No faith in the SAK numbers

[Rancid Crabtree]

Recently I have been looking at car deer crashes as an indicator of the deer herd size in WI. If the population is high, then we should be seeing increased car deer collisions. Driver data indicates that the number of miles driven increases about 2% a year due to new drivers and new roads. Miles driven is on the increase. The math is simple. The number of miles drives is on the increase and based on the SAK formula, so is the deer herd. The last few years we have been at all time highs of 1.6 - 1.8 million. Pretty easy right? More miles driven plus more deer should equal more car deer crashes.   

 I did not stop at WI. I also looked at other states to see if they were seeing the same percentage change in the last few years. I used the data from 2004 to 2006 since that is when EAB took off and we would be seeing the effects of the T-zone hunts.

Wisconsin Data

2002: 45,278 car/deer crashes ,  deer herd estimate (pre hunt) 1.3M

2003: 47,840 car/deer crashes ,  deer herd estimate (pre hunt) 1.6M

2004: 48,316 car/deer crashes ,  deer herd estimate (pre hunt) 1.6M, steady increase, right?

2005: 41,688 car/deer crashes ,  deer herd estimate (pre hunt) 1.6M

2006: 36,900 car/deer crashes ,  deer herd estimate (pre hunt) 1.8M

As you can see, the 2006 data shows a 25% drop in car deer collisions from 2004  to 2006 and yet the SAK numbers  claim 1.8 million deer yet we were seeing a steady increase in crashes from 2002 to 2004. The data from 2006 shows that with the with the deer herd at an all time high and miles driven across the state at its highest amount ever, we are seeing deer/car crashes at their lowest since those of 1999. I believe the number of miles driven is accurate but I have a problem with the SAK deer herd number and the car/deer crashes show that.

 Next, I looked at other states to see if they were seeing the huge declines in car/deer crashes like WI

 Illinois Data

2000, 19,731 car deer crashes

2001, 22,933 car deer crashes

2002, 23,675 car deer crashes

2003, 25,660 car deer crashes

2004, 25,837 car deer crashes

2005, 24,248 car deer crashes

2006, 25,491 car deer crashes

Net change in last two years of just 1.5%   



Michigan Data

2000, 65,005 car deer crashes


2001, 66,993 car deer crashes


2002, 63,136 car deer crashes


2003, 67,760 car deer crashes


2004, 62,707 car deer crashes


2005, 58,741 car deer crashes


2006, 60,875 car deer crashes


Net change in last two years of just 3%   

Iowa Data


2000, 7556 car deer crashes


2001, 6,057 car deer crashes


2002, 8,641 car deer crashes


2003, 8,396 car deer crashes


2004, 8,481 car deer crashes


2005, 7,320 car deer crashes


2006, 8,335 car deer crashes


Net change in last two years of just 2%


New York saw a 1% decline in the last year


Ohio saw a 1% increase in car deer crashes in the last two years. Minnesota is the only state that is seeing a decline nearly every year since 1999  but it's numbers vary greatly from year to year. On average, other states are seeing pretty static numbers of car/deer crashes (around 1 to 2 % ) and yet Wisconsin's numbers have dropped dramatically.


Side note: All the states that I looked at saw a drop in car deer crashes in 2005 and then saw an increase in 2006. All states except WI which continued to decline.


Being a skeptic myself, I started to look at WI county totals. This was hard since few counties have just one DMU that covers it entirely plus from year to year, most saw some sort of change. I went back to the reg books and the DMU maps from 2002 to present time. I started with Waupaca county since it has been a T-zone or EAB county for many years. Waupaca County is covered by deer management units 62A, 63A and 65B. I looked at the car/deer crash totals for Waupaca County starting with 2001


2001, 1954 car/deer crashes


2002, 2164 car/deer crashes


2003, 2409 car/deer crashes .. Are you seeing the trend? Now insert T-zones and EAB


2004, 2333 car/deer crashes


2005, 1701 car/deer crashes


2006, 1943 car/deer crashes which is a 17% decrease from 2004


Next, I looked at Buffalo County which is covered almost entirely by DMU 61. Like Waupaca county, Buffalo county has been a T-zone or EAB county since 2003.


Buffalo county


2001, 402 car/deer crashes


2002, 327 car/deer crashes


2003, 445 car/deer crashes


2004, 349 car/deer crashes


2005, 312 car/deer crashes


2006, 301 car/deer crashes which is a 14% decrease from 2004


Ok so now your thinking to yourself, "You said that WI saw a 25% decrease, These Counties are less than that. There must be Counties that saw much bigger decreases in car/deer crashes" Well you would be right. Enter Manitowoc County which is covered almost completely by DMU 64 and has also been a T-zone County since 2003 .


 Manitowoc  county


2001, 722 car/deer crashes


2002, 709 car/deer crashes

2003, 833 car/deer crashes

2004, 962 car/deer crashes

2005, 634 car/deer crashes

2006, 526 car/deer crashes which is a 45% decrease from 2004


If you have kept up this far, thanks. we are almost done. The next question you should be asking is "Hey! what about those counties that have never been part of the T-zone or EAB structure, surely they too are seeing the same declines in car/deer crashes?" Good question. Again, it was hard to find a county that was spared from any change over the years but I did find Forest County which is covered by DMU's 38,39,43,44 and 45. Forest County has remained a regular deer season County through all of the season structure changes so it was a good control unit to use as a check


Forest County

2001, 124 car/deer crashes

2002, 139 car/deer crashes

2003, 210 car/deer crashes

2004, 159 car/deer crashes

2005, 183 car/deer crashes (actually saw a 15% increase of crashes)

2006, 155 car/deer crashes which is a 2.5% change from 2004 and aligns with what other states are seeing.


So, there you have it. The reason why I no longer have faith in the SAK (at least since 2001) Back when it was pure data from a regular season structure, it was much closer to estimating the herd size but in early 2000 when T-zones, EAB, CWD hunts and youth hunts started to screw with the kill totals, it became useless and is estimating higher herd numbers than what is actually out there.

[Rancid Crabtree]

I have been keeping track of the gun kill numbers so far. It makes sense that Waupaca County is leading the list in kills as it is once again an EAB county and those hunters are forced to kill disproportionately high numbers of does for this year and out of fear for next year being an other EAB year. Don't get me wrong. EAB works to drive down the deer numbers but don't then turn around and tell me that the SAK numbers are right based on buck kill when the system is bastardized with skewed kill totals.


lets looks at the early totals using those same four counties:


Waupaca


7021 total deer killed so far  but 62% were antlerless.


Buffalo


3132 total deer killed so far  but 67% were antlerless.


Manitowoc


1280 total deer killed so far  but 68% were antlerless


Lastly, Forest County


925 total deer killed so far but only 38% were antlerless.


Which of those four counties will have far less car deer crashes next year since more of the fawn makers are being shot off? This which means the herd is being effectively reduced due to the season structure so I would expect to see next years pre hunt totals to be in the 1.0 - 1.2 million range.

[mudbrook]

It's remarkable that someone has not seen this relationship before. There must be just too much common sense involved. I hope the word gets out that there are issues with the data that is being used. I will do my best to see that as many people as I can will be informed about this issue.
great work on your part!

[Rancid Crabtree]

I sent this data to Dean Bortz at Wisconsin Outdoor news. I wonder what he will do with it?

[Bukmastr]

 Eye opening info...

[lungbuster]

Very interesting info...............I wonder if the DNR would even consider looking at those figures? Doubtful as it goes against their agenda to kill as many deer as possible every season

[Rancid Crabtree]

So as I see the numbers, this was the worst year for bucks killed since 1997. (based on Lic. sale)

This year 641,432 tags were sold and so far the total shows 125,060 bucks were taken. That means that there was a 19.5% buck success rate for all the tags sold. There is still the ML season but I doubt it will change the buck total by even one half of 1%

In 2007, 641,432 tags were sold and the buck success rate was 19.5% yet the pre hunt herd estimate was 1.8M based on the 06 kill.

In 2006, 644,906 tags were sold and the buck success rate was 21.2% The pre hunt herd estimate was 1.8M based on the 05 kill.

In 2005, 641,789 tags resulted in a 23% buck success rate. The pre hunt herd estimate was 1.6M based on the 04 kill.

In 2004, 649,955 tags resulted in a 20.4% buck success rate. The pre hunt herd estimate was 1.6M based on the 03 kill.

2003 there was a 22.3% buck success rate. The pre hunt herd estimate was 1.6M based on the 02 kill.

2002 (the year nobody hunted because of CWD) 619,323 tags netted 126,470 bucks for a 20.4% buck success rate. Not only was the percentage higher but the actual buck kill was about 1,400 higher back then compared to today. The pre hunt herd estimate was 1.3M based on the 01 kill.

In 2001, there was a 20.6% buck success rate. The pre hunt herd estimate was 1.3M based on the 00 kill.

2000 was one of the best years of all. nearly 25% of all tags sold were used on a buck. The pre hunt herd estimate was 1.8M based on the 99 kill.

1999 was 23%

1998 was 22.6%

1997 was 18%. So 2007 was the worst in 10 years for buck success rate.

1996 showed a 20.5% buck success rate .

1995 again had a 25% buck success rate per tags sold.

The average from 1984 thru 1994 showed that 18.3% of all gun tags sold were used to tag a buck.

It would appear that the number of gun bucks is down (again, I know there is still the ML season) the total buck kill so far for 2007 is 125,060.

In 2006 the gun buck total was 137,223


in 2005 the gun buck total was 147,692


in 2004 the gun buck total was 133,178


in 2003 the gun buck total was 147,463


in 2002 (the year nobody hunted) the gun buck total was 126,470 and there was only 619,323 licensed hunters. We killed 1410 more bucks with 22,109 fewer hunters.


in 2001 the gun buck total was 141,942


in 2000 the gun buck total was 171,753


on 1999 the gun buck total was 159,256


in 1998 the gun buck total was 151,575


Again back in 1997 only 121,050 bucks were taken with the gun


To summarize, the car kill method and the data showing the steady decline in car kills means there are less deer to hit. Couple this with the lowest buck kill and lowest buck percentage in 10 years and you will understand why I think gross over estimations in herd size have taken place in order to justify more EAB and other antlerless hunts.


Using a simplified explanation of how SAK works which says:

1. Start with number of bucks 1.5 Years old or older killed. (if the ratio follows prior years, and the number of bucks killed this year is down. This first multiplier will show that the herd has been reduced)


2. Estimate the percent of bucks that were harvested.


3. Estimate the adult buck:doe ratio.


4. Estimate the doe:fawn ratio.


Based on what I have seen so far, I would expect the DNR to report the estimated herd size for next year to be 1.1 to 1.3M and that the Oct. T-zone hunt would be called off. Of course you know that won't happen and there will be more units added to EAB next year and the pre hunt estimate will be 1.8 to 2M

The number of 2.5 year old bucks may be on the increase but that has less to do with herd size and everything to do with hunters practicing their own versions of QDM and letting the small bucks walk (which is why the SAK audit made specific mention of that very fact)

The doe kill will be up but again, this is less of an indicator of herd size and has everything to do with EAB and the forced killing of does to get that buck tag.

Directly from the SAK audit.

The SAK model appears to be very sensitive to sudden changes in the male harvest rate. We noted wide changes in SAK estimates compared with simulated known populations as a result of changing male harvest rates. Perhaps most troubling is that the SAK estimates are opposite the true population trend when changes in the male harvest rate are introduced. Given these findings, any change in regulations that alters the male harvest rate (e.g., earn-a-buck) could bias population estimates. Changes in hunter attitude and hunting styles, such as QDM, could further adversely affect SAK estimates given its sensitivity to male harvest rate.



OK. Lets look at the doe totals so far from the gun season. I know, I know. More math.............. Sorry.

2007 gun season preliminary 218,584 antlerless

2006 total gun antlerless, 253,458 (this included the 7,700 does shot during ML season

2005 total gun antlerless, 234,611 (including the ML season and the late T-zone kill of 13,845 Does)

2004 total gun antlerless, 280,323 (including the ML season and the late T-zone kill of 12,085 Does) This was a high Doe kill because of EAB.

2003 total gun antlerless, 240,908 (including the ML season and the late T-zone kill of 14,586 Does)

2002 (the CWD year) 191,418 Does

2001 219,322 Does

In the two EAB years (2006 and 2004) we saw some pretty large doe kill numbers 253,485 and 280,323 respectively. We are currently about 62 thousand away from the high of 2004. That means the ML crowd would need to shoot 10,000 Does and the Late T-zone crowd would need to shoot 52,000 Does. I don't think this is possible given the numbers from the other years and the fact that the deer herd is lower then the 1.8M estimate.

My guess is that the ML crowd will take about 8,500 does and the Late T-zone crowd will take 17,000 does.



The Northeast region killed does at a rate of 1.75 : 1

The South Central region (CWD) killed does at a rate of 1.96 : 1

The Southeast region killed does at a rate of 2.1 : 1

The Northern region killed does at a rate of 1.5 : 1

The West Central region killed does at a rate of 1.95 : 1

Only 4 counties in the whole state killed more bucks than does. Ashland, Forest, Iron and Marinette



Lets go back to those 4 counties that I used in the car crash data. Here are the county by county totals from the DNR for the 9 day gun season.

http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/ce/news/specialedition/2007PrelimDeerReg.html

Waupaca County:

4,167 Bucks and 8,037 Does. The does were killed at a 1.93 : 1 ratio

Buffalo County:

1,904 Bucks and 4,367 Does. The does were killed at a 2.3: 1 ratio

Manitowoc County:

837 Bucks and 2,065 Does. The does were killed at a 2.5 : 1 ratio.

Keith said the Oct. T-zone could be dropped if hunters shot 2 does for every buck.

Remember Forest County? The county that has never had T-zone or EAB and has remained unaltered.

1,291 Bucks and 1,024 Does. More bucks killed than Does. The does were killed at a 0.8 : 1 ratio.

you will see the same declines in car kills in these 3 counties next year and Forest County will remain static. The herd is being greatly reduced and I would expect the pre hunt estimates for next year to reflect that. 1.1 to 1.3M

[Rancid Crabtree]

I keep hearing this line over and over. “You can't shoot them if they are not there.” On it’s face, this makes sense but in regards to herd estimation, it is an attempt to prop up the SAK system. I have also heard that we can't shoot 1/3 of all the deer we see. But what those folks fail to realize (since they are not students of deer hunting history) is that we have become very efficient at killing deer. We kill deer at levels un-thought of years ago. Since the DNR likes using hunter kills as an estimate of herd size (SAK) Lets do just that.

Join me now as we jump in the way-back machine.......... Lets travel back in time to the glory days of deer hunting. Lets look at hunter efficiency in killing deer. This is based on the number of licenses sold and how efficient we were at filling them. This method works if there were 5,000 deer licenses sold or 500,000. It is a percentage........ Off we go.
 
First stop: 1969, When the estimated herd size was 590,000
 
 506,526 gun tags sold produced, 52,655 bucks and 45,353 antlerless. This means that 10% of all hunters tagged a buck and 8.9% of all hunters got an antlerless deer.
In other words, hunters killed 16.6% of the estimated herd that year. This was back when the SAK was better suited for estimating the herd size. It also had checks and balances.
 
Jump ahead 10 years to 1979, When the estimated herd size was 770,000 (this is higher than the herd goal the DNR wants for today)
 
617,109 gun tags sold produced, 76,550 bucks and 49,020 antlerless. This means that 12.4% of all hunters tagged a buck and 8% of all hunters got an antlerless deer. In other words, hunters killed 16.3% of the estimated herd that year. We have not seen T-zone or EAB seasons as of yet. And the SAK formula is still pretty close and includes some of those checks and balances.
 
Now in 1989, When the estimated herd size was 1,300,000
 
661,713 gun tags sold produced, 139,651 bucks and 170,282 antlerless. This is after hunters started taking more does than bucks. This means that 21% of all hunters tagged a buck and 25.7% of all hunters got an antlerless deer. In other words, hunters killed 24% of the estimated herd that year. Hey! were really getting to be good hunters but that is due to increased pressure to harvest more does. Also, the checks and balances have now been removed from the SAK because they were costly.
 
In 1999, When the estimated herd size was 1,700,000
 
690,068 gun tags sold produced, 159,256 bucks and 242,879 antlerless. This means that 23% of all hunters tagged a buck and 35% of all hunters got an antlerless deer. In other words, hunters killed 23.6% of the estimated herd that year. We were kicking butt with all those T-zones and units on watch to be T-zones. Just look at those antlerless harvest numbers compared to the bucks.
 
Lets move in smaller increments now as we coast into modern times.
 
2005, When the estimated herd size was 1,600,000
 
641,789 gun tags sold produced, 140,905 bucks and 234,611 antlerless. This means that only 22% of all hunters tagged a buck but 36% of all hunters got an antlerless deer. In other words, hunters killed 23.4% of the estimated herd that year. We are stacking up the does like crazy. EAB mandates and T-zones hunts have more people than ever, filling their tags with an antlerless deer. In fact, we are now harvesting more than 4 times the antlerless deer (percentage per hunter) than we did back in 1969.
 
In 2006
 
644,906  gun tags sold produced, 137,223 bucks and 253,458 antlerless. This means that only 21% of all hunters tagged a buck but a whopping 39% of all hunters got an antlerless deer. In other words, hunters killed 24.4% of the estimated herd that year. We are still stacking up the fawn makers and getting more efficient every year but we have dropped a bit in buck efficiency but we are making up for that by now killing 5 times the does than we were killing in 1969.
 
Finally in 2007, when the estimated herd size for this year was 1.8M
 
Prelim. numbers plus very big estimates for the ML and Dec. T-zone hunts for both does and bucks. Estimates larger than actual harvest from any prior year even though the 9 day kill is down and most likely the ML and T-zone will be as well but I’m feeling generous.
 
634,652 gun tags sold produced, 127,760 bucks and 244,584 antlerless. This means that now only 20% of all hunters tagged a buck and 38.5% of all hunters got an antlerless deer. In other words, hunters only killed 20.6% of the estimated herd this year. This is a decrease in buck efficiency AND in a year where we have the highest ever forced killing of Does due to expanded EAB, we will remain flat for the doe kill. I say nonsense. What we really did was kill deer at a rate that was around 26.5% efficient which means that the real heard size was 1.35 to 1.4M and not the 1.8M the SAK told us were out there.
 
"You can't shoot them if they are not there" We ARE killing them but not because there are more to kill. We are simply killing them at a higher rate than ever before. The five upper Midwest states that I surveyed which are all big deer hunting states have shown flat numbers in regards to car kills of deer. Ohio showed a small increase in car deer accidents and yet WI saw a 25% drop in car kills in the last 2 years. Why??? There are just less deer to hit.

This year, hunters killed fewer deer in a year that should have been a record kill. Why have we hunters suddenly become much less efficient at harvesting deer?? I contend that the SAK over estimated the deer herd by nearly 25%  We are seeing the beginning of a decline in deer numbers. Don't worry, there are still plenty around but not as many as we are being told. Remember, the DNR has set a statewide goal of 709,000 deer on the landscape so increases in EAB and T-zones are going to be seen in an effort to reach that goal.

P.S. I was even more generous with the doe harvest than I let on. I estimate that a large number of does that were registered were never shot. These would be the does that were multiple registered as well as car kills, all done to get the EAB sticker. I think a conservative estimate would be that 5% of the doe numbers were multiple or false registrations which would lower the antlerless numbers in the harvest total by another 12,250 does and lower our efficiency even more..  Also, I think the archery kill will be down as well (around 100,000 deer harvested) but when added to the totals from the gun harvest, we will see that we really are killing about 1/3 of the deer right now.

I love math. There is just no arguing with raw data and numbers. The numbers are what they are. All data for this came from the DNR hunter stats off the DNR website. I invite your review.
 

[Rancid Crabtree]

I highly encourage you to view this SAK evaluation video from the DNR website. Watch all of it but the first ten minutes can be skipped. The data presented from the 13 minute mark to the 28 min. mark is "Must see" viewing.


http://media2.wi.gov/DNR/Viewer/Viewers/Viewer240TL.aspx?mode=Default&peid=8a7391b1-429e-4172-baf9-d0f556986edc&pid=da5b2d41-ac17-4b9b-abff-44a9339d2a63&playerType=WM7


Fast forward to the 35 min. mark and watch the video for a good breakdown pertaining to QDM and EAB.


If your hunting in Unit 28, you have particular reason to distrust the SAK.

[DBerg]

I Dont trust any of it and this is why the state says 634652 hunters stood around the state and we had 1.8 million deer So about half the Deer give or take was covered for the gun season. Now out of that with all the percentages lined up an looked at from what I read, we only had 1.3 Million where was the rest of the Numbers? Are they counting inside citys? I live in Wauwatosa Wi and I can tell you I have seen deer at my house in my yard So do they use those numbers like Milwaukee and Other citys like Madison count them into the grand total? I am just confused. We as hunters are better equipted than years ago and well the aid of trail cams hunters must have the Dnr shaking in its tracks. There would be proof on the numbers we just need to see it.

[Rancid Crabtree]

the answers lie in the pages of the DNR website.

[DBerg]

Hey me agian. Been hunting since I was 12 and have seen many changes in hunting as a whole. The number of hunters has gone down while the numbers of hunters now have beter chances to get a deer with all the gadgets out there to use. Guns are better and so are the bows we use. Broad heads with broad heads in the tip of the broad head an still the Dnr Cant count the number of deer even with a system that has had millions of dollars spent on it by us, to get accurate numbers. What I wanna know is how come they havent been able to get better results on their counts? And how far can we take the deer heard down to. Because if it gets to low and there is a huge number of NEW hunters buying all the gadgets and never seeing any deer in the woods like they say. Will they as a group loose intrest and where will the dnr be then? just some thoughts but all in general they need to get the counts somewhat right or what are we accually doing to the herd.

[Rancid Crabtree]

The DNR's goal for the state is 709,000 deer. (post hunt) If that happens, you will see folks leave the sport all together.

[mudbrook]

I agree Rancid, if they get those kinds of numbers it will be a domino effect. They will have to raise the license fees again to compensate for the lack of hunter participation.
I think they are so scared of CWD that they will continue to kill down the herd as a precaution. I don't think they know what else to do. They don't want to be accused of doing nothing. again

[Rancid Crabtree]

As you may have figured out already, I have had some doubts as to the herd size in the past few years. The DNR is great at providing data but it is not compiled in a manner that allows easy cross reference so I made a chart to make it easy for me to see trends.
 
I had the luxury of hindsight but I think the DNR could enjoy the same. The SAK takes the deer kill and tells us what the pre-hunt population will be for next year. I took the same data and claim to tell you what the pre-hunt population was going into the same year. I worked backwards from the 07 harvest to tell me what the 07 pre-hunt population WAS. From this, some estimates can be made for what the 08 year will look like. This was repeated for each year going back to 1966. Here is what I found. It seems that every year, the buck kill equals about 10% of the pre-hunt deer population. Starting back in 1966, Grandpa Lou and his buddies were just as effective with their open sighted lever action 30-30 Winchesters as hunters of today are.
 
 
The DNR lists the pre-hunt population numbers and I also found the gun harvest totals broken down for Bucks and Does so I was able to find the percentage of the population that was harvested for both Bucks and does for each year. Example:
 
 
The 1967 pre-hunt herd size was 700,000. The buck kill that year was 71,032. That means the buck kill was 10.1% of the standing herd. I did this same math for each year and found that trend was repeated over the years with only slight fluctuation. of the 41 years I tabulated, half of those years were within 1/2% of hitting the same total. Then I took blocks of ten years to get an average for each decade.
 
 
For 1966 thru 1976, 10% of the pre-hunt population was harvested as bucks.
 
 
For 1977 thru 1986 it was 10.7%
 
 
for 1987 thru 1996 it was 10.1%
 
All during this time, I suggest that the DNR was actually under-estimating the deer herd (see the chart) which may have lead us to the population growth we saw. There are several years that my estimate matches the DNRs estimate exactly. I did not try to match them. I compiled the data and discovered the similarities once I made the chart.
 
 
now, lets look at more recent years and when I feel they began to over estimate the herd size. Again, these numbers are derived from the DNR's herd estimates and actual Buck harvest data
 
 
1995, 10.1% of the estimated herd was what the buck kill was
 
 
1996, 10%
 
 
1997, 10%
 
 
1998, 10%
 
 
1999, 10%
 
 
Then in 2000, there is a deviation. Suddenly we have become much less efficient at harvesting bucks.
 
 
2000, 9.5%
 
 
2001, 9.4%
 
 
2002, 8.4% (this was the CWD year that nobody hunted so it was slightly skewed)
 
 
2003, 8.9
 
 
2004, 7.85
 
 
2005, 10.9% (this year, the DNR had the pre hunt estimate at only 1.35M and I suggest that they were correct)
 
 
2006, 8%
 
 
If you look at the chart form 2000 until now, I suggest that the DNR has been overestimating the herd size (with the exception of 2005). What I am saying is that we did not get less efficient, what really happened was that we continued to harvest bucks at a rate of 10% of the standing herd size but just not the herd size we were told. I arrived at my herd estimates by taking the actual gun buck harvest data and finding out what that number was 10% of.
 
 
In 2001 the DNR's heard estimate was 1,500,000. I'm saying that the buck harvest was 10% of a herd of 1,400,000
 
 
in 2002 the DNR's heard estimate was 1,500,000. I'm saying that the buck harvest was 10% of a herd of 1,300,000
 
 
in 2003 the DNR's heard estimate was 1,650,000. I'm saying that the buck harvest was 10% of a herd of 1,450,000
 
 
in 2004 the DNR's heard estimate was 1,700,000. I'm saying that the buck harvest was 10% of a herd of 1,340,000
 
 
in 2005 the DNR's heard estimate was 1,350,000. I'm saying that they were correct that year
 
 
in 2006 the DNR's heard estimate was 1.6 to 1.8M. I'm saying that the buck harvest was 10% of a herd of 1,350,000
 
 
in 2007 the DNR's heard estimate was 1.6 to 1.8M. I'm saying that the buck harvest was 10% of a herd of 1,300,000
 
 
With the exception of last year, my numbers and the DNR numbers are not all that far off but in recent years they have been a bit high in herd estimation. A portion of the SAK formula uses the numbers of the bucks killed that were 2 1/2 years old. This has not changed. what has changed is the percentage of bucks being registered that fit this category. QDM, TDM and EAB have skewed these numbers and is what the SAK audit warned us about.
 
 
On a side note. There are those who continue to say that there is no way in hell that we can come close to killing 1/3 of the deer herd in any given year but as I look over this data which again is only gun harvest data and does not include archery or car kills or any other way a deer could die., I see that is that guns alone killed
 
 
24% of the population in 1984
 
 
25% in 1985
 
 
25% in 1989
 
 
26% in 1990
 
 
27.1% in 1991
 
 
25.1% in 1992
 
 
27% in 1996
 
 
25.1% in 1999
 
 
29.3% in 2000
 
 
29.1% in 2001
 
 
28.7% in 2005
 
 
Today, when you combine Gun, Archery, ML, crop damage, car kills etc. you will see that we are killing 1/3 of the deer herd. (These percentages would be even higher if I used my herd estimates.)
 
 
I closing, I suggest that the overestimations and increased EAB and addition of the Oct. T-zone hunt is all part of the DNR's goal to get us to the population goal of 709,000. I do not claim that this is some kind of evil plot or any kind of cover up or hidden agenda, It is just an aggressive move towards a much smaller deer herd. What will the pre-hunt estimate be for next year??