DOCSLIB.ORG

White-Tailed Deer Population Management in the North Central States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
White-Tailed Deer Population Management in the North Central States ;1 ~:..._ ~ WHITE-TAILED DEER POPULATION MANAGEMENT IN THE NORTH CENTRAL STATES North Central S~ The Wildlife Soc 1980 A\~V' Gc~s~ \\l_~~c\~O /:" J\t) ~~~= ! I' / ,_ _ ~ J !U ~ / ,1\:1 C . ., I ) ",??r, ~~'/ ;- ~~~"-I;~:_~~ ..f _ -: "-.,,~A' ~ ,J----' '19':/ ,. .' ,.,>~. '1-­ / WHITE-TAILED DEER POPULATION MANAGEMENT IN THE NORTH CENTRAL STATES Proceedings of a Symposium held at the 41st Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference, Urbana, Illinois, 10 December 1979 Ruth L. Hine and Susan Nehls Editors Sponsored by North Central Section of The Wildlife Society 1980 .... CONTENTS 3 PREFACE David A. Arnold and Oliver Torgerson 5 DEER POPULATION ESTIMATORS IN THE MIDWEST FARMLAND Lee Gladfelter 13 MONITORING DEER POPULATIONS IN THE NORTHERN FORESTED AREAS OF THE MIDWEST Jack J. Mooty 23 REPRODUCTION OF WHITE-TAILED DEER IN THE NORTH CENTRAL UNITED STATES John D. Harder 37 THE LEGAL DEER KILL - HOW IT'S MEASURED Lawrence A. Ryel 47 WINTER - THE GRIM REAPER Patrick D. Karns 55 FAWN MORTALITY ESTIMATES IN FARMLAND DEER RANGE Wayne R. Porath 65 ESTIMATING ILLEGAL KILL OF DEER Kirk H. Beattie, Cleveland J. Cowles, and Robert H. Giles, Jr. 73 AGE DETERMINATION OF WHITE-TAILED DEER IN THE MIDWEST - METHODS AND PROBLEMS John L. Roseberry 83 DEER HERD MANAGEMENT - PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER William A. Creed and Frank P. Haberland 89 POPULATION PHENOMENA - THEIR MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS George E. Burgoyne, Jr. 95 CONVINCING THE DECISION MAKERS Merrill L. Petoskey 99 SELLING MANAGEMENT TO THE DEER HUNTER John Madson 103 DEER MANAGEMENT FOR WHATl Edward E. Langenau, Jr. 107 WHITE-TAILED DEER MANAGEMENT IN THE MIDWEST - SYMPOSIUM SUMMARY Robert S. Cook and Rebecca Field 111 APPENDIX: A WISCONSIN DEER MANAGEMENT CHRONOLOGY (1836 - 1980) Walter E. Scott 2 PREFACE The white-tailed deer is the "bread and but­ definite limitation on both time and space for ter" game animal for nearly all the states in the symposium. the north central part of the United States. Working with leaders of the North Central The welfare of this deer has more influence Section of The Wildlife Society, they set on the policies, the politics, the finances, and about to recruit the most competent deer the sociology of the hunting public in this workers in the region to contribute to this region than any other game species, except book. perhaps the pheasant in South Dakota. This collection of papers attempts to deal The whitetail has generated vast numbers with the major phases of species manage­ at scientific studies, precipitated many ment for the white-tailed deer. It looks at the acrimonious debates, caused more highs and basic tools and techniques, such as aging lows in organizational morale, has triggered deer, determining populations, and measur­ departmental reorganizations, and even has ing the harvest. It also considers various been the political downfall of state legisla­ causes of mortality, factors influencing pro­ tors. The scientific literature could keep a ductivity, and goes all the way to the human reviewer busy month after month. Volumes dimensions of dealing with the hunters, the have been written on deer biology and general public, and the administrators. In the countless sporting journals tell how to hunt Appendix are highlights of an extensive the animal. In spite of the literally millions of chronology of white-tailed deer in Wisconsin, written words about the whitetail, we are prepared by a noted conservation historian. unaware of any single volume which deals We are more than grateful to the authors with the pertinent population management for their contributions to this symposium, concepts that must be dealt with annually by which will bring under one cover the pieces the managers and administrators responsible of the management puzzle and sort them out for today's deer herds. The collection of in a logical and useful manner. papers in this symposium has been designed to fill this void. A loosely organized group of biologists David A. Arnold known as the Midwest Deer and Wild Turkey Michigan Department of Group served as an informal committee to Natural Resources P.O. Box 30028 carefully consider the major elements in the Lansing, MI 48909 deer management formula. It was decided, after due consideration, to restrict the sym­ Oliver Torgerson posium subject to the species management Missouri Department of problems and not include habitat manage­ Conservation ment. Two major reasons for this decision P.O. Box 180 Jefferson City, MO 65102 were: many deer herds occur on private lands ,1\ where little or no opportunities for range manipulation are available, and there was a Symposium Co-Chairmen 3 IVlichlgan DNR DEER POPULATION ESTIMATORS IN THE MIDWEST FARMLAND Lee Gladfelter Iowa Conservation Commission Wildlife Research Station Boone, IA 50036 Abstract: Estimating deer population South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas; north­ crop damage and hunting seasons were once numbers or trends is useful in formulating harvest ern Missouri; southern Minnesota, Wisconsin, again instituted to harvest the surplus. Since regulations, long-range management goals, and and Michigan; all but the southern tip of Il­ then, scientific management of deer has public relations programs, and in evaluating linois; and Iowa, Indiana, and Ohio (Fig. 1). become increasingly difficult because of harvest goals and habitat management practices. Generally, white-tailed deer (Odocoi/eus vir­ unique biological, social, economic, and Techniques vary between states and-depend upon ginianus) density is low because of lack of ex­ agency management goals, manpower, tradition, political problems. Resource managers have habitat, deer density, and weather conditions. tensive timbered habitat. However, high attempted to establish a balance between Population ilStimators currently in. use .in the reproductive rates, minimal overwinter toss, landowner tolerance for crop damage and Midwest Farmland include: deer-vehicle accident and good body condition are benefits pro­ deer populations that are extremely reports, sex-age-kill estimates, roadside observa­ vided by extensive use of agricultural crops vulnerable to harvest. tions, aerial surveys, registered buck kill, hunter for food (Mustard and Wright 1964, Watt et kill-effort, track counts, conservation officer al. 1967, Nixon et al. 1970). Farming is the estimates, crop depredation reports, population major land use and because of problems with THE NEED FOR POPULATION models,and landownersurveys. Most statesrely on landowner intolerance for crop damage, deer more than one estimator in an attempt to obtain ESTIMATORS populations must be carefully controlled. comparable results. Numerous sources of bias are involved and somequestionableassumptions must Because of milder winters and the wide The need for proper management deci­ be made. It is doubtful that these techniques can distribution of their major food source, deer sions, based on sound biological data, is dic­ measure changes of less than 20% in population do not concentrate in winter yards as in the tated by well-informed and organized sports­ size. Finding new population estimators that can more northern parts of their range. man and nonhunter groups, competition for be statistically evaluated and can accurately History indicates that significant changes available habitat from other land uses, and predict population change should be a major goal in deer management have taken place in the competition for conservation dollars. The of future research. Midwest Farmland. Deer were common when ability of resource managers to accurately settlers first arrived and were used extensive­ predict deer population size or trends is the INTRODUCTION ly for food, clothing, shelter, and tools. But, a cornerstone to formulating management The Midwest Farmland is generally defined growing demand for food, by an expanding goals, hunting regulations, and public rela­ as the bluestem prairie region which consists human population, brought about market tions programs. of agricultural land interspersed with oak­ hunting and habitat destruction which Management goals should be developed in hickory, cottonwood-elm, or beech-maple substantially reduced deer numbers during response to deer density, available habitat, timber types. Portions of 12 states are in­ the late 1800's. In the early 19OO's, state crop depredation, landowner attitudes, and cluded in this region: eastern North Dakota, legislatures began closing or restricting hunt­ hunting and nonhunting recreational uses. A ing seasons in an attempt to reduce harvest. classic statement at this point would be that During the 1930's and 1940's, populations in­ population levels should be maintained near Gladfelter, Lee. 1980. Deer population estimators in the Midwest farmland. Pages 5-11 in Ruth L. creased rapidly in response to restricted hunt­ carrying capacity. Carrying capacity has Hine and Susan Nehls, eds. White-tailed deer ing, establishment of refuges, effective law generally been defined as the maximum population management in the north central enforcement, restocking, and habitat im­ number of deer that an area can support states. Proc. 1979 Symp. North Cent. Sect. Wild!. provement. By the 1940's and 1950's, in­ without damage to the habitat (Hosley Soc. 116 pp. creased deer densities produced widespread 1956:224). But, determining the carrying s FACTORS AFFECTING human comfort, and equipment operation. POPULATION ESTIMATORS TECHNIQUES CURRENTLY IN USE Population estimators are designed to measure some degree of change in deer IN THE MIDWEST FARMLAND population
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cultural Commentary: Affectional Preference on Film: Giggle and Lib Joseph J
    Bridgewater Review Volume 1 | Issue 2 Article 9 Dec-1982 Cultural Commentary: Affectional Preference on Film: Giggle and Lib Joseph J. Liggera Bridgewater State College Recommended Citation Liggera, Joseph J. (1982). Cultural Commentary: Affectional Preference on Film: Giggle and Lib. Bridgewater Review, 1(2), 21-22. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/br_rev/vol1/iss2/9 This item is available as part of Virtual Commons, the open-access institutional repository of Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, Massachusetts. CULTURAL COMMENTARY Affectional Preference on Film: Giggle and Lib omantic attachments on screen the romantic man whose passionate desire With the great artist abandoning R these days require at least a hint of is for a person unquestionably of the romantic love--Bergman has lately something kinky to draw the pop audience opposite sex. So straight are his lusts that announced that his next two films will be his which in the days of yesteryear thrilled to no one seemed to notice the dilemma posed last--leaving the field to an oddity like Allen Bogart and Bacall, but which now winks in Manhattan of a man in his mid-forties or television's "Love Boat", the pop knowingly at Julie Andrews in drag. having physical congress with a fifteen year audience, which never warmed to Bergman Something equally aberrant, in fact moreso, old. This year, A -Midsummer Night's Sex or his like anyway, might find solace in Blake more blatant and proselytizing, quickens Comedy renders two points of sexual Edwards, an intriguing director whose last the mental loins of the liberal film-going metaphysics for those still lost in memories three films and his wife's, Julie Andrews, mind; anything less denies the backbone of a gender-differentiated past, the first changing image in them illustrate a syn­ upon which liberal sentiments are oddly enough insisted upon by the women: if thesis of audience demands with a structured.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter 2011 OFFICIAL) ##&'!4#( ) MAGAZINE of BACKCOUNTRY%)/(.,3"/(
    #"$,$06/53: TM +063/"- Winter 2011 OFFICIAL) ##&'!4#() MAGAZINE OF BACKCOUNTRY%)/(.,3"/(.,-((!&,- HUNTERS AND ANGLERS "ACKCOUNTRYBANNERINDD !- BC Moose Hunt EAGLE POINT, OR POINT, EAGLE PERMIT NO. 09 NO. PERMIT U.S. POSTAGE PAID POSTAGE U.S. NON-PROFIT ORG. NON-PROFIT EXECUTIVE DIREctor’s NOTE By Jim Akenson and stepped up enforcement activities fo- BHA roars cusing on protecting habitat from abuse and overuse by off-highway vehicles. Colorado and Washington have been into 2011! focusing on their states wilderness and roadless area protection issues. s we enter 2011, I wonder how Throughout the West, BHA has be- the conservation efforts of today come a powerful voice for sportsmen pro- would score with our forefa- tecting the public lands and waterways Athers of a century ago. Would Theodore that support our outdoor traditions. As Roosevelt or Aldo Leopold say our ef- Executive Director Jim Akenson has set our membership expands, we are also ex- forts are on target? up BHA world headquarters in Joseph, panding our geographic scope, cultivat- I imagine they would be proud of Oregon, gateway to great backcountry. ing opportunities to protect wild places the current land protection status with a in the Appalachian states and hopefully fairly robust wilderness system, and the of John Gale from Colorado. John has someday the great swamps and bayous of general recovery of “huntable” wildlife been serving as a Co-Chair of the Colo- the Deep South. The list goes on and on populations across this country’s rural rado Chapter and he’ll continue that task – wherever there remains wild country landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-2021 Arizona Hunting Regulations
    Arizona Game and Fish Department 2020-2021 Arizona Hunting Regulations This publication includes the annual regulations for statewide hunting of deer, fall turkey, fall javelina, bighorn sheep, fall bison, fall bear, mountain lion, small game and other huntable wildlife. The hunt permit application deadline is Tuesday, June 9, 2020, at 11:59 p.m. Arizona time. Purchase Arizona hunting licenses and apply for the draw online at azgfd.gov. Report wildlife violations, call: 800-352-0700 Two other annual hunt draw booklets are published for the spring big game hunts and elk and pronghorn hunts. i Unforgettable Adventures. Feel-Good Savings. Heed the call of adventure with great insurance coverage. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on motorcycle insurance. geico.com | 1-800-442-9253 | Local Office Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states, in all GEICO companies, or in all situations. Motorcycle and ATV coverages are underwritten by GEICO Indemnity Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, DC 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. © 2019 GEICO ii ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT — AZGFD.GOV AdPages2019.indd 4 4/20/2020 11:49:25 AM AdPages2019.indd 5 2020-2021 ARIZONA HUNTING4/20/2020 REGULATIONS 11:50:24 AM 1 Arizona Game and Fish Department Key Contacts MAIN NUMBER: 602-942-3000 Choose 1 for known extension or name Choose 2 for draw, bonus points, and hunting and fishing license information Choose 3 for watercraft Choose 4 for regional
    [Show full text]
  • Hunting Deer in California
    HUNTING DEER IN CALIFORNIA We hope this guide will help deer hunters by encouraging a greater understanding of the various subspecies of mule deer found in California and explaining effective hunting techniques for various situations and conditions encountered throughout the state during general and special deer seasons. Second Edition August 2002 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME L. Ryan Broddrick, Director WILDLIFE PROGRAMS BRANCH David S. Zezulak, Ph.D., Chief Written by John Higley Technical Advisors: Don Koch; Eric Loft, Ph.D.; Terry M. Mansfield; Kenneth Mayer; Sonke Mastrup; Russell C. Mohr; David O. Smith; Thomas B. Stone Graphic Design and Layout: Lorna Bernard and Dana Lis Cover Photo: Steve Guill Funded by the Deer Herd Management Plan Implementation Program TABLE OF CON T EN T S INTRODUCT I ON ................................................................................................................................................5 CHAPTER 1: THE DEER OF CAL I FORN I A .........................................................................................................7 Columbian black-tailed deer ....................................................................................................................8 California mule deer ................................................................................................................................8 Rocky Mountain mule deer .....................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Pheasant Hunt
    YOUTH HUNTING OPPORTUNITIES Selected Wildlife TAKE A KID HUNTING Management Areas for the Pheasant Youth Pheasant Hunt Hunt: November 6, 2004 Saturday, Nov. 6, 2004 Guided Open Open The 2004 Take a Kid Hunting Pheasant Hunt WMA Morning After All will allow properly licensed hunters with a valid 1 pm Day youth license to hunt on one of nine stocked Whittingham X X Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) on Saturday Black River X X morning, Nov. 6, 2004. In a cooperative effort A proud hunter with his Flatbrook X between the Division of Fish and Wildlife and Youth Pheasant Hunt quarry. Clinton X X the NJ State Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, Assunpink X X volunteer hunting mentors with trained bird dogs will guide youth hunters on a pheasant Colliers Mills X X hunt. This experience will increase the young hunters’ opportunity for harvesting a Glassboro X Millville X X pheasant in a setting which encourages responsible and safe hunting practices. Peaslee X X All participants must pre-register and be accompanied to the check-in by a parent or guardian. Parents or guardians are welcomed and encouraged to follow the hunters Guided: Pre-registration required. through the fields. All pre-registered hunters will receive an information packet. One Open—Afternoon: Any youth hunter with session will be offered, starting at 7 a.m. a valid youth hunting license accompanied Only 50 youth hunters will be allowed on each WMA during each session. If the by a licensed, non-shooting adult (aged number of applicants exceeds the number of slots available, a random drawing will be 21 or older), will be permitted to hunt on held to select participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Deer Plan Cover 09-18.Cdr
    Maryland White-tailed Deer Plan 2009-2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) currently garner more attention than any other wildlife species in Maryland. Wildlife-watchers, photographers and hunters contribute millions of dollars each year to the state’s economy while pursuing deer. At the same time, deer are responsible for Maryland’s farmers and other citizens sustaining millions of dollars worth of damage to crops, landscaping and vehicles. Managing the deer population to satisfy recreational interests, while at the same time reducing damage concerns, is a challenging and controversial process. White-tailed deer were plentiful in Maryland at the time of settlement in the 1600s. However, market- hunting and habitat destruction nearly extirpated deer from the state by 1900. The early 1900s through the 1960s was a period of population restoration and deer proliferated due to ideal habitat conditions and the protection of female deer from harvest. By the 1980s, management philosophies across much of the state changed from restoring deer to stabilizing and reducing deer numbers. Active management of deer is a necessity in Maryland today if we are to maintain population levels compatible with the varied interests of the citizens of the state. As an evolutionary prey species, deer exhibit a high fecundity rate, enabling them to rapidly increase in number. Presently, non-lethal management techniques (such as contraceptives) and non-hunting mortality (disease, injuries and predators) are not sufficient to maintain deer populations at satisfactory levels. The lethal control of deer via regulated hunting remains the most effective way to balance the deer population with environmental and cultural concerns on a landscape scale.
    [Show full text]
  • Black Bear Information Sheet
    Maine Chapter of The Wildlife Society Excellence In Wildlife Stewardship Through Science and Education The Maine Chapter of The Wildlife Society (MeTWS), established in 1976, is a local membership organization of The Wildlife Society, an international non-profit scientific and educational association dedicated to excellence in wildlife stewardship through science and education. The mission of MeTWS is to enhance the ability of wildlife professionals to conserve diversity, sustain productivity, and ensure responsible use of wildlife resources for the benefit of society. The membership of MeTWS includes approximately 120 wildlife professionals and other concerned individuals employed by government agencies, academic institutions, private firms, and non-governmental organizations, working to promote sound stewardship of wildlife resources throughout Maine. MAINE BLACK BEAR POPULATION INFORMATION April 16, 2004 Current Bear Status in Maine Black bears exist throughout the state with the exception of the extreme south-coastal region of the state. 23,000 bears are estimated to inhabit the state. Maine has the largest population of black bears of any state in the eastern U.S., and one of the largest populations within the lower-48. Regulated hunting and trapping are the primary methods used to manage the number of bears in the population. Black bears are an important component of the state’s ecosystem, and are valued by society, including hunters and non-hunters. Management History State legislature has the authority to enact laws to regulate bear populations, but practical aspects of implementing regulations were transferred to the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) in 1972. Bears were bountied from 1770-1957; considered a pest species until 1931 (no closed season); a short season was established and opened coincidentally with the deer season from 1931-1941; year-round open season was reinstituted from 1942-1965; season lengths and harvests have changed since 1966.
    [Show full text]
  • Elk Neck State Park Hunting 2020-2021 Rules, Regulations And
    Elk Neck State Park Hunting 2021-2022 Rules, Regulations and Policies 1. Bow hunters are required to wear fluorescent orange or daylight fluorescent pink during shotgun and muzzleloader seasons and Junior Hunt Day: a. October 21 – October 30, November 27 – December 11, December 18, 2021 – January 1, 2022 and January 7 – January 8, 2022. b. Junior Hunt Day: November 13, 2021. 2. All deer harvested count toward the state bag limits. 3. Shooting Hours a. ½ hour before sunrise to ½ hour after sunset. b. Hunters are permitted in the hunting areas 2 hours before sunrise and up to 2 hours after sunset. 4. Hunting is prohibited on Sundays. 5. Hunting is not permitted above or within 50 yards of a trail or road. 6. A DNR Managed Hunt Permit (MHP) and a Free Public Hunting Permit are required to hunt at Elk Neck State Park. Every hunter must have his or her own permit. These permits are NOT transferable. 7. All State and Federal hunting laws, as well as park regulations, will be strictly enforced. 8. Call ahead reservations through the Gwynnbrook Wildlife Office are required for the North East Beach Area. 9. Hunters (and non-hunting companions) must sign in and sign out at the sign-in box at each parking area EVERY time they enter or exit the hunting areas. 10. All harvested deer must be recorded at the sign-in box. 11. Park in designated areas only, as indicated by the hunting map. 12. Hunters are required to display their Free Public Hunting Permit on the dashboard of their vehicle.
    [Show full text]
  • Pronghorn Antelope Workshop 20:5-23
    SOUTH DAKOTA PRONGHORN MANAGEMENT PLAN 2019 – 2029 SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF GAME, FISH AND PARKS PIERRE, SOUTH DAKOTA WILDLIFE DIVISION REPORT draft May 2019 This document is for general, strategic guidance for the Division of Wildlife and serves to identify what we strive to accomplish related to Pronghorn Management. This process will emphasize working cooperatively with interested publics in both the planning process and the regular program activities related to pronghorn management. This plan will be utilized by Department staff on an annual basis and will be formally evaluated at least every 10 years. Plan updates and changes, however, may occur more frequently as needed. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This plan is a product of substantial discussion, debate, and input from many wildlife professionals. In addition, those comments and suggestions received from private landowners, hunters, and those who recognized the value of pronghorn and their associated habitats were also considered. Management Plan Coordinator – Andy Lindbloom, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks (SDGFP). SDGFP Pronghorn Management Plan Team that assisted with plan writing, data review and analyses, critical reviews and/or edits to the South Dakota Pronghorn Management Plan, 2019 - 2029 – Nathan Baker, Chalis Bird, Paul Coughlin, Josh Delger, Jacquie Ermer, Steve Griffin, Trenton Haffley, Corey Huxoll, John Kanta, Keith Fisk, Tom Kirschenmann, Chad Lehman, Cindy Longmire, Stan Michals, Mark Norton, Tim Olson, Chad Switzer, and Lauren Wiechmann. Cover art was provided by Adam Oswald. All text and data contained within this document are subject to revision for corrections, updates, and data analyses. Recommended Citation: South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Communities Are Welcoming Hunters and Anglers
    Potential Costs of Losing Hunting and Trapping as Wildlife Management Methods Updated: May 25th, 2005 Produced by the Animal Use Issues Committee of the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 444 North Capitol Street, NW Suite 725 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 624-7890 www.IAFWA.org i Acknowledgements This report was developed for the Animal Use Issues Committee of the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA). Funding was provided by the Wildlife Restoration Program through Multistate Conservation Grant DC M-35-O awarded to the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This report was authored by Rob Southwick, Ashley Woolley and Donna Leonard of Southwick Associates, Inc., Fernandina Beach, FL., and Sharon Rushton of Killingworth, CT. The project was conceived and championed by Bob Carmichael, Manitoba Department of Natural Resources, and guided in part by Bruce Taubert, Arizona Game and Fish Department; Gordon Robertson, American Sportfishing Association; Don MacLauchlan and Jen Mock, IAFWA; and Mike S. O’Brien, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources. A special thank you goes to Rob Cahill, Fur Institute of Canada, for ensuring Canadian data and issues were a part of this report. Data was provided by many state, provincial, federal and private agencies and sources, with special mention to Martin Mendoza of the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Stephanie Kenyon and Carol Wynne, Point to Point Communications, Leesburg, Va., provided invaluable editorial and strategic guidance. Reviews and expertise were provided by Alan Clark, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources; Buddy Baker, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources; Gordon Batchellor, New York Department of Environmental Conservation; and John Erb of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Antelope Mule Deer White-Tailed Deer Elk Bighorn Sheep
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Antelope Rattlesnake (745) - Areas 70-72 1 North Natrona (746) - Area 73 13 North Converse (748) - Areas 25, 26 17 Black Thunder (750) - Areas 4-9, 24, 27, 29 Mule Deer Cheyenne River (740) - Areas 7-14, 21 25 Black Hills (751) - Areas 1-6 29 North Converse (755) - Area 22 33 South Converse (756) - Area 65 36 Bates Hole - Hat Six (757) - Areas 66, 67 40 Rattlesnake (758) - Areas 88, 89 47 North Natrona (759) - Area 34 62 White-tailed Deer Black Hills (706) - Areas 1-6 67 Central (707) - Areas 7-15, 21, 22, 34, 65-67, 88, 89 71 Elk Black Hills (740) - Areas 1, 116, 117 75 Laramie Peak / Muddy Mountain (741) - Areas 7, 19 81 Rattlesnake (742) - Area 23 86 Pine Ridge (743) - Area 122 105 Bighorn Sheep Kouba Canyon (Non-herd unit) – Area 20 108 i 2019 - JCR Evaluation Form SPECIES: Pronghorn PERIOD: 6/1/2019 - 5/31/2020 HERD: PR745 - RATTLESNAKE HUNT AREAS: 70-72 PREPARED BY: HEATHER O'BRIEN 2014 - 2018 Average 2019 2020 Proposed Population: 10,769 10,315 9,965 Harvest: 499 1,110 1,340 Hunters: 518 1,126 1,400 Hunter Success: 96% 99% 96 % Active Licenses: 585 1,215 1,400 Active License Success: 85% 91% 96 % Recreation Days: 1,597 2,950 4,100 Days Per Animal: 3.2 2.7 3.1 Males per 100 Females 48 67 Juveniles per 100 Females 72 52 Population Objective (± 20%) : 12000 (9600 - 14400) Management Strategy: Special Percent population is above (+) or below (-) objective: -14.0% Number of years population has been + or - objective in recent trend: 3 Model Date: 04/06/2020 Proposed harvest rates (percent of pre-season estimate for each sex/age group): JCR Year Proposed Females year old: 10.9% 12.3% Males year old: 17.2% 27.5% Total: 10.6% 12.9% Proposed change in post-season population: -10.4% -9.2% 1 2020 HUNTING SEASONS RATTLESNAKE PRONGHORN HERD (PR745) Hunt Archery Dates Season Dates Type Quota Limitations Area Opens Closes Opens Closes 70 1 Aug.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Social Studies Through Film
    Teaching Social Studies Through Film Written, Produced, and Directed by John Burkowski Jr. Xose Manuel Alvarino Social Studies Teacher Social Studies Teacher Miami-Dade County Miami-Dade County Academy for Advanced Academics at Hialeah Gardens Middle School Florida International University 11690 NW 92 Ave 11200 SW 8 St. Hialeah Gardens, FL 33018 VH130 Telephone: 305-817-0017 Miami, FL 33199 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: 305-348-7043 E-mail: [email protected] For information concerning IMPACT II opportunities, Adapter and Disseminator grants, please contact: The Education Fund 305-892-5099, Ext. 18 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.educationfund.org - 1 - INTRODUCTION Students are entertained and acquire knowledge through images; Internet, television, and films are examples. Though the printed word is essential in learning, educators have been taking notice of the new visual and oratory stimuli and incorporated them into classroom teaching. The purpose of this idea packet is to further introduce teacher colleagues to this methodology and share a compilation of films which may be easily implemented in secondary social studies instruction. Though this project focuses in grades 6-12 social studies we believe that media should be infused into all K-12 subject areas, from language arts, math, and foreign languages, to science, the arts, physical education, and more. In this day and age, students have become accustomed to acquiring knowledge through mediums such as television and movies. Though books and text are essential in learning, teachers should take notice of the new visual stimuli. Films are familiar in the everyday lives of students.
    [Show full text]