If they are looking for trends they need to ask some sensible questions that make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
Printable View
If they are looking for trends they need to ask some sensible questions that make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
X2-they probably work with inherent bias, repeated every year.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
Should work similarly ,if they do not change the measurement system.
That is another question-how accurate it is ever-but hey, that is a different story.
We have bigger worries with moose management,or lack of it-but that is neither in,nor out.
Nothing we will change.
EXACTLY. They aren't trying to get an actual population size or density. All the report indicates is the change in population size. If hunters report what they actually see each year, the MNR will get some idea as to whether or not deer numbers are up or down in a certain area.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris915
thats exactly what they are doing. Asking the same question they always have. If people start reporting trail camera photos as a live deer they have seen, how would that compare to prior to people having trail cameras.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
I might have bought 10 trail cameras last year for the first time. Presumably I could report 10 times more deer than the year prior but I'm pretty sure the population didn't change that much.
This comes up every year, and people constantly overthink a simple question. How many days did you hunt, and how many "Live" deer did you see.
Next we will get the questions from guys who hunt morning and evening compared to an all day hunt.
Its a known statistical process to look at long term trends. Just answer the simple questions, there are no tricks going on here
They used to ask how many hours and days you hunted. Guess days hunted are good enough now.
I saw 21 deer as a dogger in the December controlled hunt. Never seen that many ever.
To my earlier post...Doggers always see more deer than the average group hunter who takes the stand at the far end of the run and never sees anything. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by cramadog2
One field near the camp harboured several deer e.g. 15+. Other fields had 0. Had we only hunted the field with lots of deer then our sightings would be impressive but could skew the data.
Your report gets mixed with every other hunters and it evens out in the melting pot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Menard
Again, they don't care about the actual number. It's a trend of up vs down of years previous
Well I never suggested there were any tricks going on, I merely said the questions are outdated and make very little sense if your trying to get an accurate count of trends in population.Quote:
Originally Posted by FishHog
These questions have been on the books for probably about a decade now and for instance before wide spread use of trail cameras. So lets take a simple example, I hunt my front field and know I have a mature doe with a fawn. I see them every day for 5 days, have I seen 10 deer or two deer?
In the meantime in the back 40 where I have a feeder, I have a spike horn, a 4 pointer, 6 pointer and 8 pointer, all coming into the feeder.
I exclude them as I have not see them. How does this make any sense.
The question that I believe should be asked is "how many uniquely identifiable deer did you see". This should include the trail camera images.
So a more accurate answer to the question is that I saw Six deer in total but my answer as it stands could be two deer if I decide not to multiply all the times I saw the doe and fawn in person. If I give them the daily sightings of the doe and fawn I am up to ten deer.
In the old days when the MNR and volunteers put out winter feed, they could get a accurate idea of the population. They don't do that now.
In the old days they did fly over counts and counts in the deer yards, they don't do that now.
They could get some better ideas of population by simply dropping into local meat processors and asking what they took in for harvest numbers, I am pretty sure they don't do that either.
If they don't care about actual numbers, what is the point of the whole exercise. How do you assign the correct number of doe tags for a WMU. I think hunters today with the new technology could be providing accurate numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
This reminds me of the mess in managing the Moose herd and even cod fishery.