What's new
Forums
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Pics
Videos
Fishing Reports
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Big Game Hunting
Deer
NDGF revisits deer license goals.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KDM" data-source="post: 1007" data-attributes="member: 314"><p>It gets better guys. All of you have access to the game and fish annual reports that include these so called surveys. There are LOTS AND LOTS of "DID NOT FLY" The game and fish hasn't flown over my hunting unit in over 12 years. Yet they keep telling me they know what the deer population in my unit is doing based on hunter harvest surveys, (can be skewed), deer auto collisions (only those reported), Hunter observations (whatever those are), license densities (These are licence numbers from past years that they determine based on these same goofy factors for each region), social factors (that's the scary one for me), and disease. What?? They can't tell me how many deer I have in my unit, how the hell can they tell me the disease rates of a population they can't even define???? I encourage all of you to get copies of the annual reports and see how many times the game and fish has done a white tail aerial survey for your units. I think you will be surprised and angered and how absent this survey data is and yet you are being told that it's not only being done, but it is a key indicator that is used for determining tag numbers.In order to have a valid survey, you need to cover the exact same ground, at the exact same time, for several years to even be able to get a statistically predictive model for populations. This is basic statistics that is taught at every university across the country. Being told that aerial surveys are key indicators for deer populations, but having only one being done for my unit in the past 12 years is infuriating to say the least. Here is a copy of the cover page.....</p><p></p><p>NORTH DAKOTA STATE GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Wildlife Division Project W-67-R-48 Phase C, Big Game Investigations Study No. C-I: </p><p></p><p>DEER POPULATION STUDIES Job No. C-I-1: White-tailed Deer Census (2007-2008)</p><p>Job No. C-I-2: 2008 Mule Deer Census </p><p>Job No. C-I-3: 2007 Deer Gun Season and Harvest</p><p>Job No. C-I-3: 2007 Deer Bow Season and Harvest (Supplement)</p><p>Job No. C-I-4: 2007 Deer Muzzleloader Season and Harvest</p><p>Job No. C-I-5: 2007 Youth Deer Gun Season (Supplement)</p><p></p><p>Terry Steinwand Director Submitted by Bill Jensen, Roger Johnson,and Bruce Stillings Big Game Biologists July 2008 Report No. A-177</p><p></p><p>and here is a copy of part of the report about the aerial surveys...............</p><p></p><p>White-tailed Deer Population Density Monitoring Block Survey </p><p></p><p>White-tailed deer monitoring blocks, ranging in size from approximately 800 to 1290 square miles, have been assigned to five of the seven Coteau Hills management subunits (overlapping 8 hunting units). Each of these subunits were larger than 1200 square miles, therefore monitoring blocks have been positioned over representative habitat and terrain of each subunit. In 2004, six smaller monitoring block encompassing 16 townships, or 576 square miles, were established in the central portions of the six Slope Hunting Units.Methods for the winter aerial inspection of a monitoring block are the same as for the regular trend survey. Deer numbers, group size and geographic location are recorded to the nearest square mile (i.e., section).Snowfall and snow depth data are provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Daily weather conditions are monitored on their various websites(e.g., <a href="http://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/nsa/index.html" target="_blank">www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/nsa/index.html</a> ).</p><p></p><p>In June 2005, the area within each survey unit was recalculated using GIS technology. Updated estimates of the areas are provided in Tables 1 through 10.RESULTSSnow Conditions During the Winter of 2007-2008Due to very poor snow conditions, no white-tailed deer winter survey units were flown. Some flights were made to get an index of moose and elk populations, but recorded deer numbers observed during these flights were deemed of little value.</p><p></p><p>DISCUSSION: A comparative analysis of past population data is essential to providing meaningful population trend information from the data gathered during the period covered by this report. An evaluation of these data is ongoing and will require extensive review. </p><p></p><p>White-tailed Deer Herd Status</p><p></p><p>The white-tailed deer herd status for each major management unit is presented in the same sequence as that found elsewhere in this report. </p><p></p><p><strong>No census areas or monitoring block were surveyed for white-tailed deer in 2007-2008</strong>. Badlands Management UnitSub-unit 0-1 to 0-4No current data (Table 1).</p><p>Slope Management UnitSub-units 1-1 to 1-6No current data (Table 2).</p><p>Missouri River Management UnitSub-units 2-1 to 2-10No current data (Table 3).</p><p>Coteau Hills Management UnitNorthwest Coteau Sub-unit (3-1)No current data (Table 4).</p><p>North Central Coteau Sub-unit (3-2 to 3-3)No current data (Table 4).</p><p>Northeast Coteau Sub-unit (3-4)No current data (Table 4).</p><p>South-central Coteau Sub-unit (3-5 to 3-7)No current data (Table 4).</p><p>Souris-Des Lacs Management UnitSouris-Des Lacs Sub-unit (4-1 to 4-3)No current data (Table 5).</p><p>Turtle Mountains Management UnitOn February 15, 2008, the 93 square mile moose study was surveyed and a total of 672 deer (7.2 deer per square mile; hunting unit 1) (Table 6). A total of 43 moose were also reported (17 bulls, 17 cows, and 9 calves). Three coyotes and one red fox were also observed. It should be noted that biologists believed many of the deer that usually winter within this survey unit had not moved into the Turtle Mountains off the prairie due to mild winter conditions. Snow cover in the Turtle Mountains was one of the poorest that Roger Johnson could remember for the last 30-years.</p><p>Devils Lake Management UnitsNo current data (Table 7).</p><p>Sheyenne-James Management UnitNorth of I-94 Sub-units (7-1 and 7-2)No current data (Table 8).</p><p>South of I-94 Sub-units (7-3, 7-4 and 7-5)No current data (Table 8).</p><p>Pembina Hills Management UnitSurveys were attempted in the Pembina Hills management unit February 18, 2008. A total of 454 deer were observed on a portion of the approximately 289 square mile triangle moose and elk survey unit, Pembina River, and that portion of the Tongue River between highways 5 and 66 before the flight was terminated. Additionally, no moose, 147 elk (41 bulls [11 spike and 30 branch-antlered bulls], 106 cows and calves), 110 turkeys, 4 coyotes, and one red fox were reported. Observation conditions were considered very poor (Table 9). .</p><p>Red River Valley Management UnitNorthern Valley (9-1)No current data (Table 10).</p><p>Central Valley (9-2)No current data (Table 10).</p><p>Southern Valley (9-3)No current data (Table 10).</p><p>Additional SurveysOn February 12, Roger Johnson and Jeff Faught surveyed a 600-acre fenced enclosure on Camp Grafton under very poor snow conditions. A total of 40 deer were sighted inside the 600-acre enclosure, and another 6 were sighted just outside the fence. A total of 4 turkeys were also observed.On February 12, Roger Johnson and Jeff Faught surveyed the area in the greater Fargo area between Cass Co. HWY 20 and the moth of the Wild Rice River. A total of 170 deer and 32 turkeys were observed during this aerial survey (Cass Co. HWY 22 to HWY 20: 26 deer; Cass Co. HWY 20 to 12th Avenue North: 81 deer and 25 turkeys; 12th Avenue North to I94: 14 deer; I94 to 52nd Avenue South: 47 deer; and 52nd Avenue South to Wild Rice River: 2 deer and 7 turkeys).</p><p></p><p>SUMMARY</p><p>1. Weather and snow conditions did not permit aerial surveying for white-tailed deer in the state.</p><p>2. An effort was made to survey for elk in the Pembina Hills and moose in the Turtle Mountains.</p><p>3. Limited winter aerial survey work was done on Camp Grafton and the greater Fargo area.</p><p>4. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) web site continues to be a valuable asset for monitoring snow conditions around the state</p><p></p><p><strong>Please notice the verbiage in the DISCUSSION section and draw your own conclusions.</strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KDM, post: 1007, member: 314"] It gets better guys. All of you have access to the game and fish annual reports that include these so called surveys. There are LOTS AND LOTS of "DID NOT FLY" The game and fish hasn't flown over my hunting unit in over 12 years. Yet they keep telling me they know what the deer population in my unit is doing based on hunter harvest surveys, (can be skewed), deer auto collisions (only those reported), Hunter observations (whatever those are), license densities (These are licence numbers from past years that they determine based on these same goofy factors for each region), social factors (that's the scary one for me), and disease. What?? They can't tell me how many deer I have in my unit, how the hell can they tell me the disease rates of a population they can't even define???? I encourage all of you to get copies of the annual reports and see how many times the game and fish has done a white tail aerial survey for your units. I think you will be surprised and angered and how absent this survey data is and yet you are being told that it's not only being done, but it is a key indicator that is used for determining tag numbers.In order to have a valid survey, you need to cover the exact same ground, at the exact same time, for several years to even be able to get a statistically predictive model for populations. This is basic statistics that is taught at every university across the country. Being told that aerial surveys are key indicators for deer populations, but having only one being done for my unit in the past 12 years is infuriating to say the least. Here is a copy of the cover page..... NORTH DAKOTA STATE GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Wildlife Division Project W-67-R-48 Phase C, Big Game Investigations Study No. C-I: DEER POPULATION STUDIES Job No. C-I-1: White-tailed Deer Census (2007-2008) Job No. C-I-2: 2008 Mule Deer Census Job No. C-I-3: 2007 Deer Gun Season and Harvest Job No. C-I-3: 2007 Deer Bow Season and Harvest (Supplement) Job No. C-I-4: 2007 Deer Muzzleloader Season and Harvest Job No. C-I-5: 2007 Youth Deer Gun Season (Supplement) Terry Steinwand Director Submitted by Bill Jensen, Roger Johnson,and Bruce Stillings Big Game Biologists July 2008 Report No. A-177 and here is a copy of part of the report about the aerial surveys............... White-tailed Deer Population Density Monitoring Block Survey White-tailed deer monitoring blocks, ranging in size from approximately 800 to 1290 square miles, have been assigned to five of the seven Coteau Hills management subunits (overlapping 8 hunting units). Each of these subunits were larger than 1200 square miles, therefore monitoring blocks have been positioned over representative habitat and terrain of each subunit. In 2004, six smaller monitoring block encompassing 16 townships, or 576 square miles, were established in the central portions of the six Slope Hunting Units.Methods for the winter aerial inspection of a monitoring block are the same as for the regular trend survey. Deer numbers, group size and geographic location are recorded to the nearest square mile (i.e., section).Snowfall and snow depth data are provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Daily weather conditions are monitored on their various websites(e.g., [URL="http://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/nsa/index.html"]www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/nsa/index.html[/URL] ). In June 2005, the area within each survey unit was recalculated using GIS technology. Updated estimates of the areas are provided in Tables 1 through 10.RESULTSSnow Conditions During the Winter of 2007-2008Due to very poor snow conditions, no white-tailed deer winter survey units were flown. Some flights were made to get an index of moose and elk populations, but recorded deer numbers observed during these flights were deemed of little value. DISCUSSION: A comparative analysis of past population data is essential to providing meaningful population trend information from the data gathered during the period covered by this report. An evaluation of these data is ongoing and will require extensive review. White-tailed Deer Herd Status The white-tailed deer herd status for each major management unit is presented in the same sequence as that found elsewhere in this report. [B]No census areas or monitoring block were surveyed for white-tailed deer in 2007-2008[/B]. Badlands Management UnitSub-unit 0-1 to 0-4No current data (Table 1). Slope Management UnitSub-units 1-1 to 1-6No current data (Table 2). Missouri River Management UnitSub-units 2-1 to 2-10No current data (Table 3). Coteau Hills Management UnitNorthwest Coteau Sub-unit (3-1)No current data (Table 4). North Central Coteau Sub-unit (3-2 to 3-3)No current data (Table 4). Northeast Coteau Sub-unit (3-4)No current data (Table 4). South-central Coteau Sub-unit (3-5 to 3-7)No current data (Table 4). Souris-Des Lacs Management UnitSouris-Des Lacs Sub-unit (4-1 to 4-3)No current data (Table 5). Turtle Mountains Management UnitOn February 15, 2008, the 93 square mile moose study was surveyed and a total of 672 deer (7.2 deer per square mile; hunting unit 1) (Table 6). A total of 43 moose were also reported (17 bulls, 17 cows, and 9 calves). Three coyotes and one red fox were also observed. It should be noted that biologists believed many of the deer that usually winter within this survey unit had not moved into the Turtle Mountains off the prairie due to mild winter conditions. Snow cover in the Turtle Mountains was one of the poorest that Roger Johnson could remember for the last 30-years. Devils Lake Management UnitsNo current data (Table 7). Sheyenne-James Management UnitNorth of I-94 Sub-units (7-1 and 7-2)No current data (Table 8). South of I-94 Sub-units (7-3, 7-4 and 7-5)No current data (Table 8). Pembina Hills Management UnitSurveys were attempted in the Pembina Hills management unit February 18, 2008. A total of 454 deer were observed on a portion of the approximately 289 square mile triangle moose and elk survey unit, Pembina River, and that portion of the Tongue River between highways 5 and 66 before the flight was terminated. Additionally, no moose, 147 elk (41 bulls [11 spike and 30 branch-antlered bulls], 106 cows and calves), 110 turkeys, 4 coyotes, and one red fox were reported. Observation conditions were considered very poor (Table 9). . Red River Valley Management UnitNorthern Valley (9-1)No current data (Table 10). Central Valley (9-2)No current data (Table 10). Southern Valley (9-3)No current data (Table 10). Additional SurveysOn February 12, Roger Johnson and Jeff Faught surveyed a 600-acre fenced enclosure on Camp Grafton under very poor snow conditions. A total of 40 deer were sighted inside the 600-acre enclosure, and another 6 were sighted just outside the fence. A total of 4 turkeys were also observed.On February 12, Roger Johnson and Jeff Faught surveyed the area in the greater Fargo area between Cass Co. HWY 20 and the moth of the Wild Rice River. A total of 170 deer and 32 turkeys were observed during this aerial survey (Cass Co. HWY 22 to HWY 20: 26 deer; Cass Co. HWY 20 to 12th Avenue North: 81 deer and 25 turkeys; 12th Avenue North to I94: 14 deer; I94 to 52nd Avenue South: 47 deer; and 52nd Avenue South to Wild Rice River: 2 deer and 7 turkeys). SUMMARY 1. Weather and snow conditions did not permit aerial surveying for white-tailed deer in the state. 2. An effort was made to survey for elk in the Pembina Hills and moose in the Turtle Mountains. 3. Limited winter aerial survey work was done on Camp Grafton and the greater Fargo area. 4. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) web site continues to be a valuable asset for monitoring snow conditions around the state [B]Please notice the verbiage in the DISCUSSION section and draw your own conclusions.[/B] [/QUOTE]
Verification
What is the most common fish caught on this site?
Post reply
Recent Posts
Tail Gate Tent
Latest: Davey Crockett
13 minutes ago
Mercer county deputy killed
Latest: Davey Crockett
39 minutes ago
R
Israel
Latest: riverview
Today at 5:19 PM
R
1969 Evinrude 25 sportster
Latest: rodcontrol
Today at 3:54 PM
R
"Conspiracy Theory" or not?
Latest: Ruttin
Today at 3:29 PM
Outdoor Playsets
Latest: LOV2HNT
Today at 1:16 PM
Baltimore bridge collapse
Latest: Allen
Today at 12:57 PM
S
EV mountain bikes
Latest: snow2
Today at 12:56 PM
Rain
Latest: Davey Crockett
Today at 11:39 AM
went to a bar part 2
Latest: Average_NDA_Member
Today at 11:10 AM
Humminbird Side Imaging
Latest: Big Iron
Today at 10:50 AM
Riddle Me This.....
Latest: Davey Crockett
Today at 10:29 AM
Battery powered lawn mowers
Latest: guywhofishes
Today at 10:27 AM
2024 Bis-Man Reel & Rec Flyer
Latest: Honkerherms
Today at 10:23 AM
29th Annual NDSFC Banquet
Latest: Honkerherms
Today at 10:07 AM
So what is this?
Latest: SDMF
Yesterday at 10:22 PM
Good old days
Latest: bucksnbears
Yesterday at 7:33 PM
L
Soil temperatures
Latest: LBrandt
Yesterday at 6:52 PM
F
More CWD NE ND
Latest: Fester
Yesterday at 6:25 PM
Walleye fishing on Missouri?
Latest: Wally World
Yesterday at 1:00 PM
Friends of NDA
Forums
Hunting
Big Game Hunting
Deer
NDGF revisits deer license goals.
Top
Bottom