67 results after applying filter
In complete archive
A random sample of 9,000 deer hunting license buyers were contacted after the 2006 deer hunting season to (1) estimate importance of deer hunting and motives of deer hunters in Michigan, (2) quantify hunter activity during the past three deer hunting seasons, and (3) determine deer huntersâ opinions on various hunting regulations. Most licensees (83%) indicated hunting deer was either one of their most important recreational activities or the most important activity. The primary reasons people enjoyed hunting deer were to spend time outdoors, spend time with friends and family, and the excitement of seeing deer. Among hunters who purchased a deer hunting license in 2006, 96% of these licensees spent time in the field hunting deer during the past three years (683,095 deer hunters). About 74% of these hunters took at least one deer during the past three years. Nearly 60% of hunters took an antlered deer and 46% took an antlerless deer during the past three years. Over 75% of deer hunters felt the number of deer, number of bucks, number of mature bucks, and deer herd health were the most important issues to consider when developing deer hunting regulations. Most deer hunters (>62%) statewide believed there were moderate to extensive problems with the number of deer, number of bucks, and number of mature bucks in the region where they most often hunted. Statewide, most deer hunters (84%) agreed the regular firearm season should begin on November 15. Most deer hunters in the Upper Peninsula (58%) and Northern Lower Peninsula (52%) supported additional restrictions on buck harvest. Nearly equal proportions of deer hunters in the Southern Lower Peninsula supported and opposed additional buck harvest restrictions. Although most Michigan deer hunters favored additional buck harvest restrictions, none of the buck harvest restrictions evaluated received higher support than the existing regulations (i.e., allow hunters to take a total of two bucks in any combination of seasons if one of those bucks has at least four antler points on one antler).
A survey was completed to determine whether hunters and landowners supported proposed mandatory QDM regulations in losco County (Deer Management Units [DMU] 035 and 135). A key element of the proposed mandatory regulations was changing the definition of a buck to a deer with three or more points on one antler. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) supports the voluntary implementation of QDM practices on private land in Michigan. However, mandatory regulations should be imposed in a DMU only when it can be shown that a clear majority (66%) of hunters and landowners support implementation. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of landowners and hunters; 73% of the landowners and 78% of hunters returned their questionnaire. About 59% of landowners owning land in losco County, and 57% of people hunting deer in losco County supported implementing mandatory QDM regulations. Support from both landowners and hunters was insufficient to recommend implementation of mandatory QDM regulations.
A survey was completed to determine whether hunters and landowners supported mandatory QDM regulations in Deer Management Units (DMUs) 032, 076, and 079. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) supports the voluntary implementation of QDM practices on private land in Michigan. However, mandatory regulations should be imposed in a DMU only when it can be shown that a clear majority (> 66%) of hunters and landowners support implementation. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of landowners and hunters; 79% of the landowners and 87% of hunters returned their questionnaire. About 39% of landowners owning land in the affected DMUs, and 36% of people hunting deer in the affected DMUs supported implementing mandatory QDM regulations. Support from both landowners and hunters was insufficient to recommend implementation of mandatory QDM regulations for DMUs 032, 076, and 079.
Results of a survey of Hunting Access Program (HAP) hunters conducted following the 2012 fall and 2013 spring hunting seaons to determine the number of people hunting on HAP lands and to determine hunter satisfaction and opinions about the administration of HAP.
Preliminary report on the results and conditions of the 1964 grouse season as they pertain to the effects and responses to the extension of the season in Zone 3.
Report on the results of the 1962 waterfowl hunting season, with discussion of opinion surveys of hunters at bag check stations.
Results on the twenty-seventh consecutive year of a mail survey asking for opinions of deer hunters on various subjects. A continuing thread through all surveys has been one or more questions asking opinions about antlerless deer hunting.
A survey was completed to determine whether hunters supported continuation of existing mandatory Antler Point Restrictions (APRs) in twelve counties in the Northwest Lower Peninsula. A key feature of the existing mandatory regulations was changing the definition of a buck to a deer with three or more points on one antler.
Results on the twenty-eighth consecutive year of a mail survey asking for opinions of deer hunters on various subjects. A continuing thread through all surveys has been one or more questions asking opinions about antlerless deer hunting.
Results of a survey where nearly 3,000 waterfowl hunters were contacted by mail after the 1998-99 waterfowl hunting season to determine hunter activity and opinions about waterfowl management in Michigan.
A survey was completed to determine whether hunters and landowners supported mandatory QDM regulations in Deer Management Units (DMUs) 313,318, and 332. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) supports the voluntary implementation of QDM practices on private land in Michigan. Mandatory regulations should be imposed in a DMU only when it can be shown that a clear majority (66%) of hunters and landowners support implementation. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of landowners and hunters; 85% of the landowners and 86% of hunters returned their questionnaire. About 73% of landowners and 68% of people hunting deer in DMUs 313, 318, and 332 supported implementing mandatory QDM regulations. Support from both landowners and hunters was sufficient to recommend implementation of mandatory QDM regulations for DMUs 313, 318, and 332.
Report on the results of a survey sent to Ruffed Grouse hunters, who were asked about their hunting experiences during the 1984 season.
Legal or forensic science can be defined as any area of scientific study that deals with legal questions and produces data suitable for use in courts of law. Cause of death determination and the identification of deer meat, deer blood. and deer hair are the only forensic tests being done routinely by the Department of Natural Resources. The purpose of this poll was to determine which new ones might be of use in the future. All conservation officers and law supervisors were asked which one specific type of scientific test would help them most enforce natural resources laws more efficiently and effectively. Responses were mostly ranked lists. This made it impossible to tell which one test might be the most useful, but judging from the number of different suggestions, there is a desire for a variety of them, particularly for ones directed at things involving deer.
Turkey hunters were contacted following the 2001 spring hunting season to determine why eligible applicants did not purchase a turkey hunting license and to determine if applicants supported more liberalized sales of hunting licenses for use on private lands. The primary reason that successful applicants did not purchase a hunting license was because they lacked time to hunt. Other common reasons for not purchasing a license included: (1) the hunt selected in the lottery was during the wrong time period, (2) few turkeys existed in the hunt area, and family emergency. Most of the successful applicants indicated they would have been more likely to purchase a license if an application was not necessary, and the license was valid during all spring hunt periods on private lands. Moreover, most of the applicants that intended to hunt on private lands would have been more likely to purchase this license.
Report on a study of the correlation between hunter satisfaction and restricting hunting numbers among deer hunters. The study looks into whether restricting hunting numbers is a viable tool for deer managers in attempting to increase hunter satisfaction.
A survey was completed to determine whether hunters and landowners supported mandatory QDM regulations in Deer Management Unit (DMU) 017. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) supports the voluntary implementation of QDM practices on private land in Michigan. However, mandatory regulations should be imposed in a DMU only when it can be shown that a clear majority (>66%) of hunters and landowners support implementation. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of landowners and hunters; 77% of the landowners and 83% of hunters returned their questionnaire. About 57% of landowners owning land in DMU 017 and 53% of people hunting deer in DMU 017 supported implementing mandatory QDM regulations. Support from both landowners and hunters was insufficient to recommend implementation of mandatory QDM regulations for DMU 017.
This report presents results of an opinion surveys conducted in 1992 to gain hunter opinions on the season extension and its effect on squirrel harvest and recreation days.
By October 1. 1989, Michigan's deer population was estimated to be 2,000,000 deer. which was about four times the number of deer in Michigan in 1971. This herd was causing unacceptable societal costs through damage to agricultural crops and car/deer accidents. For 1990, the State Deer Damage Task Force recommended, and the Michigan Natural Resource Commission adopted, the experimental Deer Crop Damage Block Permit (DCDBP) Program to reduce the number of out-of-season deer damage control permits; increase antlerless deer harvest on sites of chronic deer crop depredation; and utilize licensed hunters to resolve crop damage problems during regular deer seasons. In 1991, the Wildlife Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) contracted with the Department of Park and Recreation Resources of Michigan State University to impartially examine the attitudes and reported behaviors of the following groups affected by the program: farmers eligible for the program, neighbors of farmers in the program., and deer hunters who did and did not hunt with DCDBP. Mail questionnaires were used to solicit the information. The majority of farmers, landowners adjacent to participating farmers, and hunters who hunted with DCDBP had favorable attitudes about the program.. Hunters who did not hunt with DCDBP were evenly divided between those with favorable attitudes and those who had negative attitudes about the program. The majority of farmers rated the DCDBP program as highly or moderately effective in controlling deer crop damage. The reported harvest of antlerless deer on DCDBP participating farms increased 138% between 1988 and 1990, while the reported harvest of antlerless deer on non-participating farms increased 75%. When asked if they would participate in the DCDBP if offered in 1991, the large majority of the participating farmers (84%) and a sizeable minority of the non-participating farmers (34%) responded they would.
Results of the annual mail survey for opinions of deer hunters on various subjects.
For years the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has recognized that it could not produce enough ring-necked pheasants (Phasianus colchicus) on state-owned lands in southern lower Michigan to satisfy hunters and non-consumptive users. Management biologists commissioned this survey to quantitatively assess the potential for management of pheasants on private lands.
Results of the postcard survey asking for opinions of hunters on various subjects.
Due to a drop in participation and controversy with continuing hunters about waterfowl issues, the Department of Natural Resources. (DNR) appointed a committee of 18 waterfowl hunters representing various regions of the state to provide them with improved public input and recommendations about waterfowl hunting issues. This report covers the results of their findings and the results of mail surveys.
Result and analysis of a questionnaire mailed to property owners in Roscommon County after half of a planned 12,990 acres were clearcut as part of a deer habitat research project.
Results of the 1955 and 1956 hunter postcard surveys to collect data on live and dead deer seen while hunting and for opinions on opening dates and special seasons.
Results of a mailed opinion survey of deer hunters after the 1955 season.
