|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 25, 2018 19:53:11 GMT -5
I started playing around with the 2015 deer numbers (because the 2016 data was missing a data point) and put together some charts that rank counties based on various pieces of data. I ranked them based on: - Square Miles of Deer-holding habitat (based on last land survey, 2013 I think) - Gun effort (not exactly how this was calculated, assuming it's a way of knowing how many hunters in the county) - Gun effort per Sq Mi (This could tell us how dense the hunter population was) - Deer killed per effort (Essentially, how successful were hunters in killing a deer) - Deer killed per sq mi- Deer killed per sq mi per effort (I see this as a way of "ranking" how good the deer hunting was in that county)     |
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 25, 2018 19:54:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 25, 2018 21:47:31 GMT -5
Excel has an awesome new map-charting feature...comparing these two, in particular, spoke volumes to me. Square Miles of Deer Habitat vs. Gun Hunting Effort per Sq. Mile   |
|
|
|
Post by thebellcompany on Jan 25, 2018 23:36:54 GMT -5
Brilliant. Thank you so much for this work
|
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jan 25, 2018 23:42:42 GMT -5
Thanks for the information!
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Jan 26, 2018 5:45:52 GMT -5
Cool work!
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrencecountyhunter on Jan 26, 2018 8:51:24 GMT -5
That's cool arlowe13 ! Assuming the data is fairly accurate, it's interesting that the counties with the most public land also have some of the lowest hunting pressure. |
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 26, 2018 8:52:48 GMT -5
That's cool arlowe13 ! Assuming the data is fairly accurate, it's interesting that the counties with the most public land also have some of the lowest hunting pressure. I see no reason to not trust their data. |
|
|
|
Post by lawrencecountyhunter on Jan 26, 2018 9:42:22 GMT -5
That's cool arlowe13 ! Assuming the data is fairly accurate, it's interesting that the counties with the most public land also have some of the lowest hunting pressure. I see no reason to not trust their data. I just meant that particular piece goes against the idea that public land is always overrun with hunters.
I suspect that the data is accurate enough to portray the overall picture as you've done here, and is very interesting to look at. But the state doesn't even know how many people deer hunt each year, let alone how many days that they get out or what counties they hunt in, so the numbers here cannot be absolute.
|
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 26, 2018 9:59:57 GMT -5
I see no reason to not trust their data. I just meant that particular piece goes against the idea that public land is always overrun with hunters.
I suspect that the data is accurate enough to portray the overall picture as you've done here, and is very interesting to look at. But the state doesn't even know how many people deer hunt each year, let alone how many days that they get out or what counties they hunt in, so the numbers here cannot be absolute.
I hear ya. Sure, we're never going to have every single piece of data available, but surveys and check-in data can be used to infer what's happening, with a large-enough data set. Hence, why most agree that this map, in the overall picture, is pretty close to reality. |
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 26, 2018 10:12:58 GMT -5
Seems like a simple question, but does more habitat lead to more deer killed? As a general trend, yes, but there will always be some outliers.  |
|
|
|
Post by thebellcompany on Jan 26, 2018 12:51:48 GMT -5
Seems like a simple question, but does more habitat lead to more deer killed? As a general trend, yes, but there will always be some outliers. Could you list the 8 counties that are above the 2500 line?  |
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jan 26, 2018 22:32:52 GMT -5
If I understand the information correctly, I find it interesting the number of counties that we keep hearing have no deer are towards the top in success rates.
|
|
|
|
Post by span870 on Jan 27, 2018 7:03:04 GMT -5
If I understand the information correctly, I find it interesting the number of counties that we keep hearing have no deer are towards the top in success rates. Or another way to look at it is, there is so little habitat that the deer are squeezed tighter and tighter into extremely dense hunter areas that the few deer that are there are pretty easy pickings especially if each area has several hunters per square miles. Some of the guys that hunt the northern areas that complain, I don't "disbelieve" their thoughts on few deer but what are you to do when there isn't any place for more deer to go. What I do find interesting are the two counties I hunt, Lawrence and Washington aren't higher up on the kill ratio. Many deer per square miles but so few deer killed. Like Lawrence county said, so much public land but very low on the hunter use. I've always told people that on n.f land, sure some gets hammered but I know alot that sees few if any pressure. What I find is guys that live in those counties generally hunt private land and most of what I know that hunt public are people from up North that come down for a weekend or so and hunt the same general area year after year along with everyone else. Either those deer are killed quick or pushed back farther to another piece of property or property with less pressure. |
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 27, 2018 8:33:40 GMT -5
Seems like a simple question, but does more habitat lead to more deer killed? As a general trend, yes, but there will always be some outliers. Could you list the 8 counties that are above the 2500 line? Here's the chart with labels...  |
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 27, 2018 8:40:18 GMT -5
Map chart of total deer killed, reminder this 2015 data  |
|
|
|
Post by arlowe13 on Jan 27, 2018 8:48:00 GMT -5
Total Kill and Habitat maps side by side  |
|
|
|
Post by jimstc on Jan 27, 2018 11:27:11 GMT -5
Outstanding work. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by parkerbow on Jan 28, 2018 19:44:24 GMT -5
We always say we do not know how many Deer hunters Indiana has. Would it be possible that every deer hunter that hunts deer be mandated to call and get a HIP number to hunt deer. Whether they are a land owner, Lifetime License holder or regular license holder you have to have this HIP number also. It could also be beneficial to punch in the county number of which county you primarily hunt deer in. The HIP number is used for migratory birds, why can't it be used for deer? It would give us a better idea how many hunters there are and what the hunter density is for each county.Just a suggestion.
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Jan 29, 2018 5:42:30 GMT -5
We always say we do not know how many Deer hunters Indiana has. Would it be possible that every deer hunter that hunts deer be mandated to call and get a HIP number to hunt deer. Whether they are a land owner, Lifetime License holder or regular license holder you have to have this HIP number also. It could also be beneficial to punch in the county number of which county you primarily hunt deer in. The HIP number is used for migratory birds, why can't it be used for deer? It would give us a better idea how many hunters there are and what the hunter density is for each county.Just a suggestion. I have thought the same for years. Easy and the system is already set up. Few mods and it is done. |
|
