Deer Hunting Questionnaire...voluntary reporting

[Bushmoose]

All this is in an effort to determine regional Deer densities per km/2...we might not like to see how that affects the Doe tags and extra Tags, but it's all in an attempt to ensure that the Deer don't become overpopulated.

Or "under populated"? I have no doubt the info from these survey's is used to good advantage, and I would like to see a more thorough break down of the WMU included in the survey. Township perhaps? I hunt WMU 36 and it is huge, with many areas having very little deer population. There are a few small pockets within, however I believe it would be much more beneficial for the MNRF, the deer AND the hunters to break the info down even further. Deer density per square km. in a WMU this size can't possibly give them the real picture.

[35wailin]

That's the second thing I did after getting home. First was opening the envelopes that CP delivered today. I fill mine out every year.

[huntermac]

Fill mine out every year as well,still have a bow tag left so will wait till the end of the season.any info they can muster has to help,you sure don't see many co's out and about,like mentioned above hunters are afield all year long.mac

[x_xeon_x]

It would be nice if they published all their research and data that billions of our tax dollars over the decades have funded.

[Bigbear]

I do complete them every time I get one.
My beef is this why not make it COMPULSORY not voluntary.
I feel that every one participating on the controlled hunt which purpose is to control the deer population should have to fill up a survey after the hunt. I feel that this will give you a better feedback on the harvest during the hunt.

No, there are already far too many things "compulsory" in this province. I think that the surveys, as the main method of estimating deer numbers and sex and age ratios, are kind of a joke. There is no method of verifying the information, and, I routinely hear hunters agreeing to "cook the books" as far as surveys are concerned.

[SongDog]

Or "under populated"? I have no doubt the info from these survey's is used to good advantage, and I would like to see a more thorough break down of the WMU included in the survey. Township perhaps? I hunt WMU 36 and it is huge, with many areas having very little deer population. There are a few small pockets within, however I believe it would be much more beneficial for the MNRF, the deer AND the hunters to break the info down even further. Deer density per square km. in a WMU this size can't possibly give them the real picture.

I have to agree, My unit is at least 4 different county`s. That is huge. 3 of the units the deer population has taken a major hit the last few years, The one county has a decent population mostly because it has a lot of anti hunters and land locked by water and provincial parks.

[huntrfishr]

No, there are already far too many things "compulsory" in this province. I think that the surveys, as the main method of estimating deer numbers and sex and age ratios, are kind of a joke. There is no method of verifying the information, and, I routinely hear hunters agreeing to "cook the books" as far as surveys are concerned.

Fudging the answers mean that they don't believe in it's value. So it's either the MNR hasn't sold this to the public by not giving enough info on it as you say or just plain irresponsible on part of hunters. I don't believe most of us are and if the goal is for conservation and game management then it's a good tool and everyone should welcome it.

[x_xeon_x]

Fudging the answers mean that they don't believe in it's value. So it's either the MNR hasn't sold this to the public by not giving enough info on it as you say or just plain irresponsible on part of hunters. I don't believe most of us are and if the goal is for conservation and game management then it's a good tool and everyone should welcome it.

I'm sure deep down people who fudge the numbers do actually understand how important these surveys are for biologists, but I think some hunters only have the next season on their mind. If people are reporting they're seeing more animals than they did so they can get more tags the next year, the years after are only going to be continually worse for hunting. Especially with the winter we had last year, the deer herds need a couple good winters to rebound from that alone.

I'd think if they completely cut anterless tags in the hardest hit WMUs for a few years, the few years after would make for some fantastic hunts once the populations stabilized again. Seeing how there were very few tag reductions in most of those WMUs this year and people were already disappointed with their success, next year is going to be even worse for hunting in those areas.

[Ridger]

Is there anywhere to see what the numbers or avg deer numbers look like per WMU?

[seabast]

I have to agree, My unit is at least 4 different county`s. That is huge. 3 of the units the deer population has taken a major hit the last few years, The one county has a decent population mostly because it has a lot of anti hunters and land locked by water and provincial parks.

That's interesting, I was into the impression that the deer collapse was from last year tough winter and the over population of yotes, not hunters. If it the case the MNR should have reduce the tags a while ago so the survey is just a waste of time....