Record harvest?

[JNRBRONC]

The DJ on the local radio station announced the deer kill numbers released by the DNR (funny, I couldn't find it at the DNR website). He stated some figure like 211,161 (I chuckled when he added the one on the end, get real, how can they attain such accuracy?). Anyhow, the DNR stated in the release he read that we came close to get the 25% herd reduction. At the end of the story, he went into a personal commentary about coming home from Des Moines last weekend and along I380 north to CR, he saw 16

deer in one group in a field. The way he said it made it sound like we still have a "population problem".

Some aren't going to be happy until all the deer are dead.

 

[Ghost]

I don't think anyone at the DNR or elsewhere, has a clue as to how many deer were killed or how many exist in the state from year to year.

That's kind of funny when a figure like that is thrown out there.

 

[Windwalker]

Kinda sad in my area. After all the bitching of the over size herd, it was open season here to shoot and leave lay . Last yr it was a pile of nine and nothing uncommon to see two laying side by side dead. I think the hit in my are was 2/3rds dead. Ya can really tell it by driving around late. I guess that made the ins. co. happy. Who should they be to ditacate regulations. He11 they have the largest buildings in the city. Their business consist of producing nothing and paying on a policy what they feel like. Talk about a legal way to work your pocket! Sorry for ranting.

 

[DOR]

Registration stations are a pain in the butt, but they do give you "real" numbers to work with. I think it would be everyones best interest to have them.

 

[wjs]

Here is where the number comes from:

Preliminary Harvest Estimates for the 2005 Deer Season

There were about 34,000 more deer licenses issued (38,000 more antlerless licenses but 4,000 fewer either sex licenses) for the 2005 deer season compared to 2004. The number of paid licenses increased by 22,400 and the number of landowner/tenant licenses increased by 12,000. If hunters have about the same success rate as last year this should result in an increase in the total harvest by about 17,000 deer and an increase in the number of does killed by 15,000 (Table 1).

Table 1. A comparison of license sales for 2004 and 2005 and the estimated deer kill if success rates stay they same.

2004 2005
Season Licenses Kill Licenses Kill *
Youth/Disabled 4,372 2,197 4,057 2,041
Archery 67,393 30,025 73,518 32,756
Early Muzzleloader 13,125 6,818 13,693 7,105
November Antlerless 16,841 10,105
Regular gun 201,479 124,163 202,099 123,550
Late Muzzleloader 29,237 13,550 30,718 14,032
Nonresident 8,452 3,987 8,824 4,152
Spec. hunts/Depred. 5,801 3,709 6,739 4,309
January Antlerless 23,313 10,063 31,096 13,551
Total 353,172 194,512 387,585 211,600

* - kill assumes success rates were the same as in 2004
(Sorry I can't get the darn columns to line up)

Based upon this expected harvest of 211,600 deer the simulations indicate deer numbers should decline by about 15 to 20% following this season and would be near the goal set by the department. If we continued this level of harvest next year the simulation indicates deer numbers would decline by about 30% to 35% after the 2007 deer season and would be far below the department’s goals. Based upon these expected results I would recommend reducing the number of antlerless deer we kill in 2006.

Simulations for each of the 20 wildlife management units will need to be run once we have the actual harvest estimates and the population survey data for each county. Based upon last years simulations and this years expected kill it is very likely that the antlerless license quotas will need to be reduced or eliminated in many counties in northern and central Iowa. I would also recommend that we remove these counties from the January antlerless season.
If deer survey numbers in eastern and southern Iowa have not declined as much as anticipated we will need to keep the antlerless license quotas the same to maintain an adequate kill. If the population survey numbers are down then the county antlelress quotas could be reduced and the January or November antlerless seasons could be eliminated. If the deer population surveys do not decrease then the January and November antlerless seasons will be needed in this part of the state to obtain an adequate antlerless harvest.

If you would like the complete report please email me at:
willie.suchy@dnr.state.ia.us

 

[jkratz5]

Im with DOR, check stations are the way to go. They give the DNR a much more accurate count on the number of deer taken. We had them in IL up until this year, and not only did the DNR get good head counts, but it was also a way for 1. the DNR to check out hunters and 2. for eveyone else to see what was getting harvested, was quite a sight to see a couple hundred trucks lined up waiting to check deer.

 

[teeroy]

[ QUOTE ]
quite a sight to see a couple hundred trucks lined up waiting to check deer

[/ QUOTE ]

sounds like a gigantic pain in the a$$ to me, and a waste of time that i could be hunting. first shotgun season lasts 5 days, waiting in line for a couple hours, everytime someone shoots a deer, is going to piss alot of people off

 

[singlecoyote]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think anyone at the DNR or elsewhere, has a clue as to how many deer were killed or how many exist in the state from year to year.

That's kind of funny when a figure like that is thrown out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you want check stations, continue to have this attitude.

Basic laws of statistics and averages could give the DNR a relatively close preliminary number.

I really don't want to have to check in a deer that I shoot. I want to go have a beer or twelve and BS with my hunting buddies.

Do your part and respond to the surveys if you recieve one.

 

[DOR]

A couple hundred trucks????

I have never seen anything even remotely close in MN or WI in over 20 years of registering deer in both states. Maybe 10 or 12 trucks at the peak of gun season, but that would be max.

For me it has really been a minor issue.

Pro-shops, bars, gas stations etc... have it in their best interests to be a registration station. It brings in that many more people who spend cash at their facility.

It really isn't a big deal from my experience.

 

[pandy175]

Should be able to do it on line with tag number and sex of deer or call it in??? Should be easy at the end of the day or within 24 hours???

 

[DOR]

"I want to go have a beer or twelve and BS with my hunting buddies."

With registration stations at the bar you can do both!

 

[luvtohunt]

Good Post, I don't think alot of thought went into the first few posts. I think they looked at those numbers without realizing what went into the makeup of the numbers themselves.

 

[Ghost]

[ QUOTE ]
Good Post, I don't think alot of thought went into the first few posts. I think they looked at those numbers without realizing what went into the makeup of the numbers themselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I guess I didn't take the time to think before I typed.

I do complete all the surveys I get and send them in.

The part I still find funny is that there were 211,161 deer killed in 2005.

Why not just say, "The calculated estimate for the 2005 deer harvest was 210,000."

 

[dbltree]

[ QUOTE ]
If the population survey numbers are down then the county antlerless quotas could be reduced and the January or November antlerless seasons could be eliminated. If the deer population surveys do not decrease then the January and November antlerless seasons will be needed in this part of the state to obtain an adequate antlerless harvest.


[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for explaining some of this for us Willie. I'm sure that to some extent, it all boils down to how many deer that people in any given area, will tolerate. No matter how accurate the counts, hunters may want to see more deer and motorists for example much less. Neither of these may match up with DNR estimates of what the herd is and what it should be. I'm sure it's a challenging endeavor to say the least.
For my part I am hoping that we no longer need the special seasons here in SE Iowa...but I don't have a "warm and fuzzy" feeling about it

 

[JNRBRONC]

Thanks for the post, WJS. I like round numbers better than the "exact" one the DJ threw out, especially when it comes to projections/estimations.

 

[Liv4Rut]

So what happens when we reach our goal? That's what I want to know

Decrease doe tags?

 

[luvtohunt]

No, I guess I didn't take the time to think before I typed.

I do complete all the surveys I get and send them in.

The part I still find funny is that there were 211,161 deer killed in 2005.

Why not just say, "The calculated estimate for the 2005 deer harvest was 210,000."

[/ QUOTE ]

It is important to be consistant from one year to the next. All the numbers are estimates, but how the DNR posts the results is the same from year to year. If you go back last year, and the year before, they never rounded numbers.

 

[ElkHunter]

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa -- State officials said the 2005 deer-hunting season was a record breaker.

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources estimates nearly 212,000 deer were killed.

DNR Director Jeff Vonk told a legislative committee Tuesday that it's the first time the number has topped 200,000, and is close to the targeted 25 percent reduction needed to help cull the excess herd.

DNR wildlife experts put the post-hunt deer herd in 2004 at 400,000. Now, they think it's closer to 300,000. Iowa issued 34,000 more deer licenses for the 2005 season over the year before.


Vonk said his agency would analyze the numbers into the spring and determine the next step

 

[sims8ball]

I have personally worked a check station both 1st and 2nd gun seasons in Illinois, right after dark we might get 20 trucks that pull up and have to wait in line for a little while, but never anything even close to hundreds.

It doesn't cost the DNR a whole lot of money, all Illinois was doing was takin a few college kids that wanted to make a little extra cash (like me) and love to be around deer and deer hunters (like me) and giving them the stuff they needed to check the deer. I'd be willing to bet there are more then enough kids enrolled in the Iowa State Conservation program that would be willing to do this (the teachers seem to give you a few extra points to do this as well). During the other seasons the owner of the sports shop we were at said he had no trouble taking care of it, plus, as was said before, it's more people coming to your business looking to spend money.

We even had time for a few beers, and a bottle of yager with a guy who brought in about a 170 in 14 point towards the end of the night.

 

[IA ML'r]

I just don't understand everyone's fascination with "exact harvest numbers"

I'm fine with 212,000 give or take a few thou, we're talking about a statewide number, 5000 deer one way or another is not even going to be visable from your tree stand next fall, you'll never notice that small a difference.

And what about the number you are planning on subtracting the harvest from?

I'd love to see someone do a physical head count of every deer in the state, so we have an "actual" population number to subtract the "actual" harvest number from.

That level of accuracy is neither necessary nor cost effective.

I am in favor of mandatory hervest reporting, in the form of an 800 number or simply report it to a license vendor with in 72 hours, but NOT for accuracy, timeliness is a much more important issue than a few deer up or down.