WILDLIFE SECTION 



DEER HUNTING 

 AND MANAGEMENT 



Iho deer management program in Ontario aims at provid- 

 ing recreation opportunities through hunting and viewing 

 deer. Obviously we would like to provide as many oppor- 

 tunities as possible by maintaining and increasing deer 

 numbers to the maximum levels which are consistent with 

 other forest uses. Since the shortage of good winter range is 

 the factor controlling deer numbers in Ontario, we direct 

 our major efforts toward the management of that range, 

 In improve the condition of existing winter deer range, and 

 iillimately to produce more good winter range. 



Providing the opportunities for recreation will not ensure 

 tlial people use them. Often, other factors such as the 

 weather interfere. This was the case with deer hunting in 

 1<)f)9, As in 1968, very adverse weather continued to frus- 

 trate the hrmters. Frequent rain, accompanied at times by 

 fog, helped the deer, and only on the last day or two was 

 there enough snow for tracking. 



It appeared that deer were still widely scattered over 

 Iheir summer range. Hunters who had done poorly in re- 

 cent years in northern Parry Sound and Pembroke Forest 

 Districts fared a little better this year. Other hunters, who 

 usually have good hunts near deer yards, this year did 

 poorly. It may have been that the summer distribution of 

 deer fooled a few hunters too. Many hunters saw reason- 

 .ibly plentiful signs of deer but were unable to locate them. 

 Throughout the deer range, percentages of fawns and year- 

 lings were high. There was no indication of unusually heavy 

 mortality. With good reproduction and light hunting, there 

 is reason to hope for more deer next year. 



For a second year, a mailed deer hunter survey was con- 

 ducted by the Central Licence Bureau. All results from the 

 I omputer-addressed questionnaires have not been com- 

 piled However, preliminary results show a slight decrease 

 in over-all hunter success percent. 



In Pembroke District, hunter success declined slightly to 

 VilVo from 14.5% in 1968. It was also down in Kemptville 

 District. In Tweed District, it was just about the same, 

 T^.OVo in 1969 compared with 15.8% in 1968. In Lindsay 

 nisiricl, there was a slightly higher hunter success of 14.5% 

 I o rn pa red with 13.4% in 1968. Parry Sound had a rather 

 lower success, 20.7% in 1969 compared with 22.4% in 

 1968. 



Farther north, the story was much the same. About a 

 third less deer were checked at Sault Ste. Marie than in 



1968, On the Sudbury District mainland, more hunters were 

 around, but the few deer resulted in even lower success 

 than in 1968. At North Bay, the 8.1% success was about 

 normal for recent years. There were fewer hunters and more 

 signs of deer reported. 



The hunt on the Bruce Peninsula was about the same as 

 in recent years, the 10.5% success being nearly identical 

 with that of the last two years. 



On Manitoulin Island, hunters passing the Little Current 

 checking station during the 1969 deer season were almost 

 exactly as successful as those in 1968 (22.2% with deer in 



1969, 22.8% in 1968). Similarly, the number of days re- 

 quired for a hunter to kill a deer was 19.5 in 1969 compared 

 with 18.7 in 1968. But there were fewer hunters and, there- 

 fore, fewer deer taken. The number of hunters decreased 

 to 3,417 in 1969 from 3,776 in 1968, and the number of 

 deer taken declined to 757 in 1969 from 860 in 1968. In 

 Dawson and Robinson Townships, hunter success was 

 24,8%, a little above the average for Manitoulin. These two 

 townships provided 53.9% of the deer kill recorded for the 

 entire island. 



DEER RANGE MANAGEMENT 

 To improve the condition of existing deer range, it is neces- 

 sary to provide enough high-quality food near available 

 evergreen shelter to support present populations of deer 

 through the critical winter season. The best deer range in- 

 cludes brush and young hardwoods for food, interspersed 

 with patches of older evergreen trees for shelter. This ar- 

 rangement can be brought about by introducing logging 

 operations near conifer stands already used for shelter by 

 the deer, and leaving the evergreen trees standing. Thus, 

 the Department encourages such operations in deer winter- 

 ing areas. However, in many places there are not enough 

 merchantable hardwood trees for such operations. In these 

 places, the Department hires men to cut non-merchantable 

 trees. Such cutting produces food by the sprouting of cop- 

 pice growth from the stumps. 



During the past winter, snow conditions became severe 

 about the 1st of February, and emergency relief measures 

 replaced some routine cutting operations. This meant mak- 

 ing trails with tractors and snowmobiles from sheltered 

 areas, where deer had gathered, to places where food was 

 abundant. The cutting of hardwoods, carried out to stimu- 

 late the regrowth of more food for deer along main travel 

 trails, was timed to supply immediate food from tree tops as 

 well. Because of the emergency work, the annual cut under 

 this program was reduced from about 3,000 acres during 

 the past two years to about 2,000 acres in 1969. 



