Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Deer Hunting Regulations, Proposals, and Law Debat' started by LabtechLewis, May 17, 2018 at 9:06 PM.
Interesting blurb in the latest QW...
No big surprise there.
What is QW
Quality Whitetails - It is a publication of the QDMA
Oh boy....I just did a quick search using the keyword "retention". That word sure was used a lot on this site, especially as it pertains to APR's.
So, Is qdma now a naybob and naysayer
No way in h$ll my area lost hunters.
You're reading it all wrong. But I will say they chose some odd words to describe the deflecting, cherry picking, know nothing state university (public employees) and their status quo agenda based drivel.
Maybe it's a tag team match and the next man in will fill in the blanks better than I could?
A familiar story.
Well, you can state that it is a trend, but a short-term one. Ten year data on hunter retention would be a better long-term indication of the impact...but, then, you would have to wait eleven years to quantify it.
The other interesting point, the author brushes past. APR restrictions, per these data did not accelerate hunter drop-out rates when compared to those for the surrounding geography of deer hunters.
Another impact that was not a previous factor in hunter drop-out rate in Michigan is CWD spread and incidence in the herd...
Do you have data to support that claim?
I believe that we have not seen the impact of that yet but definitely will in the future.
Sure, measuring trends takes time and if you expect more than generic or gross results you increase the time and complexity of data requirements. A bump here or a drop there is continuously propped up or torn down around here, it's what we do. No qualifications expected or necessary. Though a Tornadic determination can provide a sense of security that pure data might not.
True or false, I'm just glad you read something from an unbiased publication for once...Its a start..
Sent from my LG-H871 using Michigan Sportsman mobile app
APR's in NW Michigan did what they were intended to do; saved a percentage of yearling bucks and increased the number of 2.5+ plus year olds harvested. According to some on here, most hunters only want one deer. So it only makes sense that if you have a good number of older bucks running around you are not going to shoot a doe. Same logic also predicts why you see a transient bump in doe harvest in the first year of APR's.
APR's related to hunter retention? That's likely a long shot eh?