2016-2017 NJ Deer kill numbers are out (big rebound from last season)

[BenedictGomez]

It seems like NJ ranks on the high end of hunters per square mile.  This is 2013 data but I doubt the rankings have moved much since then.  This seems to contradict Gomez's assertion that NJ needs more hunters.  

 

 

 

I cant replicate the QDMA data for New Jersey.   If you just go by hunters per square mile, the numbers QDMA comes up with should be even WORSE. 

 

But that's not a very useful way to think about it given New Jersey has one of the highest (maybe even #1 in USA) numbers of deer per square mile.    Not sure if anyone has the data for that, but I think either Connecticut or us has the biggest deer "infestation", lol.

 

I have been hunting deer in NJ for 42 years which is long enough to see trends in herd and in hunters......  When I began, we had very few deer in Zone 3 where I grew up, you did your best to take off "buck week" (6 Day), and you shot the first legal buck that came by if you saw one at all to shoot.... Times changed, the herd grew mightily in size, seasons grew to meet the larger herds, archery gear advanced and muzzleloader became popular and now we have nearly 6 months of deer hunting in most zones.  The numbers are well down from their peak in the late '90s, but there are still a lot more than when I first began hunting even with liberal seasons and liberal bag limits.   

 

 

CAREFUL!!!!!!    DANGER!!!!!   

 

Anyone who voices the obvious truth that there are plenty of deer in New Jersey will receive IMMEDIATE and AGGRESSIVE flaming and attacks.   Prepare for incoming.  Get out your hard hat and shelter in place!!!!!!

 

[John B]

I am also not into antlers or cars. I measure my best deer by how much meat I get. Last year I got my best deer ever, 40.5 lbs of boneless meat. I took 3 deer last season on free public land. The day I pay for land or anything else to hunt a deer, besides a license, never gonna happen! I take pride in efficient and cost effective hunting, my dream is to live a subsistence lifestyle.

[Lunatic]

I doubt it.

 

Even though we're a densely packed state, we're a very small state, so any way you slice it 1% is 1%.  It's a tiny figure!

 

To illustrate that point, I looked at a large state with a TON of the "far more huntable land" that I think would be exactly what you're suggesting - Texas.

 

Texas sold 1.2M hunting licenses last year in a population of 25M people, which is 5%.  So roughly 5x as many Texans hunt as New Jerseyans when we adjust it by percentage (works out to ~8x the number of licenses sold).

 

 

PA 7.5%

NY 3.5%

[DV1]

NJ has one of the highest hunter density rates in the country, and is rated as one of the worse states for deer hunting, in the country. Both of those point to there being too much pressure, and too much competition for space, and resources. Adding more hunters makes the problem worse, not better. 

[stratocaster]

It would be interesting to overlay this with license sales or permit sales to see a success rate.  

I was crunching some numbers for ya:

2016 firearm licenses sold = 32512   

6 day harvest total             = 6282

which equates to 19.32% kill rate

 

Fall bow licenses sold =18363

Fall bow harvest total  = 15105

which equates to 82.25 % kill rate

 

Highest deer kill was 2000-01 with 77,444 total deer harvested.  

*No fall bow permit or permit shotgun data are included*

 

The problem as you can already see is that the numbers for fall bow include both antlered and antlerless but 6 day is only for antlered. I'm sure the breakout for type is there but I didn't want to find it. I just did the general harvest rate as faulty as it is.  The other issue is that not everyone who bought a firearm license went deer hunting and some guys bought both firearm and archery so if a hunter killed a deer during archery and firearm then that throws off the numbers as well. Archery hunters can be assumed to hunt deer only as opposed to firearm hunters. 

 

What really alarmed me is the license sales in total and how they have fallen off a cliff, these numbers came directly from the license sales data on the DFW site. 

1990 was the peak year for fishing licenses and trout stamps so that's why I included it. 

 

1971 firearm licenses   186,774     2016  firearm 32512

1971 archery licenses   30408        2016  archery  18363

1990 fishing licenses   229545        2016  fishing    120,987

1990 trout stamps      149662         2016  trout stamps  85998

 

So with regard to trout fishing which I do more of than anything else because of the length of the season and the least time and effort,  with less guys on the streams and lakes and more trout available for each fishermen why haven't the restrictions/regulations been decreased to allow for more opportunity and maybe attract more fishermen instead of less.  

 

Obviously by the numbers there are less fishermen and pressure on the resource than ever so it doesn't make sense why the regulations should be tightened or even kept the same.   Regarding hunting, there is less available habitat/acres per hunter so that makes some sense and a lot of places are off limits due to proximity of houses/structures so even if you are a new hunter there are less places available than before so that discourages some.

 Disposable income could definitely play a part especially as it relates to who fishes/hunts and their income level.   I have thought of so many variables with regard to the fishing part and there is absolutely  no logic to what the state is doing especially since that is the easiest place to increase participation and bring revenue in.  Unless there is some other disguised motive.  I have looked at a lot of other states data and the numbers are down across the country but NJ is one of the worst.  

Edited May 16, 2017 by stratocaster

[Lunatic]

I was crunching some numbers for ya:

2016 firearm licenses sold = 32512   

6 day harvest total             = 6282

which equates to 19.32% kill rate

 

Fall bow licenses sold =18363

Fall bow harvest total  = 15105

which equates to 82.25 % kill rate

 

*No fall bow permit or permit shotgun data are included*

 

The problem as you can already see is that the numbers for fall bow include both antlered and antlerless but 6 day is only for antlered. I'm sure the breakout for type is there but I didn't want to find it. I just did the general harvest rate as faulty as it is.  The other issue is that not everyone who bought a firearm license went deer hunting and some guys bought both firearm and archery so if a hunter killed a deer during archery and firearm then that throws off the numbers as well. Archery hunters can be assumed to hunt deer only as opposed to firearm hunters. 

 

What really alarmed me is the license sales in total and how they have fallen off a cliff, these numbers came directly from the license sales data on the DFW site. 

1990 was the peak year for fishing licenses and trout stamps so that's why I included it. 

 

1971 firearm licenses   186,774     2016  firearm 32512

1971 archery licenses   30408        2016  archery  18363

1990 fishing licenses   229545        2016  fishing    120,987

1990 trout stamps      149662         2016  trout stamps  85998

 

So with regard to trout fishing which I do more of than anything else because of the length of the season and the least time and effort,  with less guys on the streams and lakes and more trout available for each fishermen why haven't the restrictions/regulations been decreased to allow for more opportunity and maybe attract more fishermen instead of less.  

 

Obviously by the numbers there are less fishermen and pressure on the resource than ever so it doesn't make sense why the regulations should be tightened or even kept the same.   Regarding hunting, there is less available habitat/acres per hunter so that makes some sense and a lot of places are off limits due to proximity of houses/structures so even if you are a new hunter there are less places available than before so that discourages some.

 Disposable income could definitely play a part especially as it relates to who fishes/hunts and their income level.   I have thought of so many variables with regard to the fishing part and there is absolutely  no logic to what the state is doing especially since that is the easiest place to increase participation and bring revenue in.  Unless there is some other disguised motive.  I have looked at a lot of other states data and the numbers are down across the country but NJ is one of the worst.  

That's a BIG dip in numbers of hunters from 1971 to 2016. If you just consider what you have above, Firearm and Archery, this is a 78.8% less hunters and yet we killed almost 350% more deer:-)

[DV1]

That's a BIG dip in numbers of hunters from 1971 to 2016. If you just consider what you have above, Firearm and Archery, this is a 78.8% less hunters and yet we killed almost 350% more deer:-)

While there has been a decline, the numbers posted do not tell the true tale. In 1971, there was no All Around Sportsman license, so you have to add those numbers in to both categories, since a hunter would not be buying an AA license unless he/she is going to hunt both. Same with number of fishing licenses...add in AA numbers. That was 17,655 in 2016, so there are 17,655 more archery hunters, 17,655 more firearm hunters, and 17,655 more people fishing. 

 

So yeah, numbers are down for fishing, down dramatically for firearm hunting but actually higher in 2016 than 1971 for archery season (and imagine the amount of acreage lost to development since 1971 to give you a better picture of the increased crowding in archery season). The real total for archery hunters in 2016 was 43,912. In 1971, 30,795 (adding in non-residents).

 

Part of the decline in firearms license sales is the near total loss of small game and bird hunting in NJ. When I started hunting in the 1970's, everyone hunted rabbits and quail. There was also a tremendous grouse population and pheasants were not hard too find. Waterfowl was much more popular as well. Rabbit and bird hunting in NJ are almost unheard of now. Places to chase small game, and populations of small game (except squirrels) has fallen through the floor. I don't have much recollection of deer numbers before about 1975, but I know for a fact we had more deer around in 1975 than we do now. You could count dozens of them in many, if not most fields around where I grew up in the mid 1970's through the mid 1980's. Now, it's common to see a half dozen in a few fields, no deer in most. 

Edited May 16, 2017 by DV1

[BenedictGomez]

I am also not into antlers or cars. I measure my best deer by how much meat I get. Last year I got my best deer ever, 40.5 lbs of boneless meat.

 

Nice!  Did you weigh him dressed?

 

PA 7.5%

NY 3.5%

 

Thanks.  Two more data points showing how relatively few New Jersey residents hunt.  The NY one is pretty telling I think.

 

That's a BIG dip in numbers of hunters from 1971 to 2016. If you just consider what you have above, Firearm and Archery, this is a 78.8% less hunters and yet we killed almost 350% more deer:-)

 

His math is way off because he's only using resident hunting licenses for his firearm number, so he's not capture the thousands of All Around Sportsman licenses as well as the thousands of Senior Hunting licenses.   That's a huge difference.   But the analysis he tried to do is the same one I wrote about on the first page that I tried to do, and I quickly realized it really isn't possible to arrive at any accuracy due to all the many variables (various seasonal permits, etc...).  What you'd really need is for the state to release a deer per hunter statistic that that only they could know given they have all are unique hunter identification numbers.

Edited May 16, 2017 by BenedictGomez

[Lunatic]

While there has been a decline, the numbers posted do not tell the true tale. In 1971, there was no All Around Sportsman license, so you have to add those numbers in to both categories, since a hunter would not be buying an AA license unless he/she is going to hunt both. Same with number of fishing licenses...add in AA numbers. That was 17,655 in 2016, so there are 17,655 more archery hunters, 17,655 more firearm hunters, and 17,655 more people fishing. 

 

So yeah, numbers are down for fishing, down dramatically for firearm hunting but actually higher in 2016 than 1971 for archery season (and imagine the amount of acreage lost to development since 1971 to give you a better picture of the increased crowding in archery season). The real total for archery hunters in 2016 was 43,912. In 1971, 30,795 (adding in non-residents).

 

Part of the decline in firearms license sales is the near total loss of small game and bird hunting in NJ. When I started hunting in the 1970's, everyone hunted rabbits and quail. There was also a tremendous grouse population and pheasants were not hard too find. Waterfowl was much more popular as well. Rabbit and bird hunting in NJ are almost unheard of now. Places to chase small game, and populations of small game (except squirrels) has fallen through the floor. I don't have much recollection of deer numbers before about 1975, but I know for a fact we had more deer around in 1975 than we do now. You could count dozens of them in many, if not most fields around where I grew up in the mid 1970's through the mid 1980's. Now, it's common to see a half dozen in a few fields, no deer in most. 

 

 

Somehow I don't believe people buying all around, all of them or even most of them, do bow, firearm, and fishing. In fact I know one guys who buys it and never hunts deer with shotgun. So no I don't thin you just add 17K, 17K and 17K to each of the  three categories but you point is valid, there are more

Edited May 16, 2017 by Lunatic

[DV1]

Somehow I don't believe people buying all around, all of them or even most of them, do bow, firearm, and fishing. In fact I know one guys who buys it and never hunts deer with shotgun. So no I don't thin you just add 17K, 17K and 17K to each of the  three categories but you point is valid, there are more

If you are buying the AA license, you are buying an archery license, firearms license (any and all firearms hunting, not just deer) and fishing license, so yes, those numbers are added to the total number of persons participating in those activities. 

Edited May 17, 2017 by DV1

[Lunatic]

If you are buying the AA license, you are buying an archery license, firearms license (any and all firearms hunting, not just deer) and fishing license, so yes, those numbers are added to the total number of persons participating in those activities. 

 

 

Not really it is not as straight foreword as adding a guy to archery hunters who just bought Archery license and here is why, for example: One can buy the all in one and fish, bow hunt and small game hunt. Yet you want to add him to the group who hunts deer with a gun.  

[DV1]

 

If you are buying the AA license, you are buying an archery license, firearms license (any and all firearms hunting, not just deer) and fishing license, so yes, those numbers are added to the total number of persons participating in those activities. 

 

Not really it is not as straight foreword as adding a guy to archery hunters who just bought Archery license and here is why, for example: One can buy the all in one and fish, bow hunt and small game hunt. Yet you want to add him to the group who hunts deer with a gun.  

It is exactly as straightforward as I have stated.  You are just confused. A firearms license is not just for deer hunters. The number counts all license buyers, not just deer hunters. For the sake of license sales, there is no such group as 'hunts deer with a gun', it's, firearms hunting, period. That includes deer, small game, turkey and waterfowl. And nowhere in the post of mine you quoted did I make that distinction. We are talking about the number of license sales, as compared between 1971 and 2016...license sales, period.

Edited May 17, 2017 by DV1

[JHbowhunter]

I doubt it.

 

Even though we're a densely packed state, we're a very small state, so any way you slice it 1% is 1%.  It's a tiny figure!

 

To illustrate that point, I looked at a large state with a TON of the "far more huntable land" that I think would be exactly what you're suggesting - Texas.

 

Texas sold 1.2M hunting licenses last year in a population of 25M people, which is 5%.  So roughly 5x as many Texans hunt as New Jerseyans when we adjust it by percentage (works out to ~8x the number of licenses sold).

 

Texas has several very large densely populated cities much larger than anything NJ has... Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, etc. I bet if you took the percentage of hunters on huntable  land per square mile , versus NJ hunters per square mile on huntable land, you would see NJ has more hunters per huntable square mile than any other state.  Z5 has a bowhunter in every tree - would you prefer that we start putting two hunters in every tree?  NJ gets way too much hunting pressure for all game species - per huntable square mile, IMHO.    

 

NJ has gone to great lengths to get deer out of "unhuntable" areas, by allowing baiting.   However as I have stated in the past, the best way to keep deer in "huntable' areas is to leave them the F alone... Seasons are too long, too much land gets "pushed/driven/yo-bucked" and this behavior has the opposite effect.  All it does is push deer out into areas they can't be hunted... I think like a deer - simply put, we freakin' hate humans, in all shapes and forms. We hate the way you smell, look, talk and walk. Mostly though - we hate when you stick us with arrows and bolts and hit us with those loud bang sticks.  Keep pushing us and we will go elsewhere, despite how good the habitat may look...    

Edited May 17, 2017 by JHbowhunter

[BenedictGomez]

 For the sake of license sales, there is no such group as 'hunts deer with a gun', it's, firearms hunting, period. That includes deer, small game, turkey and waterfowl.

 

That's one of the reasons the waters get clouded if you're trying to figure out the math on things like success, etc....  I might ask the state for the # of deer per successful hunter data, they dont release that, but they obviously have it.

[Lunatic]

It is exactly as straightforward as I have stated.  You are just confused. A firearms license is not just for deer hunters. The number counts all license buyers, not just deer hunters. For the sake of license sales, there is no such group as 'hunts deer with a gun', it's, firearms hunting, period. That includes deer, small game, turkey and waterfowl. And nowhere in the post of mine you quoted did I make that distinction. We are talking about the number of license sales, as compared between 1971 and 2016...license sales, period.

 

I guess you are right.