Quality Hunting Ecology: Forest Landowners and Hunters Working Together

1
Quality Hunting Ecology Forest Landowners and
HuntersWorking Together

2
Sand County Foundation
3
2006 Leopold Conservation Award winner
4
(No Transcript)
5
Agricultural Incentives
6
Agricultural Incentives
7
Agricultural Incentives
8
Agricultural Incentives
9
Sand County Foundation
10
Sand County Foundation
11
Sand County Foundation
12
Sand County Foundation
13
Sand County Foundation
14
Sand County Foundation
15
Sand County Foundation
16
(No Transcript)
17
Deer Impacts
18
Deer Impacts
19
Deer Impacts
20
Deer Impacts
Woody species

• to plant populations
• to plant communities
• to other wildlife habitat

Herbaceous species
Invasives
Diversity
Song birds
Small mammals
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
KQDC Project Area
26
(No Transcript)
27
Allegheny Plateau
28
Deer Density 1850-2000
29
Reasons for the Project

• 80 years of high deer abundance 1920-2000 led to
• Removal by deer of most preferred foods, leaving
  ferns and less desirable seedlings
• Poor habitat for wildlife like deer, rabbits,
  grouse, songbirds
• Deer in poor body condition, scrawny racks, too
  few bucks
• Fencing required to protect seedlings from deer

30
Project Objectives

• Reduce deer density to 10-15/square mile
• Reduce deer impact on seedlings, shrubs,
  wildflowers, wildlife habitat
• Improve deer quality better antlers (total
  points, spread, beam diameter) heavier deer
• Increase buckdoe and fawndoe ratios
• Eliminate need to protect tree seedlings with
  fencing
• Survey hunter attitudes about hunting KQDC

31
Goals healthy deer, happy hunters, healthy
habitat
32
Project Plan

• Reduce deer density through hunting to balance
  deer with habitat
• Monitor response of deer herd, habitat to
  reduction in deer density
• Educate, motivate hunters to participate in
  program, survey hunter attitudes
• Provide hunters with incentive to bring deer to
  check stations (raffle tickets for banquet)
• Conduct project over large area with history of
  high deer density and impact and monitor long
  enough (10 years) to measure long-term effects

33
Reduce Deer Impact on Habitat

• Reduce impact by reducing deer density
• Improve road access to get better distribution of
  deer harvest over project area
• Increase production of forage by more timber
  harvest to open the overstory, let sunlight
  stimulate growth of more food as seedlings,
  shrubs, wildflowers
• Eliminate fencing to provide more food for deer,
  spreading deer impact on habitat out over larger
  areas

34
Improve Deer Quality

• Increase quality, quantity of deer forage via
  timber harvest and removing fences to increase
  shrub, seedling, wildflower abundance
• Prevent harvest of yearling bucks, let them go
  so they can grow 3-point antler restriction by
  Game Commission
• Produce more bucks/does to reduce stress on bucks
  during rut
• Increase deer weights
• Improve antler characteristics

35
Get Hunter Feedback

• Record hunter comments at check stations
• Conduct formal and informal hunter surveys
• Seek feedback at density/impact workshops
• Seek feedback at other meetings

36
Monitoring Deer Density Impact

• Every spring, volunteers count deer pellets and
  measure deer feeding impact on vegetation on
  twenty-six 500 acre areas scattered across the
  projects 74,000 acres.

37
Deer Density Impact Workshop

• Every spring a one-day deer density impact
  workshop is given at one of the project areas.
• Hunters, foresters, biologists, and students take
  the training and learn how to collect, analyze,
  and interpret the information to make management
  decisions about deer.
• The workshop is April 10th in 2008.

38
Monitoring Deer Sex and Age Ratios

• In late summer, volunteers (mostly hunters) count
  fawns, does, and antlered bucks along six
  different routes across the project area. Routes
  are driven in cars at dawn and dusk.

39
Monitoring Deer Herd Health

• Three check stations are run on the project area
  during rifle season. Volunteers weigh and age
  deer, identify if buck or doe, and measure
  antlers. Hunters bringing deer to check stations
  get raffle tickets to the annual hunter
  appreciation banquet two for antlerless deer,
  one for antlered deer.

40
Monitoring Hunter Attitudes

• At the annual Hunter Appreciation Banquet, Mike
  Bleech conducts an informal survey of hunter
  attitudes. In 2004, PennState scientists
  conducted a formal study of hunters who hunted
  the project area.

41
Pennsylvanias Deer Program

• Supportive research program
• Massive hunter education program
• Aggressive antlerless allocations
• Three point antler restrictions (2002)
• Concurrent buck-doe season (2001)
• DMAP (2003)

42
Results Deer Density
43
Accuracy of Density Estimates - 2006
44
Results Deer Density Impact

• Deer density steadily decreased 2002-2006 then
  increased slightly in 2007. Similarly, impact
  declined consistently 2002-2006 with a slight
  uptick in 2007. Since 2005, spring deer density
  has been at the target level range (10-15
  deer/mile2).

45
Deer Impact Indicator SeedlingsBeech Striped
Maple
46
Deer Impact Indicator SeedlingsRed Maple
Hemlock
47
Deer Impact Indicator SeedlingsBlack Cherry
Birches
48
Results Deer Herd Composition

• Numbers of deer counted in roadside counts
  declined 2001-2006 as deer density declined.
  Most of the decline was does ratio of fawnsdoes
  and bucksdoes improved over time.

49
Results Deer Health

• Body weights of field-dressed bucks in all age
  classes increased 2001-2006 due to more deer
  forage available. Doe body weights also
  increased. With more food and fewer deer
  competing for it, deer were bigger.

50
Results Antler Characteristics

• As deer density declined and forage quality and
  quantity increased, racks improved number of
  antler points increased.

51
Results Antler Characteristics

• As deer density declined and forage quality and
  quantity increased, racks improved inside width
  of antler spread increased.

52
Results Who Hunts the KQDC?

• As deer density declined, number of deer
  harvested and brought to check stations did too.
  Local hunters were very supportive, bringing in
  as many deer as non-local residents.
  Out-of-state hunters also contributed.

53
Forest Responses

• Herbaceous Improvement
• Seedlings ?
• Interfering Species

54
The KQDC Success Why?

• Cooperating landowners ANF, FIA, Bradford
  Watershed, Collins Pine, Ram Forest Products
• Partnership Allegheny National Forest Visitors
  Bureau Warren Forestry Sciences Laboratory,
  PennState Cooperative Extension
• Road access maintenance
• Hunter information and education program
• Media support Mike Bleech, ANF public affairs
• PGC Management Programs
• Volunteers Hunter support

55
Whats up for 2007 and beyond?

• DMAP Adaptive Management
• Reduced Fencing
• Improved deer herd
• Forest Monitoring 2010
• Educational programs
• Hunter retention and recruitment
• Communication and Promotion

56
For More Information

• Check out the KQDC website www.KQDC.com
• Sand County Foundation www.sandcounty.net

57
(No Transcript)
58
(No Transcript)
59
(No Transcript)
60
(No Transcript)
61
(No Transcript)
62
(No Transcript)