Post by deerman1 on Feb 28, 2010 11:41:18 GMT -5
Here is an interesting little table and perhaps some real facts that might just appear and open a few eyes what happens when a county with a finite deer herd and large hunter numbers can happen in just one year .I suspect in large deer /hunter numbers like the northern tier and southern most suffer the same thing to an extent . the two counties are the counties I have hunted on the same farms for over 35 years .Howard and Pulaski . Howard co. tends to fluctuate by high percentages up and down over a few years every few years of buck harvest when the doe herd harvest numbers go up and the the buck harvest spikes it then plummets by percentage instead of staying constant or a slight rise or fall. IMHO Howard co shows what a small unstable herd does and to a tee when deer take is excessive or spikes one or two seasons . The trend is disturbing at best . Also notice the bonus tag number and its increases on the far right of the table.
Pulaski shows small rises and falls for the most part but a constant travel up in numbers without large percentage crashes after tag and harvest increases. This IMHO shows what a stable deer herd with stable yet constant harvests with slight increases by percentage yearly should look like . IMHO A very stable deers hunter co. Pulaski.
Notice from 2000 to 2009 the harvest numbers of buck and doe compared to the rise and fall trend s from year to year.
Howard co. first by the way Howard co over the last 35 years reads like a frickin Greek tragedy in deer numbers and harvest as well . By the way 2000and 2001 were 2 buck years as well the rest were OBR.Notice the years of large doe /deer harvest jumps by percentage were fallowed by bit time falls in buck harvest by percentage .
Year---------- total yearly take -----Bucks-----Does--------- Bonus#
2000---------- 243 --------------------- 143 -------- 98 ----------- A
2001 --------- 312 ---------------------- 146 -------- 166 --------- 1
2002 --------- 302 ---------------------- 136 -------- 166 --------- 1
2003 --------- 336 ---------------------- 142 -------- 193 --------- 1
2004 --------- 356 --------------------- 163 -----------193 ---------1
2005 --------- 409 ---------------------- 188 ----------- 221--------- 2
2006---------- 417 ---------------------- 157 -----------260 ---------3
2007 --------- 512 ---------------------- 213 ----------- 300 ---------3
2008 --------- 496 ----------------------- 173 ----------- 322--------- 4
2009 --------- 527 ----------------------- 190 -----------337 ----------4
Pulaski co hunting results and a more stable typical harvest however at a lesser percentage there still declines in buck / deer harvests the years of large jumps in Doe harvest .
2000 --------- 1039 -----------------------488 -----------551---------- 1
2001 --------- 1015 -----------------------520 -----------495---------- 1
2002 --------- 1072 ----------------------- 522 ----------- 550 ------- 1
2003 --------- 1110 ----------------------- 545 -----------565--------- 1
2004---------- 1169------------------------578 ------------ 591--------1
2005 --------- 1385 ------------------------621------------- 764--------2
2006---------- 1424------------------------ 606------------- 818--------2
2007---------- 1379 ------------------------612 --------------766--------2
2008 ---------- 1599 ----------------------- 693 --------------894 -------3
2009 ---------- 1586 ----------------------- 632 --------------953 ------- 3
Here is my summation I believe the big drops in buck harvest years fallowed a year or two of big time Doe harvests . In small herds with alot of hunters this percentage fall is large and I fully believe these herds need a break in doe harvest for a few years not some arbitrary raise in bonus tag numbers when over all herd numbers are low in these central counties . I fully believe that in the counties like Howard the DNR are way off base since IMHO these middle counties are still in the deer herd building stag not the lower the deer herds stage. I mean just 9 seasons ago my county was not even taking a buck per sq mile and now we are just getting close to one buck per sq. mile . Remember if you are not seeing any or very few deer / bucks on your land before you kill the next doe is the herd estimate the DNR bonus tags right for you .
BECAUSE ALL ANTLERED BUCKS COME OUT FROM A DOES TAIL THE YEAR BEFORE >
After extensive discussions with my hunting entourage and less than heated discussions over the last week .I will not shoot another single doe in our county or will the the 27 hunters that I hunt with and run with until the numbers stabilize here or the DNR listens to us instead of the insurance companies and soccer moms , factory workers ,and blind teenagers on the cell phones putting on makeup and running late for work ,that hit the deer that live in and around the sprawling subdivisions .The ones have popped up in the last 10 years in the deer woods that surrounds Kokomo and the two small towns in this county are pathetic city dwellers that think because they bulldozed a farm field or woods that they are county folk now.
Be smart local hunters and let the harvest numbers and what you see guide you not some falsely conceived bonus tag limit number in a book. THINK people.
Pulaski shows small rises and falls for the most part but a constant travel up in numbers without large percentage crashes after tag and harvest increases. This IMHO shows what a stable deer herd with stable yet constant harvests with slight increases by percentage yearly should look like . IMHO A very stable deers hunter co. Pulaski.
Notice from 2000 to 2009 the harvest numbers of buck and doe compared to the rise and fall trend s from year to year.
Howard co. first by the way Howard co over the last 35 years reads like a frickin Greek tragedy in deer numbers and harvest as well . By the way 2000and 2001 were 2 buck years as well the rest were OBR.Notice the years of large doe /deer harvest jumps by percentage were fallowed by bit time falls in buck harvest by percentage .
Year---------- total yearly take -----Bucks-----Does--------- Bonus#
2000---------- 243 --------------------- 143 -------- 98 ----------- A
2001 --------- 312 ---------------------- 146 -------- 166 --------- 1
2002 --------- 302 ---------------------- 136 -------- 166 --------- 1
2003 --------- 336 ---------------------- 142 -------- 193 --------- 1
2004 --------- 356 --------------------- 163 -----------193 ---------1
2005 --------- 409 ---------------------- 188 ----------- 221--------- 2
2006---------- 417 ---------------------- 157 -----------260 ---------3
2007 --------- 512 ---------------------- 213 ----------- 300 ---------3
2008 --------- 496 ----------------------- 173 ----------- 322--------- 4
2009 --------- 527 ----------------------- 190 -----------337 ----------4
Pulaski co hunting results and a more stable typical harvest however at a lesser percentage there still declines in buck / deer harvests the years of large jumps in Doe harvest .
2000 --------- 1039 -----------------------488 -----------551---------- 1
2001 --------- 1015 -----------------------520 -----------495---------- 1
2002 --------- 1072 ----------------------- 522 ----------- 550 ------- 1
2003 --------- 1110 ----------------------- 545 -----------565--------- 1
2004---------- 1169------------------------578 ------------ 591--------1
2005 --------- 1385 ------------------------621------------- 764--------2
2006---------- 1424------------------------ 606------------- 818--------2
2007---------- 1379 ------------------------612 --------------766--------2
2008 ---------- 1599 ----------------------- 693 --------------894 -------3
2009 ---------- 1586 ----------------------- 632 --------------953 ------- 3
Here is my summation I believe the big drops in buck harvest years fallowed a year or two of big time Doe harvests . In small herds with alot of hunters this percentage fall is large and I fully believe these herds need a break in doe harvest for a few years not some arbitrary raise in bonus tag numbers when over all herd numbers are low in these central counties . I fully believe that in the counties like Howard the DNR are way off base since IMHO these middle counties are still in the deer herd building stag not the lower the deer herds stage. I mean just 9 seasons ago my county was not even taking a buck per sq mile and now we are just getting close to one buck per sq. mile . Remember if you are not seeing any or very few deer / bucks on your land before you kill the next doe is the herd estimate the DNR bonus tags right for you .
BECAUSE ALL ANTLERED BUCKS COME OUT FROM A DOES TAIL THE YEAR BEFORE >
After extensive discussions with my hunting entourage and less than heated discussions over the last week .I will not shoot another single doe in our county or will the the 27 hunters that I hunt with and run with until the numbers stabilize here or the DNR listens to us instead of the insurance companies and soccer moms , factory workers ,and blind teenagers on the cell phones putting on makeup and running late for work ,that hit the deer that live in and around the sprawling subdivisions .The ones have popped up in the last 10 years in the deer woods that surrounds Kokomo and the two small towns in this county are pathetic city dwellers that think because they bulldozed a farm field or woods that they are county folk now.
Be smart local hunters and let the harvest numbers and what you see guide you not some falsely conceived bonus tag limit number in a book. THINK people.