*Because we operated so many fewer deer check stations, we could not
utilize the models as we have in previous years for our preliminary
estimate of the firearm season harvest,* he said. *But we*ll have
solid numbers next spring after the mail survey is completed and those
are the numbers we use for making management decisions.*

The DNR is committed to the conservation, protection, management,
accessible use and enjoyment of the state*s natural resources for
current and future generations.
 
See less See more
#2 · (Edited)
Weather -- both a harsh 2008-2009 winter and unseasonably high
temperatures during most of the firearm season -- likely contributed to
the decreased harvest, wildlife officials said. Although weather across
the state was good to ideal for hunters to sit in the woods, it was less
than optimal for encouraging deer movement.
Is it me or in their first release did they not say the weather being warmer had hunters in the woods and would help increase the kill:lol:

Next year is going to be one of the better years for MI hunting:)
 
#4 · (Edited by Moderator)
Early Reports of 2009 Firearm Deer Season Typical to Recent Years Contact: [SIZE=-1]John Niewoonder 616-794-2658[/SIZE]
Agency: [SIZE=-1]Natural Resources[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]Nov. 19, 2009
The 2009 firearm deer season is underway and the first few days have been typical of recent years, the Department of Natural Resources said.
Good weather -- a lack of snow and little rain, warm temperatures and generally light winds - created excellent conditions for sitting outdoors. Hunter numbers are about the same as last year, though Upper Peninsula personnel report a slight decrease in hunter numbers, especially in the west end. Hunter attitude seems good statewide.
Hunter success is similar to last year statewide, though a reduction in the number of DNR deer check stations makes it difficult to gauge. Deer are in good to very good body condition, though antler development is sub-par in the northern two-thirds of the state.
Here's a look at the first few days on a regional basis:
Upper Peninsula -- Hunters have brought in a large number of two and one-half year-old bucks, though a number of them have been spikes or small fork-antlered deer. The number of deer checked is down. Some hunters have complained of low deer numbers. License agents report high sales of firearms licenses compared to combination licenses.
Northern Lower Peninsula -- Most deer checked do not appear to have a lot of body fat, which was not unexpected after last winter. More older bucks are coming to check stations, though antler development is below par. Overall harvest appears to be down somewhat. Some hunters expressed concern about low deer numbers. Southern Michigan -- Hunter success appears to be a little bit better than last year with more older bucks being harvested. Hunting pressure appears to be up significantly on public land over last year. Both body condition and antler development of deer are good. The slow corn harvest is a major subject of discussion among hunters, though many report seeing good numbers of deer. Conservation officers are busy with increased complaints of illegal baiting. Firearm deer season continues through Nov. 30 with archery season resuming Dec. 1. For more information about hunting opportunities in Michigan, go online to www.michigan.gov/dnrhunting.
[/SIZE]
We went from being UP in the SLP to down in 2 weeks:lol:
 
#5 · (Edited by Moderator)
Biologists were a little surprised by the size of the decrease of the
harvest in the northern Lower Peninsula, where a more modest decline was anticipated.
and from the DNR's 2009 pre-season forcast:

The deer population for the NLP is expected to be similar to the last few years. "Despite a more severe winter this past year, deer came through in good condition. A few fawns were lost, especially on private land providing poor quality wintering habitat. Fawn production appeared to be good this spring although there were some reports of more does with only single fawns," said Larry Visser, DNR Northwestern Management Unit wildlife supervisor.
Sounds to me like they have NO CLUE how many deer they have!
 
#7 ·
Quote *Because we operated so many fewer deer check stations, we could not
utilize the models as we have in previous years for our preliminary
estimate of the firearm season harvest,* he said. *But we*ll have
solid numbers next spring after the mail survey is completed and those
are the numbers we use for making management decisions.*


Why do they bother with deer check stations if they don't use those numbers. By next spring we will be hearing it was an average season.
I would be ok with mandatory check in. Numbers are of the utmost importance and I feel they should do everything possible to get those numbers right. Just my opinion.
 
#8 · (Edited by Moderator)
and from the DNR's 2009 pre-season forcast:



Sounds to me like they have NO CLUE how many deer they have!
Bingo. The DNR has no clue. These types of scattered statements could be gleaned from this forum, or many others. They're worth nothing, when you're talking about managing over an entire state, or even a portion of a state.

We could start saving state money by disbanding any DNR group associated with the creation of fluffy nonsense like this. Just go with car/deer accident data, year over year, and estimate deer populations based upon that alone.
 
#9 ·
We could start saving state money by disbanding any DNR group associated with the creation of fluffy nonsense like this. Just go with car/deer accident data, year over year, and estimate deer populations based upon that alone.
Quote

You may have a very good point there;)

I'm afraid as time went on though they would say the cars stop better now and theres less accidents leading to flawed numbers again:lol:
 
#10 ·
Is it me or in their first release did they not say the weather being warmer had hunters in the woods and would help increase the kill:lol:
In years past the DNR stated that the warmer temperatures did not have an impact on the deer harvest as it created conditions where hunters are more apt to sit longer in the woods thereby shooting just as many deer.

Maybe it was just me but I did not feel that the weather the first couple of days of firearm season had the impact many people feel it did. Temps in the mid 30's to mid 40's aren't that warm. I have hunted many openers warmer than the one we had this year and always seen deer. The difference is back then there were actually deer where I hunted. :lol:
 
#12 ·
Ya and next year they will be reporting the deer herd to be 1.8 million just like they always do. Funny how you can shoot 500,000 + deer every year and never put a dent in the population.....I sure don't miss MI deer hunting.
 
#13 ·
It makes me laugh that typically the people who complain of the DNR not having an idea on deer kill #'s are the same ones who scream and hollar about instituting a mandatory deer registration.

Until hunter are required to register every kill, the number is just an "educated" guess.
 
#15 ·
Didn't the DNR release something earlier this year like a report of the herd by region and what we can expect to see in those areas? I thought they usually do that? If so, did they mention anything about the numbers being lower in the U.P. due to last winter? Surely they had to know that prior to the season so WHY wouldn't they say something to cover their butts and avoid the scrutiny? Maybe they truley didnt know?

CB
 
#16 ·
It makes me laugh that typically the people who complain of the DNR not having an idea on deer kill #'s are the same ones who scream and hollar about instituting a mandatory deer registration.

Until hunter are required to register every kill, the number is just an "educated" guess.
It will be just as "educated" with mandatory check in, if not a bigger guestimate. Unless they figure out a way to get complete compliance, mandatory check in won't be any more accurate (mathematically, it will be less accurate) than what we currently have.
 
#17 ·
The numbers being down does not surprise me with temperatures in the mid 40-'s to low 50's every day I was in camp (Nov 13-23) & (Nov27-29) and the severe winter we had last year, combined with an extensive coyote kill. Out of 7 camps totaling about 900 acres there were two deer taken. Even the camps that usually shoot the small ones didn't have any success. I personally only saw two deer, a small spike and a small 3pt. I did not see a single doe this season except for the ones that come in front of the house to eat the apples off the trees. I am hoping the late bow season will be more productive!
 
#18 ·
I think there were fewer gun kills in my area this year. However, the early antlerless season numbers were way higher and bow season kills sounded somewhat higher as I talked with family, friends and neighbors. Overall, about the same numbers so far compared to last year.
More 2 1/2 y.o. and older bucks taken this year in our area according to our processor.
Still too many button bucks taken and only gets much worse in the muzzle and late antlerless season. I sure wish more guys would do their meat and population control hunting in the early antlerless season when it is almost impossible to mistake a BB for a doe.

L & O
 
#19 ·
I would say the sightings were down in my area, but I chalk that up to a late corn harvest. Saw more 2.5+ bucks this year than years past. So far total doe harvest is at 13 which is around our average for a full season. With that being said I see a 20+ doe kill coming this year with the late archery, ML, and LAS still to come.
 
#20 ·
It will be just as "educated" with mandatory check in, if not a bigger guestimate. Unless they figure out a way to get complete compliance, mandatory check in won't be any more accurate (mathematically, it will be less accurate) than what we currently have.
Just wondering how you came up with this statement. Why would most people not check in their deer if it was law and how could mandatory check in be less productive then asking by mail a small percentage of the hunters how they did. I have gotten all of my deer checked for the last 20 + years. Woundn't the dnr use # of mandatory + a certain percent for those who slipped by? I just don't see how it could be less accurate.
 
#21 ·
Just wondering how you came up with this statement. Why would most people not check in their deer if it was law and how could mandatory check in be less productive then asking by mail a small percentage of the hunters how they did. I have gotten all of my deer checked for the last 20 + years. Woundn't the dnr use # of mandatory + a certain percent for those who slipped by? I just don't see how it could be less accurate.
Ask Wisconsin and Ohio how well folks adhere to their mandatory check in law. Their answer will basically be they have no clue.
 
#22 ·
So with this mandatory check in, what does the state do,come check your freezer if you don`t reply? So what if the state has a true number (which it never will) what good is it? The total number of deer in the state is a quess(the deer sure as hell aren`t going to call the dnr to be tallied) so the best you are going get is a guess on the number killed based on a guess on the total number of deer in the state. Learn to live with it.
 
#23 ·
Ask Wisconsin and Ohio how well folks adhere to their mandatory check in law. Their answer will basically be they have no clue.
Hunters register 195,647 deer in November hunt

MADISON – A survey of Wisconsin deer registration stations conducted by the state Department of Natural Resources has yielded a preliminary tally of 195,647 for the just-ended, nine-day November gun deer hunt. This includes a buck tally of 86,251 and an antlerless tally of 109,396.

This number is preliminary and is expected change before a final report is published in late winter. It does not include harvest information from the archery, October antlerless gun deer hunt, muzzleloader, December antlerless deer gun hunt or late archery seasons. The preliminary harvest count in 2008 was 276,895.

“Deer populations are variable throughout the state,” said Keith Warnke, DNR’s big game biologist, “and we believe people when they say they did not see deer in their hunting area. We have also received reports from successful camps. As always, local populations make all the difference.

“Wildlife management and especially deer management is a process of continual adjustment. In response to hunter input we adjusted seasons this year to reflect lower populations across the north and central forests and suspended EAB in many areas.”

DNR wildlife officials anticipated the total harvest would be down due to changes in season structure that significantly reduced the antlerless deer harvest, lower fawn production and tough weather conditions for deer and hunters alike. In some northeastern units it was not possible to shoot an antlerless deer and in other northern region units the small supply of bonus antlerless deer tags did not meet demand. Careful adjustment of antlerless tag numbers is an important tool in managing deer numbers.

“There are still days to hunt in 2009 in herd control units where deer are above goal and in CWD units. The muzzleloader hunt is underway and the December antlerless hunt is around the corner.”

In February, DNR biologists will compare unit-level harvest numbers against overwinter population estimates and will adjust the recommended season structure for 2010 to address any significant trends.

“A pillar of Wisconsin deer management is the accurate harvest figures provided by hunters,” said DNR wildlife biologist Jeff Pritzl. “Periods of stable deer populations have always been relatively short-lived in Wisconsin. Mandatory deer registration allows us to respond quickly to changing population levels. We have annually adapted our harvest strategies, and will continue to do so in consideration of what the 2009 harvest tells us about the deer population.”

Looks to me like they have it going on.
 
#25 · (Edited)
Hunters register 195,647 deer in November hunt

MADISON – A survey of Wisconsin deer registration stations conducted by the state Department of Natural Resources has yielded a preliminary tally of 195,647 for the just-ended, nine-day November gun deer hunt. This includes a buck tally of 86,251 and an antlerless tally of 109,396.

This number is preliminary and is expected change before a final report is published in late winter. It does not include harvest information from the archery, October antlerless gun deer hunt, muzzleloader, December antlerless deer gun hunt or late archery seasons. The preliminary harvest count in 2008 was 276,895.

“Deer populations are variable throughout the state,” said Keith Warnke, DNR’s big game biologist, “and we believe people when they say they did not see deer in their hunting area. We have also received reports from successful camps. As always, local populations make all the difference.

“Wildlife management and especially deer management is a process of continual adjustment. In response to hunter input we adjusted seasons this year to reflect lower populations across the north and central forests and suspended EAB in many areas.”

DNR wildlife officials anticipated the total harvest would be down due to changes in season structure that significantly reduced the antlerless deer harvest, lower fawn production and tough weather conditions for deer and hunters alike. In some northeastern units it was not possible to shoot an antlerless deer and in other northern region units the small supply of bonus antlerless deer tags did not meet demand. Careful adjustment of antlerless tag numbers is an important tool in managing deer numbers.

“There are still days to hunt in 2009 in herd control units where deer are above goal and in CWD units. The muzzleloader hunt is underway and the December antlerless hunt is around the corner.”

In February, DNR biologists will compare unit-level harvest numbers against overwinter population estimates and will adjust the recommended season structure for 2010 to address any significant trends.

“A pillar of Wisconsin deer management is the accurate harvest figures provided by hunters,” said DNR wildlife biologist Jeff Pritzl. “Periods of stable deer populations have always been relatively short-lived in Wisconsin. Mandatory deer registration allows us to respond quickly to changing population levels. We have annually adapted our harvest strategies, and will continue to do so in consideration of what the 2009 harvest tells us about the deer population.”

Looks to me like they have it going on.
So what does that mean that is any different than what the Michigan survey tells us? How many people didn't check in their deer? Does that mean only ~195K deer were killed? How do they come up with their total figure that will end up in their final report? It's not just based on the number of deer checked in. Last I read Wisconsin assumes about an 11% non-compliance rate which is what they use as their fudge factor. Guess how they determine that fudge factor - through surveys! That's right, they use a supposed inferior method of collecting data to correct their superior data. Also, I should add that once Wisconsin gets their harvest data, they use basically the same basic methodology to interpret and asses future hunting regulations as Michigan does.

Google is your friend on this. You can read all night about statistical analysis of survey data, level on confidence, WI surveys, OH surveys, you name it. I'm not saying that the MI system is perfect, but what I am saying is that it's not nearly as bad as people think, and for those that think that mandatory check in is going to magically work or give us different number, I think you'll end up being pretty disappointed.
 
#26 ·
A mandatory check in would probably find a low compliance rate unless the check in site was really close and convenient. People hunting during the week and not recovering a deer until late in the evening and having to go to work in the morning are going to hang and go on.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top