DEER AND ELK POPULATION STATUS AND HARVEST STRUCTURE IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA: A SUMMARY OF STATE AND PROVINCIAL STATUS SURVEYS.

Transcription

1 DEER AND ELK POPULATION STATUS AND HARVEST STRUCTURE IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA: A SUMMARY OF STATE AND PROVINCIAL STATUS SURVEYS. JUSTIN BINFET,' Wyoming Game and Fish Department, 5400 Bishop Boulevard, Cheyenne, WY 82006, USA DARYL W. LUTZ, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, 3030 Energy Lane, Casper, WY 82604, USA Abstract: In 2002, we surveyed 20 member agencies of the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) to collect information about deer (Odocoileus spp.) and elk (Cewus spp.) population status, harvest and hunter activity during The 2002 survey, although of lesser scope, was an extension of the survey initiated by the Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) for the 2001 Western States and Provinces Deer and Elk Workshop (Heath et al. in press). Fifteen agencies responded to the 2002 survey. Information and data were summarized according to state or province, species or subspecies, and harvest type. Results from our survey were appended to relevant data from the prior survey. The objective was to continue the collection and synthesis of long-term demographic data pertinent to deer and elk management in western North America. WESTEmSTATES AND PROV1IVCES DEER AND ELK WORKSHOP 5:48-68 Key Words: black-tailed deer, Cewus elaphus, mule deer, Odocoileus henzionus, Odocoileus virginianus, Rocky Mountain elk, Roosevelt elk, status, Tule elk, western North America, white-tailed deer. Health and sustainability of deer and elk herds are increasingly threatened throughout western North America. To improve our understanding of the various factors affecting deer and elk management, the biennial Western States and Provinces Deer and Elk Workshop was established as a forum by which professional biologists from the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) can interact and exchange data and ideas. At the 2001 workshop, the ODFW reported population and harvest statistics from deer and elk populations throughout western North America (Heath et al. in press), and identified a need to continue preparing a standardized, accumulative report in which these data are periodically summarized. There are many reasons to periodically review the status of deer and elk populations and this information has various management implications. Compilation of a geographically broad data set spanning many years can enhance the ability of managers to detect common trends and evaluate contributory factors. Resulting information is available to assist the management programs of counterpart agencies. In 2002, we expanded the ODFW study by incorporating 2001 data into the original analysis, which included data fiom 1970, 1985,1995, and The scope of our survey was limited to the following statistics: population size and composition, hunter-days expended, and harvest. Our objective was to continue the compilation and dissemination of standardized, comprehensive information pertaining to deer and elk population status, hunter activity, harvest, and apparent trends throughout the period of record. 1 jbinfet@wgf.state.wy.us

2 METHODS To maintain data continuity, we surveyed the 20 participating WAFWA states and provinces. Our survey requested estimates of deer and elk populations, herd composition, harvests, hunter numbers and hunter-days expended during 2001 only. Appropriate personnel within each agency were sent surveys for completion. We accepted surveys that were returned late to ensure our summary would be as complete as possible. Data summaries were organized based on state or province, species and data type, and conformed to the reporting format of the ODFW survey (Heath et al. in press). Due to incomplete responses and non-reporting, few statistical analyses were possible. However, trends in various population and harvest parameters were apparent (Appendix A, Tables 1-16). RESULTS All agencies in the survey responded at least one year during the period of record encompassed by the ODFW survey and our 2001 extension. The numbers of states or provinces reporting specific data has varied. Some agencies provided data sets during all years the survey was conducted, other agencies provided data only through 2000, and some reported data intermittently. In 2001, 5 agencies (Alaska, Hawaii,,, and British Columbia) did not respond. Data from all complete and partial responses were included in our report. Gaps in the data tables indicate incomplete data or missing survey responses. The following summaries were compiled by combining ow 2001 results with data sets from the ODFW survey (Heath et al. in press). Results fiom 2001 were not analyzed separately because the objective is to examine trends throughout the period of record. Our analysis also did not consider the possible effects changes in techniques or procedures may have had in estimating population size and structure. Deer Population Status and Harvest Thirteen agencies reported estimates of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus hemionus) populations (Appendix A, Table 1). Five of the 13 supplied data from 1970 through 2000 or Three of the data sets indicated a moderate to significant decline in mule deer over the last years, and 2 indicated a substantial increase. Eight agencies reported population estimates fiom 1985 through 2000 or Four agencies indicated populations had declined significantly since 1985, and 4 reported moderate to substantial increases. Seven agencies reported population estimates from 1995 through 2000 or Of the 7, 1 agency indicated a substantial decrease in mule deer over the last 6-7 years, 4 indicated increasing populations with recent stability, and 2 indicated generally increasing trends. Three agencies reported estimates of black-tailed deer (0. hemionus columbianus sitkensis) populations, 2 of which indicated populations had declined (Appendix A, Table 1). Nine agencies supplied estimates of whitetailed deer (0. virginianus) populations, however only 5 provided data for multiple years (Appendix A, Table 1). Four agencies indicated white-tailed deer populations had increased. Sixteen agencies reported composition data fiom mule deer populations, 4 reported similar data from black-tailed deer populations, and 9 reported composition data fiom white-tailed deer populations (Appendix A, Table 2). Although the majority of agencies supplied information

3 regarding age and sex composition of deer populations (all species), the variability in responses prevented us from making reasonable inferences about trends. Six agencies reported state- or province-wide population objectives for mule deer in 2000 andlor All had populations ranging fiom 5% to 27% below the desired management objective (Appendix A, Table 3). Arizona and reported white-tailed deer populations were 5% and 6% respectively below objective in 2001 (Appendix A, Table 3). All agencies reporting data from 1970 or 1985 through 2000 or 2001 indicated the number of persons participating in mule deer rifle seasons and total days expended hunting have generally declined during the last years. Days expended by participants in white-tailed deer rifle seasons have increased or remained stable (Appendix A, Table 4). Days expended by participants in black-tailed deer rifle seasons have varied among reporting states. Alaska reported an increase in 1995 and a slight decrease in 2000, Hawaii indicated a substantial increase since 1970, and reported a decline since 1985 (Appendix A, Table 4). Of the 3 agencies that reported data for multiple years, but did not distinguish between deer species, 2 suggested days expended by participants in deer rifle seasons had declined substantially overall since 1970 (Appendix A, Table 4). Trends in archery and muzzleloader deer (all species) hunting were variable among states or provinces reporting data for multiple years (Appendix A, Table 5). Five agencies generally reported the total days expended hunting with archery equipment increased, 1 reported consistent decreases since 1985,5 reported widely fluctuating data, and 2 reported relatively minor changes. Days expended hunting with muzzleloader equipment increased in 5 states, decreased in 1 state, fluctuated widely in 3 states, and remained relatively stable in 3 states. Reported trends in deer harvest have generally mimicked trends in hunter numbers. Harvest of mule deer during rifle seasons generally declined, harvest of white-tailed deer generally increased, and trends in black-tailed deer harvest have varied among states or provinces (Appendix A, Table 6). Although archery and muzzleloader deer harvests were variable, harvest trends are generally increasing for special weapons deer hunting (Appendix A, Table 7). Elk Population Status and Harvest Fifteen agencies provided population estimates for Rocky Mountain elk (Cewus elaphus nelsoni) (Appendix A, Table 8). Eleven agencies provided data for multiple years, all indicating Rocky Mountain elk populations have increased fiom earliest to most recent years in the data set. Five agencies reported populations appeared to stabilize after Four states supplied Roosevelt elk (C. e. roosevelti) population data (Appendix A, Table 8). Three states supplied data sets spanning multiple years, 2 of which indicated Roosevelt Elk populations had increased. Alaska reported a population decrease between 1995 and Tule elk (C. e. nannodes) populations have increased in since 1970 (Appendix A, Table 8). Sixteen agencies provided composition data fiom Rocky Mountain elk populations, 4 provided similar data for Roosevelt elk, and provided composition data for Tule elk (Appendix A, Table 9). As noted for deer, variability in the type and amount of reported data prevented us from making reasonable inferences about sex and age composition trends for any elk species. Seven respondents to the 2001 survey listed state- or province-wide population objectives for Rocky Mountain elk. Population estimates in 5 of the 7 jurisdictions ranged fiom 44% to 99% of objective (Appendix A, Table 10). Population estimates exceeded the management objective in the remaining 2 states. and reported Roosevelt elk populations were 86%

4 and 87% of objective respectively in 2001, and reported the Tule elk population was 85% over objective (Appendix A, Table 10). Trends in the number of rifle hunters and days expended hunting varied somewhat (Appendix A, Table 1 1). Ten of 13 agencies indicated the number of persons participating in rifle seasons for Rocky Mountain Elk increased since the earliest years of the survey, reported an overall decline, and 2 agencies reported the number of hunters peaked in 1985 and again in 1995, but subsequently declined through Data fiom indicated the number of persons participating in rifle seasons for Roosevelt elk decreased since 1985, but appears to have stabilized recently. reported recent increases in rifle hunters for both Roosevelt and Tule elk since All but 3 agencies reported overall increases in archery and muzzleloader hunters, 2 agencies reported significant declines since 1995 (Appendix A, Table 12). Six states reported an overall increase in the bull harvest of Rocky Mountain elk throughout the period of record. Four agencies reported bull harvests increased until 1995, then declined through 2000 or Data from 3 agencies indicated harvests were relatively stable throughout the period of record, and 1 agency reported an overall decrease (Appendix A, Table 13). All agencies providing multiple years of data had increasing cow harvests through 1995 (n = 3) or 2000 (n = 1 I), but considerable variation in subsequent harvests. Eight of 11 agencies reporting data for 2000 and 2001 had decreased cow harvests since It is noteworthy that 2000 was the first and only reporting year in which the total harvest of cows exceeded that of bulls throughout all states and provinces combined. In 2001, the sex ratio of harvested elk was approximately even. The rifle harvest of bull Roosevelt elk varied among the 4 states providing data, but cow harvest increased in 2 states (Appendix A, Table 13). Harvest of Tule elk (both sexes) increased in throughout the years of reported data (Appendix A, Table 13). Among the 11 agencies that provided multiple years of data, 9 reported archery harvest of bull elk increased since the earliest years of data, through 2000 or Eight agencies reported a general increase in archery harvest of cow elk (Appendix A, Table 14). Muzzleloader harvest of bull elk increased through 2000 or 2001 in the 9 states or provinces reporting multiple years of data. DISCUSSION Twenty western state and provincial wildlife agencies were surveyed to obtain data characterizing deer and elk population size and structure, harvest and hunter activity. Fifteen agencies responded. Data were summarized and merged with the original data compiled by the ODFW (Heath et al. in press) in preparation for the 2003 Western States and Provinces Deer and Elk Workshop. Due to incomplete data sets and variability of responses, elaborate statistical analyses were not possible. Despite inconsistent data reporting, compiling this information in a standard format is useful to deer and elk managers, and should be continued. Because the overall status of ungulate herds and habitat is increasingly threatened in western North America, it is imperative that states and provinces contribute standardized management data for collective analyses to identify and address cumulative impacts over time. Reviewer: L. H. Carpenter

5 APPENDIX A. Data Tables. Table 1. Estimates of deer populations (all species) reported by states and provinces in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information or are not inhabited by a species). --- Species State/Province Mule Deer Alberta 86, , ,000 Arizona Texas Wyoming Yukon Black-tailed Deer Alaska White-tailed ~ eer~ Alberta Arizona Texas Wyoming Yukon No Species Delineation Total Reported Mule Deer Black-tailed Deer White-tailed Deer All Species 1,935,150 2,826,449 2,876,134 3,098,608 6,914,672 a Value represents a 3-year average. b No subspecies delineation was provided because it was not requested in the survey. ' Represents a minimum population value (not all white-tailed deer herd population sizes are estimated).

6 Table 2. Composition of deer populations (all species) reported by states and provinces in western North America, (Excludes states or provinces that did not report information). Species Ratio StateIProvince Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mule Deer Fawns: 100 Does Alberta Arizona Montana North Dakota Texas Wyoming Bucks: 100 Does Alberta Arizona Montana North Dakota Texas Wyoming

7 Black-tailed Deer Fawns: 100 Does Hawaii Bucks: 100 Does Hawaii White-tailed Deer Fawns: 100 Does Alberta Arizona Montana Texas Wyoming Bucks: 100 Does Alberta 5-47 Arizona Montana North Dakota Texas Wyoming

8 Table 3. Comparison of deer population estimates and management objectives, Species Stateprovince % of Objective Population Objective % of Objective Mule Deer Arizona 75% 111, ,500a 81% 87% 81% 282, ,400 89% 36,461 43,200 84% 75% 310, ,100 73% Wyoming 95% 488, ,150 86% White-tailed Deer Arizona 83,000 87,500a 95% 277, ,000 94% a Median value of the range of objectives given.

9 Table 4. Numbers of hunters and days expended hunting deer (all species) during rifle seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow hunting of a species). Number of Hunters Number of Hunter Days Species StateProvince Mule Deer Alberta 58,099 45,916 38,660 34, , , , ,300 Arizona 30, , , , ,425 69, , , , ,900 98,600 60, , , , ,000 23,781 30,846 16,420 22,628 20, ,766 77,087 89,533 86,030 97,000 87,025 54,259 53, , , ,950 North Dakota 9,721 6,956 9,015 3,971 5,150 20,017 19,685 28,397 13,978 17, , ,387 66,127 69,605 74, , , , ,289 Texas Wyoming Black-tailed Deer Alaska Hawaii White-tailed Deer Alberta Arizona North Dakota Texas Wyoming

10 Species Not Arizona 97,257 84,809 58,980 42, , , , ,739 Distinguished British Columbia 443, , , , ,675 Montana 136, , , , , ,538 1,222, , ,785 Wyoming 136, ,381 Table 5. Numbers of hunters and days expended hunting deer (all species) during archery and tnuzzleloader seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow archerylmuzzleloader hunting of a species). Number of Hunters Number of Hunter-days Weapon StateProvince Type Archery Alberta 6,698 12,400 54, , ,000 Arizona Hawaii Montana North Dakota 4,792 32,905 11, ,060 Texasa 69, ,597 16,775 26,539 13,107 11,782 11,782 71, ,707 90,644 91,774 91,774 13,187 20,108 17, , ,556 Wyoming 1,397 7,034 6,478 7,072 7,482 40,952 35,682 48,701 49,501

11 Muzzleloader Arizona Hawaii North Dakota Texasa 2,350 10,654 6,913 11,079 63,036 a Figures represent white-tailed deer hunters and hunter-days only. Table 6. Deer harvest (all species) during rifle seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow hunting of a species). Buck Harvest Doe Harvest Species StateIProvince Mule Deer Alberta 9,346 10,347 8,586 6,400 8,586 8,815 8,265 7,800 Arizona 13,177 23,688 9,001 5,192 5, ,214 British Columbia 22,850 7, ,140 44,299 35,576 26,611 20,114 8,358 40,128 5,768 44,700 25,800 14,800 20,900 19,600 33,400 8,900 2,900 8,100 3,800 Montana 43,952 45,655 36,371 42,954 27,348 30,891 9,293 18,469 10,333 16,927 6,937 9,146 7, , ,329 1,941 34,313 24,015 10,809 13,760 3,546 0

12 North Dakota 2,238 2,895 3,787 2,220 1,915 1,588 3,038 3,553 1,112 1,700 54,595 33,180 21,334 24,013 24,394 14,265 2,093 3,551 4,354 4,365 2,778 2,200 3,120 5, ,204 Texas 3, ,243 53,773 21,861 23,425 27,004 30,510 43,640 1,200 4,244 3,983 7,691 7,031 8,327 3,466 2,374 2,285 Wyoming 58,967 36,849 24,636 36,242 31,618 37,922 14,469 6,717 5,559 5,357 Black-tailed Deer Alaska 11,571 16,174 10,410 3,606 4,022 3,100 British Columbia 17,000 8, Hawaii ,053 32,040 27,336 21,223 19,122 4,347 11,341 5,937 4,781 4,621 15,309 13,588 9,973 12,382 2,781 3,286 3,192 1,272 White-tailed Deer Alberta 12,347 25,219 24,283 24,000 8,158 9,800 12,354 12,000 Arizona 2,207 6,792 4,894 4,204 3, ,200 20,400 10,000 12,000 3,100 8,100 3,700 5,800 Montana 24,929 25,225 31,700 27,448 24,845 17,724 29,095 17,348 11,374 North Dakota 13,675 23,450 25,625 24,800 33,053 8,590 24,624 26,566 27,350 27, ,858 7,946 12,500 22,474 12,000 19,013 Texas 217, ,290 6,004 8,407 7,917 3,731 4,784 2,867 Wyoming 3,771 5,512 4,479 7,166 5,991 6,107 3,455 2,480 3,439 3,276 No Distinction of 38,645 31,651 15,922 19,540 1, Species

13 Table 7. Deer harvest (all species) during archery and muzzleloader seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow archery/muzzleloader hunting of a species). Buck Harvest Doe Harvest Weapon Type State/Province Archery Alberta 538 1,127 1, Arizona Hawaii Montana North Dakota Texasa Muzzleloader Arizona Hawaii North Dakota

14 Texasa 336 1, , , a Figures represent white-tailed deer harvest only.

15 Table 8. Estimates of elk populations (all species) reported by states and provinces in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information or are not inhabited by a species). Year Species StateProvince Rocky Mountain Elk Alberta 25,000 28,000 Arizona Montana Wyoming Yukon Roosevelt Elk Alaska Tule Elk Total Reported Rocky Mountain Elk Roosevelt Elk Tule Elk All Species 131, , , , ,895 a Number represents the actual number of elk counted and is not a statewide population estimate.

16 Table 9. Composition of elk populations (all species) reported by states and provinces in western North America, (Excludes states or provinces that did not report information). - Species Ratio State/Province Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Rocky Mountain Elk Calves: 100 Cows Alberta Arizona Montana North Dakota Wyoming Yuhn 0-60 Bulls: 100 Cows Arizona Montana North Dakota Wyoming Yukon Roosevelt Elk Calves: 100 Cows Alaska

17 Bulls: 100 Cows Tule Elk Calves: 100 Cows Bulls: 100 Cows Table 10. Comparison of elk population estimates and management objectives, Species StateProvince Population Objective % of Objective Rocky Mountain Elk Arizona 24,000 27,500a. 87% Wyoming Roosevelt Elk Tule Elk " Number represents the median value of the range of objectives given.

18 Table 1 1. Numbers of hunters and days expended hunting elk (all species) during rifle seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow hunting of a species). Number of Hunters Number of Hunter-days Species State/Province Rocky Mountain Elk Alberta 37,412 19,701 27,113 22, , , , ,900 Arizona 5,677 10,323 14,713 16,113 19,655 51,195 51,095 57,154 70,308 British Columbia 155,000 a , , , , , , ,382 72,800 67, ,500 62, , , ,000 Montana 77,819 89, ,860 99, , , , , , ,024 5,084 4,713 6,577 8,086 17,921 17,400 61,600 North Dakota ,190 76,075 70,674 59,687 59, , , , ,232 6,259 27,436 1,024 1,124 6,656 7,497 10,354 24,751 33,964 26,729 41,121 40, , , , ,363 Wyoming 40,251 45,809 53,041 51,944 53, , ,371 1,013, , ,987 Roosevelt Elk Alaska 490 British Columbia 2,500 a ,370 52,126 46,846 44,718 44, , , , , ,495 Tule Elk a a Archery and muzzleloader hunters are included within rifle hunter statistics. - -

19 Table 12. Numbers of hunters and days expended hunting elk (all species) during archery and muzzleloader seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow archery/muzzleloader hunting of a species). Number of Hunters Number of Hunter-days Weapon Type StateRrovince Archery Alberta 1,691 3,600 12,257 28,484 26,000 Arizona 3,608 6,654 6,978 8,507 24,471 47,049 49,801 54,328 1,908 11,869 24,374 32,190 92, , ,406 8,200 21,600 16,000 57, , ,000 Montana 1,780 8,483 15,769 51, , ,198 1,667 2,949 6,682 7,200 31,500 16,794 22,580 32,896 35, , , ,5 14 1,059 5, ,664 1,673 1,971 6,729 5,346 5,575 12,196 46,365 36,655 37,876 9,707 14,182 11,356 90, ,865 Wyoming 545 4,605 6,331 7,213 8,310 4,905 35,324 53,048 55,536 65,430 Muzzleloader Arizona 753 1,118 1,495 2, , ,542 8,647 16,046 22,591 45,921 84, ,100 5,100 5, ,600 24,200 20, ,231 4,603 6, ,906 2,125 3,970 9,975 11, ,043 2,167 2, ,191 5,937 9,840 9,830 2,341 10,886 10,917 13,644 66,872

20 Table 13. Elk harvest (all species) during rifle seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow hunting of a species). Bull Harvest Cow Harvest Species Stateffrovince Rocky Mountain Elka Alberta 1,776 1,508 1,707 1,770 1, ,366 1,125 Arizona californiab Montana North Dakota Wyoming TotalHarvest 57,690 70,141 78,702 77,405 52,055 28,501 43,055 65,522 85,708 51,147 Roosevelt Elk Alaska californiab ,230 4,321 3,662 3,358 3, ,516 1,822 2,241 2,366 1, , Total Harvest Tule Elk californiab a British Columbia reported a Rocky Mountain elk harvest of 3,800 elk in 1995 but did not distinguish sex of harvest. Archery and muzzleloader harvest is included within rifle harvest statistics.

21 Table 14. Elk harvest (all species) during archery and muzzleloader seasons in western North America, (Excludes states and provinces that did not report information, or did not allow archery/muzzleloader hunting of a species). Bull Harvest Cow Harvest Weapon Type StateIProvince Archery Alaska Alberta Arizona 325 1, , , ,841 2, ,311 1, ,375 1,000 1, Montana , ,261 1, ,195 1,521 2,122 1,252 1,233 1, Wyoming 18 Muzzleloader Arizona , , , ,