Deer Densities

Discussion in 'Michigan Whitetail Deer Hunting' started by NoWake, Aug 11, 2010.

  1. I hate maknig excuses, but either my color blindness or my ignorance makes it a struggle for me to read these kinds of colored maps. Does anyone know of a link that shows numbers that correspond with the following map? Or does anyone want to translate the entire map for me? :gaga::lol:

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. The darker the better. Color change increases as you move from 0 deer per square mile to 40. light brown is halfway at about 20. Increments of 4 are used.

  3. I understand the concept. lol.............Where I am struggling is matching up the color of the county with the colored legend.

    For instance, is Ogemaw County pegging out the scale or is it a shade lighter than the bottom?

    Then take counties like Kent county. I can tell it's between ~20 and ~40 or more, but is it closer to the ~20 or is it closer to the ~40?
  4. I wouldn't worry about it, this map is something of a joke. According to this Ogemaw has higher densities then most of the SLP.

    Yeah....Sure. :rolleyes:
  5. That's exactly the reason I would like to see some firm numbers associated with this latest assesment.

    In my part of Branch County, I believe the numbers have came down considerably over the last 10-15 years. But this is just going by personal observation. I still think there are plenty of deer in this area I am speaking of, but I don't think it's nearly as overpopulated as it was in the late 80's and 90's. On the other hand, I know of another large area of Branch county that doesn't seem to changed a bit from the 90's. It's still way overpopulated. County wide, I have no idea how much it would even out.

    What data do you have to suggest that this map is way off? Car deer reports? and?
  6. Yes, car deer reports are the primary proxy that I use to validate DNR numbers. They are collected in a pretty consistent manner and I believe they are pretty reflective of population trends. I put together a spreadsheet which shows the car/deer accidents for each year between 2001 and 2008 (last reported data), for each DMU, which gives you a pretty good idea of which direction the population is trending in each DMU.

    For example, in the 2005 DNR population density report, the last time there was a statewide census, the DNR thought there were about 29,000 deer in Ogemaw Co. The same census pegged the population in Jackson Co. at 50,400 deer. Since 2005 car deer accidents have increased moderately in both DMU's, going from 497 to 631 a year in Ogemaw and 2,111 to 2,148 in Jackson. This would indicate that densities should have increased in both DMU's, slightly more in Ogemaw.

    Yet on the map in question, the DNR has Ogemaw at high density while they say Jackson is at medium density, lower then Ogemaw.

    Sorry, not buying it.
    #6 Munsterlndr, Aug 11, 2010
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2010
  7. Do you know what data the DNR used to generate this map? I agree that it seems way out of whack in certain areas, but I am curious to why they would publish something that seems to be totally inaccurate. Trying to give them thhe benefit of the doubt, but it almost appears if that map was generated to deceive some one or some group for some reason.
  8. Does the MDNRE consider the number of miles driven in each county? My guess is that the traffic is a little bit heavier in Jackson County vs. Ogemaw County.
    I don't know that's why I ask.

    Big T
    #8 QDMAMAN, Aug 11, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2015
  9. My understanding is that the map was compiled based on estimates from local DNR biologists and field staff and that the methods may have varied from DMU to DMU but I may be incorrect in that conclusion. I'm pretty sure that it was not generated from any of the data from either the annual harvest survey or check station data.

    Maybe Big T can find out for us the next time he sits down with Russ, Becks, John & Brent to pop a PBR and smoke a cheap stogie. :lol:
  10. You're missing the point, sure human population density and miles driven will impact the number of accidents but annual counts within the same DMU won't be impacted by that difference, unless there was some major shift in human population density that occurred between different years.

    In order for Jackson to go from being a high density DMU in 2005 to a medium density DMU in 2008, there would have had to have been a huge reduction in deer density which would have been reflected in the annual car/deer accident numbers. Instead, those numbers increased slightly. No way that density in Jackson Co. was reduced by 60% or so in the last 3 years, which is what would have had to happen in order for the map in question to be accurate.

    BTW, the traffic accident statistics come from the Michigan State Police/Dept. of Transportation, not the DNRE.
    #10 Munsterlndr, Aug 11, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2015

Share This Page