BIG BUCKS ? YEARS AGO????

This is the discussion: were these big bucks we are getting on trail cam's here years ago and we never seen them???...with the hi tech cam's we can now see them in early am,, of the 5000 pictures we have taken so far this year in 3 months, over 50 shooter bucks, 8pts or bigger have been captured..were they here before the cam's in the big woods, 90 % of these bucks were out between 12am and 5am...hardly any in daylight hours...have the hunting pressure made them nocturnal???...I read we are down 200,000 hunters from years ago, silver will have exact figures as soon as he reads this...what HR has done is eliminate the hunters from the big woods, AR was the best thing ever done in this state for buck hunters and should have been implemented years ago..what would it have been like in the 70's 80's in AR was in force?????....my forecast is that off all these big boys we have on cam's.only a small percentage of them will be taken, and they just keep getting bigger and bigger..what do you guys think..?????

In the area of 2F that we hunt, when we used to have lots of pressure, we would see those big bucks about once a season when there was a lot of pressure and guys got them up and moving. As declined along with deer populations we saw them less and less, until we started using the trail cams in the area.

One thing I have noticed is that before we went to all IR flashes, we would get the big ones in the daylight early in the summmer a couple of times, but once they started to work at night we would get them under the flash, one time and then never again. Once those big boys got hit with the flash once, they were gone.

musky, and RSB..flash has less effect on big bucks than IR..they make noise...have many trophy bucks coming back after flashes..IR most never come back..have proof on many bucks..RSB..wco's told me years ago about the big bucks they saw after midnight when patroling and "spoting"..you guys can get away with it..who's going to stop you...what is your honest opinion on big bucks in the big woods..were they here 10 years ago...??? or is this a result of AR and less hunters in the woods???? thats my question....

NOW, one more question for you....has the deer hunters in your area decreased since ar..????

I can relate another "big buck" story as it realates to a WCO watching a particular field for poaching..

My local WCO and his deputies were watching a field that also had a poaching problem a few years ago.. one of the deputies told me of a BIG buck coming out in it late at night ... this buck always appeared from 1am until about 3am.... never before or stayed later... two hours of grazing and that was it, plus he never ventured more than about a hundred yards from the woods and the security there... I think NO ONE in this area was aware of this buck except for the WCO and his deputies .....

No one ever heard of it getting harvested either ... he just dissappeared

ORIGINAL: deerfly

Every time those two bucks heard a car approaching they went back into the woods until the car was past. Though several people stopped and spotlighted the other deer in that field I don’t think any of them saw those two big bucks at all that night. I

That is precisely why the B/D ratio you derive from your surveys are meaningless. The bucks are more wary than the does which skews your results.

 
Wouldn’t you rather expect that the mature older bucks have always been harder to see and count? I would rather suspect that since we are primarily looking at trends the surveys pretty accurately reflect that from both before and since antler restrictions.
 
What is affecting the surveys even more though is that as the habitat improves all of the survey teams are commenting on how it is getting harder every year to see back into the woods where they once used to be able to see and count deer and other wildlife.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

Wouldn’t you rather expect that the mature older bucks have always been harder to see and count? I would rather suspect that since we are primarily looking at trends the surveys pretty accurately reflect that from both before and since antler restrictions.
 

You used your surveys to support your claim that there was a problem with the B/D ratio before ARs and I proved you were flat out wrong.

I see about the same number of both fall turkey hunters and deer in a day of turkey season as I did in the early sixties but come deer season I don’t see the hunters of deer moving around. I kind of suspect if we were to once again have the hunters we once had moving around through the woods all day they would see about as many deer as they saw back then too.

How do you explain the fact that hunters managed to kill 7 DPSM in 2G in 2003 ,but a harvest of only 2.28 DPSM kept the herd stable in 2009?

Riz-- part came from the 2009 QDMA deer Management report, part from the 2008 QDMA hunter stats report and part from the Audit report on the PGC done by WMI. At the 1B-2F meeting last spring Martone and other PGC reps confirmed the Pa stats but wouldn't give an answer on why or what they were going to do to reverse the trend. Nationwide overall hunter numbers fell 10% but big game hunters only fell 5% between 1985 and 2006 and they only fell 2% from 2001 to 2006. There are a couple pages and charts in the Audit report that show the Pa numbers and they are just the opposite.

All the article is doing is taking a longer time frame and giving one mans opinion of whats the cause. Geez Doc, the QDMA information has always been your bible and the nationwide data came from them. Most of the Pa data is from the WMI Audit and confirmed by the 2F/1B Commissioner and PGC reps.

last one for today... shouldn't have ATTACKED my BIBLES !!!...


I just had to copy just what the QDMA stated in their 2010 whitetail report...

In our 2009 Whitetail Report
(download at www.qdma.com) we
discussed “Hunter Numbers, Demographics
and Trends” on pages 23 to
25. In the article we stated that while
hunter numbers are in a steady decline,
the number of big game hunters
was only slightly declining and
was even increasing in some states.
As Families Afield and other hunter
recruitment initiatives continue to
attract and retain new hunters, we
were interested in the most recent
license sales data available from state
agencies, so we surveyed wildlife
agencies in the continental U.S. and
asked for the total number of hunting
licenses (number of unique hunters)
sold in 2007 and 2008.


We received data from 38 states, and 26 (68 percent) reported
selling more licenses in 2008 than in
2007!

One state sold approximately
equal numbers, and only 11 states
(29 percent) sold fewer licenses in
2008. For states selling more licenses,
the average increase was 3.5 percent
and ranged from 0.3 percent in
Pennsylvania and Tennessee to 22.6 percent in Idaho.

Numerically, Missouri tallied the largest
increase by selling an additional 28,521 licenses (+4 percent) in 2008. For states selling fewer
licenses, the average decrease was 1.7 percent and ranged from 0.3 percent in Alabama and
South Carolina to 6.8 percent in Mississippi. Numerically, Mississippi tallied the largest decrease by selling 14,446 fewer licenses in 2008. However, according to a Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks deer biologist, this decline is misleading as Hurricane Katrina had
a major negative impact on license sales in Mississippi in 2005. License sales rebounded slightly

----------------

License Sales
Quotable QDMA:
“We received data
from 38 states, and 26
(68 percent) reported
selling more hunting
licenses in 2008 than
in 2007!”

-----------------
New England states also took it on the chin as Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont
all sold fewer licenses in 2008. Fortunately only 29 percent of the survey respondents sold
fewer licenses in 2008. Of these 11 states, 9 (82 percent) had 2008 license sales within 3 percent of
their 2007 values. In total, 32 of the 38 respondents (84 percent) had 2008 license sales within +/- 5
percent of their 2007 numbers.
Regionally, 9 of 11 (82 percent) Midwestern states had increased sales in 2008, 3 of 4 (75 percent)
Western states had increased sales, and 7 of 11 (64 percent) Northeastern and Southeastern states
had increased sales in 2008. In the Midwest, Missouri had the largest increase adding 28,521 licenses
(+4 percent), while Kentucky had the largest decline selling 6,549 fewer licenses (-1.9 percent).
In the Northeast, New York added 26,330 licenses (+4.5 percent) while Massachusetts sold 2,306
fewer (-3.3 percent). In the Southeast, Texas sold 19,691 additional licenses (+1.8 percent) and
Mississippi sold 14,446 fewer licenses (-6.8 percent). Finally, in the West, Idaho sold 12,692 more
licenses (+22.6 percent) while Wyoming sold 2,323 fewer licenses (-2.5 percent).

With a declining trend for hunter numbers and reduced wildlife agency budgets, it is encouraging
for the majority of states to report license sales increases in 2008. Let’s hope when the 2009 license
sales become available they will show a similar increase. We may have turned the corner with declining
hunter numbers, and to do so in a tough economy is even more encouraging.

so as usual S-10 mis-represnts what he reads....

the increase nation wide was for JUST ONE YEAR and that was counting all license sales...
QDMA even included PA.... S-10 did not mentioned that did he NOW !!!

I forgot to copy the "declining buck hunters in Pa info from that report .. now I'm done ==
Monday night football and Coors light !!!!!!

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) conducts a national survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation every five years. The most recent survey was published in 2007 and includes data from 2006. This report includes the number of days afield by type of hunting, and categorizes these data for all hunting, big game, small game, migratory bird, and other animals.

According to the FWS, big game hunters logged 164 million days in pursuit of their quarry in
2006. While white-tailed deer hunting constitutes the bulk of these days, the report does not
separate big game hunting by species.


To get a measure of the number of man-days spent pursuing whitetails, we surveyed state agencies
in the contiguous U.S. and asked for the number of man-days expended for white-tailed
deer in 2007 and 2008. We received responses from 41 states (see map); 21 states reported 2007
hunter effort data and 16 also reported 2008 data. Since nearly half of the states that responded
to the survey do not collect man-days of effort, we were not able to estimate what proportion
of big game effort in the FWS report was likely attributable to whitetail hunters. However, we
did receive some interesting information. For states that collect/estimate this data, white-tailed hunter effort ranged from 62,000 man-days in Oregon to 9.7 million man-days in Michigan (see chart).
Given the declining trend in license sales that we hear so much about, it is encouraging that only 4 of the 16 states reporting data for both years had fewer man-days in 2008. Two of the 4 states (Michigan and Pennsylvania) had reductions of 0.2 percent, and this is essentially a wash for states that tallied 9.7 and 6.5 million man-days in 2008, respectively.
The other states with reductions were Wyoming (-1 percent) and Louisiana (-3 percent) -- minute reductions for sure.

Minnesota estimated equal numbers of man-days in 2007 and 2008, and the other 11 states
reported increases ranging from 1 percent in Maryland to 76 percent in Idaho (note: data from
Idaho included man-days for mule deer and increased from 241,059 to 424,779). Other notable
increases included Oregon (22 percent), Connecticut
(16 percent), and Mississippi (8 percent). Excluding the
monumental percentage increase in Idaho, the other states’
average increase was 7 percent.

This is extremely encouraging
for deer management programs and the future of deer
hunting.

post edited by Dr. Trout - 2010/09/27 18:53:59

Wrong year doc. Also one year hardly makes a trend. But 10% decline from 2001-2006 does.

"Coors light"

Doc--Why is it you can find the 2010 report but can't find the 2009 one. Here it is for the blind and lazy whoever they may be. Read the audit yourself and look at the charts.

QDMA's 2009 whitetail deer reportEmail Print Comments By Don Mulligan
ESPNOutdoors.com
Archive
This year's whitetail roundup is filled with lots of good news for deer hunters and was presented at QDMA's convention by their CEO, who took sides on one of the most controversial topics in deer hunting today.



Brian Murphy - QDMA Chief Executive OfficerLOUISVILLE, Ky. — Speaking before a packed house at this year's QDMA convention in Louisville, Ky., Brian Murphy, QDMA Chief Executive Officer, didn't mince his words when describing his biggest concerns for the future of deer hunting.

"Television hunting shows and even QDMA misinform hunters at times regarding the true nature of deer hunting," he said. " We all have to do a better job portraying the sport as something more than just the pursuit and harvest of record book bucks."

Even more controversial, however, was his statement about high-fence hunting operations.

"Though different operations offer very different experiences, I am concerned about the role high-fenced hunting will have on the future of deer hunting and the health of our deer herd in the United States," Murphy said.

He cited concerns over the spread of diseases within the deer herd and the role captive farms might play. He also discussed the negative impact privatization of otherwise wild animals would have on hunting.

After that, Murphy offered endless research and evidence that we are currently in the midst of "the good old days of deer hunting right now."

From 1985 to 2005, the number of whitetail deer in the United States more than doubled, growing from 14 to 30 million animals.

In that time hunter numbers have declined, according to the USFWS, but not as drastically across all species.

From 1996 to 2006, for example, overall hunter numbers fell 10 percent, but big game hunter numbers only dropped 5 percent. From 2001 to 2006 the decline was only 2 percent.

That's manageable, Murphy said, as long as we all continue to portray our sport positively and strive to keep it in the public eye.

And by all indications, hunters are doing a good job.

GHEEEEEZZZZZZZZZ...
here we go again....

An ESPN writer reports about what someone said from the QDMA...

so it is not from the 2009 QDMA report.. it's from Murphy's comments...

and note he (Murphy)says according to USFWS not QDMA figures... and they are not a direct quote from anyone..

In that time hunter numbers have declined, according to the USFWS, but not as drastically across all species.

From 1996 to 2006, for example, overall hunter numbers fell 10 percent, but big game hunter numbers only dropped 5 percent.From 2001 to 2006 the decline was only 2 percent.

wasn't 2001 to 2006 during our AR/HR when everyone quit hunting because there were no deer left ?????

note it also does not say DEER HUNTERS..... it says big game...


BTW ==the link to the 2009 QDMA deer report is directly below the 2010 link on their home page.... so I know where it is and I have read it too....



here it is directly from the 2009 QDMA REPORT ===

Hunters by the Numbers
According to the USFWS,
5 percent of the U.S. population
16 years and older
hunted in 2006. That was
roughly 12.5 million hunters.
Of those hunters, 10.7
million (86 percent) hunted
big game and 10.1 million
(94 percent) of those hunted
deer. These numbers suggest
deer hunters comprised
about 78 percent of all
hunters 16 years and older
in 2006. This highlights the
importance of deer hunting
and re-emphasizes that deer
drive the hunting industry.
In 1996 there were 14 million
hunters (16+ years), so
we lost around 10 percent
of them by 2006. This isn’t
a preferred trend, but it’s
worth noting during that decade
the number of big game
hunters remained relatively
stable with only a 5 percent
decline and only a 2 percent
decline from 2001 to 2006.
Hunters Lost and Found
There are multiple ways to calculate hunter participation rates, however, according to NSSF, 35
states lost hunters from 1996 to 2006. Rhode Island lost 19 percent of its hunters while South Carolina
lost 17 percent, Connecticut lost 16 percent, New Hampshire lost 15 percent, and Massachusetts
lost 14 percent. New England took quite a hit with respect to hunter numbers. However, 15
states increased their number of hunters during that decade. Georgia, North Dakota and Tennessee
all increased their number of hunters by about 16 percent, and Oklahoma and South Dakota both
gained nearly 10 percent. Noticeably absent from these
lists are the “Big 3”. Texas, Pennsylvania and Michigan
are the perennial leaders in hunting license sales and
from 1996 to 2006 Texas held steady with less than a
1 percent decline while license sales dropped nearly 6
percent in Pennsylvania and over 8 percent in Michigan.
That means Pennsylvania and Michigan each lost approximately
as many hunters during that time period as
there are in Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts
and Rhode Island combined!

NFL TIME .....

good night guys.....

HOG WASH