Embed
Email

Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division

Document Sample

Shared by: ajizai
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
12/19/2011
language:
pages:
6
Michigan Department of Natural Resources

Wildlife `Division





2010 Ruffed Grouse and American Woodcock

Hunter Cooperator Survey Preliminary Results*

and Hunting Forecast for 2011



CONTACTS: Al Stewart or Val Frawley 517-373-1263



Introduction

Ruffed grouse and American woodcock cooperator surveys rely on volunteer hunters who record

numbers of hours hunted and ruffed grouse and woodcock flushed each day of hunting. Data

obtained from cooperating hunters are summarized by hunt zone and by two-week intervals as the

average number of grouse or woodcock flushed per hour of hunting. Flush rates reported by

cooperators provide an index of abundance and an indicator of harvest. Grouse and woodcock

cooperator surveys are just one of several surveys used by the Michigan Department of Natural

Resources (DNR) to monitor ruffed grouse and woodcock populations. Results of this survey will be

combined with hunter harvest data and information gathered during spring breeding surveys to

forecast grouse and woodcock hunting prospects for the 2011 season.



Cooperator Participation

Hunter records were available from 197 cooperators who hunted in 2010. These hunters spent 6,133

hours afield. In 2009, we received reports from 186 cooperators who spent 6,803 hours afield.



Ruffed Grouse Flush Rates

The average number of ruffed grouse Table 1. Average ruffed grouse and American woodcock

flush per houra, by two week intervals, as reported by

flushed per hour by cooperators in 2010

cooperating hunters in 2010.

(1.7) is similar to the average number of

grouse flushed per hour in 2009 (1.5). Zoneb

Ruffed grouse flush rates were highest in Species and dates 1 2 3

zones 1 (Upper Peninsula; 2.0) and 2 Ruffed grouse

(northern Lower Peninsula; 1.7) (Figures 1

and 2). The highest average flush rates September 15–30 2.0 1.9 1.0

reported by cooperators were during October 1–15 2.2 1.5 1.3

October 1-15 in zones 1 and 3, and October 16–31 2.0 1.7 1.3

September 15-30 in Zone 2 (Table 1).

November 1–14 1.8 1.8 0.7

American Woodcock Flush Rates December 1–15 1.3 1.7 0.9

The average number of woodcock flushed December 16–January 1 n/a 1.7 0.7

per hour statewide by cooperators was

slightly higher in 2010 (1.4) than in 2009

(0.9). Woodcock flush rates were highest in American woodcock

Zone 2 (1.7), followed by zones 3 (1.1) and September 15–30 0.5 2.1 1.3

1 (0.9), respectively (Figures 3 and 4). October 1–15 1.6 2.2 2.0

Average flush rates peaked during October

1-15 in all zones (Table 1). October 16–31 0.6 1.8 1.8

November 1–14 0.1 0.5 1.0

*The results will be final when the annual status report is

December 1–15 0.0 0.0 0.0

published.

December 16–January 1 n/a 0.0 0.0

a

Does not include hunting data when effort was <20 hours.

b

See Figure 2 for boundaries of zones.





A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Michigan Project W-147-R

2011 Hunting Forecast

Ruffed grouse populations have exhibited ten-year cycles in abundance over much of Canada,

Alaska, and the Great Lakes states of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan (Rusch et al. 1999).

Many factors affect grouse populations including changes in habitat and food availability. It is unclear

why the population cycles occur. Based on current survey data, we expect the grouse population this

fall will be near the peak of the cycle. With favorable spring production, 2011 fall ruffed grouse and

woodcock numbers could be similar in the Lower Peninsula and similar or slightly higher in the Upper

Peninsula compared to fall 2010. The best grouse and woodcock hunting opportunities will continue

to be in areas of young early forest successional habitat.



Acknowledgments

We thank all of the cooperators who maintained and provided grouse and woodcock hunting records,

and Theresa Riebow, Jamie Fuller and Katie Shaw who completed data entry. Brian Frawley, Russ

Mason, Cheryl Nelson, and Doug Reeves reviewed a previous version of this report. This project was

supported by the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act under Pittman-Robertson Project W-147-R.



Literature Cited

Rusch, D.H. 1989. The grouse cycle. Pages 210-226 in S. Atwater and J. Schnell editors. Ruffed

Grouse. Stackpole Books. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA.

Flush Rates Per Hour

19









0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

5

19 7 3.5

5

19 9

6

19 1

6

19 3

6

19 5

6

19 7

69

19

7

19 1

7

19 3

75

19

7

19 7

7

19 9

81

19

8

19 3

8









Year

19 5

8

19 7

8

19 9

9

19 1

9

19 3

9

19 5

9

Zone 3

Zone 2

Zone 1









19 7

99

20

0

20 1

0

Figure 1. Ruffed grouse flush rates reported by cooperating hunters, 1957-2010.









20 3

0

20 5

0

20 7

09

Figure 2. Average number of ruffed grouse flushed per hour by cooperators in 2010.

Flush Rates Per Hour

19









0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3



6

19 0

6

19 2

6

19 4

6

19 6

6

19 8

7

19 0

7

19 2

7

19 4

7

19 6

7

19 8

8

19 0

8

19 2

8

19 4

86

19





Year

8

19 8

9

19 0

9

19 2

9

19 4

9

19 6

9

20 8

0

20 0

0

20 2

0

Zone 3

Zone 2

Zone 1









20 4

0

20 6

0

Figure 3. American woodcock flush rates reported by cooperating hunters, 1960-2010.









20 8

10

Figure 4. Average number of American woodcock flushed per hour by cooperators in 2010.



Related docs
Other docs by ajizai
NH_Members
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
06 Mr. Wu Jun 16012009
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
9i CITY OF RAPID CITY
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
K Readiness Doc. July 2010
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
LookMaNoHands
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
97605964
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
NBA 2006-07 data
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!