Michigan-Sportsman.com banner

21 - 40 of 51 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
Not very different at all. Check the stats and bear populations from the year before the lottery to 2020. What you have is a certain group instigating higher bear numbers to make it easier to run them with dogs. Not to hunt them with dogs but to be able to run then to help train their dogs in the off season.
Screenshot_20210113-195035_Drive.jpg
Screenshot_20210113-195102_Drive.jpg
Screenshot_20210113-195207_Drive.jpg
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,063 Posts
Just look at the bear populations before lottery was instituted. When it was over the counter.

Keep in mind seasons are implemented to achieve game management. Not to make it easier.

Also by limiting license sales they are limiting hunting recreation. Many applying apply for points only knowing they will not have the time or resources to hunt that year. So the actual those who wish to hunt are less that those applying.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Just look at the bear populations before lottery was instituted. When it was over the counter.

Keep in mind seasons are implemented to achieve game management. Not to make it easier.

Also by limiting license sales they are limiting hunting recreation. Many applying apply for points only knowing they will not have the time or resources to hunt that year. So the actual those who wish to hunt are less that those applying.
Try reading it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,063 Posts
I did but it does not dispute facts of data. Even showing with over the counter sales still showing a slight increase in populations.

I noticed in 2008 showed hunter increased but is that application or actual applications that we're going to hunt. With the lottery many apply for preference points but no plans on bear hunting that year, which I already posted
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,063 Posts
Keep in mind where majority of bear population increases have occurred, many also deer hunt. Studies have showed that 30% or higher mortality rates on fawns were from bears. I would have to look it up but it was a study in Minnesota if I remember correctly.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
I did but it does not dispute facts of data. Even showing with over the counter sales still showing a slight increase in populations.

I noticed in 2008 showed hunter increased but is that application or actual applications that we're going to hunt. With the lottery many apply for preference points but no plans on bear hunting that year, which I already posted
There is significantly increased demand to bear hunt. Not just points. This document is from 2008. Demand is now higher than ever.

Giving everyone a tag that wants one would easily cause a large drop in populations (especially in the lower peninsula), which has been rising to the levels and hunter satisfaction we see now.

The survey addresses the desire for additional harvest in some areas and in a way, gages whether people think there is overpopulation or the opportunity for increased harvest without damaging hunter satisfaction.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
Keep in mind where majority of bear population increases have occurred, many also deer hunt. Studies have showed that 30% or higher mortality rates on fawns were from bears. I would have to look it up but it was a study in Minnesota if I remember correctly.
And dnr wants less deer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,063 Posts
There is significantly increased demand to bear hunt. Not just points. This document is from 2008. Demand is now higher than ever.

Giving everyone a tag that wants one would easily cause a large drop in populations (especially in the lower peninsula), which has been rising to the levels and hunter satisfaction we see now.

The survey addresses the desire for additional harvest in some areas and in a way, gages whether people think there is overpopulation or the opportunity for increased harvest without damaging hunter satisfaction.
I disagree. It showed that even with over the counter bear populations we're good. Your speculating that bear harvest would be greater that need be but not everyone will be successful especially with additional bait sites and woods being disrupted by hunters. The bear population should be less in several areas. The only area that would have to stay lottery that could very well be over hunted is Drummond Island being it is land locked and a very small area.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
I disagree. It showed that even with over the counter bear populations we're good. Your speculating that bear harvest would be greater that need be but not everyone will be successful especially with additional bait sites and woods being disrupted by hunters. The bear population should be less in several areas. The only area that would have to stay lottery that could very well be over hunted is Drummond Island being it is land locked and a very small area.
Lower populations would result in lower success rate and lower hunter satisfaction. The document also talked about distribution of hunters in regions. The current structure helps spread them out, thereby avoiding over harvest in particular regions.

Fill out the survey. You can put comments in there that you disagree with how things are done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,063 Posts
Lower populations would result in lower success rate and lower hunter satisfaction. The document also talked about distribution of hunters in regions. The current structure helps spread them out, thereby avoiding over harvest in particular regions.

Fill out the survey. You can put comments in there that you disagree with how things are done.
Already done, actually hours ago, before I even posted. Reality is they will do very little. They make more money with application fees. If the average wait or points is 13 your looking at a very expensive resident license if you add all those application fees plus the license fee.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
I have been trying to do the survey. When I type in my drivers license number it tells me it is an invalid id and to try another one. Does anyone have any ideas?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
I have been trying to do the survey. When I type in my drivers license number it tells me it is an invalid id and to try another one. Does anyone have any ideas?
I tried to get in that way too, just to see what other surveys are available, and it didn't work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
Already done, actually hours ago, before I even posted. Reality is they will do very little. They make more money with application fees. If the average wait or points is 13 your looking at a very expensive resident license if you add all those application fees plus the license fee.
What’s you definition of expensive? I pay over $1000 a year on tags in other states. A Michigan nonresident bear is not expensive compared to hunting other states.

Also I’d love to have a bear tag every year. Problem is that guys like me and my family know what we are doing and we would put a hurting on the population. So I will hunt when I have enough points to draw which should hopefully be at least every other year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,915 Posts
Been around bear hunting my entire life. Watched dad OTC hunt bears and even my older brother but I never was old enough before the lottery went into effect. I could not think of a worse management idea over going to OTC tags. Limited resource calls for limited hunting especially in certain areas of the state. I hate waiting ten years in my area but I understand why its necessary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
They should have never went to the lottery system.
In the mid-to late 80's more and more over the counter licenses were being sold....also success numbers were going down....plan and simple bear hunting was becoming more popular.....
But the major reason anti-hunters were working to stop bear hunting first with dogs then go after all bear hunting....
With area quotas and hunter quotas it would be easer to prove the numbers of bears and a harvestable numbers are available....
LP in the early 70's you could buy over the counter tags but also needed to apply to hunt and limited permits were issued....

What kind of quality hunt would there be if 35'000 + over the counter tags were sold....sure wouldn't be fun and success rates would be less than 1%....bear number would drop fast....
Not like a deer where a doe will have 1-2 sometimes 3 fawns a year ...some sows don't breed until the 3-4 years old and then may have twins its very rare more....if they don't have a good fat supply for winter they will abort the fetus to save them selves....on the average a sow needs to weight 160 lbs going into hibernation.....
 
21 - 40 of 51 Posts
Top