Mn DNR Moose population stats

3Roosters

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Posts
4,706
Likes
694
Points
343
Location
Devils Lake
fyi below here. My biggest jaw drop isn't so much the actual survey numbers but rather the remark from the MN DNR that a decrease to 3,030 from 3,710 is called STATISTICALLY UNCHANGED!!! Not sure how the DNR does their calc's but I would say a 20% drop to be a CHANGE. Not sure what they are smoking??
Next comes the topic of wolves..........and go
;:;popcorn[h=1]Moose population remains low but stable for aseventh year [/h][h=2]Population estimate statistically unchanged from last year’sestimate[/h]Results of the 2018moose survey indicate the moose population in northeastern Minnesota remainsstable but relatively low for the seventh year in a row, according to theDepartment of Natural Resources.
“While thepopulation appears stable, low numbers of moose are still a major concern forthe DNR,” said DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr. “We continue to pursue the bestscience, research and management tools available to us to help Minnesota’smoose.”
The 2018 aerialmoose survey estimated 3,030 moose in northeastern Minnesota, statisticallyunchanged from last year’s estimate of 3,710. The survey is statisticallysound, but there is inherent uncertainty associated with such surveys, becauseresearchers will never see and count all of the animals across the 6,000 squaremile survey area. Statistically, the DNR is 90 percent certain that thepopulation is between 4,140 and 2,320 moose.
“The stability ofmoose numbers in recent years provides a reason for some optimism – after all,we’re not facing a significant decline,” said Glenn DelGiudice, DNR moose anddeer project leader. “But this year’s results would be more palatable had theyreflected the beginning of a turnaround in the population trend.”
Each year thepopulation estimate is compared to 2006, because the state’s highest moosepopulation estimate of 8,840 occurred that year. Currently, northeasternMinnesota’s moose population is estimated to be 65 percent lower than the peakestimate of 2006.
“While the trend ofstability is encouraging, it does not allow us to forecast the futuretrajectory of the population,” DelGiudice said.
Reproductivesuccess and adult survival have the greatest impact on the annual performanceand dynamics of the moose population over time.
“Our field researchhas shown that annual pregnancy rates of adult females in this population havebeen robust,” DelGiudice said. “But it is a challenge to maintain a high numberof adult females that can become pregnant, produce calves and rear them to 1 yearof age.”
Survey results alsoindicate that calf survival to January has been relatively stable, butconsistently low. Field studies have indicated that it is even lower by spring,translating to low numbers of moose calves living through their first year.Importantly, the DNR’s detailed investigations have shown that wolf predationhas consistently accounted for about two-thirds of the calf mortality comparedto one-third of the adult mortality.
Annual aerial moosesurveys have been conducted each year since 1960 in the northeast. Adjustments were made in 2005 to make the survey more accurate and annualresults more comparable.
This year’s survey involved flying in 52 survey plots distributed acrossnortheastern Minnesota’s moose range from Jan. 3 to Jan. 13. The Fond du LacBand of Lake Superior Chippewa and 1854 Treaty Authority contributed fundingand provided personnel for the annual moose survey.
 


fly2cast

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 14, 2015
Posts
1,014
Likes
19
Points
191
I'm guessing they are saying it's statistically stable because they don't know the actual population of moose. The actual population varies by around 2000 moose and so a drop in the number that was counted doesn't mean that the population has actually dropped. Just a guess. I'm not a statistician.
 

bucksnbears

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 16, 2015
Posts
2,042
Likes
534
Points
363
Location
Moorhead
Annual flying since 1960 for moose yet they gave out 5 tags for deer when they shoulda closed the season!
 

dean nelson

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Posts
8,270
Likes
66
Points
308
Location
Bismarck
Errrrrrrrr that be some of that there new math or perhaps they thought they were working with integers and that whole two negatives make a positive thing!

The only other option other than they're just stupid is that perhaps they didn't fly exactly the same route so they couldn't exactly correlate the numbers evenly across. Or it just came out to something similar per square mile so statistically the same or something!?
 

Huskerdu

Established Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2017
Posts
128
Likes
0
Points
81
Location
MN ND
MN DNR will not admit there is a wolf problem in MN. The moose will remain below average until the wolves are below average.
 


3Roosters

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Posts
4,706
Likes
694
Points
343
Location
Devils Lake
MN DNR will not admit there is a wolf problem in MN. The moose will remain below average until the wolves are below average.

^^^^^^ This! Farmers/ranchers have been complaining about cattle disappearing for a long time. I may be wrong on this but I believe a farmer/rancher will get compensated/reimbursed $1000 a head, but only if they have some proof a wolf was the cause of the disappearance/death of one of their cattle.
Article reads a full 2/3 of the deaths of young moose is wolf related. If that is true..wow..just wow.
 

AR-15

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Posts
2,322
Likes
227
Points
298
Maybe we need some of them wolves to clean some of the moose out of Unit M10
 

snow

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2015
Posts
4,839
Likes
582
Points
358
I see no mention of ticks effecting the moose population,thats a major concern we see in northeast Mn,these ticks are active all 12months these days and also take a toll.
 

dean nelson

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Posts
8,270
Likes
66
Points
308
Location
Bismarck
Yeah wolves are not probably going to be very high on this list of causes since the moose population is dropping in almost every state even those without wolves. For instance the area around the Pembina Gorge and the turtle mountains have been wiped out by a brain worm that thrive in more humid areas and thus why the moose in the West are doing so well compared to out east.
 

Ponyroper

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Posts
1,041
Likes
19
Points
201
Location
Mandan
^^^^^^ This! Farmers/ranchers have been complaining about cattle disappearing for a long time. I may be wrong on this but I believe a farmer/rancher will get compensated/reimbursed $1000 a head, but only if they have some proof a wolf was the cause of the disappearance/death of one of their cattle.
Article reads a full 2/3 of the deaths of young moose is wolf related. If that is true..wow..just wow.


I don't think 2/3 of all the young moose born are killed by wolves. The way it is worded it means 2/3 of the young moose that die are killed by wolves. But then, who knows if they know how to write grammatically correctly. If 1000 calves are born and 2/3 die that is 666. If wolves kill 2/3 of those they killed 444 not 666. Still, an astounding number of calves.

the DNR’s detailed investigations have shown that wolf predation has consistently accounted for about two-thirds of the calf mortality compared to one-third of the adult mortality.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 90
  • This month: 87
  • This month: 76
  • This month: 75
  • This month: 74
  • This month: 70
  • This month: 67
  • This month: 63
  • This month: 56
  • This month: 56
Top Bottom