Harvest %

[the blur]

any numbers of what % of the deer population is harvested during the season ?

[Bballhunter11]

Probably varies from unit to unit quite a bit. i know to keep a deer herd population stable you have to take 20-30% of the herd every year so probably not enough in most areas

[Buckstopshere]

In order to answer that question, we would have to know what the deer population is in any locale, specific unit, or in the state. And that metric is on the one hand, not considered important, and on the other hand...is extremely difficult to pin down.

If it was up to you, when would you think a population count could be taken? (Even if it could.) At the beginning of the deer season would be one number, after the season would be another and very different (like half,) and a third number could be taken after the fawn drop...probably doubles again.

So the DEC counts the hunter success reports, check stations, processors, and CO reports and then figures a reporting rate. Usually the Northern Zone reports under 50% while the Southern Zone traditionally has a little bit higher reporting rate. As I recall the reporting rate for for DMU permits is historically below that of "regular" tags.

[Doc]

It always amazes me how it is possible to manage a herd of deer without ever really knowing the size of it. When we say that the herd size is "unimportant", I have to wonder exactly how we could have any idea when it is "right-sized". Isn't raw quantity kind of a basic part of that management? 

Yes I know that we go through all kinds of statistical mumbo-jumbo each year with each new result being cumulatively built on, and impacted by, decades old annual results arrived at by the same means. We even come up with statewide numbers to serve as some sort of bogus measuring stick of management success. But none of it is ever subjected to on-the-ground real verification. I understand the economic difficulties of such verification (especially in these years of state fiscal crisis). But I don't believe I will ever be able to consider such mathmatical juggling to have a whole lot of credibility until such time as they make some periodic attempts at some crude version of observed verifications of their statistical results.

And yes I have heard all about the statistical model verifications by "expert statisticians", but that is not the kind of verification that I am talking about. I don't care if their math is correct. I am more concerned with whether the statistics are turning out credibility in actual useable results. I have seen periods of both extremes of mismanagement (over-population and under-population) as have we all, and these have been admitted to by the DEC so I know it is not flawless. When we see examples of such management gone awry it seems to me that verification is a reasonable thing to demand if any part of the system is to be believed.

Yeah, I know it all sounds like some version of paranoia, but I really do have difficulties with great amounts of mathmatical fancy footwork. If it always worked out well, I guess I would have a need to ever question it ....... but it doesn't.

[MuzzyLoader]

Yeah, I know it all sounds like some version of paranoia, but I really do have difficulties with great amounts of mathematical fancy footwork. If it always worked out well, I guess I would have a need to ever question it ....... but it doesn't.

My college statistics professor told us. "If you torture numbers long enough, they'll confess to anything".  Remember... there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

[Buckstopshere]

Great line. Ha!  ;D

It is right up there with: "Another beautiful theory murdered by a ruthless gang of facts."

[nyantler]

maybe the DEC considers 1,000,000 deer over population. But if my property has 999,999 and yours has 1. you might not see it that way...

[wztirem]

maybe the DEC considers 1,000,000 deer over population. But if my property has 999,999 and yours has 1. you might not see it that way...

Joe,

The DEC has no clear estimate as to how many deer inhabit the state. FYI, google deer in Greenich CT where an INFRARED flyover was performed some time ago. It is eyeopening and was expensive!

[Doc]

maybe the DEC considers 1,000,000 deer over population. But if my property has 999,999 and yours has 1. you might not see it that way...

Joe,

The DEC has no clear estimate as to how many deer inhabit the state. FYI, google deer in Greenich CT where an INFRARED flyover was performed some time ago. It is eyeopening and was expensive!

Eye-opening? ..... definitely! Expensive? .... yes, if the entire state were done every year. However, to do it once each decade, and only a representative amount of area, just to verify the statistical results of those areas, might actually be a bargain in terms of developing a reliable, credible, and proveable statistical management procedure. I would sooner see that than simply applying the same statistics decade after decade with each year's errors compounding with each successive year and never knowing if all that data gathering, inputting and massaging was giving you a dime's worth of reliability. As far as I know, such a reliable verification activity has never been done in NYS. PA did it and now you tell me that CT did it. I would say that that automatically gives those states a leg up in terms of credibility and reliability. That has to be worth something. And if we ever get this state financially righted again, I would support the same kind of periodic activity here in NYS.

[nyantler]

maybe the DEC considers 1,000,000 deer over population. But if my property has 999,999 and yours has 1. you might not see it that way...

Joe,

The DEC has no clear estimate as to how many deer inhabit the state. FYI, google deer in Greenich CT where an INFRARED flyover was performed some time ago. It is eyeopening and was expensive!

The statement was more to the point of no matter what the population... there will always be areas where generalizations don't apply and there will be guys dissatisfied with certain DEC decisions based on their own observation of the deer herd in their area. Or basically, you can't please everyone no matter what.

[outdoorstom]

I've got a copy of the 2011 Deer Hunting Almanac put out by Deer & Deer Hunting Magazine. They list the deer population in NY as 940,000. It doesn't say how they came up with the number.

[Doc]

I've got a copy of the 2011 Deer Hunting Almanac put out by Deer & Deer Hunting Magazine. They list the deer population in NY as 940,000. It doesn't say how they came up with the number.

That's all fun stuff to read, but I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in the actual accuracy of such numbers. Actually I can't imagine why anyone would be interested in "statewide" numbers anyway. What effects hunters is a whole lot more local than that.

[wztirem]

I've got a copy of the 2011 Deer Hunting Almanac put out by Deer & Deer Hunting Magazine. They list the deer population in NY as 940,000. It doesn't say how they came up with the number.

Sometimes I think that the DEC resorts to the ancient art of Divination to come up with their deer population statistics.

[Doc]

Could be that it is just a reactionary system that issues or denies permits only after the state of the herd is so extreme that it is obvious to anyone who steps out into the woods. Then adjust permit numbers accordingly. Set the permit numbers at a certain level until the hunters scream or the farmers scream and then react by changing permit numbers in the appropriate direction.

And then perhaps we have this statistical system to simply make it look like they are doing something.....lol.

No, that is just a little too conspiratorial even for me ..... ha-ha

Doc