What's new
Forums
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Pics
Videos
Fishing Reports
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Bird Hunting
Pheasant
Pheasant Politics
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="gst" data-source="post: 207386" data-attributes="member: 373"><p>At a advisory meeting in Bowbells years ago aftrer I asked some pointed questions about deer numbers, management and the process of determining tag numbers Randy approached me after the meeting and asked if he could educate me a bit on how the process worked. </p><p></p><p>He took out a large binder and started going thru hunter survey returns and then the following year tag determinations based on those hunter survey returns. The previous couple years we had had a fair bit of snow (one yeat shut down all travel except those main roads. </p><p></p><p>Randy pointed ot those two years and the drop in success on the handful of hunter surveys returned from our unit those years. He explained in a very "trained professional" manner that as a result of the lowered success rate the biologists at the G&F concluded there were less deer and as a result lowered tag numbers those subsequent years. </p><p></p><p>I asked if they took into consideration the fact no one could get to the areas the deer were unless they used skis or snowshoes and he got a look like you don;t have a clue what you are talking about. </p><p></p><p>I suggested perhaps there were NOT a decrease in deer numbers simply hunters not willing ot put the effort into filling tags and that they had reduced tag numbers on a herd that came thru winter at a higher number than figured which would lead to incresed deer numbers. I shared doing this two years in a row would snowball the deer number increase and possibly start to cause problems..........</p><p></p><p>A couple years later at an advisory meeting in Lansford they were trying to excuse the dramatic increase in deer numbers and the damage to vehicles and hay yards and were talking about a second season in January. </p><p></p><p>Go figure. </p><p></p><p>But hey those guys know what is up so the rest of us are likely "chowder heads".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gst, post: 207386, member: 373"] At a advisory meeting in Bowbells years ago aftrer I asked some pointed questions about deer numbers, management and the process of determining tag numbers Randy approached me after the meeting and asked if he could educate me a bit on how the process worked. He took out a large binder and started going thru hunter survey returns and then the following year tag determinations based on those hunter survey returns. The previous couple years we had had a fair bit of snow (one yeat shut down all travel except those main roads. Randy pointed ot those two years and the drop in success on the handful of hunter surveys returned from our unit those years. He explained in a very "trained professional" manner that as a result of the lowered success rate the biologists at the G&F concluded there were less deer and as a result lowered tag numbers those subsequent years. I asked if they took into consideration the fact no one could get to the areas the deer were unless they used skis or snowshoes and he got a look like you don;t have a clue what you are talking about. I suggested perhaps there were NOT a decrease in deer numbers simply hunters not willing ot put the effort into filling tags and that they had reduced tag numbers on a herd that came thru winter at a higher number than figured which would lead to incresed deer numbers. I shared doing this two years in a row would snowball the deer number increase and possibly start to cause problems.......... A couple years later at an advisory meeting in Lansford they were trying to excuse the dramatic increase in deer numbers and the damage to vehicles and hay yards and were talking about a second season in January. Go figure. But hey those guys know what is up so the rest of us are likely "chowder heads". [/QUOTE]
Verification
What is the most common fish caught on this site?
Post reply
Recent Posts
Food porn
Latest: Maddog
Today at 2:58 AM
Poor Sportsmanship
Latest: Davy Crockett
Today at 1:11 AM
What are you listening to these days?
Latest: svnmag
Today at 12:32 AM
Sporting Clays
Latest: 1lessdog
Yesterday at 8:57 PM
New MN crappie Record
Latest: NDSportsman
Yesterday at 6:19 PM
Fishing videos
Latest: Rowdie
Yesterday at 5:08 PM
NFL News (Vikings)
Latest: Rowdie
Yesterday at 1:42 PM
Colorado Elk - Rifle
Latest: SDMF
Yesterday at 12:35 PM
Insanity in Oregon
Latest: Rowdie
Yesterday at 12:47 AM
If You Can't Sleep YT
Latest: svnmag
Friday at 10:12 PM
Elon's Damascus 1911 YT
Latest: svnmag
Friday at 9:49 PM
YOUTH TAG
Latest: Coyote Hunter
Friday at 9:14 PM
Battery draw…boat question
Latest: 1lessdog
Friday at 8:14 PM
Creek Chubs
Latest: Rowdie
Friday at 3:52 PM
Oahe 26
Latest: Bullsnake
Friday at 3:30 PM
L
Dont Forget
Latest: LBrandt
Friday at 12:23 PM
Eating Nelson Lake Fish
Latest: Allen
Friday at 11:29 AM
A win for Sportsmen
Latest: 1bigfokker
Friday at 10:00 AM
Greyboe Rifle Stocks
Latest: svnmag
Thursday at 9:14 PM
The Outfitters North Minot (WOW)
Latest: Duckslayer100
Thursday at 1:59 PM
Li time lithium batteries
Latest: Allen Gamble
Thursday at 11:03 AM
Friends of NDA
Forums
Hunting
Bird Hunting
Pheasant
Pheasant Politics
Top
Bottom