Gun numbers from DNR

[swamptiger]

Quote:

Interesting observation on the public vs private. Are the deer around your yard hunted?

Yes, I live on a chain of lakes with private residences around the lakes, but the private land is surrounded by public land. Deer density is much higher around the residences, and they are generally hunted all around the outside edges of the private land.

[Jameson]

Noticed something similar when I hunted near Ely for a few years, and there folks could shoot the deer near the cabins. It just seemed the wolves would not go near the cabins, and the deer figured it out. I suspect there was some SSS going on with the wolves all year, and the deer were only targeted in season, and mostly only bucks were shot since it was lottery every year.

[swamptiger]

It's to the point around here where you don't even hardly see any wolf tracks when you get far enough out in the woods.

[walleye18]

thats because they are all behind my house....wife saw 3 in the last week.

Really watching my labs closely. Deer are absent in the last 2/3 weeks.

[laker1]

Mentioned above,Yes deer harvest numbers are very accurate,unless you and I decide not to register our deer,the DNR did their job,did we do ours in trying to figure harvest rate.

The wolf estimate is a estimate with known observed packs,track counts,scent posts etc.,and as the DNR says it has wide confidence limits so the 2250-2500 estimate could be 3500 at tops. I look it as more of a index their track counts etc and compare it to past years and the last one was like in 2008.

It seems in the ball park because we did lose some wolfs because of widespread mange in the wild canine world the last 5 years. Wolves last year that were harvested,some had hardly any hair or fur.

[laker1]

Wildlife management is more about managing people.

[ClownColor]

These types of maps are slightly misleading. Take into account cities, large open tracks, waters, and so on. That's deer density per average over the entire area. I'm guessing most understand this but it can really play into affect the northern areas vs populated areas. My hunting area, 179, in actual deer habitat has way more then 10-14 deer per square mile...

[rockman]

Wildlife management is more about managing people.

Regulation enforcement is about managing people. Wildlife management is exactly what it is, managing wildlife numbers.

[Jameson]

These types of maps are slightly misleading. Take into account cities, large open tracks, waters, and so on. That's deer density per average over the entire area. I'm guessing most understand this but it can really play into affect the northern areas vs populated areas. My hunting area, 179, in actual deer habitat has way more then 10-14 deer per square mile...

Good point.

Wisconsin calculates their deer density per square mile of deer habitat. We could do the same and have better data to work with. It would be interesting to see the ratio of deer habitat to overall area in each permit area.

[laker1]

I am pretty sure about a decade or so ago Minnesota removed lakes from being counted in the square miles of habitat.

[B. Amish]

save a little buck, just shoot the does instead... LOL!

[B. Amish]

A square mile is 640 acres. That is sixteen 40 acre tracts. If you hunt on a 40 in a 10 dpsm area you might not have a deer on your 40.

or you might have 50 deer.

the deer per square mile is an average over a LARGE area. some areas will have more than the average and some will have less.