New Brunswick deer herd down 70% in 30 years, DNR numbers show - Hunting Stories - New Brunswick Hunting

Jump to content


Photo

New Brunswick deer herd down 70% in 30 years, DNR numbers show


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Mister November

Mister November

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Locationin the woods of course

Posted 26 September 2016 - 10:51 AM

Deer population's changes studied by N.B., Maine researchers

 

http://www.cbc.ca/ne..._medium=twitter

 

Deer population is 'catastrophically low,' biologist says

 

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...swick-1.3339977

 

New Brunswick deer herd down 70% in 30 years, DNR numbers show

 

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ation-1.3532002


  • 0

If you are not working to protect hunting, then you are working to destroy it.
 


#2 Rub liners

Rub liners

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 425 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 06:59 PM

I'm not trying to be difficult here, but is there any reason companies like Irving and others need to be involved in this study? Legit question. Is it funding they are assisting with? It just seems that with them involved, the results may miraculously make it appear as though they are not part of the problem. It seems tantamount to involving anti gun activists in a project studying the correlation between firearms and crime rates. Can we really expect fair and accurate results? Perhaps it's just the cynic in me. Lol.
  • 0

#3 mr unluckey

mr unluckey

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 224 posts
  • Locationparts uknown

Posted 27 September 2016 - 05:59 AM

I had a good laugh when I seen that to


  • 0

#4 Mister November

Mister November

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Locationin the woods of course

Posted 27 September 2016 - 08:46 AM

that was my whole point for posting it....

they are doing a study that isnt going to change anything or findings that cant be public without ppl getting fired....or sorry...let go!

 

We are all in the woods enough to know the real reason why the deer population is down .....its not rocket science....look at the woods......oh wait...what woods

 

but the govt can say....look ...we are doing something!

 

to be honest....i havent even started getting ready for deer season....and anyone who knows me...will know that is odd for me...i dont know if ....i even want to deer hunt this year....the deer herd is just in that bad of shape!


  • 0

If you are not working to protect hunting, then you are working to destroy it.
 


#5 MountEagle Outfitters

MountEagle Outfitters

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 27 September 2016 - 07:37 PM

I didn't buy a tag last year because of the lack of deer in my area, actually hoped that DNR would close the season or at least a few zones to give them a chance. Unfortunately its more about money, what do you do with the herd in jeopardy........add a weapon to put more pressure on them. Who is the wildlife minister?? is his name  Irving


  • 0

#6 Old guide

Old guide

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 28 September 2016 - 09:45 PM

I believe there was a plan all along.... they knew when the Deer numbers went down so does the interested number of potential protesters/voters drop off,  and  as more people stop hunting Deer the traditions of deer hunting Camps and family deer hunts become something of the olden Days, more people loose interest and so do the potential number of people to stand up or Mont any coordinated effort against them,  Its is  a numbers game and when deer hunters numbers become low enough they will simply not have to worry about a small group of protesters!! They will tell us to go  fishing instead... Fishing..back when you could keep 15 trout, and you had10 grilse Tags  there were lots of fisherman but now ..........etc.....etc.....


  • 0
Home of Paparazzi home Brew Game cams.

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

#7 Mister November

Mister November

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Locationin the woods of course

Posted 29 September 2016 - 07:22 AM

I have to agree old guide!

to me i think the deer herd is at an all time low.....when you compare hunters to deer.....in the last 10 yrs the deer hunters have dropped...the young kids of today dont have the interest in it....unless being brought up with hunting!
 


  • 0

If you are not working to protect hunting, then you are working to destroy it.
 


#8 Old guide

Old guide

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 10:46 AM

When a generation or two stop hunting Deer the traditions and knowledge of what the province once  had for a potential Deer herd drops  off, they general public will Think we have plenty of Deer in our province because they cannot keep them out of their Gardens in the Suburban areas , in reality we will only have a fraction of the Deer herd this province once had , and still should have today. 


  • 0
Home of Paparazzi home Brew Game cams.

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

#9 Bowtech

Bowtech

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1610 posts
  • LocationBelleisle Creek

Posted 01 October 2016 - 04:02 PM

Let's see, they started a deer study group that includes the province and Irving and say they are going to look at how snowfall and coyotes affect deer numbers. The province has made a statement that coyotes and winter are what affects the deer numbers (not spraying). So the results are going to come back that coyotes and winter affect the survival of deer in a negative way, which they do but since the only factors they are looking at is coyotes and winter they can say yup, we studied the reasons for deer number decline and have found that winters and coyotes both negatively affect deer numbers, just what we have been saying all along and we have backed it up with a scientific study that proves it. Brilliant, lol


  • 0
Bowtech Genesis 27:3 - Now then, get your weapons, your quiver and bow, and go out to the open country to hunt some wild game for me.

#10 abuckisabuck

abuckisabuck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 629 posts

Posted 03 October 2016 - 05:18 PM

Doesn't sound like much of a study.  100 collars in NB and another 100 in Maine.   Looks like JDI 's gonna exonerate himself on the cheap this time!  How much are we forkin over for the JDI "HAHAHA It's not my fault" exposé?  I wonder.


  • 0

#11 Duckboy2010

Duckboy2010

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 03 October 2016 - 09:04 PM

130 - 140 satellite collars is actually a pretty large number for a deer study. It wouldn't surprise me if the collars are close to or over $1000 each.


  • 0

#12 Mister November

Mister November

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Locationin the woods of course

Posted 04 October 2016 - 07:47 AM

130 - 140 satellite collars is actually a pretty large number for a deer study. It wouldn't surprise me if the collars are close to or over $1000 each.

actually...when we used them for the ducks and geese  ....they were $200 per collar when i worked for Canadian Wildlife Service but that was back in the late 80's early 90's


  • 0

If you are not working to protect hunting, then you are working to destroy it.
 


#13 Mister November

Mister November

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Locationin the woods of course

Posted 04 October 2016 - 07:48 AM

Let's see, they started a deer study group that includes the province and Irving and say they are going to look at how snowfall and coyotes affect deer numbers. The province has made a statement that coyotes and winter are what affects the deer numbers (not spraying). So the results are going to come back that coyotes and winter affect the survival of deer in a negative way, which they do but since the only factors they are looking at is coyotes and winter they can say yup, we studied the reasons for deer number decline and have found that winters and coyotes both negatively affect deer numbers, just what we have been saying all along and we have backed it up with a scientific study that proves it. Brilliant, lol

exactly Bowtech...you hit that one right on the money!


  • 0

If you are not working to protect hunting, then you are working to destroy it.
 


#14 Duckboy2010

Duckboy2010

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 04 October 2016 - 08:39 PM

 

actually...when we used them for the ducks and geese  ....they were $200 per collar when i worked for Canadian Wildlife Service but that was back in the late 80's early 90's

 

I assume those were radio tags and not satellite tags?


  • 0

#15 Albertabound

Albertabound

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 07 October 2016 - 01:34 AM

Reminiscent of deer yard/wintering area(DWAs) study,no?
In the 1980s,NB had 900+ identified and protected from wood harvest DWAs.
Eliminate the surrounding habitat.....no more deer around to utilize DWA.....no deer/no DWA protection....cut'er down.
Fast forward 30 years.....<200 DWAs.....if there's no deer to use them,no need to protect habitat.
  • 0

The kill is the satisfying, indeed essential, conclusion to a successful hunt. But, I take no pleasure in the act itself. One does not hunt in order to kill, but kills in order to have hunted. Then why do I hunt? I hunt for the same reason my well-fed cat hunts...because I must, because it is in the blood, because I am the decendent of a thousand generations of hunters. I hunt because I am a hunter.- Finn Aagard


#16 abuckisabuck

abuckisabuck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 629 posts

Posted 07 October 2016 - 06:10 AM

Reminiscent of deer yard/wintering area(DWAs) study,no?
In the 1980s,NB had 900+ identified and protected from wood harvest DWAs.
Eliminate the surrounding habitat.....no more deer around to utilize DWA.....no deer/no DWA protection....cut'er down.
Fast forward 30 years.....<200 DWAs.....if there's no deer to use them,no need to protect habitat.

Yup!

 

They didn't even wait for the deer to vacate many of the DWA's, just assumed they would leave I guess, and started cutting.  That's how it went down in the Simpson's field deer yard.  Concerned citizens were told to mind their own business.


  • 0

#17 daveyn

daveyn

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • LocationHarewood NB

Posted 07 October 2016 - 09:58 AM

Let's see, they started a deer study group that includes the province and Irving and say they are going to look at how snowfall and coyotes affect deer numbers. The province has made a statement that coyotes and winter are what affects the deer numbers (not spraying). So the results are going to come back that coyotes and winter affect the survival of deer in a negative way, which they do but since the only factors they are looking at is coyotes and winter they can say yup, we studied the reasons for deer number decline and have found that winters and coyotes both negatively affect deer numbers, just what we have been saying all along and we have backed it up with a scientific study that proves it. Brilliant, lol

Completely agree, we have always had winter and we have always had deer, because in the winter they had a place to go, now they have no place to go so the winter beats the crap out of them, throw in a few coyotes and the issue multiplies. So yes winter and coyotes are the problem, we all get that, but the question is why is winter now a problem when it wasn't before, whats changed...maybe some cutting and spraying?


  • 0
If you keep doing what you've always done you'll keep getting what you've always got...

#18 Albertabound

Albertabound

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 07 October 2016 - 11:14 AM

Yes,winter has always been a factor on the northern fringe of WT range in North America,but It's been a perfect storm/quadruple whammy/deer disaster since the herd peaked mid-1980s.
1)selective cutting with chainsaws and skidders replaced by harvesters and moonscapes.
2)natural regen of woody browse replaced with monoculture softwood farms and herbicide spraying.
3)fur market crash early 90's allowed coyote population explosion....since the first yotes appeared in NB 1950s,yotie numbers had been kept in check by trappers.1990s...no more trappers/wayyyyyy more coyotes.
4)Accessability....there is no more wilderness/deep woods sanctuary for core populations of deer to thrive,live,and die of old age.a)everybody and their mother has a quad/ATV these days as opposed to 70s-80s when trikes were just gaining popularity.
b)you can't hardly walk a straight line for a mile in NB without crossing a power line,pipeline,log haul road,ATV trail any more.
c)umpteen dozen places I could name as examples in zone 20 that were an all day adventure to reach on trike/dirt bike/hike in......now you can drive there in soccer Mom's minivan or Grandpas Cadillac.

Deer herd has been under attack from every angle for decades,it's any wonder there's even one deer left to go look at in a park somewhere FFS!! :(
  • 0

The kill is the satisfying, indeed essential, conclusion to a successful hunt. But, I take no pleasure in the act itself. One does not hunt in order to kill, but kills in order to have hunted. Then why do I hunt? I hunt for the same reason my well-fed cat hunts...because I must, because it is in the blood, because I am the decendent of a thousand generations of hunters. I hunt because I am a hunter.- Finn Aagard


#19 Fraserdw

Fraserdw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • LocationYoungs Cove, NB

Posted 14 October 2016 - 08:11 AM

Well said, the population numbers are interesting as well.  the 60s and 70s saw an average herd of 50,000.  This upticked in the 80s to 240,000 which peaked with the fur crash but likely there was a access issue too with so many deer.  The numbers are coming down but seem to be holding at 50,000.  Perhaps 50,000 is a sustainable herd in NB.  If we limit the factors you mention including having ORV no go zones for wintering herds, we could likely sustain a population of 70-80K.  I see nothing wrong with a winter feeding program as well, dropping food into winter beds by aircraft to assist the population. 


  • 0

#20 abuckisabuck

abuckisabuck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 629 posts

Posted 17 October 2016 - 06:26 AM

Well, that is hopeful.  There seems to be little if anything left to be taken away from crown land.  I hear men lament that there is about 5 years worth of wood left out there, then they seem to be expecting a hard crash in the industry... dunno about that but, if we still have deer in these harshest of conditions, maybe there's hope of stabilizing a core population as the forest begins to heal.  Perhaps that's where our efforts should be aimed.  We're not getting anywhere with stopping Irving so maybe we should push for more money/programs for renaturalization of our scarified forests in whatever form that may be.(Good luck with that!! I know...)

 

And everyone of us who hunt, should also take some time to hunt coyote.  There may not be many trappers but there are still 10's of thousands of us whining hunters to do the job.  We just haven't done it and that's a crying shame on us and nobody else.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users