Naz 's Link
Madison-As a result of two separate studies conducted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, a new report is available which investigates the causes of mortality in bucks and the impact of predation on fawns in Wisconsin.
"These are the largest studies involving marked deer that we've ever undertaken," says Tom Hauge, director of Wildlife Management Program. "This work provides important information on population dynamics that will help the department and County Deer Advisory Councils with managing deer herds."
To understand how differences in habitat may affect survival rates, research was completed within what is referred to in the study as the northern forest study area, near Winter, and the eastern farmland study area near Shiocton.
DNR researchers teamed up with landowners and more than 1,000 volunteers to capture and place radio collars on deer within the two select study areas. After the initial capture and radio collaring, researchers monitored them throughout the year and investigated various causes of death.
"To date, hunting remains the number one cause of mortality in adults (deer older than one year) for both study areas," says Dan Storm, deer and elk researcher. "For deer less than one year old (juveniles), the mortality rate during the harsh winters of 2013 and 2014 was between 40 to 50 percent. This is in stark contrast to the minimal mortality observed during the mild winter of 2012 (less than ten percent). Lastly, this study has also yielded good data regarding deer migration, dispersal and habitat use, and we're excited to start digging into that."
The buck and fawn mortality studies began in 2011, with 2014 marking the last year for researchers to capture and collar deer. DNR scientists plan to monitor the collared deer into 2015.
Full report linked.
Harsh winters have always killed deer, an estimated 200K in back-to-back winters in the mid-90s alone. Fawns have always been preyed upon, and coyotes have always been the top predators. That's why even though there are many twins born, long-term (decades-old) summer deer observations often find only "one-plus" (one-point-something) fawns per doe average.
Buck fawns are meaningless for future dpsm. Besides, good luck educating hunters how to id a buck fawn vs. a doe. 1/3 of all antlerless harvest will always be buck fawns.
"Researchers conducted field necropsies when available to search for presence of tissue hemorrhaging that indicates deer were alive when killed"
Aren't all deer alive when they are killed? How would anything kill them if they are already dead?
You sir are an amazing poster.. "This thread title is intentionally misleading (agenda driven) and lack of concern or knowledge of the North."
Seriously? You're just keeping people honest? WTH? Cant Naz just post the study and excerpts w/o you trying to stir the pot saying it is an intentionally misleading title? Either that or he has no concern or knowledge about the north? How would you know to make such a claim?
You take the cake man! Its a study and he posted parts of the info. WITH A LINK to the source too I might add so there is full disclosure! He hid nothing misleading by providing the link. Gezzzzz
Naz,
Great thread info. I agree hunters and winter kill are Uno #1 and I bet MI would mirror this study in many ways.
To add to this let me say for the 1st time since hunting my lands for about 7 years now that I found 7 dead deer just this last late spring in just 2 small bedding areas. Like I said I have hunted these lands for 7 years and usually only find one or two dead deer between the two and these were all very small deer but one. Claims from others in the nearby area are that 6 or 7 others were found nearby too in 2 other bedding grounds to the east of me. That is over 5 times the normal amount and we didn't even go check in the deer sanctuary that is less than 1 mile away.
I saw an uptick last year over the average around here but nothing like what I saw from the effects of last winter and keep in mind I am in southern MI where it was just as cold as much of Northern MI (UP excluded)much of the time but we didn't have as much snow even though we broke all records (snow fall and temps).
Last winter knocked the dog crap out of the MI herd. Unfortunately here in MI other things will no doubt be blamed for low harvest numbers this year because winter kill wont fit the agenda. Count on it.
I just think it is crap to make those claims Howatt makes when Naz provided a link to the info to boot. Nothing misleading in the title. In fact it is 100% accurate. Not saying I agree with what he says on things but his title is spot on.
For argument sake, let's take the lower percentage of the juvenile mortality range. If you eliminate buck fawns as legal antlerless deer, your net gain for the following year is 33% more buck deer. So, out of 100 buck deer, you will have 33 more bucks than you would otherwise. Instead of killing a 75 pound deer, the next year you kill a 125 pound deer. So are you are potentially killing a deer with 30 pounds more meat on it? Win, win!
If you look at it from a pure business view, that 33% represents pure profit. You have more meat, you have more buck deer to see and select from, you have overall a more enjoyable experience. If you were to tell me that I could earn 33% more revenue with my business by making one very easy and simple change, I would sign on in a heartbeat!
Nov.-All other things equal, how can potentially a 33% increase in buck deer be meaningless? Educating hunters on not shooting buck fawns? Simple, stop shooting running deer and give the rule some teeth with a $3,000.00 fine!
Here is another way to look at it. If Walker, (no slam intended) would put 33% of your money back into your pocket tomorrow, would you be happy and likely to spend that money on a little bigger ticket item than you otherwise would. I would! Or, would you say no I'll keep things the way they are and opt for the puny little item instead?
On my 40 this year, I had one 5.5 year old, one 2.5 year old, two 1.5 year old bucks and as many as four buck fawns that visited. I harvested a 1.5 year old doe.
Lets's say, I harvest one of the buck fawns and the 2.5 year old during the holiday hunt and late season bow. Now I have reduced my buck herd by 25%. If a buck fawn restriction is in place, my net gain is 12.5% for next year. Over three years, my net gain in bucks is going to be 37.5% How could anyone not want that?
My point is, I don't have to harvest buck every year but, it certainly makes the act of hunting more enjoyable when I see a buck. And, I think if every hunter is being completely honest, that is what he is there for, a buck.
Walker analogy, same basic principle.
So what is your solution? Go back to hunters choice? Or, is that not ever going to happen either? I would be happy with hunters choice. Prefer a more targeted reduction in antlerless harvest. What do you have to offer?
DNR was asked by many to do studies such as this. Amazing how many people are now saying "what a waste of money." More than 1,000 volunteers have been part of this study.
Certainly, some fawns are more vulnerable to predation after being handled by humans, and one might expect adult deer handled to die from the trauma from time to time (especially the first year with the helicopter capture, which was abandoned after that). But would you rather take the word from the local who says wolves ate all the deer (and has been saying that for 20 years, even as hunters continue to harvest), or the guy who says bears ate all the fawns, or the guy who says the local crooks are poaching 'em all and selling on the black market to New York restaurants?
I have been saying this for years......but .... but...but.......but....LOL..way to darn funny
AW - Granted I'm not here a whole lot, but do you ever post anything other than this dribble?
You ever get out hunting or anything like that?
The study shows hunters are the #1 killers of deer...duhhh...
How much money was wasted on deciphering that block buster...
Take a trip to the decimated 19... LOL...no study needed ...just dump your pile and begin eradicating..
Great experience.!!!..Idiots
"I've been saying his for years" says Antler.
Go on-line and fill out an application and hire on with the WDNR - that way you can be in charge and we will reap the benefits of you vast knowledge of deer management.
Now get busy man!
Until drastic rule changes take place... so a few less doe were eradicated in the decimated 19...big deal... youth still harvested a pile of them...
That's not the problem.. it's over hunting and over harvesting .. that baiting deer has brought these counties..
Had people taken steps to ban bait to end the Eradication piles in these counties years ago as my vast knowledge had told them way back then... we would not be in this predicament ... It simply will not improve any other way... you get rid of the piles... deer live.. it's that simple
And this has again been a off topic post.. Please explain ... completely outside the rules of conduct you agreed to like 40 times with all your names..
Try again .
Ya... OK... less deer would be shot off if bait was removed from the decimated 19...it should be done as a emergency rule to protect more deer to help the herd recover ...if and when the herd is restored to except able levels... then and only then debate it's return...
Right now it's crunch time...30+% less kills in counties that lost 30+% last year... any other efforts will be minimal other then a bait ban in these counties ties...and or couple it with 1 buck or applications for tags to hunt these counties to reduce pressure and kills...
How many years are we to pay taxes on lands with no deer??
These ideas would restore the herd the fastest..barring closing the seasons all together...that would work too.. but is not necessary if you take these other steps...
I knew many years ago we would be at this point some day... I knew if rules did not change deer herds would be decimated by over harvesting ...and I am not the only 1??? Hardly... 24 thousand gun hunters alone agree.. I bet most of them hunted the decimated 19...
Go figure
For those of you entertaining yourself. I am glad someone is having fun. Much of this state forum is about a productive as watching political commercials leading up to an elections. At least with the B.S. here, I can just roll my scroll wheel and don't have to listen.
The decimated 19 are still decimated...why?? Because these counties are over hunted .. over harvested . Because the rules and bag limits are the same as the rest of the state that does not have that kind of hunting pressures or massive kill potential ...
By your way of thinking .. folks should just be satisfied with paying big tax money for hunting land that will never have deer to hunt on or near it due to over harvesting and the method legalized to do so...
Not sure many tax payers in these counties are even close to satisfied with the herd numbers...
Sooo... why keep doing what has been done year in and year out and expecting different results??? That's insane...
Herds can't survive when they are shot off annually.. cant...wont... and never will recover with present rules and bag limits ...
So a landowner can just sell his land you say.. ya.. to another hunter who wants a payment and big taxes for no deer hunting???
Ya.. OK...
First off, the rules are not the same. Buck-only for most adults (exceptions for military and disabled), no bonus tags available and no December antlerless gun hunt.
Second, many of the counties can and will come back strong, with continued buck-only, if they can catch a break in winter. If I lived or hunted in a buck-only county, I'd be working right now with the local CDAC and legislators asking for complete buck-only until there's a significant rebound, including no antlerless for youths, disabled and vets. Maybe even ask for a group hunting prohibition in those counties.
How bout that ..??
Pretty much the same as the rest of the state..
It's not the winter.. it's not the wolves.. it's not the bears.... it's the hunters and their choice of killing at will.. that choice needs to be way further restricted...
Either through a baiting ban..or a 1 buck season.. and zero doe harvest...and or closed seasons every other year... not one thing a any one can do will overcome this declining herd..
You say a season or 2 of buck only will change things...LOL.. ok.. then 1 season back to the old stack em up rules and we are right back to nothing..
These counties have more hunters then any other areas of the state!!
Spread them back to the overpopulated counties to solve those issues... how do we do this?? You apply for tags in these counties... land owner preferences.. and only issue so many tags.. .. now it's a frigging free for all ... things can't get better that way..
Group bagging needs to go bye-bye too. Does were killed and tagged with youth tags via group bagging. One would think parents/adults would understand what the buck only counties are up against and not allow the does to be shot.
False. What are you basing that on? Surely not hunters per square mile. Ask the owners of bars and restaurants and gas stations how many hunters they've seen in the past five years or more vs. years ago.
I already said I'd agree with no baldies for anyone, but if they weren't "buck only" (even as the rule now allows for youths, vets and disabled), many more does would have been shot on hundreds if not thousands of bonus tags.
Northern deer herds — given back-to-back mild winters — can double in population, even with hunting pressure. However, since some are very low right now, IMO they should remain buck-only for at least two or three more years. When the population rebounds, offer limited bonus.
It's not going to get better.. to get the population of hunters spread back out you would have to open private lands in the rest of the state.. if you can't do that... which you cant.. there are only a couple of other options...
I own 127 acres . Plus I hunted public .... in these counties.. it's virtually the same... no deer ..ya.. you still have your few survivors... but that's it.. if you want to bring these herds back.. you simply need better hunter management...doing the same every year isn't cutting it...
It's not going to get better.. to get the population of hunters spread back out you would have to open private lands in the rest of the state.. if you can't do that... which you cant.. there are only a couple of other options...
I own 127 acres . Plus I hunted public .... in these counties.. it's virtually the same... no deer ..ya.. you still have your few survivors... but that's it.. if you want to bring these herds back.. you simply need better hunter management...doing the same every year isn't cutting it...
I was all pumped about going out this afternoon to see if I could knock down another of the very numerous Door County doe that seem to be around these parts.
A just awhile ago four roosters came cruising thru. I watched them right out of window of the house. Wondering now about taking the girls out with a scatter gun and chasing ringnecks.
I'm really conflicted...
Another example on "sightability" … true story: a deer shootout many years ago inside a Wisconsin game farm of 800+ acres. The well-to-do owner, an acquaintance I'd met through Whitetails Unlimited back in the day, even paid for helicopter surveys to estimate population (he was an avid volunteer, and DNR needed to test reliability when CWD surveillance began so he offered to pay for the flights in the controlled situation). Four flights in excellent conditions in two days, with a low count of 13 and high of 25.
By the time they shot the last deer (22 were donated to food pantries, and he paid for the processing), FIFTY deer had been taken. Plenty of pressure by experienced hunters, including drives, and it took weeks to shoot 'em all inside a fence! Imagine if there was no fence? They'd simply go where most others don't. There are many such areas for deer to escape pressure and avoid bait sites by day in the "decimated 19."
I'm so sick and tierd of AW I could vomit - Naz, interesting post and I agree regarding deer and their ability to survive and vaporize when need be.
Naz...your not making the deer extinct in these areas...I agree that will never happen...as your comparison to that enclosure ..
But you can't improve the huntable herd in 2 seasons of buck only and mild winters when the same amount of hunters and. Tags are in those trees the very next year... what will happen is your kill numbers will go back up .. that means the deer will be dead... not huntable if their dead.. and returns decimation..
It's over hunting...plain and simple that has decimated these counties ..it will remain that way for ever .. or until a change in rules and or bag limits takes place...it simply can't improve with present rules and will continue to suck for us... our kids... their kids...and their kids... and then ...maybe....someone will get that..but i ain't holding my breath
Dude if you held your breath that long you would be like 100 years old.
;o)
How many hunters are happy with the deer herds in the good counties? ?.. then over hunt counties and see how much better it gets.
That's the problem.. way to many tags in not near enough area to grow a deer herd back.
I won't do it.. I will do my part to not kill them off... so have several others in these areas.. plus 24000 gun tags lost and I would bet most of those are from the decimated 19
And the numbers prove where they are..and what counties are shot off annually...if it's not over hunting... please prove your facts to support that theory then
...as the annual county harvest numbers declining year after year tell a story of over harvest ...if you killed 30% less deer in 2013... why was it that more deer were not on the landscape this fall..?? If hu term did not wipe them out ..there should have been a significant increase this fall...LOL...oh.. ya.. the wolves and a long winter... blah ..blah... not the hunter densities.... Heck no... it must not have thing to do with hunters...LOL
Tell me.. if it has nothing to do with over hunting ..then why did they cut out so many of the antlerless tags?? I mean they cut the tags for a reason... why??
LOL..keep supporting present BS and things will never get better in these counties...to many tags wipe out the herd every season....it's the same reason they cut back on antlerless tags... now you need to take that to Buck tags as well...
There are a lot more reasons for the decline in hunters up here than just the lack of deer.
so where do these 6 guns go ..yep.. public lands....
It's not done happening .. more and more are being forced to hunt public or quit...
Should the states and DNR forces people to allow hunters to hunt private lands that are not their own? Should the state not allow anymore expansion into wildlife habitat?
What I am saying is managing these counties the same as the rest of the state and expecting them to get better is rediculous.. either limit buck tags to application...get rid of baiting....go to 1 buck system.. close the deer season every other year.. all would be significant in these counties recovery ...
Anything less does nothing..
Subdivision land for profit is the trend.. so that will continue no doubt..
Additionally, folks in southern WI who lose a spot to hunt don't automatically point the car north and drive four hours! Many likely either hang it up, or find a new spot closer to home. Leasing has gained steam big-time in the past decade; another way to use private ground. Multiple hunters often go in on the leases.
The hunt numbers you see each year aren't the same people. More than one million different citizens have purchased deer licenses in the past decade. There's always turnover. Some try it for a year or two, some hunt whenever they're invited, etc. Recruit and retain is different today, and it's not about the critter numbers in most of the state. If that were the prime reason, we wouldn't have seen a huge drop in waterfowl hunters. We have more geese and duck opportunities than ever.
For our generations Steve, may be true, but not the biggest factor for the younger generations, IMO.
I've got three kids in grade school and high school, and have seen first-hand the decline in young people hunting hand-in-hand with the advent/increasing use of "smart" phones esp. and all digital/computer technology. Many families (with places to hunt) that have been generations of hunters are struggling to keep some of the kids interested, and it's not due to lack of game here (deer, turkeys, waterfowl, you name it). I realize "all kids are different" and not everyone has a "hunter inside" but I've never seen such a disconnect with nature as the past decade. This was predicted long before the northern herds were dropping and had hit many other states before Wisconsin.
"and for those who hunt private and are overly concerned about the hunting numbers, bring the new ones on your hunting grounds"
We often hear only of the "selfishness" of big-tract landowners, but I've found there are many that do open their land for youth hunts and antlerless hunting to help meet their management objectives. Obviously it has to be folks they know, but so what? They're giving more hunters a spot.
It may not be easily accessed, depending where you live, and might be overcrowded during certain seasons, but we've never had more public and private land open to hunters in Wisconsin; more than seven million acres, and in recent years, even large sections of most state parks. For the bowhunter, esp., there is a lot of room to roam. Even come gun season, if we took every hunter that says they exclusively or occasionally hunt public land, there would be still be about 40 acres per hunter (if you could spread the pressure out evenly). Many of those are gun-only hunters, leaving bowhunters with a lot more ground.
Your also missing the point about land ownership,it is and will continue be the reason for the decline in deer hunters. Your stating more or less "kids" need to known by the landowner or its door closed. great for those that do but in all practicality they would have hunted anyhow if living or having access to private land in the first place.
The promotion of the entitlement mentality to the youth and others will be detrimental in the long haul not just for the hunting camp but society.Just look around at folks that have that attitude today not good,not good at all.
Your also missing the point about land ownership,it is and will continue be the reason for the decline in deer hunters. Your stating more or less "kids" need to known by the landowner or its door closed. great for those that do but in all practicality they would have hunted anyhow if living or having access to private land in the first place.
The promotion of the entitlement mentality to the youth and others will be detrimental in the long haul not just for the hunting camp but society.Just look around at folks that have that attitude today not good,not good at all.
Changes are needed to even out the herd..only reason counties are over populated is from lack of access .. you take the orange army decimating public lands in the buck only counties ..give them 2 seasons in these over populated counties and they will be wiped out as well...
You can't pile all the tags in a 1/3 of the state and expect a deer herd... even after a mild winter... guys who have gone years without a deer are so numerous that any extra deer left will continue to be wiped out...
Limiting tags in these counties would be a good start... closing the season every other year would also help ... but i do believe with the numbers of tags in these counties...even closing it every other year will just wipe deer out every other year instead of every year... giving no real change.. Limiting tags to a past seasons kill would be a better option... your 70+% behind herd numbers 4 years ago in many of these counties.. how long are land owners suppose to wait for a herd to hunt?
Decision was my nephews if he wanted to continue as he got older. He uses a smart phone to send me pics of the whitetails, elk and mountain lions he hunts.
Don't need any more agendas pushed.. what we need is better management and lower hunter densities in the decimated 19...
Pasquinell you got it.
Parents and older folks need to keep kids interested for sure but in all facets of the outdoors,not just a special quick kill a deer hunt. Teach em trapping,catching turtles and shooting carp,fishing etc. When there little/young let them help as best as possible with cleaning game etc. Our 18month old grandson can spot a deer when riding in car or walking in the woods with his parents/grandparents. Wonder why?
But i do agree kids learn so little from their parents these days....as far as the outdoors goes
To retro and others who questioned, please re-read my posts. I never said the kids "need" special hunts. (However, I'm not opposed to them either).
Drive down a town road and it's a shack drive every 1/2 mile or so...so you have 25 plus guys per sq Mile hunting 5 deer per sq. Mile...LOL...ya back only and mile winters will turn that around.....it cant.
Unfortunately, we have/are gravitating towards being an urban society with kids raised in single parent homes. The decline of the family unit has many issues. In my day, dads gifted thier experiences to the next man up, and hunting helped supplement the supper table. Those WERE the "good old days".