Elk Survey of Cameron Peak Fire Area

mtwarden

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
9,486
Location
Montana
You definitely want more than one trend area in a unit, you want several and you want them scattered through the unit. Not sure on your units, but ours can be pretty large, so flying an entire unit is not feasible. But picking out several good ones and using them every year seems to work pretty well.

Again, speaking for Montana, not familiar with Colorado's approach.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
1,516
Location
SW Colorado
I agree with that statement, but for some reason down here they fly the same couple spots year, after year, after year. Probably one of the reasons why we are in the predicament we are in.
 

HiMtnHntr

WKR
Joined
May 13, 2016
Messages
569
Location
Wyoming
7,8,9,19,20, and 191 were all affected. They don't keep very good tabs on the elk. First flights since when? 2006? Need to save up money for them wuffs I guess...
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2022
Messages
52
Location
Wyoming
We can take photos of people in lawn chairs, from space.

Why not take an aerial from a few k ft above, go back to the office and count, save the already fire stressed herd some added winter stress...because that takes all the fun out of it?
underrated comment. I agree 100% they might say they can't find the ones in the timber tho.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2021
Messages
2,848
Location
Western Iowa
Harvest reporting is still a huge gap in the overall management plan. I've said it before for MT as well. As a NR, I killed my bull in the Bob and drove out of the state without having to report the kill to anybody. States that don't track harvest by unit, county, or some kind of reasonable geography element cannot accurately predict populations or set accurate harvest quotas. They're missing a crucial input into the equation.
 
Joined
May 6, 2018
Messages
8,820
Location
Shenandoah Valley
Harvest reporting is still a huge gap in the overall management plan. I've said it before for MT as well. As a NR, I killed my bull in the Bob and drove out of the state without having to report the kill to anybody. States that don't track harvest by unit, county, or some kind of reasonable geography element cannot accurately predict populations or set accurate harvest quotas. They're missing a crucial input into the equation.


I think this is how we view it in the East.


Our population control is hunter take.

In the west hunter take might be the number one take, one year. But then you have winter kill which can vary widely. This year, in some areas it is extreme. So should tags be issued on last falls take or this spring estimated survival?


Point being harvest info seems important, it is where I am. But if the herd might cobtraxt by 60% due to winter conditions I don't think it matters as much.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2021
Messages
2,848
Location
Western Iowa
I think this is how we view it in the East.


Our population control is hunter take.

In the west hunter take might be the number one take, one year. But then you have winter kill which can vary widely. This year, in some areas it is extreme. So should tags be issued on last falls take or this spring estimated survival?


Point being harvest info seems important, it is where I am. But if the herd might cobtraxt by 60% due to winter conditions I don't think it matters as much.
Thank you for the message and good points. Ideally, total actual and estimated mortality should be used to set population estimates and resulting quotas.

-For example, the formula could look like this:

Estimated unit population - (hunter kills + predator kills (est.) + winter kill + disease kill)= adjusted unit population

Migration patterns throw a wrench into the formula, because the adjusted population varies with time of year. As a result, biologists would need to perform surveys mid-summer (difficult to spot animals in dense foliage) to understand populations during each phase of the hunting season. I've heard the guys from MT lament the long seasons in NW MT and how they impact herds in the Bob. When you have low populations in the wilderness during the summer and then have extended seasons that pound the same herds in the winter range, it makes it incredibly difficult for those herds to sustain themselves. Not to mention the heavy predator pressure in areas like that.

Definitely an imperfect science, but IMO, having harvest data would be another data point that could be used to refine the numbers.
 

mtwarden

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
9,486
Location
Montana
Montana does use harvest information, but it's by telephone survey. They obviously don't get everyone, probably a small percentage to be honest. They extrapolate the numbers from that survey (successful vs unsuccessful harvest) over the number of licenses sold (or permits issued).

How accurate or inaccurate that data is?????????????
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2021
Messages
2,848
Location
Western Iowa
Montana does use harvest information, but it's by telephone survey. They obviously don't get everyone, probably a small percentage to be honest. They extrapolate the numbers from that survey (successful vs unsuccessful harvest) over the number of licenses sold (or permits issued).

How accurate or inaccurate that data is?????????????
Roger that and with likely small sample size, the results of the phone surveys may be directional at best and not statistically significant.

Mandatory electronic harvest reporting has been around for years. In Iowa you can call in and report via the automated system, complete electronically via web site, and most recently report via text. Compliance is encouraged 1.) by making it very easy and 2.) attaching strict penalties for failure to report. Enforcement can be a challenge like anything else with less than 1 CO per county, but the DNR counts on ethical hunters to follow the rules. With more than 100k whitetails consistently reported annually, they system does a pretty decent job of collecting data.
 
Top