Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Deer Management in Michigan
#1
[font "arial, helvetica, sans-serif"][#003366]Deer Management in Michigan[/#003366][/font]
[font "arial, helvetica, sans-serif"][black]

[Image: deer_51698_7.gif]Deer have been a valuable resource in Michigan since the first Native Americans began to hunt them. Prior to European settlement, Michigan had an abundant deer herd in the south. The mixture of hardwoods, wetlands, bogs and forest openings was perfect for deer. There were few deer in the virgin forests of the north, which were inhabited mostly by elk and moose. The mature trees were so dense that sunlight could not reach the forest floor and therefore little deer food was available.



As farmers and settlers moved into southern Michigan, deer were exterminated by removal of cover and by unregulated shooting--deer were mostly gone by 1870. Logging of forests in the north produced an opposite effect--more openings, brush, and young forests--the northern herd climbed to estimated 1 million deer in the 1880s.



[#006400]Depopulation and rebounding[/#006400]

As railroads were developed and provided access into the wilderness, market hunters slaughtered hundreds of thousands of deer. Early measures to control market hunting were not very successful, but finally in 1895 a law, which really marked the beginning of deer management in Michigan, established a deer hunting season and limited the number of deer that could be harvested.



What followed were decades of ups and downs in the deer population resulting from changes in hunting regulations and available habitat, compounded by a lack of natural predators.



In 1914, Game Commissioner William R. Oates estimated that there were only 45,000 deer in Michigan and recommended changing regulations so only antlered deer could be taken by hunters, as this would increase the size of the deer herd. The deer herd began to rebound. Some of the increase was due to habitat changes as logged-over areas produced deer browse. In addition, shrubs and other deer foods developed in many areas that had been cleared for agriculture, but abandoned.



[#006400]The "Deer Problem"[/#006400]

By 1930, the abundance of deer was recognized. The first discussion of deer-vehicle accidents began. There was also a significant amount of winter starvation and over-browsing in cedar swamps where field investigators reported a shortage of food and cover for the growing herd. Mr. Ilo Bartlett, the state's first deer biologist, reported that there were 1.125 million deer in the state in 1937 and he began to talk about the "Deer Problem." About 1/3 of the deer at this time were in the Upper Peninsula and 2/3 in the northern Lower Peninsula--only a very few deer were present in southern Michigan.



Despite the state's attempt to provide more hunting lands and to place more deer habitat in public ownership, the deer problem continued until the herd peaked at about 1.5 million deer in the late 1940s. At first with small hunts beginning in 1941 and then in larger ones, antlerless deer were once again allowed to be taken by hunters in an attempt reduce the size of the deer herd. However, before that could happen, the habitat for deer collapsed, due to a combination of pressure from a large herd and an increase in forested areas--mature stands of timber once again began to appear on formerly logged lands. The deer population once again dropped.



To answer the habitat problem, the Department of Conservation developed a Deer Range Improvement Program (DRIP) and a goal of 1 million deer was established for spring 1981. The success of the DRIP, along with series of mild winters in the 1980s and artificial feeding of deer by the public, further propelled the herd to a new peak of 2 million deer in 1989. Signs of distress in the herd appeared again. Deer-vehicle accidents exceeded 40,000 per year with an average of 5 people killed and 1,500 injured each year. Crop damage reappeared.



[#006400]Present policy[/#006400]

In the late 1980s, the Department of Natural Resources reaffirmed its goal of 1.3 million deer in the fall herd (which was biologically the same as the 1971 goal of 1 million deer in the spring herd) and continues to work toward that goal, but with an updated buck to doe ratio. Unfortunately, the large deer herd has begun to have a significant impact on their own habitat and the habitats of other animals. In some areas, they have nearly eliminated certain plants which may provide food and or shelter for other wildlife.



The build-up of deer in urban and suburban areas has also become a challenge. Other than fencing, nonlethal control methods have usually been unsuccessful or impractical, and lethal controls have eventually been applied. Management of deer in urban and suburban settings will provide many future opportunities for public education and involvement.



[url "http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10370_12145_12205-56904--,00.html"][#0000ff]Click Here[/#0000ff][/url] for more information about Michigan's deer.[/black][/font]
[signature]
Reply
#2
sorry guys , but here comes the soap box ! but when it comes to deer and the dnr . well i think these guys know more about politics than regulating our deer population . auto insurance companys seems to be one of the " management AND CASH COW " that the d.n.r. looks to .

i follow the letter of the law when it comes to hunting , and i have my own standards i live by when hunting . i would rather take a scrub brush 4 point before a dandy six or eight point . there better breeding stock .but m.u.c.c. ( SPONSORED BY THE D.N.R. ) wants and is pushing for a 8 point or more limit on bucks , come on , be for real , some of us would rather eat the venison than hang it on the wall .

now there experimenting with point limits ! why ? to bring in more out of state hunters- licence fees ! michigan hunters loose out and the dnr pockets the profits .

t,b. areas with unlimited doe tags ? ruined the 452 area ! i have hunted that area for the last twelve years . the hunting there has totally gone to @##$$^%# ! , thank you d.n.r AND WHAT ABOUT SELLING 1 ACRE PRIVATE LAND OWNER DOE PERMITS TO OUT OF STATERS ?????? come on , your inviting poaching on our state lands ! charging our military people a licence fee ? BOOO TO YOU !!!!!!!! no age limit on kids hunting with a fire arm ? TOTAL STUPIDITY ! THIS YOU CALL DEER MANAGEMENT ?

heck the first bait ban was illeagle and you knew it , yet you jailed and ticketed people for it . never gave back there stuff or recouped there fines and legal fees to them . some city guy sets out a bag of apples because he can hunt one weekend only and he's a criminal , a farmer can set a stand up in a feild of corn and rent it out near the same area . whats the deal there ? thats not baiting deer ? give me a break , were not stupid ! ( i don't bait by the way ).

because of all the goodies the dnr has given themselves over the last three or four decades , there going broke . less c.o.'s to patroll the woods and two tracks , so lets close them off from the public . total B.S. if you ask me . that land belongs to the people of the state , it is not d.n.r. property ! the d.n.r. are hired stuards of the land , we are stuards of the land also , who makes the rules ignoring the publics oppinion ? d.n.r. thats who ! it is our (the public ) combined property , where does the d.n.r. get off thinking they own it ?

yea , i have seen the political machine of the d.n.r. in action , spending thousands of dollers to improve a acess road and then blocking the road with a gate ! total missuse of our liscence and tax money ! TOTAL STUPIDITY !

sorry guys , but as far as i can see the d.n.r is run by "blind to the public" politicians , they can only see with there hands in the pockets of corparate contributors who are lobbying for there own agendia .

keep the d.n.r. out of politics ( why are they there in the first place ?we hired them not elected them ) and maybe they can do the job there suposed to do .
[signature]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)