dnr numbers down

Discussion in 'Michigan Whitetail Deer Hunting' started by rick, Dec 3, 2009.


  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.
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. 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:)
     

    #2 swoosh, Dec 3, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  3. Hey swoosh, if its not one thing its another with their estimates, so this comes as no surprise to me.:dizzy::dizzy: You never know, it could change next week, depending on the weather of course.
     
  4. We went from being UP in the SLP to down in 2 weeks:lol:
     
    #4 swoosh, Dec 3, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2015 at 6:19 PM
  5. and from the DNR's 2009 pre-season forcast:

    Sounds to me like they have NO CLUE how many deer they have!
     
    #5 Blueump, Dec 3, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2015 at 5:50 PM
  6. Ieatantlers

    Ieatantlers Banned

    5,598
    0
    0
    Sounds like a good excuse for OBR! There aren't enough to shoot 2!:hide:
     
  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. cantonrat

    cantonrat Banned

    368
    0
    0
    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.
     
    #8 cantonrat, Dec 3, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2015 at 5:50 PM
  9. tommy-n

    tommy-n Banned

    5,167
    0
    0
    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. 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:
     
  11. I like how the DNR reported in the spring that it was a milder winter then last and then issued 1000 doe permits for this area then come fall the tells us how hard the winter was and deer numbers are down.
     
  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.
     
  14. Really???

    :lol: :lol:

    .
     
    #14 William H Bonney, Dec 3, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2015 at 5:50 PM
  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
     

Share This Page