|
Post by greghopper on Sept 16, 2006 21:51:02 GMT -5
How many Deer are there In The Indiana Heard? Anybody got any Numbers?
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Sept 17, 2006 2:57:35 GMT -5
How would you know, there is no way to get them to line up to be counted.
An ESTIMATE is about all you could get.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Sept 17, 2006 7:50:51 GMT -5
Too many...especially in some areas.
|
|
|
Post by bigugly on Sept 17, 2006 19:26:43 GMT -5
Not sure about your state but some new numbers where released for my home province. We're up from 300'000 about 10 years ago to 500'000. The deers adaptibility and easy winter are the main factors. The only downside is one or two normal winters will result in a fast reduction. The worst thing for our deer and turkeys is the forming of crust on snow. Makes it hard for them to get to feed but gives the wolves and yotes easy pickings.
|
|
|
Post by wtlhaven on Sept 18, 2006 7:31:01 GMT -5
Was just told over the weekend at the Hunter's ed class that I took my boy too that there is roughly 200,000. This info came from an I.C.O..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2006 7:35:37 GMT -5
wtlhaven,
That ICO must be mis-informed! That is way too low. I have always heard that the Indiana herd is around 500,000. If the 200,000 number is correct then we harvested over half the herd last season when we took more than 125,000 deer. He must have mis-spoken.
|
|
|
Post by hotshot on Sept 18, 2006 8:06:38 GMT -5
I'd guess one for every minivan drinen on Indiana Highways.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Sept 18, 2006 8:24:30 GMT -5
Ive been trying to find the answer and cant but it seems i read that our herd is around 275,000 and that was a year or so ago. If that is correct and with the growing herd size it should be close to 300,000. h.h.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2006 8:33:40 GMT -5
I can't imagine that we harvest anywhere near half of our deer herd in Indiana in a season. We harvested over 125,000 deer last season. I would be surpised if we harvest more than 1/3 of the total herd in a given year. Extrapolate that and it would give you a rough guess of 375,000, but I would still think that is low. I will stick to my "uneducated" guess of closer to 500,000. That is what most of the pre-season magazines put our herd at, even though the state doesn't release estimated numbers.
|
|
|
Post by wtlhaven on Sept 18, 2006 9:15:08 GMT -5
Well, I was thinking it should have been a lot higher, but I wasn't going to question the source figuring he knew what he was talking about.
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Sept 18, 2006 9:47:20 GMT -5
In 1991, there was an estimated deer herd of 350,000. With the survival rate of 1.62 fawns per doe and assuming 50% does, there would be 462,000 deer in 1992 after the fall harvest. Using those same numbers would put us well into the millions in 2006. I would guess we easily have 500,000 to 750,000 deer in the state.
I also think the herd is worse shape than anyone really knows. If it was fine they would not be trying to increase the antlerless harvest to basically an unlimited number. I'm sure most of the state is well above carrying capacity. I would think the reason there is not an accurate estimate available to the public is because it would reveal just how bad it really is.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Sept 18, 2006 11:00:43 GMT -5
The answer of 300,000 i gave was just a guess. I did a search last night and could not find the answer. It wasn't anywhere on the DNR website that I could find. 500, 0000 to 750,000 is probably more correct. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Sept 18, 2006 11:02:07 GMT -5
Sometimes, it feels like there are 10 deer in the whole state, all south of Indy!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2006 12:53:54 GMT -5
I did a little search and found this estimate. It is the estimated deer populations in the top 10 states for deer/vehicle collisions (Indiana ranks 8th nationally in that catagory) You will notice that the total estimated population of Indiana's deer herd is at 450,000 which is way lower than any other state in the top 10 for auto accidents involving deer. I guess that means we have really dumb deer or really bad drivers.
1. Pennsylvania 1,600,000 2. Michigan 1,700,000 3. Illinois 800,000 4. Ohio 650,000 5. Georgia 1,200,000 6. Minnesota 1,200,000 7. Virginia 1,000,000 8. Indiana 450,000 9. Texas 4,000,000 10.Wisconsin 1,400,000
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Sept 18, 2006 13:14:03 GMT -5
Our deer estimate does seem suspect with Ohio, Michigan and Illinois surrounding us, and having much higher deer numbers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2006 13:22:07 GMT -5
It makes since keeping in mind that Indiana is quite a bit smaller, geographically, than all of those states. In fact, Indiana is the smallest state (in square miles) west of the Appalachian Mountains (excluding Hawaii).
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Sept 18, 2006 13:22:54 GMT -5
Just a theory, but I think what adds to the number of Deer hit by vehicles in states such as Indiana is the patch work of woods in most areas. Deer must cross busy road ways to acess feed areas as well as other small wood lots. In some states Deer can be born ,live out there life and rarely if ever must cross a major road way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2006 13:27:32 GMT -5
Good point, as the "Crossroads of America" we also have the most interstates criss-crossing our state than most any other state. People stand very little chance of getting stopped in time when a deer crosses them on the interstate. On a country road, you might get stopped, but not when you are doing 70 mph.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Sept 18, 2006 13:36:10 GMT -5
In fact, Indiana is the smallest state (in square miles) west of the Appalachian Mountains (excluding Hawaii). Interesting fact!
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Sept 18, 2006 13:44:20 GMT -5
I think it has been 7 or 8 years since the Indiana DNR gave any ESTIMATED deer population figures.
At that time it was 500,000
I'm sure there are more now than then.
.
|
|