31EDbb DE71 27ET fi Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 with funding from Boston Library Consortium IVIember Libraries http://archive.org/details/massachusettsgam1317mass \ Ift. JOB PROGRESS REPORT \ Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-13 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey I-l Job Title: Statewide Small Game Harvest 1 January to 31 December 1971 State Cooperator: Project No.: Job No. : Period Covered: Summary: A usable return of 923 cards (68. 5%) was obtained from three mailings of the postal questionnaire to 1400 sportsmen. Each return was calculated to represent 124.31 hunters. Approximately 81 percent of the 1969 hunters purchased a license in 1970, Also, about 73 percent of these licensees 'overrif^pfll On^^jinipr '^'^'^ted small game, of whom 433 (58.0%) were successful in rnii^Jr- taking at least one unit of game, '■^'-^^ 1 zl972 Hunter success was greatest for cottontail rabbit (147,026), OW^re—,-*-^ ^.c M 1 ducks (131,752), and pheasant (94,664). Nine other species «i.isc..^a. j^^^ lesser rates of harvest. Hunter effort increased for four species and decreased for five. Changes were most noticeable regarding ruffed grouse, ducks, raccoon, and woodcock. Private land continues to be important to the Massachusetts sportsman; however, there is an apparent increase in the use of management areas. More hunters are now reporting the use of both categories of land, rather than using solely private land. Background : Objectives: This job was initiated in 1959 as a means of determining trends in the harvest of selected small game species. The survey was conducted yearly until 1961, and every other year thereafter. Variability in sample size, sample popu- lations, and data analysis preclude direct comparison be- tween certain years; however, harvest trends can be deter- mined. Applicable comparisons between data from the current segment and that from past years are presented in the fol- lowing tables. To determine the statewide harvest of selected small game species and to determine the characteristics of land utili- zation and time expenditure by sportsmen. Publication approved by Alfred C, Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 ^ W-35-R-13:I-l Procedures : Findings : A sample v;as randomly drawn from each of 87 boxes contain- ing the 1969 sportsman license cards. This aggregation was run through an IBM 83 card sorter to eliminate cards from fishing and trapping licensees. The remaining cards were hand sorted to separate non-resident and free licenses from the resident hunting and sporting licenses. The first legible 300 cards in the resident sporting category and the first legible 600 cards in the resident hunting category were then chosen as the hunter sample for this survey. The names and addresses of the sportsmen in the sample were printed on gummed labels by the printout device on an IBM computer. Four labels were produced for each individual. A code number was assigned to each name to facilitate future identification* The questionnaire (Figures I-A and I-B) was printed on double prestamped postal cards. The format was similar to that of previous years except for changes in the species list and special questions. Three mailings were conducted, on 19 July, 19 August, and 24 September. The delay in the initial mailing was due to a late return of the address labels from the printers and a rise in the postal rates. As each card was returned, the respondent was removed from the mailing list utilizing the code number. Game harvest data was tabulated separately for each mailing's return, and subsequently combined to provide a total harvest estimate. Responses to the special questions were tabulated only for the entire sample return. Each usable return was considered to represent a specific proportion of all resident licensees. This weighting (one return represents 124,31 individuals) was determined by summing the resident hunting and resident sporting sales for the calendar year 1970 (114,735) and dividing this figure by the total usable return (923), Questionnaires were mailed to 1400 resident licensees; 1347 were delivered and there was a usable return of 923 or 68,5 percent (Table 1), As the sample had been drawn from the previous year's (1969) licenses, the 923 usable returns were first divided into two groups: (1) those hunters licensed in 1969 who subsequently purchased a 1970 license; and, (2) those hunters from 1969 who did not purchase a 1970 license. Approximately 81 per- cent (80.82) of the 1969 licensees did purchase a license in 1970 (Table 2) . No attempt was made to determine why the remaining 19 percent did not buy a license. The 746 1970 licensed respondees were further broken down into four categories: successful hunters (a hunter who took at least one unit of game), unsuccessful hunters, licensees who did not hunt, and licensees who hunted only deer. Reported hunter success increased over 4.5 percent fiouh:-; i-a: postal o^ji-'^stionmaire, 1970 GA.^ia KILL H5F0HT: l^'ORM A (OBTii'HSS) Dear Hunter: This is the statewide game kill questionnaire. It is the only method we have of compiling the annual kill of our small game species. Your cooperation v/iil be appreciated in filling out this postcard promptly. 1. If you cllcl not buy a license in 1970, check the top block of the return card. Do not complete other questions. 2. If you bought a license, but did not hunt, check the second block at the lop of the return card. 3. Check all game hunted, even if you killed nothing. 4. Under No. Bagged, list only game killed by you. 5. Under Towns, list the towns you hunt in the most. 6. If you hunted only deer, answer only the last cjuestion. Indicate whether or not you applied for an antlerless permit. 7. If you hunt on Wildlife Management Areas, list the area, you hunt the most. All replies are confidential. When the figures are compiled, a report will be published. Thank you. /VIASSACUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES ANO GAME Form FG-l6a 11-70-04S2S4 tIS.POSTAGI DIVISION DF FISHERIES & GAME FIELD Headquarters WESTBDRD, MASS. D15B1 FiCrURji; i-B: 1970 GAi-L; KILL T POSTAL OUESTIONNAIHi Po.rr : FOR A A iiiiuY^lriSE) ' "i Form A 1970 GAME KILL REPORT □ Check if you did not buy a hunfing or sporting license in 1970. Do no! complete any other questions. □ Check if you bought a license, but did not hunt in 1970. Please check all game hunted in Massachusetts V Number Bagged Town or Towns you Hunted in the Most Pheasant Ruffed Grouse Quail . Woodcock White Here Cottontail Ribbi; Raccoon Gray Squirrel Fox Ducks (All) Geese POBCAT Please estimate - (Record "None" as "0".) 1. The number of times you hunted on: Wildlife Management Areas Private Land_ ■. 2. The number of times you hunted pheasant on: Wildlife /'Aanagement Areas Private Land 3. If you hunt on Wildlife AAanagement Areas, list the area you hunt on the most . 4. Did vou hunt deer in 1^70? Yes No- If yes dio' you apply for an antlerless permit? Yes No ■U 0) c u . 00 vo a\ in U 4-< > * • • • • • • • »-i O 'H ^ r-l CM r-J CM £» CM CM f-* VO VO <}• OS CO JQ ^ XI O CM CM r^ CO CO CM a 3 0) CsJ CO r-l r-< CO uo 0^ 3 4J CO S T-l Q O !-i ^ Xi > 3 r-i c p P^ vD O O r>. CO CO ^ VO o VO VO VO r-i r^ r>. lo . •. CO , CO C -f^ C -r^ C -H d 'ri JD C a» •H 4J •1-4 +J •H 4J •H 4J •H 4J CO t-4 d (U M p5 w> 9 • d PiS t-i -f-i r-( -O 0) •H 9i 1-1 rfl TJ d CO .o S ■u C -u •r-l i-H c3 CO o J-l -Q CO H I^ u •I-l e ■u •H V X o o tB« CO H u H d •H 0) to C (U o ctf (U CO CO o 3 w 2 cu ttf w CTi VO c^ CM CJN O o -1 3 H V/-35-R-13:I-l from 1968, and the amount of non-hunters decreased two percent (Table 3). The other two categories remained nearly stable. The mean take and sample size for each game category is presented in Table 4, The mean take per hunter v/as greatest for ducks (5,17 ducks per hunter), followed by cottontail rabbit (4.15), and gray squirrel (3.60). The mean take for all other species was less than three units of game per hunter. The mean take and expanded take for 1970 are presented in Table 5 and compared with previous years in Table 6. Readers are reminded that the validity of these estimates cannot be determined statistically, as the data plots as a negative binomial. The small sample size for certain species (e.g., bobcat) increases the chance of error in expansion, and confidence limits, if possible to compute, would likely be very broad. Yearly comparisons should be made with caution, as sample sizes have varied consider- ably. The 1970 expanded bag take was greatest for cottontail rabbit (147,026), followed by ducks (131,752), pheasant (94,664), woodcock (67,886), gray squirrel (65,336), and ruffed grouse (57,482). The take for the remaining six species was less than 50,000 units each. The number of hunters seeking each species had increased for four species and decreased for five, considering the nine comparable categories for 1968 and 1970. Changes are most dramatic respecting ruffed grouse (down 16,300 hunters), ducks (down 10,000 hunters), raccoon (down 6500 hunters), and woodcock (up 6200 hunters). These fluctua- tions are not necessarily due to an increase or decrease in the number of actual hunters, but may be in part due to a diversification of effort on the part of previously re- porting hunters. The format of the questionnaire is such that if a hunter kills a certain type of game, he is con- sidered to have hunted that species regardless of the species for which he originally intended to hunt. The mean harvest of three game categories (bobwhite quail, woodcock, and ducks) has increased considerable since 1968. This could be due to increased hunting pressure, increased reporting rate by respondees, an increase in game avail- ability or a combination of two or all of these factors. Slight increases were noted for pheasants, ruffed grouse, and white hare, and minimal decreases were reported for cottontail rabbit, gray squirrel, and raccoon. Fox, bob- cat and geese were not sampled in 1968. CO (U (U 'O c o a| CO 0) Pi CX3 00 ID i-i f-H r^ i vO CO <-« >d- m vO 1^ vD CO CO CM % iJ o r-l C 33 c D o PC r-4 4J 3 c ^ 1-1 <4^ 3 1-4 ■Ul a B CO :d CO C •H U •r-4 H c (U CO ^ (U CO S HI •H t-4 •H s O u CO CO ^ u — «r^ •-•»-HcMCM-.d-cSCOCMOOmO vo-4r-^ooI-l-ct»covDco •-• CO rH CM CM «-l cooocMr^COmv£>CMCO mcM '-icMOincMu->co«-tr>.invOt-i in;j-vo i-4'-r^ a c CO CO CO CO 3 o CL) CO M-l CD IH CO (Hi o o u o o Ph oi o* IS •1-4 CO c o o 0) S-i CO 0) u •1-f 3 CO CO >-l c o o o o . "J CO CO o o CO V 3 Q CO c 0 as m 0-1 vO X) l-< en •o ,-i fH c CO a X M c o •H r-l P a o p^ S-i 0) d o CTi H CO PQ d o CM cn •vJ- in 00 o in o o tn CO i-H i-l CM CM > CM 00 CM O CO r>« <3- CM m 1-4 CM m CLH i-l O CO 1-4 >-t & u t CM m d u o l~l Q> u ^ •H u •r-l 4J ^ CO CO 3 c o 4J as cr c CO 'V o c CO o 4J CO 0) 1-4 y o (U o CO (0 ll-l •H -o *J ■u f^ o u (U «w CO o 4J •r-l CO CJ ^ ^ rC 3 3 o o J2 ^1 CO o o Pk (^ 0) ON CVJ vO <3N O vD C3N 00 m <3N o ON CO ON \ -^ CO ON vO O ON CD in ON 00 0) •1-4 V (U cn d" in 1^ vo en in 00 <]-vocr>r^cMOOcni-i invor^oocMC7\i-4co f-.rovo»sfON i-^ •r-l CO CO 3 4J a o^ c c wo O > CJ 4J i-« CO CJ o x: ^» CO O 5 O Bl fe « o 4J CO CJ Xi o CO CO o 3 » rH ■-I <3- >:j- CO ON 1-4 vO CM sf d" C3N vD m CO C3N o o o m • * « c^ vo m ON '-^ VO CNJ ca CO 0) u <3 'O C CO W CO CO (U C hJ l 9J a <: B (U 4J H 00 CO CO > J2 C tH 4J CO u o S f^ eci i CO >4 Xi c o •H ■Ul CO N •H (U oq c •1-4 CO & CO u ■u c 3 l4-( o ■u c (U o (U (14 Xi CO fS vO u vO • • o a^ - CO • • >-* CO CO CO CO o • • vO r-* • • in m • • o vO in m o CM >d- r*- • • C7N O -^ i-i CM •-< CO CO 0) ;-« < 4J CO CO m CM B i-i r-t i-» d) tc CO G CO S vO r^ r^ VO • • ON r>. ON I-< T-l CO >- »^ I-I -u •o o ■M -H H a> (u >-i u 4J a> M CO 4J (U 'U C p4 CO a J3 O c CO k3 0) CO > •r^ o CO u >^ 1^ O CT» CX) vO CM 00 CM CO V4 U 1-4 (l> d) r«>. cn \o r-* r^ NO CM 4 un en NO CNJ lO CO o o eg NO •-n 00 ON 00 CO v T-l < -^ -o CO i-i 3 O o 0) C ^ CO cu (U s* B- -o 4J ^-1 I () i-i u •i-l ^ CO CO s 6 'V c u i-i CO 0) u 3 CO ;^ CO CO •r-i CO o 1-4 o PQ PQ PQ C5 w |x< A X S 2! z Ph :3 ■u CO c ■u 3 o (U O H }-l o o fyles Standish (20), Knightville (18), and Birch Hill (15), while only one hunt- er responded for each of seven other areas. Visual examina- tion of the list shows that the areas with the greatest number of responses are generally the larger, more well o 0^ a •I-l JC CO 5-1 0) c 73 c CO d O »^ CO o ■u c 3 CO O CO •E o 0) CO 1-4 ca H ««v. u CO 0) D- 4JI •H c >-l 3 H W CO r-t CO ■P o u H , B •H 3 ^ 3 O o »4 Z H •H u Ph ^ (U 0) r-t 4J O. c B 3 CO a CO CO (U < C5 O B . 00 r^ 00 I-l 00 r^ O r-l T-4 (JN r-4 00 r-l CO CM CO VO CO o CM CO O m 00 CM »n f-i CM o CM CM VO f-l CO in m r-l CO ON r-l O 00 r-l T-l CO ON T-l CM -vJ- in vD T-1 O t-H r-l 1— 1 1— 1 «-i O CM CM rH G\ o\ 00 r-l 00 CJ\ CM rH rH CM I-l CM t-i T-t I-l t-l CM cr» CM O CM CO CO CO CM 00 I-l o o CM vO CM § r-l 00 CM 00 VO o VO I-l CO 1-1 r-l CM r-l I-l CO * r-4 CM CM CM as CM CO ON O CO o VO CO o f-l ON VO CO CO CM • T-l • vO • I c^ • O • CO • 1 o • • m • C3N • T-l • vO I-l 00 m CM •^ rH •u CO CJ 4J 3 o 0) O H Vl u 0) X ■p u o 0) C VI 0) 0) tC a> 6 (U »© •rJ d •H CO X ^ ■M +j c •rl r-l u IW 1 u 4J c: 4J CO CO B B •V 0 u M c CO CO CO U CO CO •rl CO o I-l o 3 j3 JJ M fu W X s s s (U rs 3J JJ CO o > C 9 O U (0 0) I ti (d to I o •t-l cd N •rl r-» •i-l 4J C3 ■s RS i-l H O CO TJ O •r-) H o •H c Qi U !^ (U col 3 3 CO CO 0) < a i CO C c 0) CO }^ u o ^ 1-4 <^ in 00 CO 4 CO f-i 9 vd- % 00 CM <7N VO CD CO m »£> o CO o in vO r^ o CM r- 00 1-1 VO CM o o r-l <3N CM CM CO CO CO o CM CO CsJ 00 CM CO C7\ CM .-1 O O r-i vO CO o m r-l o in CO o r-l o o ON CM VO vO CM r-l • CO • • o • o o I-l CO • CNj ♦ o o o • o CO • CO CO • o • o o I-l o • o o 1-1 + CO « CO CO CM • CO CM O • r-l CO • VO m 0\ t-i CM c\ CO CM I-l CO I-l 00 •-I CO ON CTi O CM 1-1 1-1 ON • CM CO « cn en • CO o « o CO * CM o • o O • in • 00 o o o • o o • o + CO • CO CO CM * m CO o CO r-l CM • o CM vO r^ CM o (Ti o CO CM o o o c^ CM CO T-l VO CO Js I-l 4J to c 4J 3 o p^ ■M a s (0 o .o CO a| •H H m o in «.^ >^i 0} (U a -ui •i-( c ^ s CO t-l o H ■u c 3 O O (U CO U 0) QJ 1-4 ■U Ou S CO ■x^ »4 CO 0) Cb 4Ji •1-1 d !-l 3 H Wl •o C (0 •-I u CD CO S H •H »^ i:^ J-i 0) 0) r-4 ■u O. c e 3 CO EC en CO cd . vO CO VO m r^ VO vO CTv in 00 f— 1 i-t r-4 m CO CO 00 i-< i-i 00 f-i ^ r>. in o o r- r-l CO o St O m VO m in VO m o i-t CM m r>. r^ CO VO in 00 00 • St ■vt l-l f-i r-l o » 00 CO CO CO CM o r-l 1-1 cr^ s l>x o CM o 00 m o 1-1 o o CO 1-1 o m ON m o o CM ^ (U d t-l v 3 ja u o CO •H 1-1 u •u j: o CO CO w CO c ^ CO . iH ■u CO d 4J 3 o (U o H CO r>. u Cs» o s-^ H 4J in cr\ d- CO cn u rH QJ P^ CO CO /^ (U O T-4 r- /"-N u CM ■?< 0) s^ PQ 1-1 cq ■u 5-1 c H »^ J * CO CO m >. PQ (^ 0) (U d l-l 4J •r< >«-' 3 ffi CO i-i in o ~ r«. ON vo (U CO tH ^ ja 4J TD CO C S CO ■U CO o > )^ o CO o y>. K — ' PQ !^ PQ (U 4J CD *x CO 3 ■u 4J in o m ■u c m r* CM . CU i-« CO r^ U r*. CTN r- ^ O CM VD CTN o CL • • CO o >, •H ;-i ■U CO CO CO <3 3 • en vO « <0 O vO O «^ CM 00 •> o m <0 <^ 00 vD CM rH .. C rH •H c d d c c c > •r^ -H •H •H 'H •H C C C C •H •H •H -H CO r-l r-4 rH r-l iH r-l — rH tH rH rH CO /— \ /-N /--S /'•v ^-\ /-^ Xi O rH lO O rH in 4J vD r«. OX CO »• >— ' (0 rl vD C 4J m o CM in r^ CM CM CJN o tH •» CO ■u CM ir> CO d d d d d d ^ •H T^ 'ri •H -H •H o & rH rH tH rH tH rH CO /•"s /"^ /•^ /-S r-N ^-> o r* C7N CO «d- in CO o rv r-. ON o r-H r^ o o^ csj so rH rH CO \D >.• "W >•' >~' N-^ ^^ T? d CO n 0) CO CO (U (U CU 'O CO rH rH »d- m C3N CO iH o CO CM CO <3- CO o CO ^ O V r^- 3 CM rO A d r«. o ■u 1 (0 4J CO CM m CM 0-) 0^ /— s J-t o (U r-< x> •<5 O 0) S CO P4 S CO O O ^-^ e .-( r^ rH CM 0) CvJ CO o — ' < eg (U CO CO in CO \M CM CM S • 2 LO CO ir-l CM 00 1-1 /->« U CO QJ VD -Q CvJ e C>J s_/ 0) -o u CO D. CM cu 1-4 f-l CO m CO CJ\ CM CO CM r^ ^ s CO 5-1 CO 3 • ITI 00 U fX4 CO XI (U v^ • r-l in r-) CO CM CM CO m St CO o 4J CO Ml 3 in no r-l T-4 o CM CO » r-t I-l CO CO CM CM m 00 CO 3 CO O 4J CO C o r-l T3 CO CO CO >— ' CO 0) CO CO Q 4J P t>0 C 4J CO ■u 00 I-l 5 C CO o x: JQ u o O —1 u (U V4 ^1 -u 3 o S Q M Q 1^ H o o CO H 3 00 CM CO U r-4 A > O o w r-l -O CO CO r-4 *• CO •r-l 3 A vO CO u o ■u o I-l -TS CD CU CO (U 5 t)0»-4 O O .-1 }^ Q M Q C Q c ^ c 0) P M) CO TS E G CO CO CO CO P i-4 u r^ r* t-« en a\ CO . CO VD o CM {« OD CO o^ CM CO CM i-< 1 >. CO m 00 <» (0 o o d o w 0) C4 (0 >-« 3 «J (U 4J M O D- CD oi >D r^ CM CM 0 «k H CM m vO o <7\ o » CM o\ St CO f^ . <3> CM o\ VO r^ cn CM CM o vO CM <^ CT\ CM CO CO CM eg I vol • CO CA m -3- o CO as vo CM 00 CO rH VO CO o CA CO CO CM vO CM in CO in CM CO CO •r-l CO VO l-t CO CM CO CO T-i CO 0^ vo vO CM CM (0 CO CM U o o CO W) O Q CO CO 0) CO 0) CO 3 CO u C i B 'O Q) c CO CO 3 CO Q) a M 2 u a (U CO X Q JJ CO o T-( Da CO 0 1-1 4J ^4 1-4 o o < H Table 3. A Comparison of the Total Non-Hunting Deer Mortalities of Massachusetts Deer from 1967 through 1971, 1967 No, of Deer Percent Change 1968 1969 1970 1971 500 613 \ 632 . 693 \ /' \ / \ / N / 217o 11% 27„ -0.5% 694 Table 4. A Comparison of the Sex of the Actual Number of Deer Mortalities and the Adjusted Sex Data for 1971* Massachusetts Deer, Month Male Female No Sex Total Adjusted Male Female January 15 22 1 38 15 23 February 48 46 13 107 55 52 March 51 62 10 123 56 67 April 26 26 3 55 27 28 May 14 20 0 34 14 20 June 19 34 0 53 19 34 July 14 10 2 26 15 11 August 5 6 0 11 5 6 September 11 13 1 25 11 14 October 35 24 1 60 36 24 November 53 30 1 84 54 30 December 29 48 1 78 29 49 Total 320 341 33 694** 336 358 * These data were reported by Natural Resource Officers. ** Hunting and crippling losses not included. Adjusted sex ratio: 336 males 94 males 48.47o males 353 females 100 females ; 51.6% females I o P4 CM vO to CO 00 » vO C«4 CM OS r>. 00 CO ^ i jj c 3 O O CD a CO * M sf I-) ■d- CO CO in m 4-1 r>. O i-f CO CO 3 rH < in VD CO CM CO c^ CD ^1 Cvl CO CO u •-4 Q) 0) M S-i >•. J3 5^ a J-! tu Xi 4) +J to •r-l r-( >i-i c •r-l CO ^ 4J ^ 4J s ■U x: o r-4 ^- 6^3^.2'-[A/'3b-i?ws^;^-3 JOB PROGRESS REPORT r vy/ State Massachusetts Cooperators: Project No.: Job No. Period Covered: Sunonaryi ,.,\eW> Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game i^^*-^^' €^-*~ m .6S^ W-35-R-14 Name : Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey II-3 Title: Deer Fertility Studies 1 January 1972 through 31 May 1972 Sixty-three female deer mortality carcasses were col- lected by Natural Resource Officers and Division person- nel from 1 January through 31 May 1972, The carcasses were examined and the age and stage of pregnancy deter- mined. Fetus and corpora lutea counts were documented. There were no significant changes in the 1972 reproduc- tive rates compared to the 1971 rates or the mean rates for a seven-year period, 1966 through 1972. A summary of seven years of reproductive data (1966-1972) is as follows: Age at Parturition Yearling Two years Adults Sample Size 152 84 181 No. Fawns Produced 38 119 312 1966-1972 Reproductive Rate 1: .27 (100:27) 1:1.39 (100:139) 1:1.74 (100:174) 1972 Rate (1: .33) (1:1.55) (1:1.69) Background: Objectives: A disproportionate sex ratio of 100 males to 106 females was recorded for 66 fetuses. Natural Resource Officers and Division of Fisheries and Game personnel collected carcasses of female deer mor- talities from 1 January through 31 May. These carcasses were taken either to the nearest Division installation or brought directly to Field Headquarters in Westboro. Project personnel removed the fetuses and ovaries. The age of the deer examined was determined by the tooth replacement and/or wear technique. Fetus age was deter- mined by crown-rump measurement compared to a table of known age fetus measurements. A gross examination of the ovaries was made by slicing each ovary longitudinally. The number of current corpora lutea was recorded. No intensive search was made for corpora albicantia. To determine the reproductive rate per age class of the Massachusetts deer herd. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35-R-14:II-3 Findings: During the five-month period covered by this report (January to May), 63 female deer were examined. Table No. 1 presents a breakdown of the age composition and the percent per age class. The age of these deer is the age at parturition. Since all the female deer collected and examined for this report were collected on the Mainland, any com- parison of data will be based on the Mainland deer herd. The examination of the reproductive tracts of 63 female deer mortalities collected from 1 January to 31 May 1972 found that 1, Of the 21 yearlings, seven were pregnant and were carrying five fawns. Two tracts contained remains of the embryonic sacs. However, no embryos were found. 2, All eleven two-year-old females were pregnant and were carrying 17 fawns. 3, Of the 31 adults (three years and older), 26 were pregnant and were carrying 49 fawns. Three does were not pregnant and in one doe the fetus or fetuses were missing. The reproductive tract of one adult was missing, A comparison of the age composition and the percent per age class of the female deer checked at Mainland biolog- ical deer check stations and the female deer mortalities examined for this report is presented in Table 2. Although the sample size per age class of the mortality data might be considered small, there has been a con- sistency for the past five years with a few exceptions that the percentages per age class of the harvest data and the mortality data complement each other. This could be interpreted within certain limitations that the harvest and mortality samples represent the female segment of the Mainland deer herd. There is no significant difference between the age compo- sition of the hunting harvest sample and the mortality sample collected for this report, A chi-square test total of 1,2952, with 5 degrees of freedom, shows that the mortality sample was taken from the same parameter (population) as the harvest or hunting sample. W-35-R-14:II-3 Table 1. The Age Classification and the Percent per Age Three Female Deer Mortalities in Massachusetts, through 31 May 1972. Class of Sixty 1 January Age in Years at Parturition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8-9 10 plus Number in Sample 21 11 10 9 4 4 2 1 JL 63 Percent of Sample 33.34 17.46 15.87 14.29 6.35 6.35 3.18 1.58 1.58 100.00 Table 2. The Age Composition and Percent per Age Class of Harvested Female Deer Checked at Biological Deer Stations (Mainland) December 1971 and Sixty -Three Female Deer Mortalities Collected January through May 1972. Age at No. in Percent Harvest Sample of Sample 6 mo. 101 27.15 1-1/2 64 17.20 2-1/2 69 18.56 3-1/2 51 13.71 4-1/2 33 8.87 5-1/2 20 5.38 6-1/2 14 3.76 7-1/2 11 2.96 8-9-1/2 9 2.42 10-1/2-}- Age at No . in Percent Parturition Sample in Sample 1 21 33.33 2 11 17.46 3 10 15.37 4 9 14.29 5 4 6.35 6 4 6.35 7 2 3.18 8-9 1 1.53 104- 1 1.58 372 100.00 63 100.00 Table 3. A Summary of Corpora Lutea and Fetus Counts for Pregnant Year- lings, Tt'yo -Year -Olds and Adult Female Deer in Massachusetts, 1 January through 31 May 1972. Age Yearlings Tv7o Years Adults No. No. Females Corpora No. Pregnant Lutea Fetus Single Twins Triplets 7 7* 7 7 0 0 11 23 17 5 6 0 26 57 49 5 19 2 * One pair ovaries missing but assumed that the doe had at least one current corpora lutea. W-35-R-14:II-3 Ap.e Class Yearling Two-year-old Three -year plus Based on the 61 female deer collected from 1 January through 31 May 1972, the follov^ing reproductive rates were calculated; No. Does 21 11 29 No. Fawns 7 17 49 Calculated Reproductive Rate 100 does : .33 fawns (1 : .33) 100 does : 1.55 fawns (1 : 1.55) 100 does : 1.69 fawns (1 : 1.69) Table 3 presents a summary of the corpora lutea and the fetus counts of pregnant female deer collected 1 January through 31 May 1972. The seven pregnant yearling does were each carrying a single fawn. Of the 11 pregnant two-year-old does, five were carrying single fawns and six were carrying twins. Of the 26 adult does, five were carrying single fawns, 19 were carrying twins and two does were carrying triplets. Assuming that the three age classes presented in Table 3 are representative of the female segment of the Mainland deer herd, the importance of maintaining and/or increas- ing the number of adults is evident. Simply add the number of yearlings (7) and the number of two-year-olds (11), giving a total of 18 pregnant females that produce 24 fawns. The 26 pregnant adults produced 49 fawns which is 67 percent of the total fawn production. Table 4 presents a summary of reproductive rate data from 1966 through 1972. There was no significant change in the reproductive rate for any of the three age classes in 1972 compared to the previous year. The mean reproductive rate for the three age classifica- tions of female deer are presented in Table 5. There were no significant changes in the mean reproductive rates per age class (Table 5). A breakdown of the sex of deer fetuses per age class of the dam is as follows: No. Sex of Fetus Total Age Does Male Female Fetus Yearling 5 2 3 5 Two Year 9 8 6 14 Three Years Plus 25 39 22 32 25 34 47 66 The sex ratio of the 66 fetuses of 39 female deer was 100 males to 106 females. This is a complete change from the expected 106 males to 100 females. The same type of data seen in Job Progress Report W-35-R-13, Job II-3 showed the sex ratio for 102 fetuses of 61 does to be 100 males to 104 females. The 1971 and 1972 sex ratio W-35-R- 14:11-3 Table 4. A S Jummary of the Reproduc :tive Rate Dat a per Age Class of 417 Massachusetts Female Deer Mortalities, 1 January 1966 through 31 May 1972. Y€ sarlings Sample Not No. Annual Year Size Pregnant Pregnant Favms Reproductive Rate 1966 16 9 7 11 0.69 1967 12 1 11 1 0.10 1968 14 2 12 2 0.14 1969 25 5 20 5 0.20 1970 37 4 33 4 0.11 1971 27 8 19 8 0.30 1972 21 7 14 7* 0.33 Total 152 36 116 38 Mean 21.71 5.43 0.27 Two- ■Year -Olds 1966 4 3 1 5 1.25 1967 10 9 1 12 1.20 1968 12 11 1 16 1.33 1969 16 16 0 23 1.44 1970 15 14 1 20 1.33 1971 16 15 1 26 1.63 1972 11 11 0 17 1.55 Total 84 79 5 119 Mean 12.00 17.00 1.39 Adults** 1966 18 17 1 31 1.72 1967 10 10 0 20 2.00 1968 20 17 3 32 1.60 1969 35 32 3 63 1.80 1970 28 23 5 47 1.67 1971 41 39 2 70 1.71 1972 29 26 3 49 1.69 Tot; al 181 164 17 312 Meai n 25.86 44.57 1.74 * Five (5) measured fetuses, two ' (2) 1 embryos missing ** Three yej ars and older Tab le 5. The ! Mean Repri oductive Rate of Three Age Class if: [cations of Mas isachusetts Deer, 1966 through 1972. 196 .6-1971 Me< an 1966-1972 Mean Age Sample Size No. Fawns Reproductive Rate ] R.eproductive Rate Yearling 21.71 (152) 5.43 ( 38) 1: .27 (100: 27) 1: .24 (100: 24) T\^7o Year 12.00 ( 84) 17.00 (119) 1:1.39 (100:139) 1:1.40 (100:140) Three years plus 25.86 (181) 44.57 (312) 1:1.74 (100:174) 1:1.73 (100:173) W-35-R-14:II-3 data for 168 fetuses was tested using chi-square. The test showed that there was not a significant change from the expected sex ratio 106 males to 100 females. Recommendations: It is recommended that Division personnel continue to collect, compile, and report reproductive data pertaining to the Massachusetts deer herd, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Prepared by Approved: Colton H. Bridges, Superintendent James J, McDonough, Game Biologist and William C. Byrne, Assistant Date JOB PR0GRE5C REPORT State Cooperator Project ITo.t Job No. : Period Covered: Summary: Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R--14 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey II-4 Job Title: Management of the Massachusetts Deer Herd 1 July 1971 to 30 June 1972 The sex and age composition of the state deer harvest V7as checked at ten biological deer checking stations. The calculated minimal deer population x-jas 11,571 deer pre- huntlng season for 1971. There x^as a slight decrease in the male segment of the deer harvesi: per square mile of deer range of the mainland management unit. All mainland counties showed an increase in the female harvest of deer per square mile of deer range. Fifty-eight percent of the s atewide deer harvest was taken by antlerless permit holders. ^^ <^ St' Objectives: There was an increase in the overall deer harvest on Martha's Vineyard which was attributed to the 600 antler- less permits issued for Martha's Vineyard only, A planned slight decrease in the Nantucket deer harvest was realized. The data presented in this report iidicate that the antler- less permit system of harvesting deer can be an effective and highly sensitive management tool. An increase or de- crease in the number of antlerless permits issued for a deer hunting season will result in an increase or decrease in the deer harvest two years later. In addition, the data indicate that it is possible to manage deer on a county basis of deer harvest per square mile of deer range. Problem areas within the mainland management unit were de- fined (i,e,, low reported harvest of deer in the eastern counties exclusive of Barnstable County) . A summary of the 1971 deer harvest shows that the adult male deer kill was 1,106 animals which is 19.73 percent less than the 1970 harvest of 1,378 antlered deer. A continued decline in the number of antlered bucks can be expected for the 1972 and 1973 deer seasons. Deer herd ma. agement recommendations were presented. To estimate the size of the deer herd in Massachusetts and to recommend management techniques. Publication approved by Alfred C, Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35 R-14:II-4 Procedures: Findings: Herd management recommendations will be determined after examination of factors consisting of sex and age composi- tion of the herd, reproductive rates, average removal rates, hunting pressure, and deer kill per square mile of deer range . During the 1971 shotgun deer hunting season, biological data (sex and age) was collected at ten deer checking stations. Table 1 presents a summary of the sex and age composition data collected per management unit, expanded to estimate the 1971 reported harvest, A summary of the sex and age composition of the deer kill reported at the biological deer checking stations from 1967 through 1971 (1971 was the first year that biological data were collected on Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard) is presented in Table 2, Table 3 is a sunnnary of the expanded harvest of deer based on the percent per age class and sex reported at the main- land biological deer checking stations, 1967 through 1971. The summary of the deer kill per square mile for all deer (Table 6) shows that for the mainland herd the rate of harvest has remained constant at .3 deer per square mile since 1969. On a county basis, it can be seen that the harvest in Franklin County increased one-tenth of a deer per square mile from .7 to .8 deer. Berkshire's harvest remains the same at ,8 deer per square mile. The remain- ing counties show a loss of fro : 0.1 to 0,2 deer per square mile during the 1971 deer season. The harvest of males (button bucks included) in the main- land herd dropped slightly from 0,20 bucks per square mile to 0.18 bucks per square mile. This may appear insignifi- cant, hoxjever, this is the first downward trend since 1963, The greatest change in buck harvest per square mile is noted for Worcester County with a change from 0,2 in 1970 to 0,1 in 1971. The summary of Table 5 shows a slight increase in the take of female deer for 1971 on the mainland. All mainland counties showed an increase in the female harvest V7ith the exception of Hampshire and Worcester Counties. Both of these counties presented a decrease in the female segment of the harvest with Hampshire sliding from 0.2 female to 0.1 female deer per square mile in the harvest. Worcester County regressed slightly from 0,10 does to 0.06 does per square mile. The effect of an increase of 600 antlerless permits on Martha's Vineyard is evident in Tables 5 and 6. The female harvest doubled from 0.5 deer per square mile in 1970 to 1.0 deer per square mile in 1971, The male harvest in- creased from 1.6 males per square mile in 1970 to 2,5 males per square mile in 1971. The planned decrease in the Nan- tucket deer harvest can be seen in Tables 4, 5 and 6. Table 1, Sex and age of Massachusetts deer at ten biological deer checking stations expanded to include :he statewide harvest for 1971. I'lales Females Harvest Age No. Percent Expanded Mainland 6 mo. 100 1-1/2 211 45.57 440 2-1/2 103 22.25 215 3-1/2 77 16.63 160 4-1/2 43 9.28 90 5-1/2 19 4.10 40 6-1/2 3 .65 6 7-1/2 6 1.30 12 8-1/2-9-1/2 1 .22 2 10-1/2 563 Total 100.00 96: Nantucket 6 mo. 27 1-1/2 38 60.32 38 2-1/2 13 20.63 13 3-1/2 7 11.11 7 4-1/2 4 6.35 4 5-1/2 0 - 0 6-1/2 0 - 0 7-1/2 1 1.59 1 8-1/2-9-1/2 0 - 0 10-1/2 0 - 0 Harvest No. Percent Expanded 101 27.15 64 17.20 69 18.56 51 13.71 33 8.87 20 5.38 14 3.76 11 2.96 9 2.42 197 125 135 99 64 39 27 21 17 372 100.00 724 14 22 12 13 2 3 0 0 0 0 14 21.21 22 33.33 12 18.18 13 19.19 2 3.03 3 4.54 0 «■ 0 - 0 - 0 - Total 90 100.00 63 66 100.00 66 Martha's Vineyard 6 mo. 39 31 35.23 31 1-1/2 41 56.94 41 11 12.50 11 2-1/2 14 19.44 14 16 18.13 16 3-1/2 8 11.11 8 11 12.50 11 4-1/2 4 5.55 4 4 4.54 4 5-1/2 3 4.17 3 8 9.09 8 6-1/2 0 - 0 2 2.27 2 7-1/2 1 1.39 1 2 2.27 2 3-1/2-9-1/2 1 1.39 1 3 3.41 3 10-1/2 0 - 0 0 - 0 Total 111 100.00 72 88 100.00 88 Table 2, A summary of the sex and age composition of Massachusetts deer reported at mainland biological stations, 1967 through 1971. Males Females Af^e 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 6 mo. 20 61 67 121 100 31 44 76 90 101 1-1/2 167 19G 239 263 211 32 33 55 54 64 2-1/2 122 126 153 147 103 13 28 55 69 69 3-1/2 62 87 98 97 77 13 16 36 46 51 4-1/2 25 35 55 59 43 7 11 24 29 33 5-1/2 10 17 21 21 19 3 3 11 14 20 6-1/2 5 4 14 7 3 1 4 0 S 14 7-1/2 1 0 2 7 6 0 3 2 0 11 8-1/2-9-1/2 1 0 2 1 1 3 3 0 0 9 10-1/2 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 __q 0 Total 421 528 652 723 563 109 146 259 310 372 A summary of the sex and age composition of Massachusetts deer reported at Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket deer checking stations in 1971. JtM. Martha's Vineyard Males Females Nantucket Males Females 6 mo. 39 1-1/2 41 2-1/2 14 3-1/2 8 4-1/2 4 5-1/2 3 6-1/2 - 7-1/2 1 8-1/2-9-1/2 1 10-1/2 - 31 II 16 11 4 8 2 2 3 27 33 13 7 4 14 22 12 13 2 3 Total 111 88 90 66 Table 3. Expanded statewide harvest of Massachusetts deer based on the percent per age class reported at mainland biological deer checking stations, 1967 through 1971. Age 1967 1968 Males 1969 1970 1971 Females 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 6 mo.* 53 61 125 220 183 67 93 172 223 197 1-1/2 372 433 531 602 440 69 70 124 134 125 2-1/2 272 276 340 337 215 40 59 124 171 135 3-1/2 138 190 218 111 160 28 34 81 114 99 4-1/2 56 77 122 135 90 15 23 55 72 64 5-1/2 22 37 46 48 40 6 7 25 35 39 6-1/2 11 9 31 16 6 2 8 - 20 27 7-1/2 2 . 4 16 12 - 7 5 - 21 3-1/2-9-1/2 2 - 4 2 2 6 7 • > 17 10-1/2 875* mm 3 1299 0 1378 . 2 235 2 310 586 769 - Totals 1022 1148 724 * Six-month deer not included in male total. 1 • U • 1-* Pf S CO »n i-l o o o o O o o O f-i CM iH t-4 • Xi 1-4 1** d «S 60 (7t 9 •-4 O u U CM CM r«« vO ON m CO CO CO A • o r*. CM 00 r-l r»» o CO CO CM C7N u O d) S a ON »-i u • Sid tn m lO CO CO CM o CM f-l O Xt • • • t • • • • • • § r-l o o o o O o o o f-l CO o u d^ 2. fl M r^ NO in I-l CM CO o o m VO • r o sr ^ • •H 0) Sg CO m St CO CO CM o CM 00 CM ■U C •o • • • • • » • • • • 3 I-l o o o o o o o O o CM O iM I-l • u o ON W CO ^ (U ON ■u 1-4 r-< 3 •H o g u \0 CO 00 ON iTi ON r-l r-l Csl 00 B • m O rv p*. >% (U O 0) >d- CM r-l r-l r-l CO r-l h S Q r-4 Ph 10 3 TD cr c 01 J^ • tn 94 0) as C>4 sr >d- CM CO r-l o CM r^ r^ a • • • • • • • • • • r-l r-* o o o O o o o O o r-l o ■u f-l • ^-1 CO 00 •H D- u S> SO Ui cn o > ON 2 vi r-l (0 « J3 J-l ON CM CO VO VO . r-l 00 CO r^ O C Q lai en CM CO vO vn Si- CO w-t CM CM CM NO 'O c >* tJ T^ H 3 fH O c 1 3 •k •rl 3 to §• CO O , * D Ci •t-1 •rl c •H ■w c e Ji U O -u x: I-l CO so <3> 00 SO 1^ »4 • 0) 1-4 O (U 0) >r-l A4 S "^ CO >4 O (U 25 O »4 •1-4 a W CO • to cr Q pei CO en o o o o f-4 O in en CM CM 00 in en CO en o o o cr\ o C7\ cn o •^ CM o o CM o o in VO m ••. 0) u rH o C Si U c 3 eo 1-4 tH C O 4J J= r-l •1-4 4J c J3 CO u m o o S* u ■u B u CO S o to S rs w 4J •o 0) c ^ CO O r-4 CD 3 c O 4J n-l X c s s, to to (U •1-4 JJ c 3 O CJ JC ■u 3 o I. t-t 'O c CO o »4.4 o O Qj ^4 • •H a W CO O Q> o* Q OS CO u c O o o in o CO CO o ox 00 o tn CM CO o ro O CTv CVJ o o CO tr> m • • • o CM < ft in o CO CO 00 o CO i>» o o CO in o CO CO o in CO o o CO vO CO o 00 00 o CO m o si- CM St O CO m o CxJ o CM CM O CO CM O O o r>. o C^4 CO o CO m CM OX XO CO St m CO CM cr» CM 00 t-» CM O CO m in m Cvl sr CM m CO cxi o IT) CM sr o xO m o vo CM O o in sr fxl o ox OX CO m CJX CO r* XO CXI «M O 00 m o ox CM Sf o CO ox CM xO m CM CM ox CO 00 ox sr xO 05 00 CO sr CM m CM o C3X m CO sr CM o 1^ ox xO « O CO o o CM CM CM xO CJX m ox sr 00 XT, o v£> m a\ • • f CO vO m i-< CO CO CM VO * Cu 3 o r-4 o 0) u u o JQ u c u V •o « •r4 n-i C 1-1 ■u c d -u j: r-l 0) X CO u KJ to n ■§ 'O (0 (U o t-l CO c X s* & u u c o u u VS s s u CO •H 1 s S u CO £ o 4J u C 03 CO C 3 O u •u 3 o PW •o c CO o o CO o •-I 'O 0) CO CO o CO •H M PQ I Ou 3 O $-1 O d) ■u CO CO W-35-R-14:II-4 Figure 1 presents a summary of the deer harvest by sex per square mile of deer range per county for a six-year period, 1966 through 1971, The graphs shov; the sensitiv- ity of the harvesting of deer usin^ the antlerless permit system and the value of the harvest calculated on a kill per square mile of deer range basis. Here it is possible to compare the six major deer harvest producing counties and see fluctuations in the deer harvest, A summary of the Massachusetts deer harvest by shotgun for a five-year period, 1967 through 1971, is presented in Table 7. Of the 2,248 deer harvested slightly over half (1,142) were females and button bucks. The number of antlered males taken in 1971 decreased 272 deer from the 1970 statewide harvest figure of 1,378 bucks. Table 8 presents a summary of the percent change in the adult male harvest and the calculated minimal population of Massachusetts deer from 1967 through 1971. Tables 9 and 10 present the adult male and female deer harvest per square mile of deer range per county in Massa- chusetts from 1967 through 1971. Both tables make it possible to compare the harvest of deer per county by kill per square mile of deer range rather than the total kill per county. It is interesting to note that in both tables the changes in the harvest are in tenths and in some cases hundredths deer per square mile. With data this sensitive by using the antlerless permit system it is possible to manage deer on a county basis. The harvest data throughout this report in dealing with individual deer herd divisions tends to gloss over some problem areas within a division or management segment. The eastern portion of Massachusetts is heavily populated with an expanding human population which may account for the low or apparently stable dee\ harvest in Essex and Middlesex Counties, Hovjever, the deer harvest data for Plymouth, Bristol and parts of Norfolk County indicate a definite deer harvest problem. Deer mortality data OJ-35-R-14, Job No. II-2, Non-Hunting Deer Mortality In- vestigations) show that deer are beins killed in all of these counties by cars, dogs, etc. Yet the legal harvest remains at almost nil. The established goal is to harvest a minimum of 0..^ bucks per square mile of deer range on the mainland. In order to achieve that goal it will be necessary to establish a large female breeding population. The data presented in this report strongly suggests that the deer harvest has increased to a point where more than half the deer reported were taken by permit holders. The data also show tha^ the number of adult females harvested has increased annually as the number of antlerless permits increased, Meam^hile the antlered buck harvest has started to decrease. Figure 1, A suiranary of the Massachusetts deer harvest by sex per square mile of deer range by county, 1966 through 1971, Male Female Total Berkshire 839.0 sq. mi. Franklin 649,1 sq. mi. Hampden 524.3 sq. mi 1,0 (0 •1-4 "•" \ y 0.5 y :„.""' -•' 0.0 1 -^ ! H~ 66 67 68 69 70 71 Year Hampshire 431.5 sq. mi. 1.0 0,5 0.0 / \ -^ 66 67 68 69 70 71 Tear VJorcester 1307.6 sq. mi. 1,0 0,5 0,0 I s V _ • .i 7^ N 66 67 68 69 Year 70 7*1 Barnstable 290 .5 sq. ml • •r* 1.0 ^ 0.5 CO iH r-t •H « 0.0 :\.:-<- 66 67 68 69 70 71 Year 1.0 0 .5 0 ,0 ■••. * ' ■ -. "^ • " ■« '■ ■•• •■^ 66 67 68 69 70 71 Year 1,0 0.5 0,0 \ y •^f— ^ — H — ;- 66 67 68 69 70 71 Year Mainland 6213.6 sq, mi. Dukes 86,5 sq. mi. Nantucket 35.9 eq. mi. 6,0 ig ^ 3.0 to d 0.0 4- 66 67 68 69 70 71 Year 6,0, 3.0 0.0 ! .-. -..^- 66 67 68 69 70 71 Year 6.0 3.0 \ \ t- ■'";■' •• ■ ♦ ' 0 0,0 '■•f f— : "■ ■' "' 1 66 67 68 69 70 71 Year as M 3 O U vO i-H H I (U M d O CO P-( CO M CO CO en u O 0) 1X4 u 3 3 JJ CO i-i . CM CO o r^ CO r^ C^ r-H vo C7k CO •-< CO vO CO CM CO m «^ cx> CO t-4 ir> o CO lO VO CM CM LO r-l CM CM ;t CO cTs en CO CM c3^ m ON o •vf in c^ r>. CO a\ o «-i so vO vO t^ h>- Q\ CTi 0> C3> ON c M a> (U •o iM o CO G O •H ■U (0 r-4 a o a. § •rl C •H s ■p CO t-l 3 u CO o -s CO ■u CO > CO J3 I-I § CJ ca 00 r-l a o o u d cu u u C OS CO I c o CO r>. xi as O cy\ O 00 I C <3N CO \o o (3N ON Q) vO 00 9 C CO CO VO j:: <3N CO VO ON ^ CO c 0) VO (U 00 1 o c r>. M CO VO -< CM ^ rH CO CO in CO f^ vO ON ON • • • • ON r^ CM cj i-< CM CM CM till CO Vj- ON > m r-< CO CO o o •-< •« «t M CM CM vO a o C 'r^ O JJ •H C3 W t-l c to 3 O r-4 a. T-f 3 O 4J a. a. to O t-l 0< !-< I-I 'H 'H 3 3 C CO 'O 'O tA X CO to S O CJ 3 r-l t-4 r-l -o CO to CO < o o o Table 9. A summary of the adult male deer harvest per square mile of deer range per county in Massachusetts, 1967 through 1971, County Square Miles Deer Range 1967 196G 1969 1970 1971 Barnstable 290.5 .14 .15 .20 .28 .28 Berkshire 839.0 .27 .37 .44 .44 .42 Bristol 422.6 .01 .01 .01 .01 .002 Essex 344.4 .03 .03 .04 .06 .03 Franklin 649.1 .27 .35 .39 .39 .36 Hampden 524.3 .13 .19 .24 .22 .20 Hampshire 431.5 .16 .25 .27 .26 .15 Middlesex 503.1 .02 .01 .02 .02 .02 Norfolk 277.3 --- --- .01 -— Plymouth 544.2 .03 .02 .03 .02 .01 Worcester 1307.6 .11 .06 .14 .15 .07 Total 6213.6 .12 .14 .13 .19 .15 Dukes 86.5 .71 .65 .72 .91 1.01 Nantucket 35.9 1.34 1.56 1.89 2.42 1.78 Table 10. A summary of the adult female deer harvest per square mile of deer range per county in Massachusetts, 1967 through 1971. County Square Miles Deer Range 1967 1963 1969 1970 1971 Barnstable 290.5 .03 .02 .06 .10 .09 Berkshire 839.0 .04 .06 .12 .16 .23 Bristol 422.6 .005 .002 .002 -_- — Essex 344.4 .006 .003 .01 .03 .003 Franklin 649.1 .07 .11 .14 .15 .27 Hampden 524.3 .02 .03 .06 .06 .08 Hampshire 431.5 .04 .06 .11 .11 .07 Middlesex 583.1 .002 .01 .01 .01 .01 Norfolk 277.3 .004 ... -«. .004 Plymouth 544.2 .002 .01 .01 .01 .002 Worcester 1307.6 .02 .02 .05 .07 .05 Total 6213.6 .02 .03 .06 .07 ,00 Dukes 86.5 .14 .10 .18 .36 .67 Nantucket 35.9 .17 .14 .97 1.67 1.53 W-35-R-14:II-4 The data (Figure 2) show that the results of harvesting deer by the permit system are not discernible until the second year after the harvest; i.e., the result of issuing 2,000 antlerless permits i.i 1967 and 1968 show an increase of antlered bucks in 1969 and the peak harvest of 1970 respectively. The number of antlerless permits issued in 1969 was increased to 4,000 which resulted in decline in the antlered harvest of 1971. In 1970 the number of antlerless permits issued was increased to 6,000. In 1971 there were 6,000 sportsmen's permits issued for state- wide use. It is expected that if the present trend con- tinues the harvest of antlered bucks will continue to de- cline slightly in 1972 and 1973, Table 11 shows the percent frequency ratio of adult females to adult males pe:. county from 1967 through 1971, The percent frequency represents that portion of adult female deer harvested for each adult male harvested. The effect of the number of antlerless permits issued per year can be demonstrated. In Berkshire County for the years 1967 and 1968, the percent frequency of adult females was ,14 and ,17 respectively. There were 2000 sportsmen's permits issued during these two years. In 1969 the number of permits issued was increased to 4,000 permits with the percent frequency of adult females increasing from .17 in 1968 to ,27 in 1969, Six thousand permits were issued for 1970 and 1971 with the percent frequency of females in- creasing to .38 females in 1970 and .53 females in 1971, Simply stated, for every two antlered bucks harvested in Berkshire County in 1971, there was one adult female harvested. It might appear that there was an expanding deer herd in the Berkshires and the .53 percent frequency of adult females presents a healthy situation. However, observe the steady decline in the harvest numbers of antlered bucks from a high of 371 deer in 1969 to 352 antlered males in 1971, The antlerless permit system not only protects and saves the female segment of a deer population but the system saves a number of button bucks. These animals (male fawns) are as important a segment of the deer herd as are the fe- males. The button bucks that survive a hunting season and following winter will prvide the huntable antlered male deer for the next eight to ten years. During the 1972 and 1973 deer hunting seasons, it is im- perative that emphasis be placed on increasing the antlered male population of the mainland deer management unit. This increase can be accomplished by a substantial reduction in the number of antlerless permits issued. The females saved by a permit reduction will produce fawns the following spring. The male fawns will represent the antlered bucks of the following year. Therefore, it is necessary to plan two years in advance to obtain the resulting increase in herd size. •o c CO r^ X vO 0) a\ m n-< ^^ c % to 1-1 M D. ^1 CO CO Xi to u r-4 (U J^-l 0) (U ns i-l w c ■p to 4J . x: ON >» 4J I-l ;^ •O J2 y c CO R CO 3 3 O CO 0) :^ 00^ <: CO 4J CM r-4 o r- r- cr\ CM 1— < r^ ■^ f^ o J-t CO > CO U-i O CO >3- CO en CM C4 O CM lO o r-l ,-1 spsjpunH m en <2- CM CM CO IW ■U o •I-J E 9 ^ O 0) S eu 0) S^ PC4 P^ O 3 < Dl U PC4 ►< 3 B^ C3> Pl4 3 3^ CO vO 3 s vO D- ►4 3 < X H c 3 O o m CO v£) r-« ON o CO m o f^ >:t v£» CM r^ CO CO CO r-l CO vO CNJ CO ON CO .:f CO COI^COr-» Vt r-4 1-1 CO CJN O CO CM r-t vO m o CM CM vO 3 o u to (U CO o o 00 in m NO ON vD O vO 00 m in CO 00 vO CTt o tn vO m CO r-l \o 00 4J rQ- Objectives: Procedures 9 .OB P.OOP.SS ...OP. j W -36--/?-/'// t3r-( MassachupettG Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-14 IV-1 Project Title; Job Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Experimental Turkey Stocking 1 June 1971 to 31 May 1972 The fall 1971 estimated turkey population on seven release areas totaled 175 turkeys. Populations on individual areas V7ere as follows: Quabbin-Nex;r Salera, 52; Barre -Oakham, 23; Douglas State Forest, 36; October Mountain area, 19; To\7n of: Mt. Washington, 16; Myles Standish State Forest, 2; Kolyoke Range, 2. Ti/enty-five additonal birds were present in dis- persed flocks. Five turkeys were captured by cannon net in New Salera and transferred to Horse Mountain in Hatfield, Seven additional turkeys were captured, banded, and released near Underhill Brook on Prescott Peninsula in the Quabbin Reservation. Through the courtesy of New York State personnel, seven wild- trapped Meleagrls gallopavo si lyes tr is were cannon netted in Allegany State Park, Cattaraugus County, Nex7 York, by the project leader and a University of Massachusetts graduate student. Captured turkeys were transported to Massachusetts and released in Beartown State Forest, Great Barrington, Berkshire County, Coordination efforts are being continued so that additional turkeys may be obtained to complete the Beartown stocking. To re-establish the wild turkey in the Commonwealth in suf- ficient numbers to allov? for recreational hunting. Turkeys were censused by roadside counts, track counts and cooperator reports, Snovnnobiles were used during the winter to provide access to the areas and to transport grain for baiting. Turkeys were captured using mortar, jet and Thornsberry-style cannon nets. Captured turkeys were sexed, aged by primary feather molt and growth, weighed, leg banded, and color marked with patagial streamers. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 I I W-35-R-14:IV-l Findings: A. Statewide Turkey Populations Statewide turkey population figures are presented for the fall 1971 period (Table 1). Winter and spring observations were limited by the scarcity of snov7 for tracking, follov7ed by intensive rains with muddy roads limiting vehicular ac- cess, Quabbin-Nev7 Salem counts are based largely upon direct observation; whereas, counts on other areas are based upon screened reports from cooperators supplemented by a limited number of searches by the project leader and assis- tants. Table 1. Fall turkey populations on seven Massachusetts release areas. Area Fall Population Quabbin-New Salem 52* Barre -Oakham 23 Douglas State Forest 36 October Mountain Area 19 Mount Washington 16 Myles Standish State Forest 2 Holyoke Range 2 Subtotal 150 Dispersed flocks 25 Total 175 * Prior to trapping Quabbin Reservation -New Salem Populations Prescott Peninsula in the Quabbin Reservation was the original release site in the current turkey restoration project. Twenty-two turkeys from three sources (Naushon Island, Allegheny Game Farm, and wild-trapped West Virginia sjlvestris) were released here in i960 and 1961. Popula- tions remained relatively static through 1965, and increased slightly following mild winters in 1966 and 1967. Since then, there has been a trend towards dispersal off the reservation into surrounding towns. Turkey populations on Prescott Peninsula decreased follov7ing the cessation of artificial feeding in the winter of 1970- 1971, Remaining turkeys seem wilder, as they flush more readily when approached. New Salem turkey flocks continue to be fed by local residents, and consequently are less V7ary of man. H-35-R-14:IV-l Three known broods were produced in the Underhill Brook and Mt. Pleasant areas of the Quabbin during 1970. Two more broods were produced in the West Street region of Nev; Salera. Later in summer, two of the Preccott broods merged and moved south on the Peninsula to the vicinity of Mt. Ram. The third brood was trapped, banded, and released near Underhill Brook, and was later reported near Andrews-Fisk Hill, six miles north across Route 202. The broods off West Street were trapped at Hamilton's Orchards, New Salem, and six turkeys transferred to Horse Mountain in Hatfield, A mild winter with little snov; and a good crop of red oak acorns probably contributed to the V7inter survival of Quabbin turkeys. Reproductive success in the spring of 1972 was likely affected, however, by intense rains which may have chilled eggs and poults. Cooperators reported turkey flocks near Junket Hill, Pelham; Dry Hill Road, Montague, and in the Tovm of DJhately. Al- though these reports are considered reliable, probably representing dispersion from the Quabbin, fall and winter searches by the project leader failed to verify their presence, and they are listed in Table 1 under Dispersed Flocks, Barre-Oakham Population Fifteen turkeys, vjild trapped in the Quabbin Reservation, were released in Barre in 1967 (11) and 1969 (4). Disper- sion has since occurred into the nearby tov7ns of Hubbardston, Oakham, and New Braintree. Decreased populations in 1971- 1972 are probably the result of nest failures in spring 1972. Only one brood, near Burnshirt Brook in Barre, was reported during this period. Small flocks of adult turkeys remain near the Oakham Cemetery and Fairweather Hill in Hubbardston. Individual birds were sighted near Burrow Brook, South Barre, and off Sunrise Avenue, Barre, As in the Quabbin, reproduc- tion in 1972 may have been affected by the unusual amount of rain during the spring. One nest, near Burnshirt Brook in Barre, was lost when the hen abandoned due to human dis- turbance. The eggs were collected, but artificial incuba- tion proved unsuccessful. Doupilas State Forest Population Nineteen Quabbin turkeys were released in Douglas Woods northwest of Wallis Reservoir in 1968 (12) and 1969 (7). Turkeys have dispersed throughout the forest, from Manchaug south to VJallum Lake, One small flock has been reported to the west in Webster, and a large flock of 25 to 27 turkeys in the sv/ampy area near Buffum Road in Uxbridge. These turkeys, as with others of Quabbin mixed-background ancestry, display little wildness x^hen subject to persistent feeding by misinformed citizens. One turkey in such a flock V7as cornered and killed by feral dogs in the spring of 1971. T'7-35-R-14:IV-l Holyoke Ran^e Populations Mt, Tom in the Holyoke Range \jas the final stronghold of the native Eastern turkey in Massachusetts. The last surviving bird, a lone gobbler, was shot there in the winter of 1051. Unsuccessful releases using stock of unknown origin were made in 1915 and 1918. Recent releases (1964 and 1965) were made in Granby (3) and Hadley (11), but also proved unsuc- cessful, probably due to mortalities among the released birds, followed by dispersal of the remainder. Tv70 torn turkeys, the first reported since 1970, were seen in Granby during early winter, 1972. Myles Standish State Forest Population Fourteen vjild-trapped West Virginia M. g. silvestris were released in Myles Standish Forest in Plymouth and Carver in February and March 1966 and 1967. Individual dispersal oc- curred almost immediately after release, and the only re- liably reported reproduction occurred in the spring of 1968. For the past two years, the only reliable sightings have been of adult toms, with the last report being in June -July 1971 near Webster Springs Road and College Pond Road in the southern portion of the forest, October Mountain Area Populations Tv7elve adult turkeys obtained from the Allegheny Game Farm in Julian, Pennsylvania were released off County Road, Town of Washington in April 1961. An additional seventeen turkeys, trapped at previous release sites in the Town of Mt. Washington (15) and the Quabbin Reservation (2), were released at County Road and near Sandwash Reservoir in August and September of 1962. These turkeys have displayed virtually no wildness from the time of their release to the present, A nuisance complaint by a Becket resident resulted in ten turkeys being trapped and moved to a forested area off West Hill Road in Middlefield in February 1968. In February 1971, ten additional tame turkeys were captured on the Simmon's property, Washington, using drugged grain. These inferior -strain turkeys vjere captured to effect their permanent removal from the range, and were subsequently donated to cooperating conservation agencies for display purposes. At present, only five adult turkeys are known to remain in Washington, and an additional twelve (sex and age unknov7n) are in Middlefield, W-35-R-14;IV-l Town of Mt, VJashington Population In January 1951, eleven turkeys were trapped near Margaret- ville, Delaware County, New York, and released on the Vlhit- beck Farm, Tovjn of Mt. Washington, Berkshire County, Massachusetts, The population from which these birds vjere trapped was initiated with game farm stock, but had existed for' four generations in the V7ild. Local residents began feeding the turkeys almost immediately, and they soon became very tolerant of man. Nine of these turkeys (three adult, six immature) were trapped and transferred to October Moun- tain Forest in 1962. Town residents since then have been very protective of the turkeys and frequently treat Division inquiries with suspicion. Limited observations by Western District personnel indicate a spring (1972) population of sixteen turkeys. Their lack of wildness and presence on posted land probably negate any conceivable future hunting program in this tov7n. Trapping activities utilizing Mt . Washington turkeys are not recommended. Miscellaneous Reports I 11 I W I urn. I L II^IIIBIIII »l Wf^— —■——*— Reports of single turkeys or small groups were received from Chester, Cummington, Greenfield, Peru, Terapleton, and West Brookfield. Time limitations and lack of an accurate sight- ing location precluded conducting field observations for verification. Tv7o other reports, in Monson and West Tisbury, are now know to originate from illegal private releases. B. Trapping Activities 1. Turkey broods produced in the West Street region of l-lew Salem have frequented the lovjer fields of Hamilton's Orchards for the past three summers. The owner of the orchard main- tains some dv7arf trees and had sustained some slight damage from turkey depredations during the fall of 1969. To pre- clude a repetition of this and to obtain turkeys for trans- plant, trapping (using a jet -type cannon net) was conducted on 29 September, resulting in a catch of six turkeys (Table 2). Captured birds were sexed, aged, weighed, leg banded and color marked with patagial tags. One hen was equipped with a back-pack radio-telemetry unit by a Univer- sity of Massachusetts cooper a tor. The turkeys were trans- ported in individual carrying crates and released on the F. W. Cole property on the east slope of Horse Mountain, Hatfield, Hampshire County, A few weeks after release, the turkeys V7ere reported 2.4 kilometers south, near the Laurel Park sv7amp. The instrumented hen was killed by a dog in November , 2, On 24 November 1971, trapping operations were conducted in conjunction with Walter M. Tzilkowski, Consultant Wildlife Biologist, Eight turkeys were utilizing a bait site at a sawmill clearing south of Underbill Brook on Prescott Il ON C U a a •o o> a. a. to >^ 3 H to CO nj 0) r-« O I 4J a. CO o CO ■u •H 60 >4 r-l CO H CO U CO B a> o CO ^ 'tJ i^ M O CO O O Ed S fU PC CO CO §§ ex. a CO CM CO »4 CO Xi M O CO • • CO CO M U CO CO (J U M $-1 O O d o ■u CO CO S - - 0) d c r-i o o CO -U 4J r-l c/3 I— * I—I •H 'H "1-1 B ^ a S CO a> CO CO rr: ;a p:* Ed o * m CO m CO 1^ CM PL4 m CO CM CO M B 'V 09 to i-l (U a o CO X) o at •—I 4J d 60 Q) CO a W 3 U to *J d CO •H d CD d d ^ •H -rl 3 CO CO -U 4J 4J D- d d 3 3 O O S S CO (U 00 bO CO u I bO d o CO o CO 0) W 4J +J •I-l -I-l -r-l CO CO CO » 00 CO CO •I-l -ri CO c» (u cu Oi CL CO CO o u CO > > > > > cu > Q) a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 CO CO s S s s s s CO S c^ ON «* <5- tN CM CM CM CO CO CO 13 'O ca -o V4 u r-l M CO CO 3 CO Xi JC ^ CO ^ ^ -^ •^ ^ JC ^ (J Ci 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u i4 0 •r^ 0 0 0 0 0 <^2 0 0 u d M & (4 ^ U CQ a pg PQ « PQ CQ CO CO Of CO •• ~ r-l r-l r-l r-l r-l r-l - r-l d d r-l ■u r-l r-l r-l r-l r-l d r-l 0 0 'ri 4J •r< 'r4 >r4 •rl •rl 0 -rl ■u ■M XI 0 ^ X X! X! J3 •w X r-l r-l U 0 U U M i-l M '^ U •r4 •r4 0 CO 0 0) (U t3 P t> a p CM CO ft* J3^ Fl4(X4|Z4 |X4|X|PS4 {X4|X(SS a tj no a xj a xi w -cc < M <3 M <; CO -sJ" IT) v£> r*. in vo CO CO CO CO CO o o 1-4 r-l r-l r^ r-l r-l r-l v a; a> X ^ 60 J.I -H 3 --I i^ CO CO > 000000^cnrHmoj>-tr>.iocnfoo CJ tlO •H CO i-l M (:t| 0) > 4J < i-J a> P^ r^sDor^-oooooooooooooooooOr:? oo-Doc^cgcMin»r>CNicocor-imiAvoocnor~~oro 1— lr-lt-4r-li-H i-(i— lr-— 'r-4r-if^voco u CO coror-4r-ma»ONir)vomomc^u^aNOO>d'''^r*~ voooa>cocnvoir>cM a n a 03 CO S u H * 00 V4 > fno>«>s:tvo>-< ^■^ ^^ f^"l ^"^ T^"l f^'n ^"^ ^"^ ^^"^ l^^n l^"l ^""i 3 CO 0) CO .r>. |F"*i f""t f^^ p"t ^^^ ^"i T^H IT*i P'H o CO CO CU CO u CO .J' P* r>. !>* .*-% u 4J 4J 4J ■u ■U 4J • • • • • • • • • • CO CO m • • • • • • o CJ u U t) y CJ u y > f*^ a\ ja Si wQ J3 c c c .oooNO»-'eMco c l^mlnln^nlnmln\o<>DvOvo^o^ovovOvovo^«•^«•p*.f^ co CTnONONONC3N<3nONONCjNON<3NONONC3NC3NONONONC3N<3NONON 0) CO o H CO U CO o 11 I >, • .0 t! * •0 g 0) V 0.^ a • cU si- l-l u 1^ H vO « r-4 u »4 3> 0 1 r-* •H 4J FS4 a> 0 PQ H I i W-35-R-15:I-2 Table 2. Beaver harvest for fifteen towns: 1969-1973 seasons Town 1968-69 1969-70 1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 Ashfield 20 14 2 53 50 Be eke t 41 20 10 51 57 Blandford 10 22 16 29 78 Chesterfield 14 24 12 16 18 Granville 12 23 19 19 49 New Marlboro 32 14 1 52 69 New Salem 11 10 27 10 56 Otis 36 18 14 64 72 Petersham 52 18 27 58 57 Sandisfield 49 13 8 52 6 Warwick 43 8 12 19 45 Washington 9 27 7 55 27 Wendell 40 20 7 10 38 VJinchendon 23 16 30 45 57 Worthing ton 7 30 14 52 54 Table 3. Beaver harvest by county, 1971-1972 and 1972-1973. 1971-1972 1972-1973 County No. Beaver Percent Rank No. Beaver Percent Rank Berkshire 483 35.6 1 461 27.5 1 Essex 12 0.9 8 15 0.9 7 Franklin 301 22.1 2 446 26.6 2 Hampden 114 8.4 5 227 13.6 5 Hampshire 208 15.3 3 253 15.1 3 Middlesex 38 2.8 6 35 2.1 6 Plymouth 16 1.2 7 5 0.3 8 Worcester 186 13.7 4 232 13.9 4 Totals 1,358 100.0 1,674 100.0 Table 4. Beaver harvest by month, 1971-1972 and 1972-1973 1971 -1972 1972- •1973 Month No, Beaver — Percent No. Beaver Percent November Sea son Not Of ►en 633 37.8 December 722 53.2 544 32.5 January 469 34.5 356 21.3 February 167 12.3 141 8.4 Totals 1,358 100.0 1,674 100.0 W-35-R-15:I-2 The western region of the state continues to provide the majority of the beaver harvest. For the second season in a row, the take in the western portion increased and that in the eastern region decreased from the previous season. During the 1972-1973 season, 1,148 beaver (68. 6%) were taken west of the Connecticut River, and 526 (31,47e) were taken east of the river, as opposed to 920 (67,7%) and 242 (32.3%) in 1971-1972. During the past season, Berkshire and Franklin counties together yielded over half (967, 54.1%) of the total harvest. Hampden, Hampshire and Worcester counties con- tributed another 732 beaver (42.6%), with three other counties comprising the small remainder (Table 3), Six counties reported no beaver taken. County rankings re- main unchanged from the past season, although the Berk- shire County harvest declined by 8.1 percent and that of Franklin and Hampden increased by 4.5 percent and 5.2 per- cent respectively. Success was greatest, as expected, during the initial weeks of the season since the open water facilitated trapping. Over one -third (37.3%) of the beaver were taken in the initial two weeks (15-31 November) of the season with success decreasing each month thereafter (Table 4). As in past years, approximately two-thirds (1,163, 69.5%) of the harvest was taken in the Conibear trap. In spite of a supposed decrease in pelt quality, due to the early opening of the season, the average pelt price, $20, equalled the record established in 1969. Thus, the total harvest valuation ($33,480) was the highest yet re- corded for Massachusetts. Recommendations : Continue tagging of beaver pelts and recording of harvest data in 1974, using the same methods as for the current segment. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research & Management Approved: Colt on H. Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by: James E. Cardoza, Assistant Game Biologist Date JUB PROGRESS REPORT ^"'^^n.-r,. state Cooperator : Project No,: Job No . : Period Covered: Summary: Background : ■"^t^/^ft s Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-15 Project Title: II-l Job Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Statewide Deer Harvest 6 November 1972 to 9 December 1972 The archery season was extended to three weeks, 6 November to 25 November 1972, Archers reported 76 deer harvested, 49 males and 27 females. During the shotgun season, 4 December to 9 December 1972, successful hunters reported 1,455 males and 760 females for a total harvest of 2,215 deer. The top deer-producing counties were Berkshire, Franklin, and Dukes, Worcester County, with the largest acreage of deer range, has dropped to fifth ranlc of deer-producing counties. The first and last days of the six-day shotgun season had the largest percent of deer reported. Mid-week hunting pressures were reduced. Harvest data per deer management unit were com- piled and are presented in this report. There v;as an in- crease of 500 antlerless permit applications in 1972, The success ratio of one in six for antlerless permit holders remained the same for all types of permits per deer manage- ment unit except for Nantucket, On Nantucket the hunter success ratio changed from one in three to one in four in 1972. An antlerless deer hunting permit system was initiated in 1967 for harvesting of deer during the shotgun deer V7eek. Button bucks and females were taken only by permit holders. All males with antlers three inches or longer were legal game for all licensed hunters. The shotgun deer season takes place during the first full week in December , Three deer management units have been established. The number of sportsman antlerless permits per unit in 1972 was as follows: Nantucket, 400; Martha's Vineyard, 600; and the mainland, 4000, Deer hunting regulations require all hunters to report their deer within 24 hours to an official Division deer checking station. The archery season was increased from a two-week period to a three-week period, 6 November through 25 November 1972, Hunting is not allowed on Sundays, Publication approved by Alfred C, Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35-R-15:II-l Objectives; To determine the annual harvest of deer in Massachusetts. Findings: A ten-year summary of the annual deer harvest per town per county from 1963 through 1972 is presented in Table 1. Hunters reported the taking of a deer via a written report to the Director from 1963 through 1965, From 1966 through 1972 the reporting by hunters has been on a compulsory basis. During the 1972 shotgun deer season, 4 December through 9 December, successful hunters reported harvesting 2,215 deer. Of these, 1,455 were males and 760 were females. Successful archers reported taking 76 deer during the three -week period, 6 November through 25 November. Of these deer, 49 were males and 27 were females. The 1972 deer harvest by archers is presented in Table 2. In order of importance Berkshire, Franklin, and Hampshire Counties were the best deer-producing counties for the archers, A summary of the 1972 shotgun deer harvest by county from 1969 through 1972 is presented in Table 3. Berkshire, Franklin, and Dukes Counties have remained the top-producing counties for the past tv70 years. Table 4 presents a summary of the deer harvest by day during the shotgun season, 4 December through 9 December 1972 and the archery season, 6 November through 25 November 1972, It is quite evident from the harvest data presented in Table 4 that the harvest is highest on the first and last days of the six-day shotgun season. The hunting pressure drops during the middle four days with Thursday having the smallest percent of the harvest reported. It is inter- esting to note that 632 or 43 percent of the total males were taken on Monday and 281 or 19 percent v;ere reported on Saturday. The female harvest on the first and last days of the shotgun season were approximately the same V7ith 225 or 30 percent on Monday and 235 or 31 percent on Saturday, With the exception of Friday, 17 November, archers harvested deer on each day of the three -week archery season. The last three days of the archery season include the long Thanksgiving holiday weekend. This probably accounts for the ten deer harvest on the Friday (24 November) following Thanlcsgiving Day and a total of 21 deer harvested for the long weekend. Table 5 presents a summary of the Massachusetts deer harvest and the hunter success per type of antlerless permit. Table 2, A Summary of the 1972 Massachusetts Archery Season Deer Harvest by Sex, Town and County, November 6-25, 1972. County Barnstable Berkshire Dukes Essex Franklin Hampden Hampshire Nantucket Worcester TqiTn Barnstable Orleans Pr ovine etov7n Truro Wellfleet Alford Be eke t Egreraont Hancock Lanesboro Lee Mt, VJashington New Marlboro Sandisfield Sheffield Stockbridge T3n:ingham West Stockbridge Williamstown Chilmark Edgartown West Tisbury Georgetown Bernardston Colrain Conway Deerfield Leyden New Salem Shelburne Shutesbury Wendell Bland ford Ludlow Bel chert own Chesterfield Huntington Pelham Ware Nantucket Grafton Petersham Southbridge Upton yiale (BB) 3 1 (1) 1 1 1 7 (1) 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 19 (1) (1) (1) (2) (1) (6) 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 2 (1) (1) (1) (1) TOTALS 1 1 1 _J 49 (10) Female 1 2 1 1 5 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 8 I 1 2 1 I 2 0 4 1 1 27 Total 3 1 2 1 1 8 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 5 A 24 1 2 1 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 J, 15 1 1 2 3 1 2 2 Jl 10 8 1 1 1 1 _± 76 Table 3, Summary of the Massachusetts Deer Harvest by Sex per County and Rank of Harvest for the 1969, 1970, 1971 and 1972 Shotgun Seasons. County Barnstable Berkshire Bristol Dukes Essex Franklin Hampden Hampshire Middlesex Nantucket Norfolk Plymouth Suffolk Worcester Rank Rank Rank Rank Male Female Total 1972 1971 1970 1969 78 33 116 8 7 8 8 423 160 533 1 1 1 1 3 2 5 12 12 12 12 140 126 266 3 3 7 7 16 1 17 9 10 9 11 319 201 520 2 2 2 2 147 54 201 4 5 6 5 114 49 163 6 8 4 4 3 5 8 11 9 10 10 66 61 127 7 6 5 6 0 0 0 13 13 13 13 12 0 12 10 11 11 9 0 0 0 13 13 13 13 134 63 197 5 4 3 3 Table 4, A Summary of the Massachusetts Deer Harvest by D'^y of H?irvest, 4 Dec°u;ber through 9 December 1972. Shotgun Season Mon. Dec. 4 Tues. Dec, 5 Wed, Dec, 6 Thurs , Dec, 7 Fri. Dec. 8 Sat. Dec. 9 Total Both Sexes Total Harvest Percent 857 38.69 258 11.65 209 161 9.44 7.27 Males 214 9.66 516 23.30 2,215 Total Harvest Percent 632 43.44 172 11.82 134 117 9.21 8,04 Females 119 8.18 281 19.31 1,455 Total Harvest Percent 225 29.61 86 11,32 75 44 9.87 5,79 95 12.50 235 30.92 760 I Table 4, (Continued) Archery Season November 6-11 November 13-13 November 20-25 Total per Day Mon, M F Total M F Total M .J. Total Mon. 4 4 8 1 «* 1 - 1 1 Tues. 3 1 4 - 2 2 2 2 4 Wed, 2 1 3 5 1 6 2 1 3 Thurs. 1 1 2 3 - 3 3 1 4 Fri. 1 - 1 - - - 7 3 10 Sat. - Ji 4 6 _4 10 5 2 7 10 10 12 9 11 21 11 11 22 15 22 19 10 29 73* * The archery harvest was 76 deer. Dates of harvest on three (3) deer were omitted , Table 5. A Summary of the Massachusetts Deer Harvest and the Hunter Success by T3^e of Antlerless Permit, 1967 through 1972. 1972 Archery Season (Nov. 6 - Nov. 25, 1972) Males 49 (10 BB) Females 27 Total 76 Summary of Archery Kill, 1967 through 1972 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 Males 17 21 27 24 26 49 Females Totals 4 21 13 34 10 37 12 36 - 10 36 27 76 1972 Shotgun Season (Dec. , 4-9. 1972) Males 1,455 Females 760 Total 2,215 1972 Kill Breakdown per Management Unit Martha's Mainland Nantucket Vineyard Total Males, Adult 1,105 49 102 1,256 Males, Button bucks 144 17 38 199 Females 573 61 126 760 Totals 1,822 127 266 2,215 Summary of the Shotgun Statewide Deer Harvest, 1967 through 1972 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 Males 937 1,083 1,424 1,605 1,359 1,455 Females 235 310 585 764 889 760 Total 1,172 1,393 2,009 2,369 2,248 2,215 Statewide Summary of Archery and Shotgun Harvest, 1967 through 1972 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 Males Females Total 954 239 1,193 1,104 323 1,427 1,451 595 2,046 1,629 776 2,405 1,385 899 2,284 1,504 787 2,291 Summary of Antlerless Deer Permits 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 No, Applications (rounded numbers) 20,000 24,000 32,000 35,000 37,500 33,000 Permits Issued: Sportsman 2,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 6,000 4,000 Farmer^' 243 331 295 347 270 326 Nantucket ■■ - 400 400 400 400 Martha's Vi neyard - - - - 600 7,270 600 Totals 2,243 2,331 4,695 6,747 5,326 Permit Harvest Statewide, Landowner -Farme r 1967 1963 1969 1970 1971 1972 Males 2 21 17 25 20 14 Females 20 44 45 34 26 42 Total 22 65 62 59 46 56 Harvest 1 by Sportsmen's Permits 1967 1963 1969 1970 1971 1972 Deer (both sex) 279 356 787 1 ,057 1,268 1,010 Breakdown Statewide of Harvest by Antlerless Permits 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 Antlered ma le 26 50 140 137 172 107 Button buck 40 61 124 215 253 199 Female 235 310 585 764 889 760 Totals 301 421 849 1 ,116 1,314 1,066 Antlerless Permit Success Ratio 1 (rounded) 1971 1967 1968 1969 1970 1972 Farmer* 1-11 1-5 1-5 1-6 1-6 1-6 Sportsman 1- 9 1-6 1-6 1-6 1-6 1-6 Mainland 1-6 1-6 Nantucket (101 permit deer, 40 M. , 61 F.) 1-3 1-4 Martha's Vineyard (167 permit deer. 56 M. , ni fO 1-4 1-4 *Farmer -Landowner W-35-R-15:II-l Apparently the added six days of the archery season and possibly the increased cost of the archery stamp stimulated the archers during the 1972 season. The average reported archery kill from 1968 through 1971 was 36 deer per year. The 1972 archery harvest was 76, an increase of 40 deer or 111 percent above the four-year average. During the 1972 shotgun season, 4 December through 9 December, hunters reported 2,215 deer statewide, 1,455 males and 760 females. On the mainland, 1,105 adult males, 144 button bucks and 573 females were reported. On Nan- tucket 49 adult males, 17 button bucks and 61 females were recorded. The Martha's Vineyard hunters reported 102 adult males, 38 button bucks and 126 females. The combined statewide archery and shotgun reported harvest was 2,291 deer. Of these 1,504 were males and 707 were fe- males. The 1972 applications for antlerless permits increased to 38,000 (rounded number), approximately 500 applications more than were received in 1971, The number of sportsman permits was reduced from 6,000 in 1971 to 4,000 permits in 1972 in an attempt to reduce the harvest of females and button bucks and thereby increase the number of legal bucks in the harvest of 1974. The farmer -landowner antlerless permits increased from 270 permits in 1971 to 326 permits in 1972, Nantucket and Martha *s Vineyard antlerless permits remained the same as previous years with 400 and 600 permits issued respectively. As expected with the reduction of permits the harvest of deer by sportsman permittees decreased from 1,268 deer in 1971 to 1,010 deer reported in 1972 or 258 deer less than the 1971 season, A review of the statewide deer harvest per antlerless permit shows that the number of deer harvested by permit holders was reduced in 1972, The antlered male harvest decreased 65 deer from 172 in 1971 to 107 in 1972, There were 54 less button bucks reported in 1972 (199) than the 253 taken in 1971, The largest reduction was in the female segment with 760 reported in 1972 compared to 889 in 1971, or 129 less females in 1972, The success ratio per type of permit remained the same as previous years for all types of permits in all deer manage- ment units except for Nantucket, The success ratio was one in six for sportsman and farmer -landoxtrner permits on the mainland and Martha's Vineyard, The ratio changed from one in three to one in four on Nantucket during the 1972 season. sr X- ^ 3: — _- — cr » "^ X x; ;r. X z X X x- X X X 1 3 X — X X X * X XX X X X ~ = £ -X « — X - ^ X X — — X — X X ^ = X W-35-R-15:II-l Recommendations: It is recommended that the Division of Fisheries and Game personnel continue to compile and report deer harvest data, MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved : Colton H, Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by James J, McDonough, Game Biologist and William J. Minior, Assistant Date ""^ JOB PROGRESS REPORT J State Cooperators Project No, : Job No , : Period Covered: Summary: 6o¥errsiiieot Oocumefils Col.ection NOV 14 19/3 Universit/ cf Massachusetts Background Objectives Government Documents Collection mm 2 1373 Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-15 II-2 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Job Title: Non-hunting Deer Mortality Investigations 1 January 1972 to 31 December 1972 Natural Resource Officers reported One hundred ninety-six were males, v/as reported for 27 deer. The two hunting deer mortalities were motor legal kills (44). They accounted f reported mortalities. Other causes order of importance were as follows unknown (35) ; fences (6) ; drownings The 41 deer reported killed by dogs fleets favorable winter conditions, deer were reported killed by dogs i 453 deer mortalities. 230 were females. No sex greatest causes of non- vehicles (321) and il- or 80.6 percent of the of deer mortalities in : dogs (41) ; other and (5) ; and crop damage (1) , in 1972 possibly re- Two hundred nineteen n 1971. The uneven proportion of male (49) to female (19) mortali- ties during the month of November can be attributed to the increased male activity during the rut period. There was a 34.7 percent decrease in non-hunting deer mor- talities (453) for 1972 as compared to 1971 (694). The effects of the antler less permit hunting system were evident in the adjusted sex ratio of the non-hunting deer mortalities with 208 males to 245 females or 45.9 percent males to 54,1 percent females. As in 1971, the top ranking counties for non-hunting deer mortalities were Berkshire, Barnstable and Franklin. Natural Resource Officers investigated and filed reports of deer mortalities statewide. A duplicate of each report was compiled and tabulated by project personnel. Deer concen- trations and/or wintering areas were observed by project personnel. Dead deer surveys were conducted in areas of deer concentrations , To determine the annual non-hunting decimating factors of the Massachusetts deer herd. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35-R-15:II-2 Findings: A summary of the sex classes and the causes of Massachusetts deer mortalities for January 1972 through December 1972 is presented in Table 1. A total of 453 deer mortalities were reported. Of these 196 were males, 230 were females. No sex was recorded for 27 deer. Motor vehicles continued to be the largest cause of reported deer mortalities (321 deer). The remaining 132 deer mortalities were reported as follows: illegal kills, 44; dogs, 41; other and unknown, 35; fences, 6; drownings, 5; and deer shot doing crop damage, 1. Table 2 presents a six-year summary of deer mortalities and causes from 1967 through 1972. A comparison of the total non-hunting deer mortalities in Massachusetts from 1967 through 1972 is presented in Table 3, The largest number of deer mortalities was reported in 1970 with 698 deer. Prior to 1970 the reported mortalities in- creased annually from 508 in 1967 to the peak of 698 deer in 1970. Since 1970 there has been a decrease annually start- ing from a half of one percent decline (694 deer) in 1971 to a 34.7 percent decrease (453) in 1972. Table 4 presents a comparison of the sex ratio and the ad- justed sex ratio of Massachusetts deer from 1 January 1972 through 31 December 1972. An adjusted total of 453 deer mortalities, 208 males and 245 females, was reported. The adjusted sex ratio was computed monthly on a percentage basis. The sex ratio was 85 (45.9 percent) males to 100 (54.1 percent) females. The sex ratio in 1971 was 94 (48,4%) males to 100 (51.6%) females. The reported deer mortalities are presented in Table 5 which ranks counties according to deer mortality numbers, Berk- shire, Barnstable, Franklin and Worcester, respectively, have remained the top deer mortality-producing counties for the past two years , Reported deer mortalities for Norfolk (6), Bristol (6), and Plymouth (21) outnumbered the legal deer harvest re- ported in Job Progress Report W-35-R-15, Work Plan II, Job 1, which was Norfolk, 0; Bristol, 1; and Plymouth, 10, A reviev? of the data compiled in this report shows a decline in the number of reported mortalities during 1972 as compared to the previous five years. It is quite possible that the relatively open winter with snow conditions favorable to the deer effected the sharp reduction of the number of deer killed by dogs. It is felt by project personnel that the enforced eight -hour \7orkday of the Natural Resource Officers has affected and will continue to affect the number of re- ported deer mortalities. o u 3 0} (U X o (U s CO (U c 3 • »-) • CM CM /■->. u I-< 0) r-4 XI CvJ B tsj -^ cu CM CJ un 0) en Q CM X o 0) S CO >^ CO • S fn s ^ S CO u CO 3 • S>i P4 J3 (U P4 S CM CO «-l r«. r-i r>. !/■> CM CO CO vO ^ o > !^ CO • 3 p^ C CO •-) • CM r^ r-< m kJ- I— I i-i CM CO CM CM O CM c f-l 15 CO O 4J CQ d o O .^ H 1-4 i-H c o 1-1 Q) !=) • •r-l >■-< bO S j: t^ Q "^ 3 o B C r-l O > r-l T3 CO CO CO >^' CO CM o 3 ON 00 cy% 0) 1-4 ja >>-^ o r-< 4-J CM CO o - t-l T) CO CO CO N— ' CO (U CO CO Q 4J u WD c l O r-l CO |CM r^ vO vX) ^ CO en VO CM r-l — / § r-l rH St CM CO m CM o o •rl r-l t3 CO a) CO CO 00 d (U d CO (U 3 CJ -rl 00 r-l O d CO O <-l H CJ 1-1 00 i CO Q a o g c d CO SQMQli, d 3 O u >^ .O ^ S O CO O CO d •1-1 CO u H CO O u d CO M •rl CO O Q O 3 4J d 3 O o CM CO CM CM in so vo CTv CM o> o CM n o ON CO vO m m in vo CO CO CO 00 vd- -s^ r^ CM 00 vo o in m 6-R-is/lL-Z ' JOB PROGRESS REPORT State Cooperator Project No,: Job No.: Period Covered: Summary: Age at parturition Yearling Two years Adults ^ Background : Government Documents Collection NOV 1 4 1973 University cf Massachusetts Massachusetts ^Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-15 II-3 Project Title: Game Population Trend Job Title: and Harvest Survey Deer Fertility Studies 1 January 1973 through 31 May 1973 Thirty-six (36) £emale deer mortality carcasses were col- lected from 1 January through 31 May 1973 by Natural Re- source Officers and Division personnel. The deer were aged and autopsied to determine the frequency and state of pregnancy. Fetus and corpora lutea were examined and documented. There were no significant changes in the mean reproductive rates for the eight -year period, 1966 through 1973. A sum- mary of eight years of reproductive data (1966-1973) is as follows: Sample Size 160 93 199 No. Fawns Produced 40 131 344 1966-1973 Reproductive Rate 1: .25 (100: 25) 1:1.41 (100:141) 1:1.73 (100:173) 1973 Rate 1: .22 (100: 22) 1:1.33 (100:133) 1:1.72 (100:172) The sex ratio of 126 males to 100 females was determined for the 43 fetuses examined. This was a disproportionate rate from the expected 106 males to 100 females. Carcasses of female deer mortalities were collected from 1 January through 31 May by Division of Fisheries and Game personnel and Natural Resource Officers. These carcasses were either brought directly to the Field Headquarters in Westboro or picked up by project personnel from various Division installations. Deer were autopsied by project personnel and fetuses and ovaries were removed for future examination. The tooth replacement and/or wear technique was used to age the deer examined. Crown-rump measurement was used to determine fetus age. Ovaries were sectioned longitudinally and the number of current corpora lutea were recorded. Corpora albicantia were also sought to help provide some idea of previous pregnancies. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35-R-15:II-3 Objectives: Findings: To determine the reproductive rate per age class of the Massachusetts deer herd. Thirty-six (36) female deer were examined during the five- month period (1 January through 31 May 1973) covered by this report. All 36 deer were collected from the Mainland herd. The age of the deer presented in this report is the age at parturition. From 1 January through 31 May 1973 examination of 36 reproductive tracts found that: 1. Of the nine yearlings, two were pregnant and each were carrying a single fawn. 2. Eight of the two-year-old does were pregnant and carry- ing 12 fetuses. 3. Of the 18 adults, 17 were pregnant and carrying 31 fe- tuses. One adult doe examined in early January may have been recently bred. However, no embryos were in evidence. Table 1 presents a comparison of the age composition and the percent per age class for the 1972 female deer harvest checked at Mainland biological deer check stations and the 36 non-hunting doe mortalities. The percent per age class of the harvested and the non- hunting mortalities appear comparable except for the two and four -year-old classes. A higher percent of the non- hunting mortalities was reported in the two-year class com- pared to the reported hunting harvest. Hunters harvested 16.83 percent of the 3-1/2 year old does during the 1972 season. The non-hunting mortality data show only eight percent of this class were reported in 1973, Other degrees of variation were noted in the older age classes, but these may have been due to small sample sizes (Table 1). The following reproductive rates were calculated for the 36 deer collected 1 January through 31 May 1973: Age Class Yearling Two years Adults Number Females 9 9 18 Number Fetuses 2 12 31 Calculated Reproductive Rate 100 does : 22 fawns (1 : .22) 100 does : 133 fawns (1 :1.33) 100 does : 172 fawns (I :1.72) Table 2 presents an eight-year summary of reproductive data for the three age classifications from 1966 through 1973, The contribution of the yearlings per year is minimal averaging 0.24 fawns per year. The two-year-old class contributes an average of 1.40 fawns per pregnant doe per year. Most important is the adult class in which pregnant females average 1.72 fawns per year. Producing at a rate nearly seven times greater than the yearlings and nearly one third better than the two-year class, the adult segment plays a highly significant role in the total fawn production W-35-Pv- 15:11-3 Table 1. The age composition and percent per age class of harvested female deer checked at biological deer stations ( [mainland) December 1972 and thir- ty-six female deer mortalities collected January through May 1973. Age at No, in Percent Age at No. in Percent Harvest Sample of Sample Parturition Sample of Sample 6 raos. 90 29. .70 1 9 25.00 1-1/2 57 10. .81 2 9 25.00 2-1/2 56 18. ,48 3 6 16.67 3-1/2 51 16. ,83 4 3 8.33 4-1/2 22 7. ,26 5 3 8.33 5-1/2 14 4. ,62 6 1 2.78 6-1/2 10 3. .30 7 3 8.33 7-1/2 2 .66 8-9 2 5.55 8-9-1/2 wm « ■ ... 10-;- 10-1/2 1 .33 Table 2. A summary of the reproductive rate data per age c lass of thirty-six Massachu.setts female i deer mortalities ., 1 January 1966 to 31 May 1973. Yearlings Sample Not No. Annual Size Size Presnant V Pregnant Favms Pveproductive Rate 1966 16 9 7 11 0.69 1967 12 1 11 1 0.10 1968 14 2 12 2 0.14 1969 25 5 20 5 0.20 1970 37 4 33 4 0.11 1971 27 6 19 8 0.30 1972 21 7 14 7 0.33 1973 9 2 7 2 0.22 Total 161 38 123 40 2.09 Mean 20.13 4.75 15.38 5 0.24 Two-Year-olds 1966 4 3 1 5 1.25 1967 10 9 1 12 1.20 1968 12 11 1 16 1.33 1969 16 16 0 23 1.44 1970 15 14 1 20 1.33 1971 16 15 1 26 1.63 1972 11 11 0 17 1.55 1973 9 8 1 12 1.33 Total 93 87 6 131 11.06 Mean 11.63 10.88 .75 Adults 16.38 1.40 1966 18 17 1 31 1.72 1967 10 10 0 20 2.00 1968 20 17 3 32 1.60 1969 35 32 3 63 1.80 1970 28 23 5 47 1.67 1971 41 39 2 70 1.71 1972 29 26 3 49 1.69 1973 18 17 1 31 1.72 Total 199 181 18 343 13.91 Mean 24.88 22.63 2.25 42.88 1.72 W-35-R-15:II-3 and therefore the overall size of the Massachusetts deer herd. A summary of the 1973 corpora lutea and fetus counts is presented in Table 3, No analysis of the corpora lutea data will be made at this time because of the sample size and the necessary assumptions made to obtain the count. It was interesting to note that 50 percent of the two-year-old fe- males were carrying twins and 66 percent of the adults were carrying twins. One adult was carrying a set of triplets, A breakdown of the sex of the deer fetuses per age class is as follows: Age No. Does Sex of Fetus Male Female Total No. Fetuses Yearling Two years Adults 2 7 17 26 2 6 4 16 15 24 19 2 10 31 43 The sex ratio for the 1973 fetus collection (24 males: 19 females) was 126 males to 100 females. This was somewhat disproportionate to the expected 106 males to 100 females. It is possible that the small sample size collected during the 1973 period tends to make the data uncertain or question- able. During the five -month collection period (1 January through 31 May 1973) 88 female deer mortalities were reported by Natural Resource Officers. Of the 88 deer, only 36 females or 41 percent of the mortalities were collected and examined by project personnel. No deer were collected from Nantucket or Ifertha's Vineyard during the five-month period. Recommendations: It is recommended that Division personnel continue to col- lect, compile and report reproductive data pertaining to the Massachusetts deer herd. It is recommended that project personnel present a deer project activity slide lecture at each of the Natural Re- source Law Enforcement Districts before 1 January 1974. It is felt that such lectures might stimulate interest and increase personnel cooperation between the deer project and the field officers. W-35-R-15:II-3 Table 3. two-year-old ant 31 May 1973. d adult fem^ lie deer In Ma ssachuse ittS , 1 Jai Age Number Pregnant Females Number Corpora Lute a Number Fetuses Single Twins yearlings 2 2 2 2 Two years 8* 14* 12 4 4 Adults 18 37** 32 4 12 Triplets * Ovaries missing but assumed that at least one current corpora lutea present per fetus. ** A three-year-old (at parturition) doe had two current corpora lutea and may have been in the early stages of pregnancy as no embryos were found. W-35-R-15:II-3 It will be necessary to train some person or persons (NRO or MSPCA) to collect the lower jaw and complete re- productive tract of female deer mortalities occurring on Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard in order to determine the reproductive rates for the islands. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved: __________________________________________ Colton H. Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by James J. McDonough, Game Biologist and William J, Minior, Assistant Date I JOB PROGRESS REPORT State Cooperator: Project No. : Job No. : Period Covered: Summary: Massachusetts Government Documents Col.ection NOV 14 1973 University of Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W*35-R"15 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey II-4 Job Title: Management of the Massachusetts Deer Herd 1 July 1972 to 30 June 1973 Sex and age data collected at ten biological deer checking stations were expanded for the three deer management units. The 1972 statewide shotgun deer harvest was 1,256 males and 760 females. There were 199 button bucks reported from 4 December through 9 December 1972. The number of Mainland antlerless permits was reduced from 6,000 to 4,000 permits in 1972. The reduction should re- sult in an increase of antlered males in 1974. The 1972 harvest of deer per square mile of deer range on the Mainland remained unchanged at .3 deer. The Martha's Vineyard harvest per square mile increased from 2.5 deer In 1971 to 3.1 deer in 1972. On Nantucket Island, the harvest changed from 4.5 deer per square mile in 1971 to 3.5 deer in 1972. The calculated statewide minimal deer population for 1972 was 11,336 deer. Non-hunting deer mortalities are greater than the reported harvest in the Eastern group of counties. The effect of the antlerless permit system of harvesting and controlling a deer herd is demonstrated on Nantucket Island, There was a slight increase of adult buck harvest per square mile on the Mainland and Dukes County (Martha's Vineyard and the Elizabeth Islands). A planned reduction of the adult male harvest continued on Nantucket. The number of adult females in the harvest decreased on the Mainland and Nantucket. There was a slight increase in the adult doe harvest in Dukes County. The percent frequency of adult females to adult males de- creased on the Mainland and Nantucket Island. The percent frequency of adult females to adult bucks increased in Dukes County, Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent, #5146 W-35-R-15:II-4 Background : Deer herd management recommendations are presented. Starting in 1966, successful Massachusetts deer hunters have been required to bring their deer to an official deer checking station within 24 hours to be recorded. Deer checking stations have been operated by Division personnel since 1948. Ten check stations are operated as biological stations at which sex, age, weight and antler beam diameter data are collected. Objectives: Findings: In 1967, an an tier less permit deer hunting system was initiated to control the hunting pressure on the female segment of the deer herd. The deer project leader recom- mends the number of permits to be issued after examination of herd age composition, reproductive rates, annual removal rates, hunting pressure and the deer harvest per square mile of deer range. To estimate the size of the deer herd in Massachusetts and to recommend management techniques, A summary of the sex and age composition collected at the biological deer check stations per deer management unit from 1967 through 1972 is presented in Table 1. This table includes the 1971 and 1972 biological data collected from Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard islands. Figure 1 presents the Massachusetts deer harvest per square mile of deer range per county for the six-year period, 1967 through 1972, In Berkshire and Franklin counties .5 males were harvest per square mile of deer range, while the harvest in Barnstable, Hampden and Hampshire counties was .3 males per square mile of range. The Eastern group of counties consisting of 2271,6 square miles of deer range produced a reported harvest of 34 bucks, Franklin County, X7ith a harvest of ,3 females per square mile of deer range, can be interpreted as a county with heavy hunting pressure. The highest deer harvest on the Mainland with ,8 deer per square mile of deer range was found in Franklin County, Because of the small reported harvest for the Eastern group, the data were deleted from Figure 1. The Eastern group, considered a deer management problem area, consists of the following counties: Bristol, Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, and Plymouth, The Eastern group non-hunting deer mortalities (P-R W-35-R-13 and 14: II-2, 1971 and 1972) show that there were 85 non-hunting deer mortalities in 1971 and 61 non-hunting mortalities in 1972. The reported legal deer harvest for these years in the Eastern group of counties was 54 and 50 deer respectively. Although a portion of the 2271.6 square miles of deer range of the Eastern counties is not open to hunting, the reported deer harvest for this area is still below all expectations. CO § o ON vO CO ON ON CO s ON o ON ON vO ON CO vD ON VO ON I or«.vOf- lO cnI r-i i-h r-t vD . o <}■ VO VO T ON «d- .-1 l>* ON CM .-< r-l CM O O o o CM CO o CO ON CO VO r-4 O r-icor«»r>^c7»i-tr>*r^»-<0 CM VD <}• ON m CM r-< CM i-« r»»<7vCO00u0r-»^CM vo CO tn ON in CM «-< CM rH CM r-*covof>.tor«. ON m 01 CM •• to ^ 4J :>i Rl s vO 0 (C vO CO r-l •o r^ a o\ CO .-1 >< ti CO J 00 2 c : •H 3 ^ 9 u CO Q jC < o CO T-l CO ■u o H CM C7N CO § ft* ON 4J . CO »-l 1-1 rH u C7N CO r-l f>N CO CO ja ■u M cO CM mi-immvoi-icocMoo CO o I-l l>» <3N 1-1 CM -vf i-l rH i-l 0NrH^^^ I-* ■"^^ ^**S»^ CD y CO ►Q 0.5 • 5 ,»*' ■ 0.0 . 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year 1.0 0.5 Franklin 649.1 sq, mi. 1.0 0.5 Hampden 524.3 sq, mi. 0.0 _„_ J . ,_ , , 0.0- 67 68 69 70 "Tl~72 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year Year « 1.0 CO 0.5 J/J 0.5 ►Q • tS • 0.0 Hampshire 431.5 sq. mi. 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year Worcester 1307.6 sq. mi. 1.0 0.5 0.0 z:1^--'- •"-■---- 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year Barnstable 290.5 sq. mi 1.0 0.5 0.0' 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year Mainland 6213.6 sq. mi. Dukes 86.5 sq. mi. Nantucket 35.9 sq. mi. 6.0 CO '^ CO 3,0 0.0 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year 6.0 3.0 0.0 - 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year 6.0 3.0 /\ / .^. y 0.0 \ X 67 68 69 70 71 72 Year o n O > Oi 0> P a t-' I-' I-' c o o n »-' c c c rt I-* f-" I-* (a 01 ca B rt rt a 03 a> m m f-« Ou C^ cu fO 5 0) 01 rr H- a a 03 P c c fi H- I-" H- < 5 rt ft n> &) w M f-h B rt (D 03 •a ^ H-" o (0 n> T3 H- c fD -o I-* o 0> -o -o rt O c !-•• X} (-» o c 03 0 h-" rt 03 H' rt o p- 3 0 3 >-• 4>> ro h-* V M w w ui o ro I-- ^ 00 CO o t-» (jJ t-» 0^ n o n > 03 03 01 O' ►-» v-* >-■ c O O o h-* c c c ft (-• t-* (-• 03 03 01 § rt rt rt fD (D «) I-* O^ cu a fD B 03 03 3* p. a D. 0) P c c >-t p. f_4 M < B rt ft rt) 03 CO H- hh 3 rt n> w •o a h-» o oS (0 •O f- c n> T) h-* o 03 -X) X) rt o c H- TJ h-" O C 03 3 M ft 01 H« rt O H' 0 O 0 ON ro to V V w H- h- o o 00 vO CO !-• Ui 00 ON «^ 00 VO ON ■«J -}- ^- -:- .'« VO o ^ ON 3- (D 4> W i-« 1-' •vj 03 M r>o t-» "^ Un 1 3 O • • • • l-OQ (D W VO o w VD O 3 ^ N) C/1 Ui ON CO rt Ul Ul W H- 00 N5 to »-• tf W V V l-» V W V V M O N5 f- W v£) •Vj VO J> O VO h-' VO Ui ^ •vl 4> ON M N> ON -!>• v£> JS 00 o O 4> O Ni 00 ' 1 t 1 NO O oj 3* rt) •f -}- V »" VO O 0> 3- (D N> to ro I-- O 01 n U) OJ Od to 00 01 »-! to to ■^ vo 1 3 o Ui Un l-J «^ 1 3 n • • • • •"-•CW n • • * • h-CW rt) VO VO ON »sj VO n> 3 O M VO H* VO rt) 3 U3 U1 CO OJ ft t-* VO Ui o ON VO ft H-* J> U) h-" W V w w f-« 00 o »-* to VO O O 00 vO ON V/1 "vj O VO VO 1 1 -!- -}- VO o •^ 3^ n -^ ■>- * 1 -J- VO O ON cr to h-. H' 03 *^ ro CO VO 03 i-t to w o u> 1 3 n •vi to O ON 1 3 o • • • • l—OQ rt) • • • • »-'(W rt) o ON •vj Ul VO fD 3 (-• to 00 o VO rt) 3 (jj -vl OO ON to ft 00 ■f> to 03 o ft (-' u> to I-- Oi Vyi U) I-* » u W 4# 1-' w w «t w 1-' U> VO "^ to VO o to I-* u> VO UJ W <-n Ui •^ l-» VO <-n "si •^ ON W Ul ON to JJ- VO 4> 00 o or § (D 3* (0 CO 01 o c 01 rt rt) Q. B 3 I O TJ C ft o 3 CO O o. n> rt) •-{ vD vO vO VD VO VO •^ <^ vg ON C3N ON to t-» O VO 00 *^ lO h- W to O CO Ln O •vj VO to 00 ON ON 00 VD to CJN l-i io to »-* VO Ui to lO ON Ul VO W O Ui I-* LO to lO to to H-« h- W «* W V w «* to to U> O Ul H- »-» 4> ON !-• VO *^ Ui 00 "^ O w to Ln "vj ON ^ ro to W «* V «* «> V W to -J ON U) to to -vj 4> VO U3 W ON O *«J Ln h-» ON rt) 03 »1 J2 « w w u «« Oi > 4> U> Ln ^ O VO h-" h-* Ul U1 VO to 00 U) rt) l-» Ui VO CO •{>• w *^ CD S^ CL h- c fD h-* CO ft c c o rt ?r rt CO O 3 *ri rt) *J 00 >g «-n W to B ON 00 ON 00 t-- Ul 01 O VO VO ON o U1 1— • rt) CO > Ln ON ut js ro i-« Q a W ^ 4i* M (-• ON 03 c O Ul ON Ul "^ 00 t-' t-* n> rt m •n (D to to to 1— p *^ W 4> to ^ VO ON 03 SJ O CT\ LO (-• W -^ I-* s: (D 3 CO O H fD O rt) ft ft 03 CO rt) H CO f-i o c B ^ n) f-u (J Q* ft »-• CO H 03 cr rt) to CO c 03 n o 3- fD s 03 CO CO 01 n 3* C CO rt) ft rt CO a. n> o n 3* 01 t-t < rt) CO ft cr CO 3- O ft OQ C 3 VO ON v4 ft 3* t-t O c CO 3- VO to •n 2; (D c n s B cr |j. ro ft •i CO ro r-* ro VO 4> ON W **J ON Ul Deer Harvested Hundreds Ln Q V/1 to h-« u> VD «jl) o> h-* c» ^ h-» o> VO VO o> Ui VO VO o •sj f-» ro VO ^ VI 0 »-■ 01 t-" U> VO NS •»J ON ro (D CO &> o cr D* •1 CO 0 vc 1^1 W-35-R-15:II-4 A summary of the reported statev/ide shotgun deer harvest and the number of antler less permits issued per year from 1967 through 1972 is presented in Table 2. During the 1972 shotgun season successful deer hunters removed 2,215 deer from the statewide herd. Of these 1,256 vjere adult bucks, 199 were button bucks, 530 were adult females and 230 were female fawns. Five thousand three hundred twenty-six antlerless permits were issued for the 1972 shotgun deer hunting season, a decrease of 1,944 permits from the 1971 deer season. Figure 2 shows in graphic form a summary of the Massachu- setts deer harvest per year and the number of antlerless permits issued from 1967 through 1972, It can ba seen that the deer harvest peaked in 1970 when 1,373 adult males and 989 females and button bucks were taken, A total of 6,747 antlerless permits were issued for the 1970 season. This was an increase of 2,052 permits above the 4,695 permits issued in 1969. In 1971, the number of permits was increased to 7,270 permits or 523 permits more than the 1970 total of 6,747. With each increase in the number of permits issued from 1969 through 1971 the rate of increase of the adult male harvest decreased X7hile the antlerless (button buck-female) harvest increased, A summary of the percent change in the adult male harvest and the calculated minimal populations of deer in Mass- achusetts from 1967 through 1972 is presented in Table 3. The minimal deer population was calculated using a formu- la based on the percent of 1-1/2 year-old males removed to the total adult males reported at the biological check stations (W-35-R-12:II-4, 1970). From 1967 to 1969 the percent change of the adult male harvest, the calculated adult male and female populations and the calculated minimal population show an annual increase. The rate of increase of the percent of change for all categories de- creased from 1969 to 1970 and continued to decrease into the 1971 deer season. The number of antlerless (sports- man) permits issued for the 1972 season was reduced on the Mainland to 4,000 permits. The percent change for all categories increased from 1971 to 1972. Tables 4 and 5 present a summary of the adult male and fe- male harvest of deer per square mile of deer range per county in Massachusetts from 1967 through 1972, The sensitivity of the permit system of harvesting deer is discernible in both of these tables. The number of antlerless sportsmen's permits issued in 1972 was reduced from 6,000 permits to 4,000 permits on the Mainland, The purpose of the reduction of permits was to decrease the female harvest in counties producing the bulk of the deer harvest. Table 4, A summary of the adult male deer harvest per square mile of deer range per county in Massachusetts, 1967 through 1972, Square Miles County Deer Range 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 Barnstable 290.5 .14 .15 .20 .28 .28 .26 Berkshire 839.0 .27 .37 .44 .44 .42 .45 Bristol 422.6 .01 .01 .01 .01 .002 .007 Essex 344.4 .03 .03 .04 .06 .03 .05 Franklin 649.1 .27 .35 .39 .39 .36 .43 Hampden 524.3 .13 .19 .24 .22 .20 .25 Hampshire 431.5 .16 .25 .27 .26 .15 .23 Middlesex 583.1 .02 .01 .02 .02 .02 .01 Norfolk 277.3 •»«■«» w ^ «■ .01 --- Plymouth 544.2 .03 .02 .03 .02 .01 .02 Worcester 1307.6 .11 .06 .14 .15 .07 .09 Total 6213.6 .12 .14 .18 .19 .15 .18 Dukes Nantucket 86.5 35.9 .71 .65 .72 .91 1.01 1.18 1.34 1.56 1.89 2.42 1.78 1.36 Table 5. As ummary of the adult fema le harvest per square mil Le of d eer range per county in Massachusetts , 1967 through 1972. Square Miles Couhty Deer Range 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 Barnstable 290.5 .03 ,02 .06 .10 .09 .09 Berkshire 839.0 .04 .06 .12 .16 .23 .13 Bristol 422.6 .005 .002 .002 .002 Essex 344.4 .006 .003 .01 .03 .003 .003 Franklin 649.1 .07 .11 .14 .15 .27 .22 Hampden 524.3 .02 .03 .06 .06 .08 .07 Hampshire 431.5 .04 .06 .11 .11 .07 .08 Middlesex 583.1 .002 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 Norfolk 277.3 .004 «•«>«* .004 Plymouth 544.2 .002 .01 .01 .01 .002 --- Worcester 1307.6 ,02 ,02 .05 .07 .05 .03 Total 6213.6 .02 .03 .06 .07 .08 .07 Dukes Nantucket 86.5 35.9 .14 .10 .18 .36 .67 .89 .17 .14 .97 1.67 1.53 1.11 W-35-n-15;II-4 In Barnstable, the adult female harvest remained unchanged with ,09 deer per square mile while the antlered male dropped .02 deer from .28 in 1971 to .26 in 1972. The harvest of adult females in Berkshire shows an expected drop of .10 from .23 in 1971 to .13 deer per square mile in 1972. The adult male harvest in Berkshire County in- creased from .42 in 1971 to .45 in 1972. In Franklin County, the slight reduction of .05 adult females from .27 deer in 1971 to .22 in 1972 indicates considerable hunting pressure. The antlered buck harvest in Franklin County showed an increase of .07 deer from .36 deer in 1971 to .43 adult males in 1972. The adult male harvest increased slightly in Hampden, Hampshire and Worcester Counties during the 1972 deer season as compared to the previous season. The adult fe- male harvest for these counties decreased slightly during the 1972 season except for Hampshire County which had a .01 deer increase from .07 in 1971 to .08 deer in 1972. The remaining counties; namely, Bristol, Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk and Plymouth, with exception of Middlesex, shot? slight increases in the antlered male harvest. The changes in the adult female harvest for these counties were from no harvest of females to .001 deer per square mile of deer range. It is quite evident that there is very little hunting pressure in these counties or the hunters are not reporting the taking of a deer. Harvest data seen in Table 4 and 5 show that the adult male and adult female harvest in 1972 on Martha's Vineyard in- creased ,17 male deer and .22 female deer per square mile over the 1971 harvest. This was the second year of the antler less permit system of hunting v;ith 600 permits issued for Martha's Vineyard only. With the completion of the 1973 deer hunting season a solid foundation of permit deer hunting for this island will have been completed, provided that the number of antlerless permits remains at 600 permits , The harvest of adult deer on Nantucket has progressed as expected with the harvest of 1,36 adult males and 1.11 adult females per square mile of deer range. Four hundred (400) antlerless permits were issued for Nantucket Island from 1969 through 1972. The harvest of adult deer on Nantucket Island clearly demonstrates the effectiveness and sensitivity of the antlerless permit system used in manipulating and controll- ing a deer population. During the first two years, 1967 and 1968, of the statewide antlerless permit system of harvesting deer, there were relatively few adult females harvested on Nantucket, The harvest data in Table 5 show that ,17 and .14 adult females were reported per square mile in 1967 and 1968 respectively. The antlered male harvest during these same years was a healthy 1,34 and W-35-R-15:II-4 1,56 bucks per square mile. To cope with the increased deer herd on the island and bring the herd size into balance, 400 antlerless permits were issued for the 1969 deer season. As expected, the Nantucket adult female harvest increased from ,14 deer per square mile in 1968 to ,97 deer in 1969, The adult buck harvest continued to increase 1,56 in 1963 to 1.39 males per square mile in 1969, The peak of the deer harvest on Nantucket occurred in 1970 when 2,42 antlered males and 1,67 adult females per square mile were recorded. The predicted decrease in the adult harvest of the Nantucket deer herd occurred with the harvest of 1.78 bucks in 1971 and 1,36 antlered males in 1972. (The peak was 2,42 bucks in 1970.) During the same two-year period (1971 and 1972), the female harvest decreased from 1.67 does in 1970 to 1.53 in 1971 and 1.11 adult females per square mile in 1972. It is planned to bring the adult male to female harvest close to a one-to-one ratio for Nantucket Island during the 1973 deer season. The number of antlerless permits issued for any future year can be adjusted to hold the one- to-one ratio and maintain the herd in balance. Table 6 presents the percent frequency ratio of adult fe- males to adult males per county from 1967 through 1972. The results of the 2,000 permit reduction on the Mainland in 1972 is evident in Table 6, With the exception of Barnstable and Middlesex, all counties show a lower per- cent frequency of females being harvested in 1972 compared to the 1971 percent frequencies. The effect of the 1972 permit reduction should show as an increase in the Mainland male harvest frequency in 1974. The percent frequency of adult females to adult males in- creased slightly on Martha's Vineyard but decreased slight- ly on Nantucket Island during the 1972 deer hunting season. The data documented in this report indicate the need for the continuation and the expansion of the antlerless permit system of harvesting deer in Massachusetts. By expanding the system to its full potential of a county or regional distribution of permits, it will be possible to maintain a harvestable deer herd in Massachusetts , How many deer hunters are there in Massachusetts and where do they hunt are questions often asked of project personnel. The answers given of an estimated 45,000 to 55,000 deer hunters is based on an expanded card survey conducted over 20 years ago. In order to expand the antlerless permit system to its full potential the big game license would be a useful tool. f vO 0) CO H CM o ON ON CO vO ON l<4 Pl4 3 (U tX4 •U pi* 3 a u (14 in D •O Fl4 ■U PC4 vDOrOvOi-tCTNinco cnoonoiAcMcom o o 3 u fn ■u Pm 3 < o o r^ eg »-< CM ^ f-i 00 t vO ON 00 ON 00 >-« 00 vO CM CO ON CO <)■ oo-vj-O'-'r^-d'ON 00 VO CM m i-« »-< CO CM r-l r-» CM O m r-4 «. ^ CO CO -I-I O ^-1 u f-< 3 O vO CO CM o in o in in o CO m m in C3N ON CO C>J in vO r-l CM CO CM vO CO CO CM CO o CM 00 00 C7N I-I ON vO VO \^ *if fH vj 1^ \\f *v ;»-» ^^ ' — ■ w^ v^ CQPQmWf>*ffJKSSP^cn:3: CO o H o o o o o o m vO o o o « VO o o o o o o t CM o o o CM I to JJ U CO O 4J to B M-l 0) o a! • a O CO s s «n eg o vo 00 in 00 <3N CO CO ON VO CM VO CM VO vO C3N vO m o CM CM VO O o vO O O vD CO 3 a I CO ■u U CO o u CO 6 u O DJ O CM 00 O ON VO CO in m VO cr» VO o VO 00 o o <3- O O o o vn m CO 00 vO ON o m VO m CO VO 00 O O o 3 u C CO 4J U CO O 4J a. < CO B u IM (U o a o CM CO * o CM so in C3N VO CO CO CM CO CM CM U J3 E 3 C CO O iw H O to u B u (U I to I u i CO CO ^ £/\'dZ3'^ i\j^^^'i^-(^'/7ir- PERFORMANCE REPORT State Cooperator : Project No. : Job No. Period Covered: Summary: Objectives: Procedures: Findings: Goveinmsnt DocurnerkS Cohection NOV 14 19/3 University cf Massachusetts Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-16 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey III-2 Job Title: Spring Quail Census 1 July to 31 July 1973 The 1973 spring quail census in Barnstable, Bristol, and Plymouth counties showed no statistically significant difference (t.05) in call indices from the 1971 average, or from a four-year (1958-1961) average. To determine the dynamic aspects of quail population densities and distribution. Roadside whistle counts were conducted during the first two weeks of July 1971 following established procedures and routes. The resultant call indices were corrected for temperature variations (Bennitt, 1951; Ripley, 1956) and tabulated and analyzed on a county basis. Counts for all three counties were compared with 1971 indices, and with a four-year (1958-1961) index. Changes in annual counts were analyzed for statistical significance and the results reported accordingly by counties. The 1973 weighted call indices as compared to those from 1971 and the four-year average are shown in Table 1, Computation of the tests of significance and comparisons of the indices by county and route are shown in Tables 2, 3, and A. The 1973 indices were lower than those from 1971 in all three counties. These changes were not statistically significant (t.05) for any of the counties. None of the 1973 call indices showed a statistically significant difference (t.05) from the 1958-1961 average. Call indices were lower than the average in Barnstable and Plymouth counties, and higher in Bristol County. The addition of two routes in Bristol County is probably responsible for the increase in this index . Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 a o •r-l CO t-l 3 a o « 3 O* CO *J fj cu CQ a s: V CO tfl CO m o CO ^ C 3 O o 0) r-l ►a CO H r- C3^ x-^ .— 1 in (U (U 0) o o c c d • 4J o o o ■u s Z a v«/ CO CU as M i-i ti CO J3 U I--4 ^ vO c 1 1 CO CO t) in •H cr^ «4-l --I o (U (U t4 C3 G d d o o O o &c 4-) z S :a •H CD ON « fO CD CO CM vO r> tJ en m »n GN d • « • d 3 O u CM X f-l . T? m CM O CJN d • • • l-H *a- CM CM cy> 0) r-l m CJN VD •T3 . O o vO cn VO -o CJN in M CM o , CO 1^ rH pq « P^ CO u c u to C4 (1) O 3 O vO vO vO vO -d- m o lo m i^ CM • • • • • m CT\ r>. r«- o> CO CO 1 -o CO CO n r-< r>* II ir» vO 1 . CM 1 • CM CM -y lO CO cs^ CM CO r-t CM o> CM 1-1 II 1-1 •<1- CO CM o r-«. in o c7^ v£> (T\ CM CO CM CM V.O O m CO o 11 I X O 00 t-t CO CM CM vO ir> 00 CM m • • m 1-4 VO CM r-4 Cvl 1 li in CM • CO ON CO so 0^ CM 1-4 CO S • • CO LH II II ^-s ./-> « « m U-4 • • TJ •o CO CO Si-' \— ' m t-M o o ■u> -u CO « CO C3% O . CM • • m <7\ CO CJ^ 00 < 5-1 CO IH I }-l 3 O CO CO C3N 4J d O u 0) r-4 CO 4J d CO fcCi > I o 4J 3 O Pi vO vD vO o ■^ uo o m in r^ CM • • • • • ^-v UO CO CM O t-^ CO l-O CO VO >-^ CM VD r-4 r-4 O CM d • T-l CM • o •<|- II 11 . . o CTi CM VO II CM O CO II CM CO 1 1 o en C O O (0 •H CO • • O n !3 o (U 1-) 4J ^ 3 C3 o H C4 VO 'X) vO vO t—i r-- o o o i^ O O K) CM O I— 4 CM •— * »-^|vO un m f-4 H i-« f-l vD r^ f- 00 I-* CM o CO CO o m in i-t CM as It <}■ r«. CM m CO r- 00 » « r*. t^ 1 I-t CO <3 m m vo CT\ i-l CO CO I'D CM CO vO o « vO CO m CM ca I 3 O P4 -o c CO CO G 3 O o o 0} CM I P in in CM CM • • o o m in • 1-1 o r^ o m •* 1 m vO r^ vo • 11 II II II in CM ^-s /-v • • • o O IH 14-4 in m m • • » I^ O o CO CO o ON i-l CM > > CO 1—4 to CO > 5-t I •vT CO CO CO CO CO VO vD ON CN 1-4 1-4 I I CO CO uo m c^ c^^ r-l f m CO m f-i II o »t-i CM II o q; ■u 3 O < in m vo ON I-t CO CO 4J -u o m m CM • • o o o m 0^ x* sS- CM II II o o m m • • m o --1 o • o o CM ON ON CO ^ ^ II II II •o «^-^ CM Q Its CO CO CM V-' On d en r-. r- b u O IT) Q I o p^ . c CO • CM il 00 00 . 1 it CO -i St o m I I I CO 0> vO m * in m r-l II -.1 o-J o ON in cojr^ CM ON O COjO r-i fi en r-tJCO in 1^ o C«4 II CO CO CO • CO rH • >* rs vO \o m II CM o u 3 O Pi < tn VO CM CO t I -o II col col •1 CM r^ o CO vO r^ m r-s CM CM CM Q l-O w (/) VO cr. i-H t 00 m C?N (U 00 to u o > < u ca & I 9-1 O 'O a to CO f>. c 3 O 3 I CM I Q I'D I Q CO > o o O vO vO vO 3- vo m m i-H • • • • CM CM «». 1 CM CM f^ 1^ • • « « 11 II in r-4 : CO 60 C •H U 4J &. o CO f^ O ^ 5-1 3 H M O m .u « Q %>%>>>>!>•>%>.>%>. 0) u U »J M M >-i u ;^ M ■u CO CO CO CO ct 3 CO CO CO CO CO 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 r-t Q M :>^ U M U 9^ M M V4 •H X» XI Si ^ J3 XI X) Xi XI M . CO rH CM CM CN CM CM CM CM CM CM CM a> txi >, >. >% >, t^ >> >% >. u }-4 M ;^ !-i 9-4 M ^ CO CO CO 3 CO CO CO CO 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 )^ u U M M M !-i ;^ X) x> X> X) XI XI X) X5 0) 0) (U O CD 0 (U 0) Ft. 9-1 CMCMCMCMCMvOvOVOvOO CMCMCMCMCMCNCMCMCMCM A—s. /-N /""V z"^. r>. ^ >-/ s-/ CM 1-4 tH VOVOr-4r«.r-<»00 coinoooeMiriONCT>r*^0 cococTvcoc^lOu^^Al^Na• ssssssssap^ ^O 'O 'O 'O 'O r^ CO vo St in C3N cjN O CJN f-l CM o o c\ o o o CMCMCMCMCMCOCMCOCOCO lomuoiAioiAmminm I I I I I b^ H H I I I I I H H H H H O CM r-t CO . CO CO i-« t-i cys CO u u 0) XJ u (0 CO CO O -u >* S 3 5 O (U u u si C CO O U u a> CO 3 •» 00 d 3 O CO ?-l CO ■u CO 4J fcO d •I-» V4 O CO PQ A 9-1 CO CO Q) p^ »4 o (1) ■Ul •> CO -u 4J CO CO 0) >s S d [S4 CO C>0 o o u r-t CO < CO * d CO g 9-1 -P CO 9-« C8 CM Q) * r^ PQ ^ !.» CL n CO 6 w {U CO <1> » u o d 3 U (0 U r-l 60 D- < CU CO r-l U VH r-4 (H < CO O C7\ A ^ -o d o 3 JJ CO Ci eu CO < (U O O 9-« ta CO CO ij >^ >. CO o o ^ A5 tJ J^ u a 3 3 u 4J -P 3 U r-l rH CX t-t r-l CO < < o * * 4« 4C •C W-35-R-15;IV-l Recommendations ; 1. If possible, obtain some additional wild-trapped hens to complete the Beartown stocking. If the Beartown release is successful, transplant additional turkeys to other suit- able areas in the Berkshires, and elsewhere as suitable stock and habitat are available. Acknowledgments ; 2, Utilize only wild-trapped stock in future releases. Semi -wild stock such as in the Quabbin may remain un- disturbed unless interfering V7ith wild-trapped birds through potential cross-breeding. Occasional monitoring of the progress of these semi-wild flocksis advisable in case they should overcome their previous dependence on man. I extend my appreciation to Messrs. Lee DeGraff, John Proud, Steven Clarke, Quentin Van Nortwick, Fred Evans, William Shirey, and Clint Mount of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation for their assistance in securing wild-trapped turkeys, and to Dr. Wendell Dodge and Mr. Walter M. Tzilkowski of the Massachusetts Coopera- tive Wildlife Research Unit for their assistance in mon- itoring the Bear town releases. Prepared by; MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved ; ^ Colton H. Bridges Superintendent James E. Cardoza Assistant Game Biologist Date -X PERFORMANCE REPORT State: Cooperator: Project No.: Job No . : Period Covered: Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-15 V-1 Project Title: Job Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Hunter Utilization of Wildlife Management Areas 10 October 1972 to 31 May 1973 Summary: Objectives: Procedures : Total estimated hunter effort on thirteen wildlife manage- ment areas was 32,505 hunter trips, representing an increase of 1.9 percent from the 1971 effort. Peak usage occurred on the first Saturday, followed by the second Saturday, and opening day. Usage on a weekday after stocking was approximately 2,03 times that of a weekday after no stocking. Local hunters continue to be the heaviest users of wildlife management areas, although on peak days hunters in the 32- CO kilometer range predominated on two areas (Northeast, Myles Standish), and in the 80 plus range on a third area (Crane). Game bag information was collected on thirteen areas. On the twelve state areas, 4233 hunters were contacted of whom 1514 (35.3%) had taken at least one unit of game. Knovjn harvest on these areas totalled 1735 animals of nine species, Pheasant (1442, 83%) comprised the majority of the harvest, followed by quail (186, 10.7%) and woodcock (33, 1.9%). To determine hunter utilization, game harvest, and hunter success on wildlife management areas. 1, Government Docujuents Colection NOV 14 1973 t'niversiEy of Massachusetts Roving and stationary checking stations were used to collect hunting pressure and game bag data on fourteen wildlife management areas. Data were collected on the following peak days of usage: opening day, and first, second, fourth and fifth Satur- days, At Fort Devens, checks were made every day during the upland bird season. Data were collected on four additional days during the week, as follows: two counts on a day after stocking, and two when a stocking had not been done the previous Publication approved by Alfred C, Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 PJ-35-R-15:V-l day. Freetown was not stodoed during the week; there- fore, only two weekday checks are shown for this area. 4. Division of Fisheries and Game district personnel con- ducted checks on thirteen areas. The station at Fort Devens was manned by Department of the Army personnel. 5. Hunters using Fort Devens were required to check through a permanent station. Thus, hunting pressure on Devens is based upon this mandatory check of all hunters, and is consequently more accurate than on other areas where many access points and manpower limitations precluded the use of permanent stations . 6. Roving checks were used on the remaining thirteen areas. Checkers travelled by motor vehicle and contacted as many hunters as possible to determine the following: size of party, home town of the hunters, and amount and type of game bagged. 7. VJhere the roving check was utilized, the number of hun- ters was calculated by counting the total number of cars on the area for that check day, and multiplying this figure by the average party size. Party size was computed separately for each area each day, 8. Hunters were also asked to provide the name of their hometown. Concentric circles were drawn on a map of the state at 32 kilometer (20 mile) and 80 kilometer (50 mile) distances from the management areas, and the number of hunters coming from towns within each zone was noted. If a town boundary was intersected by one of these zone lines, the town was considered as being in the zone in which the mark indicating the town center was located, 9. Daily summaries of hunting pressure were made on mimeo- graphed check forms (^J-35-R-13, V-1, Figure 1). 10, Hunters on the thirteen state-checked areas were con- tacted to determine game harvest. When possible, hun- ters were contacted after completion of hunting rather than during the hunt. Checkers noted the total number of hunters contacted, the number unsuccessful, the number taking at least one unit of game, and the amount and species of game taken. Dally results were summarized on a mimeographed form. 11, In calculating hunter success, a successful hunter was defined as one who takes at least one unit of game. Findings: A. Hunter Effort The 1972 hunting pressure on fourteen wildlife management areas for peak day, weekday, and total usage is presented I7-35-R-15:V-l In Tables 1, 2, and 3. Total estimated season usage v/as 32,505 hunter trips (Marconi Beach area excluded). Hunter effort was greatest on the first Saturday, followed by the second Saturday, opening day, fourth Saturday, and fifth Saturday, Total weekend effort ranged from 0.82 (Myles Standish) to 3.56 (Crane Pond) times that of week- days (excluding opening day), and averaged 1,29. The average effort on a weekday after stocking was 2.03 times that of a weekday after no stocking. Although the 1971 rates (1.64) represented a slackening of the disparity between the two categories of weekdays (1970 ratio was 2.26), the past seasons figure indicates that sportsmen are able to anticipate or discern stocking dates regardless of a staggered stocking schedule. The estimated hunting pressure on the thirteen areas com- parable to 1971 data was 32,505 hunter trips (Table 4). This is an increase of 1.9 percent in total effort. Total hunter effort increased on four areas and decreased on the remaining nine. Major increases were at Barre Falls (-:-59.17o) and Myles Standish (+33.4%) , while consi- derable decreases were recorded at Housatonic Valley (-41.5%) and Stafford Hill (-32 .2%) . Changes on all other areas were less than 20 percent. The increase at Barre Falls occurred largely on peak days (opening day plus Saturdays); whereas, that at Myles Stan- dish was primarily on weekdays. The decline at Crane Pond took place entirely on weekdays, that at West Hill primarily on weekdays, and that at Winnimusset primarily on peak days. Crane experienced a gain, and Housatonic Valley and Stafford Hill a loss in both categories of days (Table 5). Remain- ing areas had an overall percent of change of less than 10 percent . B. Distances Travelled by Hunters Yearly comparisons of the distances travelled by hunters to wildlife management areas are presented in Table 6, As in the past, local hunters continue to be the greatest overall users of wildlife management areas, with a few areas being favored by more distant sportsmen. Five areas (four in 1970), Northeast, Myles Standish, Crane Pond, Crane, and Winimusset, had at least 25 percent of their peak day hunters travelling 32-80 kilometers. On one area (Northeast, 56%) hunters in this distance group pre- dominated, with a second area (Myles Standish, 48%) having a percentage equal to that of the 0-32 kilometer group. (0 >. ta (=) ^ o c o » CO TJ M )4 0) 3 JQ CO § W ^ J3 S 4J «4-l 00 ♦H T-« Fl4 CO U (U 4J S CO (U en > o 4J U r-l 3 i-< O >> CO T3 Vl V4 3 (U ■P WQ CO o W ■u •o (B § CO u CM (U CO CO 13 U U in »d- vD m r* T-t O \£> CM f-4 a\ so F-l CO r^ r>. OS O in CJN r-* r>» • O m CM 00 \o ■. CO CM r*. O t-« CO • • r^ cy* in in rv 00 o VO CM r-4 •<*• i-i CM rH CM CM O . «* vO o\ in r-l O r^ CM o\ CO r«. m r>* ^ V «-l *c: t-4 ^ CO CO i-( o •H > I-I CO •d •H CO CO c G) c TJ o Ed c 1-4 I-I o ■p w CO ■p •H g 4J o CO c tJ > CD •I-i CO r-l CO •H CO (X( CO o }-l (U ►4 33 73 •H CO o c O ■M o Q U p:2 3 CO » ^-1 o O ■u o CO •H 3 a; •H O O fo s s o s K CO Cn FQ PQ !X! & :s H 1 to (U C o 0) 60 CO CO O u CO 3 CO CM O i-i CO H CO 0) 5 CO SI u o 4-1 CO o s ■p < CO i CO c o (0 0) u < •>Tf~4r-lr-lvOr-4r-4CMin04CM CM I VD 00 CTv CO ON CM CO CM O o as r>» CO CO 00 001 CM 00 o|co "«* in|r-i CO CM r» r-l VO r-< CM 1-4 in I I S CO vD o CO m O r-l a\ CM CM Csl VO o rs,(r^ cM|s;f|r-i <3N C3N CO CM CM O CM CO I >» cu r^* U2 r^-JC xa CO ,-< •rl > rH •2 •H CO c na o a r-( t-4 *_ CO C 4J •H l-» f-l c •U O CO c na CO i-« 3 CO P-t CO O }^ fa s O Qi 4J o o; iJ ta 0) ja C8 cw N M o O U CO •H U fa SOS K CO PQ PO g ■U I-I CO t-4 CO rO CO W & 12 4J 0) CO CO I CO p-< CO o H CO O • CM n o •H 4J CO in in Cv4 II « X m CO in CO m n vO CO O u o 00 CO CO o H O CO u u o H CO CU & o (U 4J CO • • o CO >,«r) >> r-< tJ CO g d (U CO 0 (U I CO M CO o en V r-l cd H CD 12 ■M Cd OS t2 cd o H cd^ w >>! cd Q c •H 0) CO > >J 1 > cd < •n >.0^ cd CM Ta •ii « 0) ^ ir» C4 i>> CM CM 00 m 00 ON r^ in ON CJN ON o r*» m o v£) vo CO ■3C cd C a 4J o Bco P-( cd 0) +j CO 0) 02 cd iw C . M O O .-<* cd t-4-5C > --I* •H CO owe ■u ♦H cd O v< O Q) 4J O p 4J O CO C5 r-l r-l O r-4 r-l 4J Cd -H CO P4 K T3 u Qi 4J O u >> CO Cd cd C -O cd M ^ o >> 0) Xi O "TO w e C cu O -M CO ^ cd o CO O ■u C t-4 3 cd O 3 U 4J O ts cd cd 'O r-l ^ Cd OJ o 0) 60 a o 4-1 (3 u OS t-i 0 O u u 3 (A CO o 1^ t3 iJ I TO W 0) CO CO 0) o u 0^ 4J CO W • RJ 'tf i Cv| r-4 r^voinor^cscMin«-ir«.ONvor*. r^r*»>lvo incovooevj.r-4d-ev|CNJi-« >^ o T-4 XI ^ m c3 f-t 1-1 J> «-* •T3 -H CO CO C S '2 "5=5 c ,-4 .-• O 4J ctf C +J -H Q) 1-4 ,-4 +j 1-4 CO •!-< CO 1-4 CO SS CO (^ R} O Vl cu fa 33 tJ 'H CO O > >J O O 4J o d 'H 3 . RJ RJ (U "B R] CO RJ u o 0) Rj CO O RJ § fi •rH (U 00 c R] o ■u c o u Q) fa in 0) I— I s> R5 H Ml C CO x: o +j c a> o M 0) fa CM CO i-l >, Rj I 01 C RJ 4J c (U o »^ fa CM |c a\ CO I-l >» RJ RJ fa t-4 OS u-»m-r-lr-ICMLnCMCMCM c:oooNvOf-4r>*cM o^^^D<^0 rOf-4incMincgcncMiricMcnd" vo en r^ O ^O CM 4- -!- -h I «.eM^o>>o Ofnt-icoinr*«.«-it-4CMcrifOin CMr-4% r-* Rj •o •H CO C CO c 'Q U S 1-4 r-4 O 4J 3 RJ C ■u •H t-4 •-4 4J 1-4 0) 4J o CO C 'O Rj •H CO r-4 CO CO fa RJ o u fa K -0 •ri CO W) CU 4J O !j ffi 3 Rj CO 01 x: Rj 4-1 (U ^ RJ a M -l O ^ 4J T-l O r-4 RJ S-I d Rj ^4 ^J rO CO c > >, M O 5 ••-» Rj •H 3 -< H >* 4J > a c CO e o u o H •-• CO «H CO ij u: Q) c V4 <-• c to nH 3 U W m H CM >» 4J cn .o c O C "S O CO ■-« a H t-4 P^ o > CO M H a> o c CO 4^ CO VO (0 •§ O (0 ^S 60 U C 0) •H 0 r-4 O d- CM CM CO CO • CM m 0/161 CM CM O CO 00 1 1 ^961 O CO CO o VO r-l o 1-4 ^^ ON 1 i 9961 CM CM CM 00 vO vO Sj- CM r-4 CM St CM O f r.4 1 S961 CM CO ^ VO vO CO i-l CO CO 1 1 2^61 t-4 CO CO St <}• in 3 vO 0^ o o F-l CO vO CO CO vd- t-4 ON 1^61 00 1-4 r* f-i 1^ ^ vi> CO o o 1-4 in • CO 00 ON VO in •. i>s <> r^ ci 6961 1-4 CO VO CO CO vO CM r-l CM >d- vo in 1 CO 1 8961 VO CO CO o CO CO r-l in sJ- in o VO r-l i ON 1 ^961 in CM as CM CM O VO CM VO r-l 1 <7N 1 9961 CO CM 00 CM St F-4 s* vo in 00 vo r*. 00 1 5961 CO CM CM CO vO r4 1 ON 1 CO is u o PC4 Myles Standish Crane Pond 4J CO CO 0) 4J Housatonic Valley Stafford Hill 03 r-4 1-4 to u u CO m Birch Hill Hubbardston West Hill Winirausset (U r4 & 6 to CO (U to ro r-4 CM o 7 u • CM -»- to o o n m to n s J " •H CM 00 -O CO 1 + a • CM O O CO CO I ■a 1 'H H o CO c a O J3 ^^ H P4 CO c to •H »^ f-« 0) (U 4J > v « s 1^ o H 1-4 •H ■u M C 0) o o 00 V4 t r-4 CO •H ^ t^ H CM c 0) c: u a u Xi 0) H p-i 2Z6 1^6 696 896 L96 996 S96 ZL6 016 696 896 /L96 996 596 2/:6 IZ6 0L6 696 896 2196 996 596 (U i-40r-400oomooooo CO CO i-< CO Or-lOOO I Ot-lOOO m I N* I o CO I UO I O i ft I O 00 I r-l I o es I vo CO »oo(>»coo»-4ir> ■it CO >d' CM CM C3^ln^-lI-^cy^mOvC)fOlAOO^^ CO mmCO r-*t-4CM r-4 r*.ocou->coo I coinouoco CM m «-! m t r-i CM CN| coi»-4ir«>.i iirjooocoi <}• I m I . lO I locoinuo I CM CO m I St I I CM CM I coooit-ii il lOr- cMOunvoiooocooooooNix. comoc\»-<<}'0«*cMir»vo«M CMONCO> si- CO CO I t>. «4- o I ON r» 00 I O CM ON I ■^f CO •-» I CM i-« 1-1 I CO m vo I o »-* in I 00 ON 1^ I <^ 00 in I ON v£> 00 I o CO r^ I ON vo r^ in CM o\ r^ O I in I ON I o I O I CO I CO •H 4J O 3 cn P-« w o C .IJ }^ >^ h o 03 > u e o (0 U-t CO U-l o 4J U Pc4 ^ U S S c/^ CO r-l i-« Ctf <1> u u c} a o o CO •o u ■w CO 4J CO CO i c •H 15 •a t-4 !■ CO (0 o C CO . r>. r>^ r^ r^ (^ r~> r- r^ r^ r-~ ON cy» o^ On o^ ON 3N ON ON On ON ON Area - Dates I— 1 I— 1 1-4 1— 1 t-i r-* r-l r-4 1—1 r-* r-4 r-4 Housatonic Valley 3WD 2T Opening Day 20 10 2 2M 2m 25 16 Saturday (4) 51 57 1 2 52 59 Weekday after stocking (1) 19 14 I 20 14 Weekday after no stocking (1) 5 1 5 1 Totals 95 82 1 1 4 5 4 102 90 Stafford Hill* Opening Day 8 8 Saturday (4) 31 31 Weekday after stocking (1)** 4 4 Weekday after no stocking (1) 3 3 Totals 46 46 ; it Barre Falls Opening Day 7 2 9 Saturday (4) 16 16 Weekday after stocking (2) 5 1 6 Weekday after no stocking (2) 2 2 Totals 30 1 2 33 Birch Hill* Opening Day 25 2 2 29 Saturday (4) 185 2 11 13 211 Weekday after stocking (2) 36 2 2 40 Weekday after no stocking (2) 16 1 5 22 Totals 262 2 16 22 302 it Hubbardston Opening Day 12 1 13 Saturday (4) 86 1 87 Weekday after stocking (2) 14 14 Weekday after no stocking (2) 3 3 Totals 115 2 117 Game Harvest - Birds (2) 95 535 2 1 17 1 30 5 4 102 588 * Area not sampled in 1971 WD = Wood Suck M = Mallard T = Teal ** Two weekdays each category in 1971, one each in 1972. Table 7 (Cont.)* Game Harvest on Twelve Wildlife Management Areas, 1971 and 1972. Ruffed Wood- Water- Subt otal Game Pheasant Quail Grouse cock fowl Birds t-i CV4 t-« CSJ i-i cs r-l CM r-l CM i-H CM f^ r*. r>- r^ r>i t^ r^ r^ r^ r^ r-. t^ r-4 t-l 1-1 (TV OS t-4 i-i West Hill Opening Day 16 16 Saturday (4) 77 77 Weekday after stocking (2) 9 2 IBD 12 Weekday after no stocking (2) 5 5 Totals 107 2 1 110 Winimusset Opening Day 40 11 1 41 11 Saturday (4) 108 79 2 5 115 79 Weekday after stocking (2) 16 12 16 12 Weekday after no stocking (2) 17 14 17 14 Totals IGl 116 3 5 1C9 116 Game Harvest - Birds (3) 181 223 3 5 2 1 189 226 Birds (2) 95 535 2 1 17 1 30 5 4 102 588 Birds (1) 371 684 66 184 10 10 2 1 1 449 880 Total Birds 647 1442 66 186 14 27 8 33 740 1694 * Area not sampled in 1971 BD = Black Duck Table 7 (Cont.)» Game Harvest on Twelve Wildlife Management Areas, 1971 and 1972. Game Cotton- tail Rabbit 1-4 CM 1-1 r-i White Hare IN. r^ a\ ON Squirrel r-4 r-t Fox i-l CM cr» cr> Subtotal Mammals f-4 CM Area** Totals Area - Dates cr. CM Crane Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (2) Weekday after no stocking (2) 2 2 2 2 2 2 29 134 60 7 22 159 28 1 Totals 2 4 2 4 230 210 Freetown Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after no stocking (2) 1 I 18 56 Totals 1 1 74 Myles Standish Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (2) Weekday after no stocking (2) 2 1 2 1 31 162 47 Totals 3 3 240 Northeast Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (2) Weekday after no stocking (2) 2 5 1 1 IW IG 1 3 1 7 1 32 137 48 , 8 32 196 63 6 Totals 3 5 1 2 1 4 8 225 297 ,* Crane Pond Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (2) Weekday after no stocking (2) 6 60 7 2 Totals 75 Game Harvest - Mammals (1) 5 12 1 2 1 1 6 16 455 G96 * knQB. not sampled in 1971 ** Includes birds total carried forward W - Woodchuck G = Gray squirrel Table 7. (Cont.)« Game Harvest on Twelve Wildlife Management Areas, 1971 and 1972. Game Area - Dates Cotton- tail Rabbit f-« CM ON 0\ White Hare i-« CM i-i i-i Squirrel Fox r-< CM r-l CM 0> C> 0> ON ,_J ,_) ^ n-t Subtotal Mammals f-l CM r-l f-4 Area*** Totals r-4 CM Housatonic Valley Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (1) Weekday after no stocking (1) 2 1 1 4 2 1 1 4 25 54 21 5 17 63 14 1 Totals Stafford Hill* Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (1)** Weekday after no stocking (I) 3 5 1 3 5 1 105 95 8 32 4 3 Totals Barre Falls* Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (2) Weekday after no stocking (2) 1 1 1 1 1 1 47 9 17 6 3 Totals Birch Hill* Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (2) Weekday after no stocking (2) 1 2 12 IG 2 I 13 35 30 224 40 22 Totals it Hubbardston Opening Day Saturday (4) Weekday after stocking (2) Weekday after no stocking (2) 1 1 1 12 1 14 1 1 316 14 87 14 4 Totals Game Harvest Mammals (2) 3 2 9 14 1 3 2 24 105 119 612 * Area not sampled in 1971 ** Two weekdays each category in 1971, one each in 1972. *** Includes birds total carried forward. G = Gray squirrel Table 7 (Cont.)« Game Harvest on Twelve Wildlife Management Areas, 1971 and 1972. Cotton- tail White Subtotal Area Game Rabbit Hari e_ Sqi] lirrel Fox Mammals Totals i-i CM 1-* •CM r-l Cvj r-* CM •-• c^ f* CM r^ r«- r^ t>» r-^ r*. r^ r^ r>. f^ r>. t^ a\ o\ 0^ ON a\ C3N (7> ON C3N Area - Dates 1-1 r-* 1-i 1-1 1-1 r-l i-< f-« r-l 1-4 r-4 •-I West Hill Opening Day 16 Saturday (4) 2 2 79 Weekday after stocking (2) 12 Weekday after no stocking (2) 5 Totals 2 2 112 Winimusset Opening Day 1 1 41 12 Saturday (4) 2 2 117 79 Weekday after stocking (2) 16 12 Weekday after no stocking (2) 17 14 Totals 2 1 2 1 191 117 Game Harvest - Mammals (3) 2 3 2 3 191 229 Mammals (2) 3 9 14 1 3 24 105 612 Mammals (1) 5 12 1 2 1 1 6 16 455 896 Total Mammals 10 24 15 3 1 1 11 43 Total Harvest 751 1737 * Area not sampled in 1971. ** Includes birds total carried forward. ? > • . & \J-35-R-15:V-l Woodcock were taken on six areas, with the largest harvest again at Birch Hill (22). Cottontail rabbit and white hare were harvested on nine and three areas respectively, with Northeast and Housatonic Valley tied at five each for the most cottontails, and Birch Hill providing the most hare (12). Harvest of the remaining species of game was scattered. For the four areas comparable to 1971 the harvest decreased slightly on Crane and Housatonic Valley, decreased con- siderably at Winimusset (189 to 116), and increased some- what at Northeast. Since stocked rather than native game is the primary attraction at management areas, these fluc- tuations in harvest are likely attributable to changes in success due to increased competition, or to changes in hunting pressure due to weather conditions, rather than to fluctuations in native game populations. The game harvest for Fort Devens from 1969 to 1972 is pre- sented in Table 8. This represents a complete count, since military regulations require sportsmen to check in and out of the area. Hunter success for the twelve sampled wildlife management areas is presented in Table 9. Success percentages were calculated for opening day, Saturdays (four combined), days after stocking (two combined), and days after no stock- ing (two combined) for each management area, and for the total of all areas combined. Combined hunter success for all areas was 35.3 percent. Combined success for the four areas (Crane, Northeast, Housatonic Valley, and Winimusset) comparable to previous years was 35. 8%, the highest percentage attained during the past three seasons (1971, 32.5%; 1970, 29.2%). Success was greatest on days after stocking (45.7%), followed by Saturdays (36.7%), opening day (28.2%), and days after no stocking (22.3%). For the twelve areas combined, and for the four areas comparable to previous years, these percentages show a decrease in opening day success, and an increase in success for the remaining three categories of days • For comparable areas, success increased by 10 percent at Crane, and decreased slightly at Northeast and Housatonic Valley. Winimusset showed a decrease of 6.7 percent. Overall success was greatest at Birch Hill (54.1%), followed by Crane (51.4%), Myles Standish (49.2%), Hubbardston (43.0%), and Winimusset (37.7%). On the remaining areas, less than one-third of the contacted hunters were success- ful, vith the poorest success being recorded at Barre Falls (13.6%). Table 8. Game Harvest at Fort Devens Wildlife Management Area: 1969-1972. Number Taken Per Check Period 10 Oct. to 8 Dec. 1969 to 11 Oct. to 10 Oct. to Game 30 Nov. 1969 15 Dec. 1970 28 Dec. 1971 31 Dec. 1972 Pheasant 751 676 461 391 80 46 61 110 86 162 37 39 36 58 34 30 32 23 23 147 94 256 7 3 Fox 1 2 IThlte -Tailed Deer 2 3 Ruffed Grouse 62 Woodcock 112 Ducks (inclusive) 42 Cottontail Rabbit 10 White Hare 9 Gray Squirrel 33 Raccoon Total Harvest 1,019 1,143 795 962 Table 9. Hunter Success on Twelve Wildlife Management Areas: 1970-1972, 1972 Percent Number of Number Taking Percent Hunters at Least One Percent Successful Successful Area - Dates Contacted Unit of Game Successful 1971 1970 Crane Opening Day 63 32 50.8 38.5 62.5 Saturday (4) 299 156 52.2 41.5 33.4 Weekday after stocking (2) 41 24 58.5 54.9 40.8 Weekday after no stocking (2) 11 1 9.1 11.8 19.0 Totals 414 213 51.4 41.4 35.7 * Freetown Opening Day 70 17 24.3 Saturday (4) 199 55 27.6 Weekday after no stocking (2) 23 0 0.0 Totals 292 72 24.6 Myles Standish Opening Day 42 18 42.8 Saturday (4) 203 109 53.7 Weekday after stocking (2) 57 25 43.8 Weekday after no stocking (2) 7 0 0.0 Totals 309 152 49.2 Northeast Opening Day 121 27 22.3 29.3 25.3 Saturday (4) 593 160 27.0 29.0 2G.2 Weekday after stocking (2) 96 52 54.2 41.2 34.0 Weekday after no stocking (2) 42 6 14.3 18.2 11.1 Totals 852 245 28.8 29.8 28.0 Crane Pond Opening Day 35 5 14.3 Saturday (4) 171 49 28,6 Weekday after stocking (2) 18 6 33.3 Weekday after no stocking (2) 19 2 10.5 Totals 243 62 25.5 Area not sampled prior to 1972, Table 9 (Cont.)» Hunter Success on Twelve Wildlife Management Areas: 1970-1972. 1972 Percent Number of Number Taking Percent Hunters at Least One Percent Successful Successful Area-Dates Contacted Unit of Game Successful 1971 1970 Housatonic Valley Opening Day 47 13 27.6 36.7 31.8 Saturday (4) 172 51 29.6 35.7 27.1 Weekday after ^^ stocking (1) 15 10 66.7 29.8 43.8 Weekday after no stocking (1) 3 1 33.3 14.7 9.1 Totals 237 75 31.6 32.1 20. 3 Stafford Hill* Opening Day 42 8 19.0 Saturday (4) 122 27 22.1 Weekday after stocking (1)** 17 4 23.5 Weekday after no stocking (1) 9 3 33.3 Totals 190 42 22.1 Barre Falls Opening Day 45 9 20.0 Saturday (4) 177 18 10.2 Weekday after stocking (1) 20 6 30.0 Weekday after no stocking (1) 22 3 13.6 Totals 264 36 13.6 Birch Hill* Opening Day 81 30 37.0 Saturday (4) 378 226 59.8 Weekday after stocking (2) 81 40 49.4 Weekday after no stocking (2) 48 22 45.8 Totals 588 318 54.1 it Hubbard St on Opening Day 29 14 48.3 Saturday (4) 163 73 44.8 Weekday after stocking (2) 15 10 66.7 Weekday after no stocking (2) 28 4 14.3 Totals 235 101 43.0 * Area not sampled prior to 1972. ** One weekday each category in 1972, two each in previous years . Table 9 (Cent.), Hunter Success on Twelve Wildlife Management Areas: 1970-1972. 1972 Percent Number of Number Taking Percent Hunters At Least One Percent Successful Successful Area - Dates Contacted Unit of Game Successful 1971 1970 West Hill Opening Day 67 9 13.4 Saturday (4) 252 75 29.8 Weekday after stocking (2) 42 11 26.2 Weekday after no stocking (2) 43 5 11.6 Totals 404 100 24.3 Winirausset Opening Day 31 8 25.8 55.5 26.8 Saturday (4) 163 63 38.6 43.5 36.1 Weekday after stocking (2) 29 9 31.0 52.6 42.2 Weekday after no stocking (2) 37 18 48.6 28.1 20.0 Totals 260 98 37.7 44.4 35.0 itic Totals (all areas) Opening Day 673 (262) 190 (80) 28.2 (30.5) 37.1 32.5 Saturday 2392 (1227) 1062 (430) 36.7 (35.0) 31.3 28.9 Weekday after 431 197 45.7 41.7 35.2 stocking (181) (95) (52.5) Weekday after 292 65 22.3 17.9 12.1 no stocking (93) (26) (28.0) Total (all days) 4288 1514 35.3 32.5 29.2 (1763) (631) (35.8) * Area not sampled prior to 1972. v«ft Comparable area figures in parentheses. W-35-R-15:V-l Opening day success exceeded 33 percent on four areas (Crane, Myles Standish, Birch Hill, and Hubbardston) . The highest success for a single area day-category was at Housa- tonic Valley and Hubbardston with day-after-stocking per- centages of 66.7. Recommendat ions : 1 . 2. For 1973, discontinue checks on the Crane Pond area and initiate checks on the Delaney area. Consider shifting utilization checks from an annual to a biennial schedule in 1974. Prepared by MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved by Title Col ton H. Bridges Superintendent James E. Cardoza Asst. Game Biologist Date PERFORMANCE REPORT State: Cooperator : Project No,! Job No.: Period Covered: Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-15 VI-1 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Job Title: Black Bear Population Dynamics 1 June 1972 to 31 May 1973 Summary: »u t . jf'^ents Ll NOV 14 19/3 fiiversity of Massachusetts Objectives: Procedures : For the first time since 1969, a bear was legally taken in Massachusetts. The bear, a female, was taken in Savoy on the first day of the season. Another bear was killed illegally, in Royals ton, during deer week. There were 423 bear permit applications in 1972, the greatest number since the requirement was initiated in 1970. Appli- cants were contacted by postal questionnaire, and a response of 345 (82,17o) was achieved. There were 213 persons who did hunt bear, of whom 96 had hunted bear in previous years. The average bear hunter expended 16.8 hours in 2.4 days. Reports of bear were collected from questionnaire results, and Division and cooperator records. To date, reports of 449 bear noted on 365 occasions in 73 tov7ns have been collected for the period 1952-May 1973. Franklin County yielded the majority of reports (143, 40.4%) followed by Berkshire (124, 33.9%), Hamp- shire (59, 16.1%), Hampden (18, 4.9%), Worcester (16, 4.4%), and Middlesex (1, 0.3%). To define the range of the black bear in Massachusetts and to determine its population characteristics and rate of harvest by hunting. Current bear hunting regulations include mandatory reporting and tagging of bear. Bear checking stations were maintained daily during bear week at three locations (Birch Hill, Temple- ton; Montague Fish Hatchery, Montague; and Western Wildlife District Headquarters, Pittsfield). Station personnel were directed to affix a metal game seal to harvested bears and to determine the following: town bear killed in, date killed, sex and weight of bear, and method of kill. A mimeographed form was provided for recording this information. Successful hunters were subsequently contacted by the project leader to remove a tooth for sectioning. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35-R-15:VI-l Bear hunters were required to obtain a free (fifty cents be- ginning in 1973) bear hunting permit from the Division of Fisheries and Game, A total of 423 permits were issued for the 1972 season. Permittees were subsequently contacted by postal questionnaire to determine their interest and partici- pation in bear hunting. Applicants were also asked to list any bear sightings they had made on previous occasions. The Information and Education Section issued periodic news releases asking for reports of black bear. Responses to these requests, replies to the questionnaire, and voluntary reports from other individuals were tabulated and mapped as an aid to determining bear distribution. Findings: For the first time since 1969, a bear was killed, legally in Massachusetts. A 74.8 kilogram (161 pounds) (hog-dressed) female was taken in Savoy on the first day of the season. An additional bear, a male, was shot illegally in Royalston during deer week. In 1972, there were 423 bear permit applications received from 421 individuals, as opposed to 214 requests in 1970, and 200 in 1971. One 1972 permit was returned as undeliverable. Appli- cants represented all counties except Dukes. The greatest number of applications from a single county was from Hampden (90, 21.4%), followed by Berkshire (63, 15.0%), Middlesex (58, 13.8%), Worcester (46, 11.0%) and Franklin (38, 9.1%). Eight other counties and two other states (New York and Connec- ticut) comprised the remaining 120 applications. A questionnaire was mailed to each of the 420 individuals re- ceiving a bear permit. A total return of 345 was obtained from two mailings of the questionnaire (Table 1). In 1972, 213 individuals stated that they hunted black bear during that season (Table 2). Of these, 187 indicated that they hunted specifically for bear, while the remaining 26 replied that they only incidentally pursued bear while bow- hunting for deer. An additional 40 persons replied that they had hunted bear in previous years, but were unable or unwilling to go in 1972. There were 116 hunters (54.5%) who stated that they hunted bear for the first time in 1972, as opposed to 49 (52.1%) in 1970. Ten hunters stated that they had bagged a bear in Massachusetts In previous years. No special attempt was made to determine the reasons for lack of participation by non-hunters. Some volunteered this infor- mation and stated that they wished to hunt, but were ill or out of town. Others felt the season was too short, and did not allo^; them enough time for a worthwhile hunt. W. 35-R-15:VI-l Table 1. Summation of Responses to 1970 and 1972 Bear Quest ionnaires 1970 1972 Total number of permits Issued Returned first mailing Returned second mailing 214 420 131 207 46 133 177 (82.7%) 345 (G2.1%) Table 2. BreakdoTt7n of Responses to 1970 and 1972 Bear Questionnaires 1970 1972 A. Hunted bear in specified year 94 (53.1%) 213 (61.7%) Did not hunt bear in specified year 80 (45.2%) 123 (35.7%) Returned unusable 2)/i 70/ v 5)ro a<7\ Undeliverable ^^d-^/o) ^^(-^-^/o) 177 345 B. Hunted bear for the first time in specified year Hunted bear in specified year - has hunted previously No response Hunted in previous years - did not hunt in specified year 49 (52.1%) 116 (54.5%) 45 (47.9%) 0 96 1 (45.1%) (0.4%) 94 213 25 40 119 253 W-35-R-15:VI-l Bear hunters were further asked to account for the time they expended while bear hunting. Total expenditure by the 210 hunters replying to this question was 3507 hours in 513 days. This is a mean of 16.8 hours in 2.4 days, per hunter. The unweighted mean number of hours per day per hunter was 6.76 (6.22 in 1970). The bear season ran for six days, from Monday, 20 November to Saturday, 25 November. Hunter effort was greatest on Saturday (151 hunters, 30.8%), followed by Friday (84, 17.1%), Monday (83, 16.97o), VJednesday (62, 12.6%), Tuesday (11.4%), and Thursday (11.2%). Pressure on Friday may have been skewed upward by the fact that Thursday was Thanksgiving Day, and some people had Friday as an additional holiday. Ten hunters (plus two who did not hunt in 1972) indicated that they pursued bear with dogs . The remaining hunters searched about in areas where they had seen bear sign, or followed bear tracks, or took a stand in an area where bears had been seen. Sixteen hunters saw a bear during the legal season. One of these succeeded in killing a bear, two others treed a bear, but refrained from killing it, and two others (both bow-hunters) shot and missed. The remainder either stated that the bear was out of range, or gave no reason for not shooting. Hunters pursued bear in 63 tovms in five counties during the 1972 season. Hunting pressure vjas greatest in Franklin County (128 hunters, 44.0%), followed by Berkshire (99, 34.0%), Hamp- shire (32, 11.0%), Hampden (17,' 5.0%), and Worcester . (15; 5 .2%) . Some sportsmen hunted more than one county, consequently, they are counted more than once. Hunters were asked if they investigated an area for signs of bear prior to the season. There were 200 responses to this question, of which 148 indicated the hunter did check out an area. Hunters were further asked to state the type of weapon they used. All 213 of the 1972 hunters replied. A rifle was the predomi- nant weapon (167), followed by bow and arrow (26). Thirteen used both rifle and bow (on different days), six employed a shotgun (an illegal weapon), and one hunter used no weapon, preferring only to run his dogs on bear. Reports of bear sightings or bear tracks were listed by 178 persons. These are included in the following section on bear sightings , Additional comments or remarks were presented by 164 respondents. The most prevalent of these are tabulated below (Table 3). W-35-R-15:VI-l Table 3. Hunter Comments, 1972 Bear Questionnaire. Category/Comment Number Hunters Season length - 71 Extend season 62 Close bear season 5 Other comments (3) 4 Timing of Season - 48 Have bear season same as deer season 15 Have earlier season 10 Don't have bear season same as deer season 5 Don't have bear season same as Vermont 5 Don't have bear season during archery season 5 Have later season 5 Other comments (3) 4 Regulations - 16 Allow Sunday hunting 5 Allow use of shotgun 5 Allo\r7 sldearms 4 Other comments (2) 4 Administration - 21 Provide information on bears and bear hunting 16 Other comments (5) 5 Management - 7 Stock bear 6 Maintain habitat 1 Populations - 6 Bear increasing 2 Bear decreasing 2 Other comments (2) 2 General Comments - 31 Volunteers assistance 10 Favors study of bear 8 Other comments (11) 13 F-35-R-15:VI-l All available recent (since 1950) reports of black bear are being aggregated and mapped to aid in determining bear dis- tribution in Massachusetts. To date, records of 449 bears reported on 366 occasions in 73 towns have been collected. Bear reports were categorized as sightings (224), sign and tracks (117), kills (23) and other (road kill, nuisance kill) (2). The distribution and approximate density of bear reports in 73 towns in six counties is presented in Figure 1. The number of reports per county and the highest towns per county are listed in Table 4. Table 4. Black Bear Reports by County and Town, 1952-1973 A. Berkshire: 124 (33.9%) Florida (29) Hancock (7) Peru (6) Savoy (18) Windsor (U) Other 21 towns (53) B. Middlesex: 1 (0.3%) Ashby (1) C. Franklin: 148 (40.4%) Ashfield (18) Charlemont (12) Colrain (15) Hawley (29) Monroe (13) Rowe (17) Other 13 towns (44) D. Hampden: 18 (4.9%) Blandford (6) Granville (4) Russell (4) Other 3 towns (4) E. Hampshire: 59 (16.1%) Chesterfield (19) Cummington (10) Huntington (6) Worthing ton (8) Other 8 towns (16) F. Worcester: 16 (4.4%) , Petersham (3) Warren (3) Other 7 towns (10) F-35-R-15:VI-l Until 1970, hunters taking a bear v;ere not required to report their kill to the Division. An approximation of the past harvest has been gathered through questionnaire results and voluntary reports (Table 5). Table 5. Known Black Bear Harvest, 1957-1972 * Town Peru Heath Charlemont Florida Florida Savoy Savoy Florida Florida Rowe Savoy Monroe Florida Rovye Chesterfield Hawley Monroe Windsor Worth ingt on Char lemont Savoy Royals ton Date Deer week 1957 1958 1961 1964 1965 1965 December 1966 1967 1968 Fall 1968 Fall 1969 November 1969 17 November 1969 3 December 1969 Deer week 1969 Deer week 1969 Deer week 1969 Deer week 1969 Deer week 1969 Deer week 1970 20 November 19^g Deer week 1972 * Does not include one unconfirmed illegal kill in 1971. ** Illegal kill Recommendat ions : 1 , 2. Continue gathering reports of bear sightings, and checking of harvested bear. Aggregate data on current distribution and status and historical data collected under Job VI-2, and publish results in a research bulletin on the history and status of bear in Massachusetts. More detailed re- commendations on future bear management will be pre- sented at that time. J F-35-R-15:VI-l Acknowledgements: I extend my appreciation to Mr. William Zurrin of Pittsfield for his contribution of a bear skull. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AiqD GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved by Colton H. Bridges Title Superintendent Prepared by Date James E. Cardoza Asst . Game Biologist >s bZ?^-^ ^-5^'(^-/(^( r-^ ^^[) PERFORMANCE REPORT State Cooperator: Project No. : Job No . : Period Covered: Summary : Objectives: Procedures ; Findings : Sovemment Documents Collection JUN 51974 Massachusetts Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-16 1-2 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Job Title: Statex^ide Beaver Harvest 1 November 1973 to 31 May 1974 A total of 1,639 beaver v/ere trapped by 123 trappers in 106 towns during the 1973-1974 beaver season. This take, the second highest on record, is 35 less than last season and 456 more than a ten-year (1964-1973) average. Berk- shire and Franklin Counties together yielded 888 beaver (54.2 percent of harvest). Over one half (53.6 percent) of the beaver were taken in the first two weeks of the 15-week season. To determine the statewide harvest of beavers by trappers. Each successful beaver trapper is required by law to pre- sent his pelts to an official checking station for tagging and recording of data. Seven stations (six prior to 1974) are maintained for two days at the close of the season. Pelts are tagged with locking metal game seals and harvest data are recorded on mimeographed forms and subsequently tabulated by month trapped, town and county trapped in, and type of trap used. The 1973-1974 beaver trapping season extended for 15 weeks from 15 November 1973 to 1 March 1974. During this period, trappers took 1,639 beaver. This take was only 35 less than last season's record take and was 456 more than a ten-year average (1964-1973). There were 123 trappers (105 in 1972-1973) taking a minimum of one beaver each, with a mean harvest of 13.3 beaver per trapper (range: 1 to 128). Beaver colonies located in 106 towns contributed to the 1973-1974 harvest (Figure 1). The fifteen towns with the largest individual seasonal harvest are listed in Table 1. The western region of the state continued to provide the majority of the beaver harvest. However, during the cur- rent season, the take in the eastern region increased slightly over that of the previous season. During the 1973-1974 season, 1,058 beaver (64.6 percent) were taken west of the Connecticut River and 581 (35.4 percent) were taken east of the river, as opposed to 1,148 (68.6 percent) and 526 (31.4 percent) during 1972-1973. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 * •>.« ?• ; >^:K^ I W-35-R-16:I*2 Table 1. Beaver Harvest for Fifteen Towns, 1969-1974 Seasons Town 1968-69 1969-70 1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 1973-74 Ashfield 20 14 2 53 50 60 Becket 41 20 10 51 57 52 Blandford 10 22 16 29 78 37 Cummington 13 11 5 8 2 38 New Marlboro 32 14 1 52 69 64 New Salem 11 10 27 10 56 61 Otis 36 18 14 64 72 72 Petersham 52 18 27 58 57 66 Sandlsfleld 49 13 8 52 6 62 Sheffield 30 12 7 10 26 37 Shutesbury 5 4 - 8 20 40 Tolland 31 - 2 37 48 35 Washington 9 27 7 55 27 37 Windsor 16 19 14 36 26 41 Worthlngton 7 30 14 52 54 79 .'t.. W-35-R-16:I-2 Table 2. Beaver Harvest by County, 1972-73 and 1973-74 1972 .-73 1973 -74 County No. Beaver Percent Rank No. Beaver Percent Rank Berkshire 461 27.5 1 518 31.6 1 Essex 15 0.9 7 16 1.0 8 Franklin 446 26,6 2 370 22.6 2 Hampden 227 13.6 5 148 9.0 5 Hampshire 253 15.1 3 288 17.6 3 Middlesex 35 2.1 6 51 3.1 6 Plymouth 5 0.3 8 17 1.0 7 Worcester 232 13.9 4 231 14.1 4 Totals 1,674 100.0 1,639 100.0 Table 3. Beaver Harvest by Month, 1972-73 and 1973-74 1972- -73 1973- -74 Month No. Beaver Percent No. Beaver Percent November 633 37.8 878 53.6 December 544 32.5 492 30.0 January 356 21.3 185 11.3 February 141 8.4 84 5.1 Totals 1 ,674 100.0 1 ,639 100.0 During the past season, Berkshire and Franklin Ctountles together yielded over half (888, 54.2 percent) of the total harvest. Hampshire, Worcester, and Hampden Counties contributed another 667 beaver (40.7 percent) with three additional counties comprising the small remainder (Table 2). Six counties reported no beaver taken. The harvest in Berkshire County Increased by 12.4 percent over 1972-1973 and in Hampshire County by 13.8 percent, while the take in Franklin and Hampden Counties decreased by 17.0 percent and 34.8 percent respectively. County rank- ings remained essentially unchanged. As in past years, success was greatest during the initial weeks of the trapping season (Table 3). Over one half (54.2 percent) of the beaver were taken in the initial two weeks (15-30 November) of the season, as opposed to ap- proximately one third (37.8 percent) of the 1972-1973 take occurring during the equivalent period. The take declined each month thereafter, with only a minimal harvest (5.1 percent) in February. Use of the Conlbear trap remains relatively constant, with two thirds (1,091, 66.6 percent) of the 1973-1974 harvest gained by use of this trap. The average price of a Massachusetts beaver pelt declined slightly from $20 in 1972-1973 to the current price of $18. Due to the near-record total harvest, however, the total season valuation of $29,502 is the second highest on record. Recommendations : 1. Continue tagging of beaver pelts and recording of harvest data in 1975, using the same methods as in the current segment. 2. There has been some comment from trappers concerning the travel distance required to check pelts. Should this continue to be a difficulty, considering the current energy situation, some alleviation may be provided by permitting cooperating sporting goods shops to tag beaver. Precedent for this has been established by mercantile cooperation in the checking of deer. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved: Colton H. Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by James £. Cardoza, Assistant Game Biologist Date i JOB PERFORMANCE REPOJltv^ - r*^^ State Massachusetts Cooperator Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game Project No.: W-35-R~16 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Job No.: II-l Job Title: Statewide Deer Harvest Period Covered: 5 November through 12 December 1973 Summary: The dates, type of hunting season, and the deer harvest by season for 1973 is as follows: November 5 and 6 - Paraplegic season - total harvest, 0; November 5 through November 24 - archery season -total harvest, 77; December 3 through December 8 - shotgun sea- son, total harvest, 2037; and December 10 through December 12 - smooth bore muzzle loader season - total harvest, 7. Grand total - 2121. The following number and type of antlerless deer permits were issued in 1973: Sportsman - 4000; Farmer-Landowner - 349; Nantucket - 400; and Martha's Vineyard - 600. The cost of an antlerless permit application was 50 cents in 1973. Prior to this time, the application was free. During the 18-day box^r season, archers harvested 77 deer. Of these, 51 were males, 26 were females. Shotgun deer hunters harvested 2,037 deer. Of 1,654 taken on the mainland, 1,114 were adult males, 106 were button bucks and 434 were females. On Nantucket Island, shotgun hunters harvested 68 adult males, 22 button bucks and 65 females; a total of 155 deer. Ttro hundred one deer were taken on Itortha*s Vineyard. Of these, 74 were adult males, 31 were button bucks and 96 were females. The Gosnold Island harvest was 2 adult males, 4 button bucks and 21 females . Five males and 2 females v/ere reported taken during the special three-day muzzle loader season. The total statewide 1973 shotgun season harvest was 2,037 deer consisting of 1,421 males and 616 females. The top three deer producing counties were Berkshire, Franklin, and Dukes. Sixty-three percent of the statewide harvest was removed from the four western counties (Berk- shire, Franklin, Hampshire, Hampden). Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35-R-16:II-l Approximately 44 percent of all deer harvested (086) during shotgun week were taken on Monday, the first day of the season. Of the 836 deer, 663 (75%) were males and 223 (25%) were females. The following Is a breakdo^m of the 1973 shotgun deer har- vest by management unit: Martha's Mainland Nantucket Vineyard Gosnold Total Adult Males 1,114 68 74 2 1,258 Button Bucks 106 22 31 4 163 Females 434 65 96 21 616 Totals 1,654 155 201 27 2,037 Background : Massachusetts has had an antlerless permit, she >tgun only; hunting season since 1967. Male deer with antlers three Inches or longer are legal game for all hunting license holders. A hunter must have been Issued an antlerless permit to harvest a button buck or a female deer. The dates of the four Massachusetts deer hunting seasons are as follows: Date November 5 and 6 November 5 through November 24 December 3 through December 3 December 10 through December 12 Type of Season Paraplegic Archery Shotgun Smooth Bore Muzzle Loader No. of Days 2 18 6 3 Objectives: Findings : Three deer management units have been established; the mainland, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. The number of sportsman's antlerless permits Issued per unit was as follows: the mainland - 4,000; l-Iartha's Vineyard - 600; and Nantucket - 400. Deer hunting regulations require that all hunters report their deer kill within 24 hours at an official Division deer checking station. There is no Sim- day hunting allovzed in Massachusetts. To determine the annual harvest of deer in Massachusetts. Table 1 presents a ten-year summary (1964-1973) of the annual deer harvest. Data for 1964 and 1965 were reported by hunters on a voluntary basis; mandatory reporting regxilations have been in effect since 1966. There were no deer harvested during the ttro-day paraplegic hunt, November 5 and 6, 1973. During the 18-day archery season, November 5 through November 23, 1973, archers harvested 51 male and 26 female deer. The archery harvest of 77 deer exceeds the 1972 harvest by one deer. W-35-R-16 : II-l Table 2 summarizes the archery and primitive weapons har- vests. The 1973 shotgun deer harvest was 2,037 animals of both sexes. The total statewide harvest of deer in all season categories was 2,121 deer. Of these, 1,477 were males and 644 v/ere females. The l65 button bucks hairvested are included in the male total. A simmiary of the 1973 deer harvest and the county rank of importance in the harvest is presented in Table 3. The three top deer-producing counties have remained un- changed for the past three years. Worcester Coxinty moved to fourth place while Dukes dropped to the seventh slot. Hampden County has ranked fifth in three of the past five years . Sixty-four percent of the 2,037 deer harvested were taken in the four western counties — Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden, and Hampshire. Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket accounted for 19.4 percent of the harvest (396 deer), while Worcester County, largest in the state, yielded 211 deer (10.4%). The remaining eastern counties accounted for 6.2 percent of the total harvest (136 deer) . Table 4 shows the daily harvest of deer for both sexes. Eight hundred eighty-six deer or 43.5 percent of all deer harvested are taken on the first day of the season. Three- fourths of the first day's harvest is in males. The nianber of males harvested exceeds the female harvest throughout the shotgun season. However, the percent of total female harvest in the last four days of the season exceeds the corresponding daily percent of total harvest in the male segment of the kill. The most significant data in Table 4 is the comparable rate of harvest of females and button bucks. Apparently, a hunter with an antlerless permit does not show selectivity with respect to the size of the deer he harvests, but the data in Table 4 do suggest that a hunter with an antlerless deer permit may pass up an antlerless deer early in the season and shoot any antlerless deer during the last two days of the season. Table 5 presents a nimber of deer harvest summaries of archery and shotgun seasons from 1967 through 1973. In- cluded in Table 5 is the success ratio per type of antler- less permit. There was no significant increase in the 1973 archery har- vest of 77 deer compared to the 1972 harvest of 76 deer (Table 5). The breakdown of the deer harvest by management units shows a slight increase in adult males on the mainland with the predicted reduced harvest of button bucks and fe- males (Table 5). On Nantucket Island, the harvest by antler- less permit holders increased from 101 deer in 1972 to 115 in 1973. An analysis of this harvest indicates the predic- ted drop in adult male harvest did not occur. However, the anticipated increase of button bucks in the harvest by CO c o (A *J ^ 4J a d 3 PQ PQ rH Cfl ■U o H (0 0) iH CO 0) iH Pn (t)

CM CO m CO CO 0^ CM CO r^ CM iH 00 O rH O r>^ m CO o CM SJ- CM VO iH o r>«. St CM iH CM CM tH tH CM I CM m o> CO yo ir> r^ 00 CO r*. in vo 0^ ool r^ -stl M3 CM uo CO vn CO trt CM 00 r>. CM CM CM O 1-4 O VO iH sr CM O CM O m CO CM O CM 00 CO in m in O CM St iH o CM fH 1 O CO tH so CM 00 ir» <* CsJ o CM CM CM CO 00 o -* o 00 CO m CM CM CM O CO vo CO O CM vO tH VD CM O u d p o rH a> ,£J M nj ^ tH ■U ■rs O CO CO 4J CO a ^ 03 0) !j ^ •H •S PQ FQ PQ Q 0) « 5 C to iH (U ^ _> Totals 2,243 2,331 4,695 6,747 7,270 5,326 5,349 Permit Harvest, Statewide, Landowner-Farmer 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Male 2 21 17 25 20 14 19 Female 20 44 45 34 26 42 37 Total 22 65 62 59 46 56 56 Statewide Harvest by Sportsman's Permit 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Deer (both sexes) 279 356 787 1057 1268 1010 854 t7-35-R-16 : II-l Table 5 (Concluded) Breakdown of Harvest by Sportsman Permits per Ilanagement Unit, 1967-1973: 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Adult Hale Data not avail- 79 163 104 55 67 Button Bucks able for 1967 107 183 175 142 102 Female and 1968. 473 612 673 546 397 Totals 659 958 952 743 566 Permits 2000 2000 4000 Nantucket 6000 6000 4000 4000 Adult Male 29 15 26 23 19 Button Buck 11 24 29 17 31 Female 49 35 70 61 65 Totals 89 124 125 101 115 Permits 400 400 400 400 400 Martha's Vineyard and Gosnold Adult Male 1 0 30 24 21 Button Buck 1 41 36 35 Female 19 38 95 126 117 Totals 20 39 166 186 173 Permits 600 635* 635* Antlerless Permit Success Ratio (rounded) : 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Farmer-Landowner 1-11 1-5 1-5 1-6 1-6 1-6 1-6 Mainland 1-6 1-6 1-5 1-5 1-7 Nantucket 1-5 1-3 1-3 1-4 1-3 Martha's Vineyard 1-4 1-3 1-4 * Includes Naushon Island W-35-R-16:II-l antlerless permit holders did occur. The increase in the female harvest was not significant. In the event the harvest remains constant, not varying more than 30 deer, it can be said that the desired balance of the herd has been achieved. From that point in time, the control of the herd size can be obtained by raising or lowering the number of antlerless permits for Nantucket Island. This is the third year the same nimiber of permits has been issued for Martha's Vineyard. The 173 deer tak^n by per- mittees represent 86 percent of the 201 deer harvested on the Vineyard and Naushon Island. An unexplainable decline in the Martha's Vineyard harvest is noted. In 1972, there were 266 deer reported. In 1973, only 201 were reported. The success ratio for farmer- landowner permit holders was 1:6 as in 1972. The mainland permit holder success ratio dropped from 1;5 in 1972 to 1:7 in 1973. Permit success ratios in 1973 were highest on Nantucket (1:3) and Martha's Vineyard (1:4). Recommendations : It is recommended that the Division of Fisheries and Game personnel continue to compile and evaluate annual harvest data, and initiate plans, based on the preceding seven years' permit system data for a regional permit distribu- tion program on the mainland. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved: Colton H. Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by: James J. McDonough, Game Biologist and William J. Mlnior, Assistant Date .EA 32. 3'. w ^m ■ R' I (^iJT-x y State JOB PERPORTiAl^TCE REPORT Massachusetts Cooperator Project No. : Job No. Period Covered: Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game Summary: Background : Objectives W-35-R-16 II-2 Project Title Job Title: Game Population Trend and Ilai-^/est Survey Non-Hunting Deer Mor- tality Investigations 1 January 1973 to 31 December 1973 During the period covered by this report, Natural Resource Officers reported 420 deer mortalities, of which 188 were males, 207 were females and 25 with no sex reported. Motor vehicles accounted for 322 deer mortalities follov/ed by 36 dog kills , 23 illegal kills . The remaining 39 mortalities were due to other and unkno\\ni causes (21): drowned-9, fences-5, trains-2, and shot doing crop damace-2. The slightly decreased deer mortality of 420 deer for 1973 compared to the 453 deer mortalities for 1972 may again reflect an open winter. During an open winter, deer do not tend to concentrate in great numbers for any length of time. Therefore, there tends to be less movement thus reducing the motor vehicle accident rate. Dog kills are reduced also because snov? conditions favor the deer. There was a 7 percent decrease in the 1973 deer mortalities compared to a 35 percent decrease in 1972. The adj listed sex ratio of the 1973 non-hunting deer mortal- ities was 48 percent male: 52 percent females. The 1972 adjusted sex ratio was 46 percent males: 54 percent fe- males . Berkshire, Barnstable and Franklin (in order of importance) were the top ranking counties where Natural Resource Of- ficers reported the largest number of deer mortalities. Deer mortalities investigated by Natural Resource Officers were reported in duplicate to the Law Enforcement office in Boston, I!assachusetts. A copy of each report was com- piled and tabulated at the Field Headquarters of the Divi- sion of Fisheries and Game by project personnel. A herd of 15 deer in a 400-acre enclosure at Uestover Field, Chicopee, ilassachusetts is being observed for natural mor- talities . To determine the annual non-hunting decimating factors of the Massachusetts deer herd. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 / W-35-R-16:II-2 Findings: Table 1 presents a summary of the sex classes and the causes of llassachusetts deer mortalities for 1 January through 31 December 1973. During the twelve-month period, there were 420 reported deer mortalities. Of these, 188 were males, 207 were females and 25 of unreported sex. With the exception of legally harvested deer, motor vehicle accidents remain the number one cause of reported deaths with 322 deer killed. In order of importance, the remain- ing 99 deer mortalities were as follows: dogs-36, illegal- 23, other unknown causes-21, drowned-9, fences-5, trains--2, and crop dainage-2. A five-year summary of deer mortalities per cause, 1968 through 1973, is presented in Table 2. The 1973 reported deer mortalities were less than the average per cause for the previous five years. Table 3 presents a comparison of the total non-hunting deer mortalities of Massachusetts deer from 1967 through 1973. From 1967 through 1970 there v/as a steady but de- clining percent increase in the reported deer mortalities , From 1970 through 1973 there v/as a decline in the number of deer reported and a fluctuating percent of decrease. A comparison of the actual number of deer mortalities hy sex per month and the adjusted sex ratios are presented in Table 4, The sex data is adjusted on a monthly basis, with sex of the largest percentage assigned any fractional part of a deer so that there are only whole deer in the adjusted sex ratio. The adjusted sex ratio of the 1973 non-hunting deer mortalities are: Males Females 200 : 220 91 : 100 47.6 : 52.4 (1972 sex ratio = 45.9% males: 54.1% females) Table 5 presents the Ilassachusetts non-hunting deer mor- talities ranlced by counties, 1967 through 1973. The top deer mortality-producing counties for the past seven years in order of importance are as follows : 1. Berkshire 2 . Franklin 3. Barnstable 4. Worcester. During the period covered by this report, Berkshire re- mains number one while Barnstable moved into the second slot. Franklin is third and Worcester remains niamber four, Non-hunting deer mortalities change slightly in the re- maining nine counties from year to year. / CO O •u 3 13 »^ . in rH O 10 CO CO rH CM in rH o •H iS M O iH CO CD /-I CD to O rH Q H CO CJ a •H CO CO 6 CO ^1 CU CJ p ^ E^ O O rH oj 4J O ■P •^ CO CO o r-l CO o /'-> U m 0) VO .o Cvl rH a O iH CM ^^ CM > CM o CA fO rH r-^ CO /~> )H CO (U CO rQ rH rH O CM C^J Vt rH v-' 4.1 (J rH CO O O Cv? ^^^ rH CM CM ."s u rH C G) rH rO rH £3 <3- ^-^ 0} C3N rH 4-J C> a CM o CO CO CM T-i rH w /-N CO rH p '"^ cc- « rH o M CO CO rH rH P •-5 VD <3- CM ON m O Cv' ■vj" CM sX) CO VD rH rH rH CM /~\ CD CO CO CO C^l ^-^ so CO CM f^ Oi CM CM CM CA CO CO C>1 CJN CM CM CM CvJ 1-t o CO CM in CM CO vo (» V.O CO CO CM CO CM CO Q) rH tJ •H rC 0) > H 13 CO ^ P fe H O O CM vo CO cr> CM CO CM CO rH CM 5- rH rH CO H O o vd en (U P > r-* 73 CO CO G) U f^ U) C o CO QJ 15 p MrH b o O rH M •—4 f— 1 P M P o CM •4- m CM o CM CO (30 H CO rH CO P o H Table 2. Five-Year Summary of Deer I'ortalities of Ilassachusetts Deer Reported by Natural Resource Officers, 1963 through 1973. 5-yr. Cause 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 Total Avp, . 1973 Hot or Vehicles 456 397 400 373 321 1 ,947 389 321 Dogs 74 166 204 219 41 704 141 36 Illegal Kills 29 39 25 39 44 176 35 23 Crop Damage 7 2 14 4 1 28 6 2 Unknovm Causes 31 51 38 41 35 196 39 21 All Other Causes 16 27 17 18 11 89 18 16 Totals 613 632 698 694 453 3 ,140 628 420 Table 3. A Comparison of Total Non-IIuntlng Deer Mortalities of l^ssachusetts Deer from 1967 through 1973. 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 No. of Deer Percent Change 508 613 21% 11% 682 693 "• 2%.-' - -.6% 694 453 420 ' ' -34.7% -7.3% Table 4. Comparison of Actual Numbers of Deer Mortalities by Sex* and Adjusted Data for Massachusetts Deer per Month, 1973. Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Unkno\\ni Adjusi red Male Female 28 Sex Total 51 Hale 20 Female 19 4 31 13 14 3 30 14 16 13 14 2 29 14 15 10 11 2 23 11 12 9 22 1 32 9 23 21 25 3 49 22 27 8 16 24 8 16 3 11 14 3 11 12 9 1 22 13 9 27 19 2 48 28 20 37 23 6 66 41 25 16 15 1 32 17 15 188 207 25 420 200 220 Adjusted Sex Ratio 200 males: 220 females 91 males: 100 females 47.6 males: 5 2. 4 females * These data v;ere reported by Natural Resource Officers en ON O U so i o o O •s frt CO Q) •H 4-1 •H .H CO 4J u o M 0) 0) § I C o TO ■U •y CO 03 m ra I o m -s H c cs tH ON VO CO ir> m CO O r* >. ON tH iH CO oi r^ VD o vO m t:-. 00 VO tH O in CM CM •W r-. ON CM VO •a CVJ tH rH o CO o in o CO CO tH iH CJ CO m VO in o tH in CO tH vD O a\ r«> fH iJ cr» r^ CM ON m vO tH CO ON iH iH o H H •» CM VD C>. iH tH CO CO 00 m in r-. O > .Q !-4 a u CD ,d CJ 0) 4J nJ •H iH •H s •H CO ^ ti ^ 4-1 ■U ^ O iH 4) ^ 0) .H 3 rH CD o 3 CO m ■U -^ 'd to iH O o o . IM Vl M CO (U S-4 CO U CO CO •H o tH 3 o 3 PQ CQ PQ iA P--I a a t-^ .-^H S PU W :s o I W-35--R--16:II-2 Tnree counties; namely, !Torfolk, Bristol and Plymouth, produce more non-hunting deer mortalities than the number of deer reported taken by deer hunters : County Bristol Norfolk Plymouth 1973 Hunting Season 1 0 8 1973 lion-Hunting Ttortalities 6 3 17 I feel that the reported deer mortalities in this report are valid even though it is impossible to obtain data on every deer mortality statewide. These data indicate trends which must be evaluated with respect to weather conditions, the Natural Resource Officer's ability and interest in filing a deer mortality report, and the NRO's mandatory eight-hour working day. In an effort to obtain greater cooperation and interest from the ?Iatural Resource Officers, the project leader prepared and delivered a slide lecture to all Law Enforce- ment personnel in each of the seven Law F.nforcement dis- tricts in Ilassachusetts, Recommendations It is recommended that deer project personnel continue to determine the annual non-hunting deer decimating factors of the Massachusetts deer herd. Prepared by: IIASSACnUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAIIE Bureau of ti'ildlife Research and J'anagement Approved; Colton K. Bridges, Superintendent James J. IlcDonough, Game Biologist and iJilliara J. llinior. Assistant Date JOB PERFORMAI.^CE REPORT State Cooperator Project No. Job No. Period Covered: Summary: Massachusetts »• Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35~R-16 II-4 Project Title; Job Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Manap;ement of the Massachusetts Deer Herd 1 July 1973 to 30 June 1974 Sex and age data collected at ten biological deer checkine stations from 1967 through 1973 were analyzed. Four thousand sportsman antlerless permits X7ere issued for the mainland shotgun deer hunting season. Six hundred sportsman permits were issued oh Martha's Vineyard; four hundred were issued on Nantucket. •. ' Successful hunters removed 2,037 deer from the herd. Of these, 1,421 were males of v/hich 1,258 were adults and 163 were button bucks. Six hundred sixteen female deer were harvested of which 444 v/ere adult does and 172 were fawns. Antlerless permits issued totaled 5,349 including landowner permits. Thirty-eight percent of the shotgun harvest (2,037 deer) vjere taken by permit holders. The calculated minimal herd size for the 1973 shotgun season was 11,431 deer. This is a .83 percent increase above the 1972 herd of 11,336 deer. During the shotgun season, there were .13 adult males and .04 adult females harvested per square mile of deer range on the mainland. On Itartha's Vineyard, adult males and females were harvested each at the rate of 1 deer per square mile. There was an unexpected increase in the adult male (1.89) and adult female (1.22) deer harvest per square mile of deer range on ?Tantucket in the 1973 shotgun season. Tlie total harvest of deer per square mile of deer range in 1973 for the archery, muzzle loader and shotgun seasons was as follows: Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent //5146 W-35-R-16:II-4 Location Mainland Dukes Cotmty Nantucket Sq. lilies of Deer Range 6213.6 86.5 35.9 I'lales per Sq. ysie of Deer Range 1 J- . .20 45 2.81 Females per Sq. Mile of Deer Range .07 1.42 2.01 Total Deer Per Sq. Mile of Deer Range .27 2.37 4.32 Background: Objectives; Findings : The percent frequency ratio of adult males to adult fe- males was 0.29 on the mainland, 1.01 on Martha's Vineyard, and 0.69 on Nantucket. Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden, Barnstable and Worcester Counties, in descending order, produced the greatest deer harvest. The remaining six counties produced 0.01 percent deer or less per square mile of deer range. Management recommendations for the distribution of antler- less permits on a county and/or regional (group of counties) basis is presented in this report. A 24-hour compulsory reporting system for deer hunters was initiated in 1967. Deer checking stations have been operated by Division personnel since 1948. Ten checking stations are operated as biological stations at whicli sex, age, weight and antler beam diameter data are col- lected. An antlerless permit deer hunting system, to control the hunting pressure on the female segment of the deer herd during the shotgun season, was initiated in 1967. The deer project leader recommends the number of permits to be issued after examination of the herd sex and age com- position, the reproductive rates, annual removal rates, hunting pressure ana the harvest per square mile of deer range . To estimate the size of the deer herd in Massachusetts and recommend management techniques. Table 1 persents a summary of the sex and age composition of Massachus3tts deer examined at the mainland, Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard biological deer check stations from 1967 through 1973. Table 2 presents a summary of the Massachusetts shotgun deer harvest and the total number of antlerless permits issued from 1967 through 1973. Shotgun hunters removed 2,037 deer from the herd in 1973. Of these, 1,421 V7ere male deer; 1,258 adults and 163 button bucks, being taken. There were 616 female deer harvested, of which 444 were adults and 172 were fawns. Although the data in Table 2 tend to mask the location of where the hunting pressure occurs, it is possible to point out the overall effect of the antlerless permit system in the state. As the 01 CO 0 fa en vD CO iH 0^ (NoocvjLomvOLnvDrsjo vo vD a^ . m m en CNj «-i oo iHr-o -i-CMCMCOCMCOOOOO H Cvl iH iH CMCOCT^iH-i-CMiHOOC CM CN rH r-l OD r--C7^C^-!CMOfOOOOO tH iH T-l rH CO r^ 00 CO C^l CO tH 1^ . o •<^ VD vO CM tH rH 0) o r-i ,r^ r-:,rH ON vO 1^ tH o> 1^ cn o 1^ CO O CO r>* CT> . 0) C tH CO r-* r^ tH CM rH r-«. W «- r3 ,C5 +> r^ Gv CO CO in iH >;f CM Cvl iHlcvl ^ vO Cx! CO en in CM iH 1 ■^ JO l.vD CO tH 00 vD 1^ in r~» >!»' >W U> CM UV q H r*. intHininvorHcocMoo cdi c-> CM vCj" tH iH S TM 00 o C5^H->. 60 O ""^. -*~. ■"-». ""^ ^x^ **>. ~»^ I iH < S rH .H rH iH tH rH tH C3^ 1 I ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 o vO iH CM CO v3- t-n vo r* CO rH WCvJCMCMCMCMCMCM StHrHiHrHrHtHiH I I I I i I CM ^-. CvJ rH "^ I rH C7^ I I o vi) tH CM CO vl- in O f^ CO rH W--35-R-16:II-4 number of antlerless permits 5.3sued per vear incraased the harvest of antlerlccs deer Increased. Li ].967 and 1968, there were 2,236 and 2,331 antlerless permits issued. During these years, the antlerless deer harvested by permit amounted to 25 percent (238) and 27 percent (371) of the total deer harvert. The adult iials^ harvest increased 136 deer from 1967 (036) to 1968 (1,022). In 1969, the number of perinit£3 issued V7as increased to 4 J 695 permits. I'he percent of antlerless deer harvested increased to 35 percent of the total harvest of the nhot- gun deer week. The adult male harvest increased 277 deer for a total of 1,299 adult males reported in 1969. In 1970, the number of antlerless permits issued was in- creased to 6^747 permits. Forty-tr-^o percent of the deer harvested were button bucks and females. The adult male harvest increased only 79 animals with a total of 1,378 deer. Seven thousand two hundred seventy permits v/cre issued in l!^71-. The result was that 51 percent (1,142) of the shoi:-j,ui?. b.arvcs'i; were antlerless de'^r. The adult male harvest dropped 193 animals for a to^al of 1,106 adult bucks ropoi'tcd. In 1972, the nuiuber of antlerlesc permits Issued was lowered to 5,326 perriiits o The combined button buck and female harvest dropped to 43 percent (959). The adult male harvest increatsed 150 animals for a total of 1,256 adult backs . In 1973, 5,349 antlerless permits vere issued. The antler- less deer harvest dropped to 38 percent (799) of the total sbotf;un harvest. There -7a9 an insignificant increase of 2 bucks in the adult siale harvest of 1,258 deer in 1973. In summary, the data xn Table 2 can be interpreted to demonstrate that on an overall basis the number of antler- less p^.rmits issued per year should be increased by relatively snail er increments than in past years, and only when the harvest of adult males warrants an increase of antlerless pcrraits . A siimmar; of the percent change in the adult harvest and the calculated minlnal deer population in Massachusetts, 1967 through 1973, is presented in Table 3. It is inter- esting to note that the percent change for the calculated adult female population and the calculated minimal popula- tion has been decreasing since the 1970 and 1971 deer seasons. It was during these seasons that the antlerless permits had been increased to 6,747 and 7,270 respectively. 00 o M ■M 4J to > ;^ 0) cu Q § W) +J o CO w iJ CD tn ;3 ,c! o w to 0) +J o tt! Pi g CM 0) H tH m CO M o -y 0) o cu e^ H « CO ^1 CO o 0) 0 rH PCI 2 tn < LO r^ ir\ CM iH CO CO CVJ CM CO «* in tH c> r* VO iH in r^ o «£> C5^ CO CO en in o vD G^ CJ^ O CO rH CO vO CX3 O CvJ CO m r^ CO 1^ in CM CO O r>. 00 in r^ r». 0\ rH v£) <1- tH CI tH CO O CO CM tN O GN ffi c\ c\ (A A r\ tH rH eg Csl CvJ CM CA t^ CO rH CO \D O CM vi"; CN r-. CM -* CO r^ tH CM CM OvJ rH CO r^ in VO CO o ■ in VO in CD VO VO CO CO CM C^ r^ o in in cG o CM CO tH CnJ CN r>~ CO cyi »H •M (1) O M 1^ v-O tH n iH o 00 00 r*. rH CM o in CM CO 00 • • rH 1 1 O r^ * to C^ rH r>. CO iH H GJ ^ r« CU O CA tH 00 O O iH to re in CO CNi O CO •vf CM O o o CO o 00 + m o in 00 o • CO rH c CM + + CO CO 00 a o VO in CO vO CM in m CO CO r^ CM r^ cr\ CO 0^ A H iH CM CO tH CO CM I (0 4J CO iH la O rH CO u X) CO ■P CO > u CO a tH T? , o U M CO X! i ^ CO vc> ^ «^ . in 0^ <^. CO o o vO CM tH o CO C^ «\ c» iK n rH ^^ CO 'Cl- rH »H c »-l Ph cr> VO 0) o bO fHI d 1 CO CD ■£ O O fy> rH ■M C 0) O M CD 00 vO ^ C! iH •H •H K: 3 O D •P Cl CC J •H •xi CO •p< .c! CO CO CO rH ;3 s 0) -d rH TJ p- T) d iH (1) 3 (U o 0) o CO ■p a 4J a 4J •H 0 CO o CO CO 4J r-i a tH (U rH CO 4J 3 3 rM 3 rH rH o CD O CO O 3 3 tH iH rH a rH a. T) CO CO CO Q) CO O CO r^ r*. rH C-1 O m c^ 9\ cs #v. « C>! «cr 4J tH m _v-p! a? U ■M O S > rH a tH -H ^ - M 3 o 3 +J c CO -d •H TJ CO •H tti CO 4J CO CO tH 3 a CD T3 tH TJ a tJ qj tH 0) d (U O OJ o cO •p a. 4J O* +J "H Q CO o CO CO +J iH cu rH 0) iH CO U :3 => tH 3 r-i rH o Q) O CO O 3 P iH rH fH g tH CL "3 CO (0 CO cy CO O < U 6 o m O P» I W-35-R-16 : II-4 Tables 4 and 5 present a summary of the adult male and fe- male deer harvest per square mile of deer range in Mass- achusetts from 1967 through 1973. IJhereas it was felt that there was an overharvest in the female segment of the deer population during* 1970 and 1971, the number of sports- man antlerless permits issued on the mainland was reduced to 4,000 permits in 1972. The same number (4,000) of per- mits was issued for the 1973 shotgun deer season. The adult male harvest per square mile of deer range in Berkshire County, except for 1971, has shown a continuous rise from .27 antlered bucks in 1967 to .51 animals in 1973. Tlie adult female harvest in 1967 was .04 deer and rose to a peak of .23 adult does in 1971. The harvest for 1972 and 1973 has remained at .13 adult does per square mile of deer range , In Barnstable County, the adult male harvest Increased slightly from .26 bucks in 1972 to .27 bucks in 1973. The adult female segment of the 1973 harvest dropped from .09 in 1972 to .05 for 1973. There was a .10 drop in both adult age classes in Franklin County during the 1973 shotgun season. It is quite possi- ble that the decrease was due to an overharvest of females from 1969 through 1972. The harvest of adult deer in Hampden and Hampshire Counties appears as expected with the buck harvest increasing and the female segment remaining the same or slightly less than the 1972 harvest. In Worcester County, the adult male harvest remained at .09 bucks per square mile of deer range while the adult female segment increased .01 deer to .04 females per square mile of range in 1973. The rem.aining counties, namely Bristol, Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk and Plymouth, contributed an insignificant number of deer to the mainland harvest. These counties are called collectively the Eastern Group. The adult male harvest in Dukes County decreased to 1 deer per square mile of deer range; the adult female harvest increased to 1 adult doe per square mile of deer range in 1973. Sixty- three percent of the deer harvested on Martha ^s Vineyard x^ere button bucks and females. The Nantucket Island adult male harvest increased from 1.36 in 1972 to 1.89 bucks in 1973. The increase in the male harvest v/as unexpected. There v/as a slight increase in the adult female harvest of .11 does during the 1973 shotgun season. Table 4. Summary of the Adult Male Deer Harvest per Square Hile of Deer Range per County in Diassachusetts , 1967 through 1973. Sq„ Mi„ County Deer Range 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Barnstable 290.5 .14 .15 .20 .28 .28 .26 .27 Berkshire 839.0 .27 .37 .44 .44 .42 .45 .51 Bristol 422.6 .01 .01 .01 .01 .002 .007 .002 Essex 344.4 .03 .03 .04 .06 .03 .05 .05 Franklin 649.1 .27 .35 .39 .39 .36 .43 .33 Hampden 524.3 .13 .19 .24 .22 .20 .25 .28 Hampshire 431.5 .16 .25 .27 .26 ,15 .23 .23 mddlesex 583.1 .02 .01 .02 .02 .02 .01 .01 Norfolk 277.3 .01 Plymouth 544.2 .03 .02 .03 .02 .01 .02 .01 Worcester 1,307.6 .11 .06 .14 .15 .07 _^9 ^^ 6,213.6 .12 .14 .13 .19 .15 .18 .18 Dukes 36.5 .71 .65 .72 .91 1.01 1.18 1.00 Nantucket 35,9 1.34 1.56 1.89 2.42 1.78 1.36 1.89 Table 5. Summary of the Adult Female Deer Harvest per Square Mile of Deer Range per County in Massachusetts, 1967 through 1973. County Deer Range 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Barnstable 290.5 .03 .02 .06 .10 .09 .09 .05 Berkshire 839.0 .04 .06 .12 .16 .23 .13 .13 Bristol 422.6 .005 .002 .002 .002 .002 Essex 344.4 .006 .003 .01 .03 .003 .003 .00 Franklin 649.1 .07 .11 .14 .15 .27 .22 .12 Hampden 524.1 .02 .03 .06 .06 .08 .07 .07 Hampshire 431.5 .04 .06 .11 .11 .07 .08 .05 Middlesex 583.1 .002 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .002 Norfolk 277.3 .004 .004 Plymouth 544.2 .002 .01 .01 .01 .002 .004 Worcester 1,307.6 .02 .02 .05 .07 .05 .03 .04 6,213.6 .02 .03 .06 .07 .08 .07 .05 Dukes 86.5 .14 .10 .18 .36 .67 .89 1.00 Nantucket 35.9 .17 .14 .97 1.67 1.53 1.11 1.22 I W-35-R-16:II-4 Table 6 presents a summary of the total harvest of deer in Massachusetts per sex per county and the harvest of deer per square mile of deer range for the 1973 deer sea- sons (archery, muzzle loader and shotgun seasons) . The six top ranking deer producing counties on the mainland in order of importance are: Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden, Barnstable, Hampshire and Worcester. The reamining counties produce .01 deer or less per square mile of deer range during the hunting seasons. Nantucket Island shows the largest reported harvest per square mile of deer range with 4.82 deer. Dukes County, with 2.37 deer per square mile of deer range, yields the second largest harvest on a unit area basis. The percent frequency ratio of adult femlaes to adult males from 1967 through 1973 is presented in Table 7. The data in Table 7 can be used, within certain limits, as the pulse of the antler less permit system. In Dukes County, the harvest of adult females was slightly over 1 female for each adult male in 1973. The percent frequency ratio of adult females in the Nantucket harvest decreased from 0.82 to 0.69 percent in 1973. Please note the number of animals involved when interpreting the percent of adult females per adult male data for the mainland. For example, the .40 percent in Plymouth County involves 7 animals while in Worcester County the .43 percent was derived from a total of 170 animals (119 males :51 females). The results of a reduction in the number of antlerless permits is evident in the data of Table 7. In 1970 and 1971, 6,000 sportsman permits were issued for the mainland. The percent of adult females to adult males harvested in- creased in all counties. The nunber of antlerless permits issued was reduced to 4,000 permits for the 1972 and 1973 deer seasons. The results seen in Table 7 show that the percent harvest of adult females to adult males declined for these years in all counties with the exception of Worcester County. The reduction in the number of permits issued removed pressure from the female segment of the deer herd. Based on the data in Table 7, the issuance of per- mits on a county basis is recommended. Figure No. 1 graphs a summary of the total harvest of deer in Massachusetts by sex per county, and the harvest of deer per square raile of deer range from 1967 through 1973. Only the six major deer harvest producing counties are represented in the graph. The sensitivity of the antlerless permit system can be observed in Figure No. 1. In 1967 and 1963, 2,000 sports- man antlerless permits were issued. The harvest of male deer increased during these years while the female harvest increased at a slower rate. The number of permits issued was increased to 4,000 in 1969. Both the male and female Table 6. A Summary of the Total Harvest of Deer In llassachusetts (including Shotgun, Archery, and lluzzle Load Harvests) par County per Sex and the Harvest of Deer per Square Hileof Deer Range in Massachusetts for 1973 Harvest Total Sq. Mi. Deer Males Females of Deer per per per County Males Females Total Range Sq. Hi. Sq. Mi. Sq. Hi. Barns tab le 83 24 107 290.5 .36 .29 .08 Berkshire 472 150 622 839,0 .74 .56 .18 Bristol 0 1 1 422.6 .002 .00 .002 Essex 20 0 20 344.4 .06 .06 .00 Franklin 247 114 361 649.1 .56 .38 .13 Hampden 161 49 210 524.3 .40 .31 .09 Hampshire 114 33 147 431.5 .34 .26 .08 Middlesex 4 1 5 583.1 .009 .007 .001 Norfolk 0 0 0 277.3 ,00 ,00 ,00 Plymouth 5 3 8 544.2 .01 ,009 .005 Worcester 145 74 219 1307,6 ,17 .11 .06 Total 1,251 449 1,700 6213.6 .27 .20 .07 Dukes 125 123 248 86.5 2.87 1.45 1.42 Nantucket 101 72 173 35.9 4.82 2.81 2.01 Total 1,477 644 2,121 6336,0 .33 .23 .10 <^ ON rH vD ON ^ iH M +J 3 1-1 O D U TJ s 0) u P4 :3 -a < ^ XT CO ON vO ON u PJ^ 3 < •M O o CD in ON vo CNi 1^ CO en -sf CO cNj d- t-J C CTi CO •«* CO <3- VO c? HcocovDooincoco.ooocoinco iHi-lCSrHCOrHCNj^ vDCOrHiHCOOOr^CO uo vO iH 3- rH VO C iH CO vO iH \o ON O. O 4 u ^ u c M cu ^ 0) rt •H iH •H d •H CO ^ +J .^. ■U 4-> ,« O tH (U ^ CU rH 3 rH CO TO CO ■M X ;^ T3 CO iH O o o cu tH C J^ CO J {^ 4J ni Qi »^ CO M CO ctf -H O rH P o O M (Q pa PQ [it K s P^ Vi 13: H o o o 'A VD O O o o c CM O O O Csl § CO 4-> U o CO O •H g • M O CU ON CO CO C7N VO CVJ CM VD VD ON VO o CM CM rH O ON vO O o CO o o in in CO 00 VO o o CN o in VD in CO VD CO *J »^ o a. +J CO QJ CO K^ lEJ 4-i o CO O -H d • H d 3 o o CO « ^ ix, s S3- CO a CO 4J O a. CO CO IW 4J O -H a • >^ O cu VO tn CN VO CO CO CM CO St CM CM IW O U . .»Hcoco r^ 1^ tH f-» CO C3N CO CM iH CM r-^ O 00 00 VO iH ON O v:3- r>. in CO m o 1^ o- . s-i iw 4.) 0 c..) en u to CO 'H O rH o a o o pq pq pq pa Fn M ffi ^3 rs pt, !3 en H 53 o rH 00 o o v^ 00 in C> O cc> CM CM o tH 00 m 00 0) o o NO o o c to s CO 4J u o a en CO U-i 4J O -H .g o o P3 PM O C3N o O CO in in O O CD C) Zi 4-> CO e to O C/3 CO IH 4J O H a • U O (!) m m CM cn o CM u Q) •K rQ CO B 4J 3 •H S 2 -4 iH CU CO Pui u 0 IW H o CD U e (U Ah V< CD C! !. c CO I U 0) M CO tc (U T) 3 tH O I I «0 <& ^ I «5i I ?i ^ ^ 5 "5> I 1^ fc fe fs. I ^ ^« I I I I I RJ ■fei i^ ^ t^ ^ ^ W-35-R-16:II-4 harvest increased with the female rate increasing at a slightly higher rate. Six thousand periaits were issued for 1970 and 1971. Tae harvest of male deer in most cases peaked in 1970 and started to decline in 1971. Tae female harvest during these years continued to climb. The 1971 harvest reflects the increase of permits in 1969 in that it takes two years to put an antlered deer in the herd. The harvest of males in 1971 started to decline and the permit holders were taking more antlerless deer. The 1972 and 1973 harvests reflect the permit increase of 1970 and 1971. The 1974 harvest, therefore, should be higher than the 1973 harvest on the mainland because of the 1972 reduction in antlerless permits issued. A summary of the total Massachusetts deer harvest by sex per square mile of deer range on the mainland, Dukes and Nantucket Counties from 1967 through 1973 is presented in Figure No. 2. The mainland data represents the bulk of the deer range in the state, but with the six poor deer producing counties included, the harvest of deer per square mile of range is quite low. The total harvest of deer in Dukes County decreased in 1973. I#ierea3 this is the third year of issuing 600 antlerless permits, further decline in the yield of this herd may necessitate a reduction in permits for the county. There was an unexpected increase in both the male and female harvest of deer on Nantucket Island during the 1973 deer season. It is quite possible that the increased harvest was due to a build up of adult female deer surviving the 1967, 1968 and 1969 deer seasons. It had been anticipated that the male harvest would equal the female harvest in 1973 followed by a reduction in the number of permits to maintain an equal harvest of bucks and does. Recommendations: Antlerless permit allocation should be modified to a county and regional basis of distribution. The following numbers of sportsman permits issued per county and/or region are suggested: County Number of Sportsman Permits Barnstable 200 Berkshire 1,300 Franklin 700 Hampden 400 Hampshire 300 Worcester 700 Region l'< 200 Region TL-^* 200 Total 4,000 * Essex, Middlesex and Norfolk Counties ** Bristol and Plymouth Counties S § c ^ :? ;^ I a^ r I o *0 * J5 ?^ •V. A2 Is. V3 *^ ^ ^ ^ "'"*■•. 00 vS 1 '■ . j:. vo « o / I ^ ^ ^ ^ ?5i ^ ^ S J5 ?:» ^ 5^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ I W-35-R-16:II-4 Prepared by; Martha *s Vineyard 600 Hantucket Island 400 Haushon 50 The sale of a il'assachusetts big game license that incorpo- rates an antlerless percdt application should be investi- gated. Mien the antlerless application is submitted, the hunter will be required to indicate in which county or region he would like the application be drawn, MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES Al^D GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved: Colton Ho Bridges, Deputy Director James J, McDonough Game Biologist William J. Minior Assistant Date fib^ I «^02/^iW'-3^-K-/C.^jfr-X PERFORMANCE REPORT State: Massachusetts Cooperators: Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game reject No,: Job No. Period Covered: Summary: Objectives Procedures Findings Goifernoient Oocoms^i's Collection NOV 1 4 1973 i^nivmty cf Massachusetts I'J-35-R-16 III-l Project Name Job Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Mourninp, Dove Census 23 May to 13 July 1973 Calling doves were counted on three randomized routes in cooperation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service's annual mourning dove breeding population census. The total number of calling doves for all three routes remained unchanged from To obtain an index of the spring breeding population of mourning doves. Ill accordance with instructions from the U. S. Fish and Wild- life Service, doves were censused on the three randomized routes used in 1967. Doves were censused by roadside coo- counts on these routes between 23 I^lay and 1 June. Division personnel conducted two routes and a Fish and Wildlife Service cooperator conducted the third route. Results of the 1973 call count of mourning doves are compared with previous years' data in Table 1. The total number of calling doves heard on the three routes surveyed remained unchanged from 1972 totals. Taken in- dividually. Route 8 decreased by 17 percent. Route 8A was unchanged, and Route 10 increased 100 percent from two to four doves. The V7elghted mean number of doves heard per comparable Massachusetts route was 6,1 in both 1972 and 1973 (Ruos, 1973). Ruos further reports that the breeding population index for the Eastern Management Unit decreased 6.8 percent from 17.4 doves per route in 1972 to 16.2 doves per route in 1973. Long-terra population trends also show a decline; re- gression analyses of the 1963-73 data indicate a highly sig- nificant downv7ard population trend in the Eastern Management Unit (Ruos 1973:6). Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 CO »-) I as m !U 4J 3 o M Q) ft JO cd !-i CO a, i u d o 'O !^ CO d 0) (J u CM t-4 o ON ON CO (3^ as CO as CM r*. <-^ 1-1 •v O u r- CO c^ vO o o> Q t-l CO \o as as 1 o O o 1-1 J. o o o o ■y- o o CO CO I ON O CO CO o 1 r -r o o St O O i-i O o 9. o o 1 o o o o "r CO CO I 'I Cvj VO 1 O O rH CO 1 CO 1 •Jc CO CO CO 1 1 1 o 1-i CM «d- vo 1-4 CO CO » r-l CM CM vo r-4 CO CO • o 1-4 1-4 1-1 CM I-I o o • r-l t-4 CM CO vo r-4 CO CO t CM 1-4 T-t rf-\ Project No.: W~35-R-I6 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Job No. IV- Perlod Covered: Summary: Objectives: Procedures: Findings: Job Title: Experimental Turkey Stocking I June 1973 to 31 May 1974 Twenty wild-trapped turkeys (five adult hens and fifteen poults) were captured in Allegany State Park, New York, and released In Beartown State Forest In western Massachu- setts. To date, 37 turkeys have been released in this area Winter observations Indicate the turkeys have adapted well to this area, with a good potential for broods this year. Observations on semi-wild flocks were limited, but indi- cate slight improvement over previous years. To re-establish the wild turkey in the Commonwealth In sufficient numbers to allow for recreational hunting. Turkeys were censused by roadside counts, track counts and cooperator reports. Snowmobiles were used during the winter to provide access to the areas and to transport grain for baiting. Turkeys were captured using Thornsberry style cannon nets. Captured turkeys v/ere aged, sexed, weighed, wing-tagged, and color-marked with patagial streamers. Turkey Trapping Through the courtesy of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Fish and Wildlife, wild-trapped turkeys were again made available for trans- planting to Massachusetts. Since adverse weather condi- tions had restricted trapping success during the winters of 1972 and 1973, New York biologists suggested that we try a fall release consisting of adult hens and their broods. Accordingly, bait lines were established In Allegany State Park, Cattaraugus County, and two captures were made by local technicians on 17 and 18 September. Twenty turkeys were captured (Table I). The project leader and an assistant traveled to the park to pick up the turkeys, returning to Massachusetts the following day to release the birds. All turkeys were released off Alcott Street near Beartown State Forest, Great Barring- ton, Berkshire County, at the same location where turkeys had been set free the previous two springs. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 <0 "O o I. Zi +- Cl (0 o CD i. L. O (0 +- CD O ® to to o cc I 4- Q. (0 O •o c (0 XNX5X5X)X) EEEEEEEEEE 0000000000 4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4- 0.0.0.0.0.0,0.0.0.0-0.0.0.0.0.0. 0000000000000000 X3 X5 E £ 0 0 t. t_ L. 1- 0 0 0 0 X3 x> x> x:) E E E £ 0 0 0 0 4-4- L. L. l- 0 0 0 .Q X5 X3 £ E E 0 0 © 1-4-4-4- O. Q. Q- Q. 0 0 0 0 cocococococococotocococococotncococococ/5 r^cx)cx5c5ocx)oocx)oocooDr^r-r-r-r-r*r-r-r^r- C3N vo — I I t CX) CJN CO '•^^ ^^ •«■.« I CX) ^ "^ CO Oi 0\ • • • N^ "st- hO ill! f^ hO (^ ! I I r-- CO r» I <>»» "w v.^ I r- — r-- tA r- hO • • • ff^ t<\ m I i i I I I U_ Ll. U. ^ J^ ^ ^ ^ c c c c c Z5 Z) 3 =) Z3 Lu C • u_s:u-U-u.LL.u.s • • •£££££££ • •££££££££ ■OXJ-OEEEEEEE-O-OEEEEEEEE <<< << *£)»or~cooNO — cNKN'vi-invor^cocTNO — cNihO'^ c\!r*-r^r^r^cooococooo(X>cococDoocrNONONc:iNaN c\jaDcocoaocococx)cc»<»cocooocococococ30coco inintniriLninLfNtniriininintninLrNLnirNininLrt H-J-H-HH-h- f-KJ-H-H-HKh-l-i— 1-H-h-f- C O +- O) c n 1. • CD i- 4- (0 (0 Q. 0 L. © CD 4- (0 •^ 4- 4- co cn © >■ 1- C O fD U- O) (1) m — 4- — CD < 4- co (0 © CD O 4- i_ fO 0 CD L. (0 0 c 0 O c i- E 0 (0 * 1 O 4- O © CS "v 0 CsJ CD L. ir\ 4- h- •* CO 4- t- 4- Q. ro 4- © CL O o o X 0 — 0 4- < (U 0 4-^ 4- CO >+- ~. O 5 C TJ (D 0 CD C7) to L. O (0 0—0 E (D < © 0 i. i_ •» 4- c in in 3 >^ cc 0 CD Jsi C H- L. — — 3 5 O 4- < < < * * * * * W-35-R-I6:IV-l Statew I de Turkey Populations A total of 37 wild-trapped turkeys (Table 2) have been released In Beartown State Forest between March 1972 and September 1973. Sixteen hens, fifteen toms, and six un- sexed poults have been released. This should be quite sufficient to establish a sustaining population In this area. Table 2. Sex, Age and Date Released of Turkeys Transferred to Beartown State Forest. Date Ad . M. Ad . F. Imm. M. Imm. F. Imm. U. Total 10 March 1972 3^ 3 II March 1972 2 I 3 17 March 1972 1 1 23 February 1973 5 5 27 February 1973 4 4 23 April 1973 1 1 19 September 1973 — 5_ 3 6 6 20 6 9 9 7 6 37 * One found dead 27 March 1972. Since wild-trapped turkeys offer the best chance of establishing a viable and expanding turkey population In the Commonwealth, turkey census activities during this segment were concentrated on the Beartown flock. Observations In the remainder of the state were further hampered by a reduction In gasoline availability due to the energy crisis. There have been few sightings of the Beartown birds during the past year. 'Western Wildlife District per- sonnel reported tracking one adult torn near the Becket Wildlife Management Area (10,5 km/6.5 miles northeast of the release site) during the spring of 1973, and workers In the state forest were told by visitors that "a number" of turkeys were seen In the center of the forest near an abandoned Civilian Conservation Corps camp (2.8 km/ I. 75 miles east of the release site). The Project Leader and an assistant searched much of the forest and adjacent areas on snowmobiles and foot during the past winter. Thirteen of the twenty birds released In fall of 1973 were located, plus a few (two or three) toms. All birds were on the west slope above Ice Glen Road, 2.0 km (1.25 miles) north of the Alcott 1 W-35-R-l6:IV-l Street release point. Snow cover was slight, seeps were open, and the turkeys were readily locating acorns, hickory nuts, and other foods. Hopeful ly, broods will be produced this year. Turkeys In the Quabbin Reservation showed slight Im- provement over previous years. Broods continue to be produced In the southern portion of Prescott Peninsula, near Prescott Brook, and these birds flush readily when approached. On the other hand, birds of the same back- ground, a few miles north In New Salem are very docile due to persistent feeding by landowners. Natural Re- source officers reported a flock of turkeys In Montague, also heavily dependent on artificial feeding. Small flocks remain In Barre, Douglas and Hatfield, but little reproduction and virtually no dispersal has occurred during the past few years. A small flock of game-farm ancestry turkeys remain near the Adams property in the Town of Mt. '/Washington, and a limited number of semi -wild birds are scattered about In the Wash i ngton-Becket area. These will probably be overwhelmed by the wild-strain Beartown birds should they disperse in this direction. The Southeast District received an unverified report of turkeys near Camp Squanto in Plymouth during the spring of 1973. Should this be valid. It would be the first indication of these birds since the summer of 1971. Recommendations: Acknow I edgments : Continue evaluation of the Beartown release. Use these birds as a source of stock for future transplant opera- tions once populations have grown enough to permit this. Appreciation Is extended to Messrs. Lee DeGraff, Fred Evans, and William Shirey of the New York State Depart- ment of Environmental Conservation and to Dr. W. Rasey of Westons Mills, New York for their assistance In se- curing and coordinating pick-up of wild-trapped turkeys, and to personnel of Beartown State Forest, the Quabbin Region of the Metropolitan District Commission and the Division of Law Enforcement for their help In reporting turkey sightings. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved: Colton H. Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by: James E. Cardoza, Game Biologist Date H/\^S FA 52. 5: iA;-3->-1^-/cyOT--i state Cooperator: Project No. : Job No. : Period Covered: Summary: Objectives: Procedures Findings: JOB PERFORMANCE REPORT MASSACHUSETTS L , ■ii Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-I6 Vl-I Project Title: Game Population Trend Job Title: and i-larvest Survey Black Bear Population Dynamics i June 1973 to 31 May 1974 Applications for bear hunting permits were received from 309 sportsmen. No bears were reported taken during the open sea- son. One bear cub was killed by an automobile. New reports of 18 observations Involving 28 bear were received from five counties. Two instances of problem bears were investigated. To define the range of the black bear In Massachusetts and to determine its population characteristics and rate of harvest by hunting. Current bear hunting regulations include mandatory reporting and tagging of bear. Bear checking stations were maintained daily during bear week at three locations — Birch Hill Wild- life Management Area, Templeton; Montague Fish Hatchery, Montague; Western Wildlife District Headquarters, Pittsfield. Should a bear be presented for examination, station personnel were directed to affix a metal game seal to the bear, and to record the following information: town of kill, date killed, sex and weight of bear, and method of kill. Successful hunters would subsequently be contacted by the project leader and the bear's carcass examined and a tooth removed for sec- tioning. The Information and Education Section issued periodic news releases asking for reports of black bear and the project leader contributed an article on bear to MASSACHUSETTS WILD- LIFE. District personnel. Natural Resource officers and University of Massachusetts cooperators assisted in reporting bear sightings. Black bear hunting permit applications were received from 309 individuals during the 1973 season (Table I). No hunter suc- ceeded in bagging a bear. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 W-35-R-l6:VI-l Table i. Number of Bear Permit Applications and Number of Bear Taken - 1970-1973 Year No. Permits 1970 214 1971 200 1972 423 1973 309 No. Bear Taken Other Mortal itles I n legal kll I; I road kll I I Illegal kill I road kill; I captured bear New reports of bears received during this segment Included 15 sightings, one road kill, and one report of tracks, total Ing 28 bear In 16 towns. Reports by county for the period 1952 to 1973 are presented in Table 2. Records of 477 bear noted on 384 occasions In 75 towns have been collected for the period 1952 to May 1973. Table 2. Repc .rts of Black Bear by County, 1952- ■1973 County 1952-1972 1973 Total Percent Berkshire Frank! In Hampden Hampshire Middlesex Worcester 124 148 18 59 1 16 366 5 6 1 5 1 18 129 154 19 64 1 17 384 33.6 40.1 4.9 16.7 0.3 4.4 100.0 Four sow-cub groups were observed, two with two cubs each and two with three each. Two problem situations were Investigated. The first. In the summer of 1973, Involved three cubs treed in a roadside park in Huntington, Hampshire County. One cub was captured by an onlooker who desired the cub for a pet. Investigation by the Division of Law Enforcement resulted in the retrieval of the cub and the prosecution of Its captor. However, the cub was too young to survive on its own and had to be given to a zoo. The second situation also Involved a sow and cubs. On 20 September 1973, barking dogs treed a sow and three cubs the Town of Clarksburg, Berkshire County. Broadcasts on a local radio station drew hundreds of curious onlookers who threatened the safety of the bears and themselves by their incautious behavior. Police and Natural Resource officers In W-35-R-l6:VI-l Recommendations dispersed the crowd and the bears later departed only to appear again later that night In the neighboring town of North Adams. The bears were again harassed by townspeople and the local fire department attempted to disperse the bears with fire hoses. State police and Resource officers again responded and succeeded In quieting the uproar and the bears were again able to depart. The cub hit by an automobl le on Route 2 a month later may have been one of this group. 1. Continue evaluation of bear harvest through checking sta- tions and periodic questionnaires. 2. Continue determination of bear range and populations through recording of sightings. 3. Investigate nuisance complaints as necessary. Promote public education programs to lessen man-bear conflicts. 4. Incorporate data gathered to date in the planned bulletin on the history and status of the black bear. Acknowledgments: Efforts of the Division of Law Enforcement are appreciated, especially Officers Lawler, Kenary, Kullsh and Rlcardl in Investigating complaints and sightings. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved: Colton H. Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by James E. Cardoza, Game Biologist Date JOB PERFORMANCE REPORT <>l 'action MASSACHUSETTS ly State Coop era tor: Project No. : Job No. : Period Covered: Summary: Objectives: Procedures: Findings: Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-I6 VI-2 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Job Title Historical Records of the Black Bear In Massachusetts I June 1975 to 31 May 1974 A comprehensive literature search was conducted to locate historical references concerning black bear. A detailed report on the history and status of the bear Is nov/ In preparation. To determine trends in black bear populations and distribu- tion in Massachusetts from pre-Colonlal times to the present. The facilities of seven state and municipal libraries were utilized In conducting the literature search for this study, indexing and abstracting journals were used as an initial source of reference concerning bear. Local and regional fauna I lists, travel accounts, reports of sporting expedi- tions, and Division annual reports and correspondence files were examined for citations pertaining to bear. Town and county histories were a valuable source of data, and all histories available at the libraries visited were screened in addition to a few more histories obtained on Inter library Loan . Abstracts were made of all pertinent references, a file-card bibliography was prepared, and maps were drawn diagramming fluctuations In bear distribution since Colonial times. In cooperation with the University of Massachusetts, this study has been expanded to Include adjacent New England states. A consolidated final report on the history and status of the black bear In this region Is being prepared. To date, 252 citations for the period 1634 to 1948 have been located for New England and component states. Of these, 125 pertain to Massachusetts. Data In the published report will Include findings from W-35-R, Job Vl-I, Black Bear Population Dynamics, and wl H be broken down Into four main sections: topography of the region and Indian Influences on bear; trends In bear distribution; bears and man; status, management and recom- mendations. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent i?5l46 W-35-R-l6:VI-2 A popular account of bears In the Commonwealth was published In MASSACHUSETTS WILDLIFE (Cardoza, 1973). Recoiroendations: Consolidated findings of this job should be published as a Division research bulletin. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved Colton H. Bridges, Superintendent Prepared by James E. Cardoza, Game Biologist Date Literature Cited: Cardoza, James E. 1973. Bay State Bruins — Past and Present. Mass. Wildl. 24(6): 10-14. i-KRFORnANCE REPORT y OF i^ASLn......ui l:::ary State: lIASSACnUSETTS Project No.: IJ-35-R-17 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Project Type: Research and Surveys Period Covered: 1 June 1974 to 31 Ilay 1975 Work Plan I Statcvida Game Harvest Objectives: To determine the statex^/ide harvest of selected small game and furbearer species and to present recomroendations , based upon management practices and regulations, to increase the utilization of certain species: Job 1-1 Statewide Small Game Harvest Job Objectives: To determine the statewide harvest of selected small game species, and to determine the characteristics of land utilization and time expenditure by sportsmen. Summary: No work V7as conducted during this segment since budgetary restrictions precluded purchase of the postcards necessary for conducting this job. Target Date: 31 Hay 1979. Status of Progress: Behind schedule Significant Deviations: No work during one segment due to non- appropriation of funds. Recommendations: This job should be reactivated when sufficient monies are allocated to allow for printing and mailing of the questionnaire cards. Job 1-2 Statewide Beaver Harvest Job Objectives; To determine the statewide harvest of beavers by trappers . Summary: A total of 1,441 beaver were taken by 116 trappers in 102 towns during the 1974-75 beaver season. Tliis take is 198 less than last season, but 247 more than a ten-year (1965- 1974) average. Berkshire County yielded more than one third (35.0 percent) of the harvest. One half (50.0 per- cent) of the harvest, or 121 beaver, was taken in the first two weeks of the season. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 Target Date: 31 I lay 1979 Progress; On schedule. Significant Deviations: None Recommendations: Continue tagging of beaver pelts and recording of harvest data In 1976, using the same methods as in the current segment. Division Rer;ulation 11 currently states that all beaver taken must be tagged within two days of the season's end. T-Jhen those two days occur on a weekend, as they did in part this year, Division personnel must work overtiire to conply with the tagging requirement. Tliis would be accept- able if trappers brought their take in on those days, but this is generally not the case. Some installations have waited a full day with no beaver being presented, only to have several brought in on the following workday. Con- sideration should be given to revising the regulation to state: "All pelts must be tagged within two world og days of the closing day of the open season." Should regulations be enacted requiring the tagging of otter and fisher, this job should be amended to include tabulation of the harvest of those species. Cost: $1,570.60 (Project Leader nan-days: 4) Remarks: Procedures: Each successful beaver trapper is required by law to present his pelts to an official checking station for tagging and recording of data. Seven stations are maintained for tv7o days at the close of the season. Pelts are tagged with locking metal game seals and harvest data are recorded on mimeographed forms and subsequently tabu- lated by month trapped, tovm and county trapped in, and type of trap used. Findings: The 1974-75 beaver trapping season extended for 15 weeks from 15 November 1974 to 1 March 1975. Trappers took 1,441 beaver during this period. Tiiis take was 198 less than last year's harvest of 1,639, but 247 more than a ten-year average (1965-1974) of 1,194. There i^eve 115 trappers (123 in 1973-74) taking a minimum of one beaver each, with a mean harvest of 12.4 beaver per trapper (range: 1 to 107) . One confiscated pelt was presented for tagging by the Division of Lav? Enforcement. The number of success- ful trappers (116) was the second highest on record, being seven less than in 1973-74 (123), but 30 more than a ten- year (1965-74) average Beaver colonies located in 106 towns contributed to the 1974-75 harvest (Figure 1) . The twelve towns with largest individual seasonal harvests are listed in Table 1. i Ik.. in r^ C\ t-i 1 . ON i-l •k CO C H >N ^1 jQ • cd 0) ^ a (Xr-I CC i-H 3 > « ti; nj iJ •tA a» o fM CQ H I ? ^ Table 1. Beaver harvest for twelve llaasachusetta toxms, 1969-1975 seasons. Tcvm 19 68-69 1969-70 41 20 1970-71 10 1971-72 51 1972-73 57 1973-; 52 '4 1974-75 Bscket 60 Blandford 10 22 16 29 78 37 59 Gicsterfield 14 24 12 16 18 22 41 Goshen > -• 11 15 17 17 33 Great Barrlngton 3 1 - 8 2 13 36 Monterey 35 - 5 18 24 12 36 New Marlboro 32 14 1 52 69 64 36 Otis 36 18 14 64 72 72 85 Petersham 52 18 27 58 57 66 42 Sandisfield 49 13 8 52 6 62 73 Savoy 9 12 18 20 21 34 36 Windsor 16 19 14 36 26 41 39 Table 2, Beaver harvest by county for Hassachnsetts , 1973-74 and 1974-75 1973- -74 1974- -75 Percent County No . Beaver Percent Rank No. Beaver Percent Rani: Change Berkshire 518 31.6 1 505 35.0 1 - 2 .5 Essex 16 1.0 8 13 0.9 7 -18 .8 Franklin 370 22.6 2 324 22.5 2 -12 ,4 Hampden 148 9.0 5 133 9.6 5 - 6 ,8 Hampshire 288 17.6 3 263 18.3 3 - 8 .7 Middlesex 51 3.1 6 29 2.0 6 -43 .1 Plymouth 17 1.0 7 5 0.3 8 -70 .6 Worcester 231 - 14.1 4 164 11,4 4 -29 .0 Totals 1 ,639 100.0 ■ 1 ,441 100.0 -12 .1 Table 3. Beaver harvest by month in Massachusetts , 1973-74 and 1974-75. 1973- -74 1974- -75 Month No . Beaver Percent No. Beaver Percent November 373 53.6 721 50.0 December 492 30.0 449 31.2 January 185 11.3 176 12.2 February 84 5.1 67 4,6 Not stated - - 1 28 ,441 2o0 Totals 1,639 100.0 100,0 The V7e3tern re;;^ion of the state continued to provide the majority of the bsavcr harvest. Harvests declined in all counties (Table 2) but this change was no re apparent in the eastern region. During the 1974-75 season, 1,026 beaver (71.2 percent) vjere taken west of the Connecticut Pd.ver and 415 (2G.G percent) were taken east of the river, as opposed to 1,053 (64.6 percent) and 5C1 (35.4 percent) during 1Q73- 74. During the past season, Berkshire and Franklin Counties together yielded over half (829, 57.5 percent) of the total harvest. Hampshire. TJorcester, and Haripdcn Counties con- tributed another 565 beaver (39.3 percent), with three other counties conprising the small rernainder. Six counties reported no beaver taken. County rankings remained essen- tially unchanged. As in past years, success V7as greatest during the initial weeks of the trapping season (Table 3). One half (50.0 percent) of the harvest, 721 beavnr, were taken in the initial tv/o weeks (15-30 IJovember) of the season — a slight decrease froin 1973-74 when 54,2 percent of the harvest was taken during the equivalent period. The take declined steadily each month thereafter with only a minimal harvest (67, 4.6 percent) in February. Use of the Conibear trap dropped slightly this season, with 906 beaver (62.9 percent) taken in that style trap, as opposed to 1,091 (66.6 percent) in 1973-74. The average price of a Ilassachusetts beaver pelt was $13, the same as last season, with the 1974-75 harvest valuation totalling $36,025. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AiH) WILDLIFE Bureau of Wildlife Research and lianagement Approved: Colton H, Bridges J Deputy Director Prepared by Date James E. Cardoza Game Biologist UOI PERFORIIANCE REPORT STATE Massachusetts Project Ho. W~35~R-17 Project Title: Gane Population Trend and Harvest Survey Period Covered: 1 June 1975 to 31 May 1975 Work Plan No. and Title: I - Statewide Game Harvest Work Plan Objective: To determine the statevjide harvest of selected small game and furbearer species and to determine the character- istics of land utilization and time expenditure by sports- men. Job Ho. and Title; 1-4. Gray Squirrel Harvest Evaluation Job Objective: To identify the characteristics (seasons, hunting tech- niques, and hunter preferences) of gray squirrel hunting in other states in order to evaluate what changes could be made in Massachusetts to improve hunter utilization., Brief Summary: States east of the Great Plains V7ere surveyed to determine squirrel season regulations, hunting methods, and factor affecting the relative popularity of squirrel hunting. Twenty-two state had straight seasons, eight had zoned seasons, five had split seasons and one state reported a zoned split season. The average season length was 120 days (x = 119.8; S.D. = 61.7) with approximately 40 per- cent (li = 38.9; S.D. - 23.2) of the seasons before leaf fall. Squirrels were ranked in the top four game species in 64, 85 and 70 percent of the states in terms of hunter preference, number killed and hunter participation, re- spectively. Hunting before leaf fall was judged more popular in 58 percent of 26 states responding by hunter preference and in 66 percent of 32 states responding by number of people participating. Still or stalk hunting was more common before leaf fall and wait-hunting was more common after leaf fall. Tlie use of dogs to tree squirrels increased sharply after leaf fall. Shotguns outnumbered the use of rifles by at least 2 to 1 in squirrel hunting. Season length appeared to be a minor factor since only extremely short seasons (<50 days) may influence relative popularity of the sport. Opening date is the most important factor and there was a significant (P <. 05) relationship between a large percentage of the season before leaf fall and high relative popularity rankings. The popularity of hunting before leaf fall was also significantly (P <.05) related to the relative popularity of squirrel hunting. Target Date: 14 February 1975. Status of Progress: On schedule. Significant Deviations: None Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent, /f5146 I i W-35-R-17:I-4 Recommendations: An earlier opening date (v/ell before leaf fall) and a longer open season extending later in the year are the regulation chances which could potentially stimulate the sport hunting of gray squirrels in llassachusetts . I foresee little difficulty in terms of population manage- ment or political repercussions in extending the present season later into the year. I am recommending a 31 December closing date. Although I do not believe this will significantly Increase the popularity of squirrel hunting, it will provide additional recreational oppor- tunity and may stimulate the use of dogs in treeing squirrels. An earlier opening date could significantly increase the popularity of gray squirrels as a game animal. The pri- mary biological and political concern would be to find the mean date of cessation of nursing of young squirrels. The effect of hunting while females are still nursing has not been proven to be a factor in limiting yearly popula- tion levels, but I believe the desired result of increas- ing the utilization of squirrels could be achieved. This data would also eliminate any humane considerations in- volved with shooting nursing females. Three management options are presented below for increas- ing the use of the gray squirrel resource and determining the date when nursing females would not be taken: 1. September 1 opening coupled vjith bag checks of se- lected hunters 0 2. September 20 opening with prior sampling of Division personnel and bag checks of selected hunters after opening date. 3. September 20 opening, assuming the Ohio data on cessation of nursing is applicable to Massachusetts. I am recommending an experimental three-year season under Option No. 1. This would provide us with the best data on cessation of nursing with the least expenditure of manpower. Any change in the popularity of squirrel hunting x^rill be monitored by telephone survey techniques. Cost: $1,500 Presentation of Data: I W-35-R-17:I-A This paper identifies some characteristics of squirrel hunting in the eastern United States and relates hunting season characteristics to the relative popularity of the sport. Squirrel hunting has never been considered popular in Ilassachusetts (Cardoza 1971), yet in most states where squirrels are hunted, they are considered one of the top game species o This study examines hunting season regulations, hunting techniques, and popularity of hunting to determine what regulatory changes might be made to improve the utilization of the gray squirrel (Sciurus caro linens is) in Massachusetts. The importance of hunting season regulations to the relative popularity of a game animal has not received much attention in the literature but considerable work has been done on the effects of regulations on game population levels and hunting pressure (Allen 1943, Gale 1954, Nixon et al. 1974, Nixon et al. 1975, Uhlig 1956, U.S. Dept. of Interior 1975). I acknovrledge Sarah Daniels and Thomas Early, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, who assisted with preparation and analysis of the questionnaire. METHODS A mail questionnaire (Appendix I) was sent in January 1975 to the chief game biologist in each state's v/ildlife management agency, requesting in- formation on the type and dates of the gray squirrel season. Fox squirrels (Sciurus niger) are present in many of the states, but no state reported separate hunting regulations for the species. All questions other than the first referred simply to squirrels, so no distinctions are made between species in this report. Eight states had zoned seasons, and the length of the season for each state v/as calculated by using the earliest opening date and the latest clos- ing date. The season length for the five states with a split season was based on the number of days the season was opened. Only one state had both a zoned and split season so I averaged the number of hunting days for each zone to determine season length ; the most frequently used opening and clos- ing dates were used V7hen appropriate. Statistical inferences in this report are based on t-test and chi-square (x2) test, and Yates' correction for continuity (x2 adj.), x = .05. RESULTS All of the 37 states east of the Great Plains have open seasons on the gray squirrel. Only one of these states did not respond to the questionnaire. Types of Seasons The three basic types of squirrel hunting seasons are straight, split and zoned. The straight season is the most common (22 states) followed by zoned (eight states) and split seasons (five states). Virginia was the only state reporting a zoned split season. Zoned seasons consist of separate opening and usually closing dates for various regions within the state. Generally, these zones appeared to be based on climatic differences, but some political differences were apparent. For example, one state opened public land before private. ^ Appendix I Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game Westboro, Ilassachusetts 01581 Name: State 1. What are the opening and closing dates of the gray squirrel hunting season In your state? (Indicate If season Is zoned). Opening Closing 2. How would you rank squirrel hunting In your state in comparison to other sport hunting? (Circle one) : a. By hunter preference 1st b. By number of people participating: 1st c. By number killed: 1st 3. Generally, in what week of what month does peak (over 50%) leaf fall occur? Month Week 2nd 3rd 4th Other 2nd 3rd 4th Other 2nd 3rd 4 th Other 4. In your opinion is the squirrel season more popular before or after leaf fall? a. By hunter preference? b. By number of people participating? 5. Please review these definitions: ^' Stalk or Still Hunting; Moving stealthily through the woods, frequently stopping for short periods of time (less than five minutes). b. Wait Hunting: Moving to a likely spot and then waiting for a long period of time (more than five minutes) before moving again. c. Bog Hunting: Using a dog to "tree" or locate a squirrel. Referring to the above definitions, answer each question below independently: a. tJhat percentage of each type hunting best describes squirrel hunting before leaf fall? % stalk 7o wait % dog b. X-Jhat percentage of each type hunting best describes squirrel hunting after leaf fall? 7o stalk % wait % dog c. Indicate your estimate of hunters using shotguns and/or rifles: For stalk hunting % shotguns % rifles For wait hunting % shotguns 7, rifles For dog hunting % shotguns % rifles 6. Indicate the numbers of the questions which were answered using survey data you have collected: Question numbers .?. I ^ Appendix I (Continued) 6^7n/mofi/Wi ^^viSicm/ eJ^ ^tSne^^^y o/m^^a/me^ ^, ffedm^6>^ om/ Dear Sir: In llassachusetts we are considering a change in our squirrel hunting regu- lations in an effort to provide more recreational opportunity to our sports- men. Enclosed is a questionnaire v^hich will help us describe the sport of squirrel hunting in the United States and perhaps identify how our regula- tions might be changed for the better. The enclosed questionnaire is designed to be folded, stapled and mailed without an envelope. If survey data is not available to answer the questions please give your opinion. Due to our regulation change procedure, this questionnaire will be analyzed starting 15 February 1975. We invite your comments and appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely yours. Chet M. McCord Chief of Wildlife Research CMM:mb Enclosure W-35-R-17-I-4 A season which Is divided into distinct segments v/ithin one year is de- fined as a split season. One state reported a spring and fall segment, but most split seasons were simply early and late fall or winter segments. Closing the season during the open deer season was reported by only one state, but I suspect it occurs in others. Length and Time of Year of Hunting Seasons The average length of a squirrel season was 120 days (x = 119.8; N = 34; S.D. = 61.7). New Hampshire (31 days) and Jtassachusetts (41 days) have the shortest seasons while North Dakota (year-round) and Oklahoma (230 days) have the longest . September (33 percent) and October (39 percent) v/ere the most frequent months for opening the season follox^ed by August (14 percent) , November and May (6 percent each), and June (3 percent). For closing the season, January (39 percent) was the most frequent month follovjed by December (25 percent), November and February (17 percent each), and March (3 percent). The use of months to compare opening and closing dates is not valid here since a September opening in Alabama vjould be much earlier seasonally than a September opening in Michigano I asked each biologist for the month and week when peak (over 50 percent) leaf fall generally occurred. These data were used to standardize the seasonal time of year V7hen the hunting seasons began. The average percent of the season before leaf fall V7as 39 (x = 38.9; N = 35; S.D. = 23.2). ITassachusetts, New Jersey and Pennsylvania were the only states not reporting hunting before leaf fall. Relative Popularity of Squirrel Hunting Each state was asked to rank squirrel hunting in comparison to other sport hunting. Comparisons v/ere made in hunter preference, number of people participating and number of animals harvested (Table 1). Over 64 percent of the states ranked squirrel in the top four species by hunter preference, and 41 percent ranked them first or second. By hunter participation and number harvested, squirrels were in the top four species in over 70 percent and 85 percent of the states, and ranked first and second in 50 and 56 percent of the states respectively. Each biologist was asked if he felt squirrel hunting was more popular before or after leaf fall with reference to (1) hunter preference and (2) the number of people participating. Hunting before leaf fall was more popular in 58 percent of the 26 states responding by hunter preference and in 66 per- cent of 32 states responding by number of people participating. Hunting Techniques Three types of squirrel hunting were defined: Stalk or still-hunting - Moving stealthily through the woods, frequently stopping for short periods of time (usually less than five minutes. Walt-hunting - Moving to a likely spot and then waiting for a long period of time (more than five minutes) before moving again. Dog-hunting - Using a dog to tree or locate a squirrel. W-35-R-17a-4 I asked each biologist to use the above definitions and give what he felt was the percentage of each type hunting that best described squirrel hunting before and after leaf fall (Table 2). Stalk-hunting was the most commonly used before leaf fall while wait-hunting was the most common after leaf fall. However, the real change in hunting techniques after leaf fall was a decrease in stalk-hunting and an increased use of dogs. Redmond (1953: 383) reported a season average of 75 percent still-hunting and 25 percent dog-hunting; before leaf fall 96 percent was still-hunting while after leaf fall the use of dogs increased to 85 percent of the hunting. Type of Firearms Used The original question asked for an estimate of the percentage of hunters that use shotguns or rifles for each type hunting method. The responses, almost invariably, gave a single percentage or the same percentage for all three methods, so I will report only the data given for the first method listed realizing these data really represent a figure for all methods to- gether. The 30 states with usable responses showed a 68 percent use of shotguns and a 32 percent use of rifles. These percentages of rifle use are higher than Redmond (1953:383; 11 percent) and Allen (1952:88; 18 percent) reported. I believe that my rifle-use data is inflated because several states, in- dicating they had no survey data on percentage of rifle use, reported rifle use above 90 percent. Season Length Related to Hunting Popularity The length of the hunting season did not appear to be a major factor in these data since comparisons of the mean season length among states with different popularity rankings showed no trends (Table 3). However, the variability in season length vras much higher for the states that ranked squirrel hunting below fourth in all the popularity categories. Empirically, this would indicate that an extremely short or long season may be a factor in squirrel hunting popularity. The three states v/ith seasons less than 50 days all ranked squirrel hunting belovj fourth vjhile the four states with seasons longer than 200 days were split v/ith two ranking squirrel hunting second in preference and participation and two ranking squirrels below fourth in both categories. I believe an extremely short season can be a factor in the popularity of squirrel hunting particularly X7hen combined with a late opening date. Length of the Season Before Leaf Fall Related to Hunting Popularity States vjith a larger percentage of the season before leaf fall generally rank preference for squirrel hunting higher than states with smaller portions of the season before leaf fall (Table 4), States ranking squirrel hunting as first or second in preference had a significantly larger percentage of the season before leaf fall than states ranking squirrel hunting as "Other" (t- test; P <.05). States ranking squirrel hunting as third and fourth also showed a significantly larger percentage of the season before leaf fall than the states ranking as "Other", but the difference was significant at a lower level of confidence (t-test; P <.10). I W-35-R-17:I-4 Table 1. The relative ranking of squirrel hunting in comparison with other sport hunting in 34 of the 37 eastern states with squirrel seasons. Rank 1 2 3 4 Other Hunter Preference No. of States Percent 6 8 3 5 12 18 23 9 15 35 Hunter Participation No. of States Percent 7 10 2 5 10 21 29 6 15 29 Number Harvested No. of States Percent 11 32 8 23 6 18 4 12 5 15 Total 34 100 34 100 34 100 Table 2. The percent of stalk, wait and dog hunting which best describes squirrel hunting before and after leaf fall. Hunting Technique Number of Leaf Fall Before After Stalk Wait 51 45 39 46 Dog 4 15 States Responding 28 30 Table 3. The mean length of the squirrel hunting season for states which ranked squirrel hunting popularity in similar categories. States' Hunter Number of Rank of Runt er Prefe Mean rence P •jrticipat ion Squ irrels ¥ Mean lilled Squirrel Mean Hunt ing N Days S.D. N Days S.D. N Days S.D. 1 6 108.3 15.0 7 110.4 14.8 11 112.0 12.9 2 8 138.5 52.5 10 134.9 47.8 8 136.0 59.8 3 3 125,3 25.7 2 122.0 31.0 6 99.3 32.0 4 5 115.2 39.4 5 116.8 39.2 4 109.8 42.6 Other 12 131.5 83.1 10 119»9 97.3 5 174.0 110.2 Total 34 119.8 61,7 W-35-R-17:I-4 The states ranking squirrel hunting as first and second by hunter participation showed a significantly higher percentage of pre-leaf fall hunting than states ranking squirrel hunting as third and fourth (t-test; P <,053 Table 4). States ranking squirrel hunting below fourth shov/ed 35 percent of the season before leaf fall, which vjas not significantly dif- ferent from either the means of the first and second or the third and fourth categories. This indicates that the length of the season before leaf fall is not the only factor which affects hunter participation. The relative number of squirrels killed in a state is probably the least sensitive method of the three used to measure the popularity of squirrel hunting. Although the states ranking squirrel hunting first and second reported the highest percentage (40 percent) of the season before leaf falls the difference was not significantly higher than the third and fourth categories except at a low level of prbability (P< .20). Again, the "Other" states showed a relatively high percentage of the season before leaf fall, but the sample size in that category had dropped to only four states. Popularity of Season Before Leaf Fall Related to Squirrel Hunting Popularity The popularity of hunting before and after leaf fall was compared to the relative ranking of squirrel hunting in comparison to other sport hunting (Table 5). Due to sample size the top two or three rankings were combined and compared by X^ analysis to the lower categories. States ranking squirrels in the top three game species by preference and participation also ranked hunting before leaf fall more popular a sig- nificant portion of the time. By preference, biologists from states ranking squirrel hunting first and second judged hunting before leaf fall more popular (X^ = 6.00s X^ ad; = 4,21, d.f. = 1). This relationship was even stranger when the first through the third popularity rankings were compared to the fourth and "Other" categories (X^- = 9.76, X^ ad; = 7.43; d.f. =1). By participation, the first and second ranked states did not show significant difference between before or after leaf fall hunting at the .05 level (X" = 3.46, Y? ad; = 2,22, d. f, = 1), but the difference was significant v/hen the first through the third categories were grouped and compared to the lower rankings (X^ = 5.72, X'^ ad; = 4.07, d. f, =1). DISCUSSION Opening dates, season length, and bag limits are the basic hunting regulations which can influence hunter attitudes or relative popularity. Bag limits have been shown to be an effective methods of increasing or de- creasing harvest of same species (U.S. Department of the Interior 1975), and Christisen (1971i32o) discusses how bag limits affect the incentive of hunters since "...a liberal limit beyond the abilities of the average hunter may depress the hunter's interest and initiative". However, Nixon (1975:10-11) found shooting one or more squirrels tended to increase hunter interest, but that squirrel hunters v/ere not strongly motivated to kill a limit. Daily bag limits on squirrels do not appear to be an im- portant factor in hunting popularity since most hunters are not successful I W-35-R-17:I-4 Table 4. The mean length of the season before leaf fall for states uhich rank squirrel hunting in different categories of popularity. States' Rank of Hunte r Prefe rence Hunter Participation Squ irrels Killed Squirrel Mean Mean Mean Hunt ing N 14 Days 43.9 S.D. 19.1 N Days SoD. N 19 Days S . D . 1 and 2 17 45.1 21.8 39.6 23.8 3 and 4 8 44.6 26.7 7 27.4 17,9 10 29.9 21.0 Other 11 28.1 23.2 9 35.0 27o0 4 35.0 22.2 Table 5. Popularity of squirrel hunting before and after leaf fall related to the relative ranking of squirrel hunting to other sport hunting within a state. States' Rank of Squirrel Hunting Leaf Fall Preference Before After Participation Before After 1 2 3 4 Other 4 6 2 2 1 1 1 0 1 8 5 8 2 2 4 1 2 0 2 6 Totals 15 11 21 11 W-35-R-17:I-4 In killing even one squirrel much less the limit (Allen 1954:92; llixon 1974:70; Uhlig 1959:383). Season length docs appear to affect squirrel hunter attitudes and perhaps the popularity of the sport. Allen (1943:341) demonstrated that a short (22 day) season affected hunter activities since the hunting pressure remained high throughout the season, yet other studies dealing with longer seasons refer to a rapid decline in hunting pressure after the first couple of weeks (Allen 1952:100; Nixon et al. 1974:71; Ilixon et al. 1975:10; Ulilig 1956:58). The increased variability in season length for states that ranked squirrel hunting low in popularity plus the low rankings by the states with short seasons indicates an extremely short season could be a factor in low popularity. The single most important factor in squirrel management is the open- ing date (Ulilig 1959:339). This conclusion is based on the second or summer litter of squirrels being independent and available for hunting. The controversey over the importance of this summer litter in population maintenance and fall population levels has never been completely rssolved. Allen (1952:106) states that the time squirrel season opens is a compro- mise between availability of the summer litters and the interest and suc- cess of the hunter. He says that in the early season when the mast ripens, squirrels are most active and hunting success is high. Nixon et al. (1975:8, 10) shov/ed increased hunter success early in the season and states, "Hunters generally stopped hunting squirrels. . .when leaf fall was virtually complete and the opening of the upland game season attracted them to other areas and other species." The questionnaire data also in- dicates a strong predilection for hunting before leaf fall by both hunter preference and participation. The significant relationship between a high percentage of the season before leaf fall and high popularity of the sport, plus the significant relationship between relative popularity rank- ing of squirrel hunting and the popularity of hunting before leaf fall leads me to conclude that the opening date is a key factor in the relative popularity of squirrel hunting. Obviously, there are many factors which work together to influence the popularity of squirrel hunting. The past trends and present abundance of squirrels, hunter success, the desirability of hunting other species which are in season at the same time, social traditions associated with the sport (could be a positive or negative stimulus), and the regulations are some of the important factors which can influence the relative popu- larity of squirrel hunting. Any one or combination of these factors may be the most important in any particular state. CONCLUSIONS A straight fall and winter hunting season of about 120 days V7ith 40 percent of the season before leaf fall is the most common t3rpe of squirrel season in the eastern United States. Hunting is most popular before leaf fall when the stalk or still-hunting method is most often used. After leaf fall, wait-hunting is more common and the use of dogs increases sharply. Shotguns outnumber rifles at least two to one in squirrel hunt- ing. I i W-35-R-17:I-4 Squirrels are one of the top four game species in most of the 37 eastern states vjhere they are hunted and frequently are rated first or second in terms of hunter preference, hunter participation and number killed. The relative popularity of squirrel hunting is related to the length of the season before leaf fall, and an early opening date appears to be the most important regulation. Extremely short seasons appear to be another factor which affect popularity of the season. LITERATURE CITED Allen, D. L. 1943. Michigan fox squirrel management. Michigan Dept. Conserv. , Game Div. Publ. 100, Lansing. 404 pp. Allen, J. M. 1952. Gray and fox squirrel management in Indiana. 2nd ed. Indiana Dept. Conserv., P-R Bull. 1, 112 pp. Cardoza, J. E. 1971. Statewide small game harvest. Mass. Div. Fish and Game P-R Proj. Rapt. W-35-R-13. 21 pp. Christisen, D. M. 1971. Importance of daily bag in squirrel hunting. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 36:322-329. Gale, L. R. 1954. The effect of season changes on hunting effort and game kill. Proc. Southeast Assoc. Fish & Game Commissioners. 7: 117-120. Nixon, C. M. , R. W. Donohoe, and T. Nash. 1974. Overharvest of fox squirrels from two woodlots in western Ohio. J. Wildl. Manage, 38(l):67-80. , M. W. McClain, and R. W. Donohoe. 1975. Effects of hunting and mast crops on a squirrel population. J. Wildl. Manage. 39 (1): 1-25. Redmond, H. R. 1953. Analysis of gray squirrel breeding studies and their relation to hunting season, gunning pressure and habitat con- ditions. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 13:378-339. Uhlig, H. C. 1956. The gray squirrel in West Virginia. Conserv. Comm. W. Va. Bull. No. 3, 83 pp. . 1959. Squirrel management and research. Pages 387-389 In V. Flyger (Editor) Sirmposium of the gray squirrel. Maryland Dept. Res. Education, No. 162. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1975. Final environmental statement for the issuance of annual regulations per- mitting the sport hunting of migratory birds. Washington, D. C. 710 pp. W'35-R-17:I-4 Submitted by: MASSACHUSETTS DIVISIOIT OF FISHERIES AIID WILDLIFE Bureau of Wildlife Research and Ilanagement Approved: Arthur W. Weill, Superintendent Prepared by Chet M. McCord Chief of Wildlife Research Date i •lA6S.!gA^Z.3:W-3S-«-l7/iZl;'i' PERFORMAflCE REPORT li OF Il!;i33/;.' ,...SI LIBRARV STATE r^JVSSACIIUSETTS Project Type Research and Survey Project Ho. IV--55-R-17 Project Title Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Period Covered: 1 June 1974 to 51 May 1975 Work Plan Number and Title: II - Massachusetts White-Tailed Deer Study Work Plan Objective: To determine, through the collection and analysis of pertinent deer harvest data, the sex and age structure of the herd, and to develop management and harvest procedures based on project findings. Job Number and Title: II-l - Statewide Deer Harvest Job Objective: To determine the annual harvest o£ deer in Massachusetts. Brief Summary: Tlie four western deer management units of Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden and Hampshire make up over 70 percent of the total deer harvest. The Worcester unit contributed 8 percent of the shotgun harvest, Barnstable unit 5 percent while the combined Region I and Region II contributed only 1 percent. Tlie 1974 statewide harvest for all deer seasons was 2,781 deer, an increase of 560 over the 1974 harvest. Target Date: 31 August 1975. Status of Progress: On schedule. Significant Deviations: None Recommendations: Continue this job. See Job I 1-4 for future recommenda- tions. Cost: $65,000 Presentation of Data: Introduction : There were four types of deer seasons in 1974: (1) an 13-day archery season from 4 November through 23 November; (2) a 2-day paraplegic season from 4-5 November; (3) a 6-day shotgun season from 2 December through 7 Decem- ber; and (4) a 3-day primitive firearms hunt from 9 December through 11 December. No hunting was allowed on Sundays. Since 1967, Massachusetts has had a statewide antlerless deer permit system. During the one -week shotgun season, deer with antlers three inches or longer are legal game, but to harvest a male fav/n or female deer the hunter must have an antlerless permit. Massachusetts regulations require hunters to report tlieir kill within 24 hours to an official deer checking station. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 I Last season, the state was divided for the first time into ten deer management units and the distribution of antler less permits was made on the basis of the new manar^ement units. Tlie management units (Figure 1) and the number of permits issued for each is shovm in Table 1. Archery Season: A summary of the statewide deer harvest by archers shov/s an increase from 21 deer killed in 1967 to 87 deer in 1974. In 1967 the archers had a 12-day season, but in 1972 the season v/as increased six days for a total of 18. Archers in 1974 reported an increase of 10 deer over 1973 as shown below: Summary of Archery Kill, 1967-1974 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 Males 17 21 27 24 26 49 51 62 Females 4 13 10 12 10 27 26 25 Totals 21 34 37 36 36 76 77 87 Seventy-two (72) deer ivere taken on the mainland of which 44 were adult males, 6 male fawns and 22 females. On Nantucket Island, the archers reported 10 bucks and 3 does for a total of 13 deer. A buck and a doe were the only two deer reported on the Vineyard. The total of 87 deer was made up of 56 adult males, 6 male fawns and 25 females. The four counties with the highest kill were Franklin, 23 deer; Berkshire, 19; Hampshire, 13, and Nantucket, 13 (Table 2). Paraplegic Season: A male and a female deer were reported for this 2-day hunt held on Martha's Vineyard. This is the first year deer have been taken on this hunt since it began in 1972. Primitive Firearms Season. Primitive firearms hunters re- ported taking 26 deer during the second year of this 3-day season. The 1974 harvest represents an increase of 21 deer above the 1973 kill. It is interesting to note the change in the sex ratio from the 1973 harvest when 5 males and 2 females were reported to 8 males and 18 females in 1974. Seven males and 17 females vjere taken from the mainland while a buck and a doe v/ere reported from the Vineyard. Berkshire County had the highest kill of 15 followed by Hampden, 4; Franklin, 3; Hampshire, 2; and Nantucket, 2 (Table 2). Shotgun Season: Shotgun hunters reported harvesting 2,666 deer including 1,873 males (214 male fawns) and 788 females (Table 2). The four top deer-producing counties were Berk- shire, 1,056: Franklin, 448; Hampden, 231; and 'Worcester, 213 (Table 1) . The shotgun harvest constitutes 96 percent of the total statewide deer harvest. The mainland deer harvest shows 1,524 adult males, 159 fawn males and 602 females for a total of 2,285 deer. The Nan- tucket Island hunters reported 62 antlered males, 26 male fa\vns, and 66 females for a total of 154 deer. On Martha's Vineyard, 73 adult males, 29 button bucks and 95 females v/ere taken for a total of 197 deer. Five males and 25 fe- males were reported harvested on Gosnold Island. Table 3 presents a suimary of the 1974 Massachusetts shotgun deer harvest by sex and the county rank of importance from 1970 through 1974. iTie top ranking deer -producing counties, Berkshire and Franklin, have not changed for the past five years. Hampden County moved to third position in 1974 ex- changing positions with Dukes County which moved to fifth. Worcester County remained in fourth position while Hampshire exchanged positions with Nantucket and moved into the sixth position. The remaining counties have been in the same lower ranks for many years . Total Harvest Figures: A ten-year summary (1965-1974) of the annual deer harvest by town and county is presented in Appendix I. From 1967, when the antler less deer permit system was initiated, to 1970 the statev/ide deer harvest in- creased from 1,193 deer to 2,403. The harvest figure dropped to 2,284 in 1971 and to 2,121 deer in 1973. TTie 1974 harvest of 2,731 deer is an increase of 560 deer over the 1973 figures and 378 deer over the 1970 high of 2,403 deer. It has been demonstrated in previous job performance reports (W-35-R:II-l, 1971, 1972 and 1973) that the state- wide deer harvest fluctuates in relationship to the number of antlerless permits issued annually. Bhe percent of females in the total harvest from 1967 through 1974 shows the percent of females increased from 20 percent in 1967 to 39 percent of the harvest in 1971. Since that time, the percent of females has been reduced to a healthy 30 percent as shovm belov/: Percent of Females in Total Harvest 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 20% 23% 29% 32% 39% 34% 30% 30% A summary of the 1974 deer harvest per sex per management unit is presented in Table 4 and the number of each sex killed statev/ide since 1967 is shown below: Kill Statewide for Each Sex, 1967 through 1974 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1372 1973 1974 Male 954 1104 1451 1629 1385 1504 1477 1949 Female 239 323 595 776 899 787 644 823 Total 1193 1427 2046 2406 2284 2291 2121 2781 The ratio of male to female deer in the statewide deer har- vest from 1967 to 1974 shows the ratio of females increasing annually from 1 male to .25 females in 1967 to 1 male to .65 females in 1971. A reduction of antlerless permits in 1972 helped to reduce the male to female ratio from 1 male to .52 females in 1972 to 1 male to .43 females in 1974 as shown: Ratio of Hales to Females in Total Harvest, 1967-1974 1967 1963 1969 1970 1971 1072 1975 1974 Ratio I'JZS 1:29 1:.41 1:.48 1:.65 1:52 1:.44 1:,43 Table 2 shows the total harvest by sex, age and type season for each management unit and for the entire state. Antlerless Permit Data. Antlerless permit applications in 1974 were 2,000 less (32,000 applicants) than the previous year (Table 5). Tliere v/ere 4,000 sportsman, 358 farmer- landovmer, 400 Nantucket Island and 600 Martha's Vineyard permits issued in 1974. The statewide harvest for antler- less deer permittees was 1,180, but the largest number ever reported by this group was 1,289 deer in 1971. The farmer- landowner permittees reported harvesting 80 deer in 1974. This is the largest harvest since 1968 when 65 deer were taken (Table 5) . Twenty- two percent of the per- mittees took deer. Thie bulk of the 358 farmer -landovmer permits were issued for the four western units in order of importance: Franklin, 34%; Berkshire, 32%; Hampden, 12%; Worcester, 11%; Hampshire, 10%. ITiree permits were issued for Region I, but there were no applications or permits is- sued for Region II, Barnstable, Martha's Vineyard and Nan- tucket . Tlie 600 antlerless permit holders for Martha's Vineyard re- ported 22 male faims, 31 antlered males and 120 females during the 1974 shotgun season. With some minor fluctua- tions, the deer harvests were the same as the 1973 data (Table 5). On Nantucket Island, the male fawn harvest by 400 antlerless permittees decreased slightly from 29 in 1973 to 26 button bucks in 1974. The adult male kill remained unchanged at 22 antlered bucks in both 1973 and 1974. The female harvest was almost the same with 65 females reported in 1973 and 66 females in 1974 (Table 5). The 1974 mainland harvest of deer by 4,000 antlerless permit holders shov/s the harvest of adult males was slightly lower (61) than the 1973 figure of 67 adult males. The male fawn harvest increased from 102 in 1973 to 150 in 1974. An in- crease of 123 females was reported by antlerless permit holders or 602 females in 1974 compared to 379 females in 1973 (Table 5). Antlerless Permittee Success Ratio. The hunter success ratio on the mainland remained unchanged in 1974 with 1 deer killed for every 5 permits issued. Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard antlerless permit holders' success ratio for 1974 was 1 deer per 4 permits. Table 6 presents a summary of the Massachusetts deer harvest per antlerless per*nit per deer management unit and the suc- cess ratio of permit holders for the 1974 shotgun season. The success ratio of pernit holders in the Berkshire unit was 1 deer per 3 permits. For Franklin and Hampden units the success ratio was 1 deer for 5 permits while in Hamp- shire the ratio was 1 deer for 6 antlerless permits. The Worcester unit permit holders reported their success of 1 deer for 8 permits; and Region II and I permit holders re- ported 1 deer for 29 permits and 1 deer for 40 permits respectively. Job Number and Title: I 1-2, Non-Hunting Deer Mortality Investigations Job Objectives: To detenrdne the annual non-hunting decimating factors of the Massachusetts deer herd. Brief Summary: From 1 January to 31 December 1974 there was a 10.4 per- cent increase in non-hunting deer mortality over 1973 re- ports. The 467 deer mortalities consisted of 179 males (42%) and 246 females (52%) and 42 of unknown sex (6%) . Motor vehicles caused the highest mortality, killing 347 deer v/hile 35 were killed illegally, 33 by dogs, 11 drowned, 5 caught in fences, 2 by trains, 1 in crop damage, and 33 due to unknovm causes. Target Date: 31 December 1974 Status of Program: On schedule. Significant Deviations: None Recommendations: Project should continue as it presently exists. Cost: $14,000 Presentation of Data: Techniques. Deer mortality reports are made by Natural Resources officers to the Law Enforcement office in Boston. A copy of each report is provided to the Division. Findings . A summary of the sex classes and the causes of Massachusetts deer mortalities for 1 January through 31 December 1974 is presented in Table 7. During this period, 467 deer mortalities v/ere reported. Of these, 179 were males, 246 were females and no sex data on 42 deer. In order of importance, the number and causes of deer mortalities are as follows: motor vehicle, 347; illegal, 35; dogs, 33; drovmed, 11; fences, 5; trains, 2; crop damage, 1; and other and unknown causes, 33. Table 8 presents a five-year summary of deer mortalities per cause from 1969 through 1974. Although the 1974 mor- talities are lower than the five-year average, there was an increase in the number of deer mortalities com.pared to the 1973 figures. A comparison of the total non-hunting deer mortalities of Massachusetts deer from 1968 through 1974 is presented in Table 9. The 1974 reported mortality of 469 deer is 10.4 percent higher than the 1973 figure of 420 deer. Table 10 presents a comparison of the actual numbers of deer mortalities by sex and the adjusted sex ratios per month. The sex data v/as adjusted on a monthly basis with sex of the larger percentages assigned any fractional part of a deer so that there are only whole deer in the adjusted sex ratio. The adjusted sex ratio of the 1974 non-hunting deer mortalities are: Males Females 198 74 269 100 58% 42% (1973 sex ratio = 47.6% males: 52. 4% females) The non-hunting deer mortalities ranked by counties for a seven-year period 1968 through 1974 is presented in Table 11. Berkshire County remains in number one position as having the largest number of non-hunting deer mortalities reported in 1974. Franklin County moved into second place with Barnstable County dropping to the third slot. Wor- cester County remains in the fourth ranking position. Hampden and Hampshire Counties were tied for fifth position in 1973. In 1974, Hampshire County remains in the fifth ranking position while Hampden County dropped to ninth place. Dulles County rr.oved from ninth place in 1973 to sixth place in 1974. Tne rank of the six remaining counties may have changed slightly from year to year; however, no sig- nificant changes occurred during the 1974 non -hunting deer mortality reporting period. Job Huinber and Title: II- 3, Deer Fertility Studies Job Objectives: To determine the reproductive rate per age class of the Massachusetts deer herd. Brief Summary: Job was inactive during the period covered by this report. Target Date for Job Completion: None Status of Program: Inactive Significant Deviations: None Recommendations: Review old data and evaluate need for continuation. Cost : None Remarks: Inadequate funds for transportation forced the inactive status of this job. Job Number and Title: II-4, Deer Management Recommendations Job Objectives: To determine the size of the Massachusetts deer herd and recommend management techniques that will provide the deer hunter with the greatest hunting opportunity commen- surate with herd population levels. Brief Summary: The calculated minimal deer population was 12,984 deer. This was a 13.59 percent increase in the 1974 calculated minimal deer population. The adult male harvest per square mile of deer range was .25 antlered on the mainland; .84 in Dukes County and 1.73 antlered bucks on Nantucket Island during the 1974 shotgun season. The adult female harvest per square mile of range was .07 does on the mainland; .69 deer for Dukes County and 1.23 does on Nantucket Island. A summary of the total deer harvest shows that .38 males and .10 female deer per square mile of deer range were re- ported on the mainland. The harvest per square mile of deer range for Dukes County was 1.27 males and 1.40 females. On Nantucket, the harvest of deer per square mile of deer range was 2.73 males and 1.92 females. The percent frequency of adult females to adult males was .30 on the mainland; .82 in Dukes County and .69 on Nan- tucket Island. The 1974 deer harvest data indicates the number of sports- man antlerless permits issued per deer management unit in 1972 caused an increase in the male harvest this year where planned and controlled the harvest in the female seg- ment. Target Date: 30 June 1975 Status of Progress: On sdiedule. Significant Deviation: None Recommendations: The following numbers of sportsman permits issued per county and/or region are suggested: County Number of Sportsman Permits Barnstable 200 Berkshire 1300 Franklin 700 Hampden 400 Hampshire 300 Worcester 700 Region I* 200 Region II** 200 Martha *s Vineyard 600 Nantucket 400 Naushon 50 * Region I represents Essex, Middlesex and Norfolk Counties **Region II represents Bristol and Plymouth Counties A big game license that incorporates an antlerless permit application should be investigated. The hunter will be re- quired to indicate in v/hich county or region he would like the application to be drawn when he purchases the license. Cost: ;J750 Presentation of Data: A summary of the sex and age composition of Massachusetts deer at biological deer check stations for an eight -year period on the mainland and for four years on Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket are presented in Tables 12, 13, 14, and 15. Ttie number of deer in any age class repre- sents the number of deer aged in that class and the totals are the number of deer aged at the biological stations. Not all deer checked at a biological station are aged. Some deer have the lower jaw shot away, the jaws are frozen or the deer is on top of a car and inaccessible to the sta- tion operator. Therefore, the total number of deer handled by a station may differ from the total number of deer aged. Massachusetts' shotgun harvest and the total number of antlerless permits issued per year from 1967 through 1974 is presented in Table 16. The shotgun hunters harvested 2,669 deer during the 1974 season. Of the deer taken, 1,878 were males; 1,665 adult males and 213 male fawns. The adult male harvest in 1974 was the highest adult male kill since the antlerless system started in 1967. The fe- male harvest was 791 does of which 563 were adults and 228 were female favms. It is interesting to note that a comparison of the highest reported harvest of deer prior to 1974 occurred in 1970 when 2,367 deer v/ere reported and 7,347 antlerless permits issued. In 1974 there were 5,358 antlerless permits issued or 1,989 less permits than in 1970 yet there was an in- crease of 302 deer ta.ken in 1974. The increase in the 1974 harvest was in the adult male segment with button bucks slightly lower than the 1970 figure. There were slight increases in the adult female and favm females re- ported in the 1974 harvest compared to the 1970 figures. Table 17 presents a summary of the percentage changes in adult harvest and calculated minimal populations of deer in Massachusetts, 1967 through 1974. In 1974, the adult male harvest was 1,665 deer. Tliis was an increase of 407 deer or 23.35 percent higher than the 1973 harvest of 1,258 adult males. The calculated adult male population was 3,107 for an increase of only .86 percent above the 1973 figure (3,080). Taere was a substantial increase (21.03 percent) in the calculated adult female deer popu- lation from 3,850 deer in 1973 to 4,660 adult does in 1974. The calculated minimal statewide deer population was 12,984 deer in 1974. This was an increase of 13.59 per- cent above the 1973 population of 11,431 deer. A suninary of the adult male and adult female deer harvest per square mile of deer range in Massachusetts from 1967 through 1974 is presented in Tables 13 and 19. There was a slight increase in the adult male and female harvest in all counties on the mainland and a slight decrease in the male and female harvests on Nantucket and Dukes Counties. The data presented in Tables 18 and 19 will become increas- ingly significant during the next few years. Prior to 1974 antler less permits were issued for three deer management units; namely, the mainland (4000 permits); Nantucket (400 permits) and Martha's Vineyard (600 permits). Since main- land has been divided into eight management units, the ef- fect of the antlerless permits on the management units will be observed and the number of permits issued for each unit can be increased or decreased dependent on the number of adult males and adult females harvested. Table 20 presents a summary of the total harvest of deer in Massachusetts by sex, by county and the harvest of deer per square mile of deer range for the 1974 deer seasons (archery, primitive firearm, paraplegic and shotgun seasons), The island counties of Nantucket and Dukes have the highest reported harvest of deer per square mile with 4.65 deer and 2.67 deer respectively. On the mainland Berkshire has a reported harvest of 1.30 deer per square mile of range. This was the first time since the inception (1967) of the antlerless permit system that any mainland county had a re- ported harvest of one deer per square mile of deer range. Franklin County has a reported kill of .73 deer per sauare mile. Barnstable, !Iampden and Hampshire have .47; .45 and ,42 deer harvested per square mile of deer range respective- ly. Worcester County, with 1307.6 square miles of deer range, has only a reported ,17 deer per square mile. The remaining counties; namely, Bristol, Essex, Middlesex and Plymouth have .02 deer or less reported. There were no deer reported harvested in Norfolk County, Table 21 presents the percent frequency ratio of adult fe- males to adult males from 1967 through 1974, It would ap- pear that the deer management units of the mainland are in good shape in relationship to the harvest of adult females to adult males. All counties, with the exception of Middlesex, have reported ,39 or less adult does to adult males. The island units of Nantucket and Dukes Counties have .69 and .82 adult does respectively per adult buck. The adult male harvest in Worcester County is expected to increase during the 1975 deer season. A summary by management unit of the shotgun deer harvest, the number of sportsman antlerless permits issued, the square miles of deer range, the adult harvest per square mile of range and the percent frequency ratio of adult fe- males to adult males for the 1974 shotgun deer season is presented in Table 22. The data in this report has been presented on a county basis, but in Table 22 the data is presented on a deer management unit basis. i Prepared by Date Figure No. 1 presents a summary of the total Massachusetts deer harvest by sex per square mile of deer range by county for an eight -year period, 1967 through 1974. In Berkshire County, the deer harvest shows an increase in total harvest. The male harvest increased at a greater rate than the fe- male. The female harvest declined slightly in Franklin County while the total harvest and the male harvest increased, It is felt that this is a healthy situation and a rise in the 1975 harvest of males is expected. In Hampden County the male harvest and the total harvest are increasing at about the same rate. Tlie female harvest declined slightly in 1974. Tlie deer harvest in Hampshire County showed a slight increase in the total harvest and the buck and doe Harvests. The rate of increased harvest in this county ap- pears to be healthy. In Vtorcester County there was a slight decline in all harvest data. It would appear that Worcester County was being overgunned but it is felt that this manage- ment unit has not recovered from being overgunned from 1969 through 1972. The distribution of antlerless permits on a deer management unit basis should relieve some of the pressure on the female segment of the Worcester County deer herd. The rate of increase of the total harvest and the female harvest appear to be about the same in Barnstable County. However, the female harvest is well below the male harvest and the male harvest is still showing a slight in- crease. Figure No. 2 presents a summary of the total Massachusetts deer harvest by sex per square mile of deer range on the mainland, Dukes and Nantucket Counties from 1967 through 1974. On the mainland, the deer harvest appears to be as expected with a continued increase in the total harvest, a continued increase in the male segment, and a slight in- crease in the female segment. The deer harvest on Dukes County continued to take an expected decline with more fe- males than males being reported. It may be necessary to reduce the number of antlerless permits for Dukes County in 1976. Nantucket deer management unit had an expected de- cline in the total harvest along with a decline in the male and female harvest. Tae decline should continue in 1975. Mien the same number of adult bucks and does are being reported the number of antlerless permits issued can be reduced. MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AT^D WILDLIFE Bureau of Wildlife Research and Management Approved: Arthur W. Neill, Superintendent James J. McDonough Game Biologist Table 1. Summary of the number of antlerless permits issued, the deer harvest per deer management unit and the ranking order of importance as a deer-producing unit for the 1974 Massachusetts shotgun season. Unit Berkshire Franklin Hampden Worcester Martha's Vineyard*** Hampshire Nantucket Barnstable Region I* Region II** Number Antlerless Permits Male Female Total Rank Percentage of Total 1,300 763 238 1,056 1 39.6 700 347 101 448 2 16.8 400 131 50 231 3 8.7 700 144 69 213 4 7.9 600 102 95 197 5 7.4 300 125 43 168 6 6.3 400 88 66 154 7 5.8 200 91 42 133 8 4.9 200 15 5 20 9 0.3 200 12 4 16 9 0.6 5,000 1,878 788 2,666 * Region I includes Middlesex, Norfolk, Essex and Suffolk Counties. ** Region II includes Bristol and Plyiiiouth Counties. *** Gosnold 5 males and 30 males not included. O 4-> o 6V> H 03 pa o H e u o U •H UU > •P •H s •H a, o o OJ o \o O O o CM O • • • • • • • • • • IT) a> o r- o r^ O^ r^ O vO O to o o o rH o o o O t>- to Ov If) i-H (Ti vO CO CM to (N CM vO o LD to t^ •<:t- 00 to vO r-^ 1^ en o r— 1 t^ to CO VO r-l o O tu •P O r-l -^ ■P V) C o o CM o o o o ~ CM vO fH rH CM to r-l o to VO vO CM 00 CO CM rH LO -^ rH rH o LO to r-4 rH CO vO '^d- CM O to rH to rH CO LO CM rH CM CO 00 to en VO LO LO to CM CM CO (N CM to CO to CM 00 00 vO CM 00 00 CO CO •H ^ o * f-i to ■p lA X ^ M tn O o !=! Jh •H -^ v> crt « t-i OT (^ ;^ ca i:3 W u* o •H i- «5 CD V) LO cr^ 00 to ■^ o o 00 •«* o to LO ^o Tt 00 o CNJ CM \£> rH o CN •* •* *\ *> r-{ o to ':t U^ 1-4 c •H -P •H c e 0) bjO cd C £ O o r«- CM vo LO cn en r>. VO o CM Ol U-} to O o \0 o o^ vO •^ 1-4 to LO o Cvj CM vO r- o o rH to LO to -^ C7i A A rH CM to X* VO * t>> rH LO r^ to vO '^ to (N to rH r>. 00 LO vO rH fH to CO o o LO VO rH (NJ vD "vl- CM vO o to r-» iH (SJ o o LO to to CM CM rH -* LO o (N rH vO r>- o o rH LO r- to ""^ o *\ O o rg to O lO O O tH LO vO o o iH o o o t^ en r^ r^ CM CM -^ o CM CM t^ CM o t^-i rt at vO r--. vo r-s LO o ft r-i \0 a> CM ^ rH vO rH CM CM •\ •» •\ • iH to vO t-- iH LO r-- rH O u o o ^ to CM CPi h- LO '* at o LO "5t LO '>f o o o CM 00 rH iH •^l- CM to LO o rH CM CO (M r-- o o rH rH vO C7» to •t rH a> •i #\ t-H lO to vO O rH CO cn r>- CM to to «vf 00 t-- o vO f-* e o V, o •H g >s rO •P to o > o Qi 'V3 -d c C3 tn -p •H E 5h trt (U P , <>> «4H W °s U O ^ to S to 5 rt LO rH O o cn r-> to at LO h- LO CM O Oi rH Ot Oi o o cr> o r- r-. o rH '>:^ vo o CM rH Ti- CC' VD o O f-f -^ vO CM •=* CT^ •k ^ rH CM to -^ f-* •\ rH 00 CM CM to (M * to C .s to p 4J 0) O •H •H rH s C3 u s rH o r\, a. p ^ ^ rH ca rH < a. u. 10 rH cd P O H CM ■^ '!l- LO vO CM O CM CM CM rH ^ S to rH P O E- to P •H E !h (D O. P 0) o B 2: o rH P rH 3 T5 ^ S 03 <1> < Uh U, to rH Oj P O H rH vO to LO to to CM to at CM (M CM O 3 to /— \ to to HH O X to 4J rH O U V) O 5 rH o a w to tw rt o o o •H -M 03 fi to u o g 3 V) Q> (/) o to •H (U ■P

CO 0 Q f-l Q fH P (U -H fH (U o o- Cl to to O rH U O O •H fH P P .1^ (U rH rt e O fH s p o t_3 a> o • • rH Lfi m • rH 00 • • rH vO • • rH in ■ • rH csj • • rH CM • • rH 9 • to « « • • fH • • rH •-0 • • O^ '* o to C7k t>^ r^ fH o c?> •^ to o^ '* Ol LO r^ lO to TJ- rH CTi to rH o •St o o CO rH fH o rH LO • • • • iH • • • • rH • • to • • • • • • vO • • • 9 • • rH rH fH rH i-H rH O rH fH rH rH rH f-i CM m:> to O sr O r>. CM CD r~i to LO a • rH rH • • to • • fH to « * rH fH • » fH rH • • o vO • • rH O • • rH tH • • rH rH fH en * • fH rH • • •^ CO •<:t Li*> '^ o o t^ o "<* 00 C?i to • • If) • • • 0 • « rH « • CM a « * * LO • • CM « • ft • • to • • rH t-H rH iH rH rH O rH t-4 rH .H fH 00 to O o O o to t^ fH LO lO rH CM • • • • in • • CvJ • • O rH • • to • • CM * • CM • • tH • • CM r-i rH i-H fH fH rH rH rH .H fH r-i CO r-i O to o lO "^ CM CM LO VO to *^» VO «-^ •O ^ «?> 7^ V^ «r. CVJ fH VO r^ rH to rH o o CM to o CO ■^ CO o fH rH "* CM rH Cvi CM CM LO -sS- to to CO CM rH •Si- (J% CM »H to o LO CM r-- to r-^ rH CO CM CM CM t-H to iH O VO o O . to fH CM f-H CM CM o CM o o o O ^ o O o o O O o o o o O o o o o o o o o to I^ r^ to ■^ CM CM CM o vO ^ o fH LO to CO ^ CO o o> (-J \u O 00 r^ LO ^'■ o CO LO -^ CM CT» CO ■* to 00 vO to LO CO vO VO 00 CO r«. LO 00 LO C7> c\ e\ f^ •K •\ •t •» *i 00 o ^ >J CM fH oo CM CM P u <7i u S 5 bO bO u c ^ o fH o OJ ctf a> 0 C(J Ctf -rJ CQ u. t» ix^ ■•^ r,> 1^ EC ^> 0) •H o p p CO o u u o o •H o o u § tn OS ^( s T) O <-> f-i O w u Vi 0) •H •P •H rH u i 0) -o to

H rH to CM CO o «H u •H JH o ■p o •H rH T3 Ctf (U (0 V) to O S bOrH O O rH ^H 0) o c O Xi (-* p ■P o s p —I u ci ^— ' P O rH P 03 ■5 ^ 3 O /—\ u 00 o CO to r-^ ■i CO lO CM rH CM ^-^ (D O iH iH rH ft) LO Q / — \ u vO o cri rQ vO < — ' o p «H ''S O CM O O CM /-N u ft) CNj XI r^ r>. r: .H V_^ ft) p CM a to o to CO p to a s 3 •-3 Cr> vO CO CM CM CN to "d- CM / — \ ^1 r- ft) to .Q O r-t E 00 CM CM CM ^— ' ft) > CM rH O rH 12 to to LO o to V— ' to vO rH tH rH CM to to CM o to iH ,-i to CM V— ' CM CM \0 to rH rH vO iH rH CM NO CM CO Oi to e c .-J U > rH TJ c« 03 cU ^•-^ a ft) to to Q P u oo ft) « f^ O rH o to 4) 2 o OO r^ r*. CM rH S.QHHQIl.HCJOCOE"' ^'> CM "St CM to rH rH CO ft) iH o •H > rH TJ rt ft) ^ bO C O to ft) 5 P bOrH O O O rH fw S Q HH Q Table 8. Five-year summary of deer mortalities of Massachusetts deer reported by Natural Resources officers, 1969 through 1974. 5-yr. Cause 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 Avg. Total Motor Vehicles 397 400 373 321 321 347 362 1,812 Dogs 166 204 219 41 36 33 133 666 Illegal Kills 39 25 39 44 23 35 34 170 Crop Damage 2 14 4 1 2 1 5 23 Unknown Causes 51 38 41 35 21 33 37 186 All Other Causes 27 17 18 11 15 18 18 88 Totals 682 698 694 453 420 469 589 2,945 Table 9. A comparison of total non -hunting from 1968 through 1974. deer mortalities of Ilassachusetts deer 1968 1969 1970 No. of Deer 613 682 698 Percent Change 11% 2% -.6% 1971 1972 1973 1974 694 453 420 469 -34.7% -7.3% +10.4% Table 10. Comparison of actual numbers of deer mortalities by sex* and adjusted data for Massachusetts deer per month, 1974. Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Unknovm Adjusted Male Female Sex Total 24 Male 11 Female 11 13 13 7 5 4 16 10 6 13 7 2 32 14 18 10 11 3 24 11 13 14 20 7 41 17 24 21 23 7 51 24 27 7 28 2 37 7 30 4 11 1 16 4 12 8 17 1 26 8 18 22 21 3 46 24 22 45 37 10 92 51 41 17 43 2 62 17 45 179 246 42 Adjusted Sex Ratio 467 198 269 198 males: 269 females 74 males : 100 females 42f males: 5S SO to CM vD Oi o CM to in vO CO to 00 00 CM lO LO CM CM CM C>J C § u ce C8 P O H rsi to i-i o\ to VO LO to o vO LO lO LO to 1-4 00 00 vO to to Oi o J-l V) o •H P • H i-H OJ u u o o •S p I § c v> -p p w (n «n I o <-• 1-4 O p o P o H .ii oe: vO cy> p o H n- i-< 'St 00 00 CM to CM CM NO LO LO CO CM CM CO CM CM O to CT> C7> ';^ rH rH to 00 LO 00 to to o to CM LO vO LO to CM to o\ CM CM o LO CM to rH fH to LO LO <0 to CM CO 00 to vO 00 to to C7> to CM CM SO 00 CM to T-( «< U ■p Vl CD 4:; 0 H Q LD r>. LO CNJ rH to 00 00 (N CvJ to "«* LO •^ to to «/) ^ w o X) :3 C CQ rt CO i—l tH Oi CNi Oi cr> '^i- CO r«- rH CO •^ LD t^ o CM to r>. o^ 1-1 o r>. o V) ■p -0 rH •H (ij rt e >-< *-- ,0 fH w O u C!3 o w +J to \D LO "vf LO a O +-> ■p (1> w o Vi to •— i CO c o V) -p ^ •p o 3 3 CQ ca LO o \o Ch <7> o tn rH 00 vO 00 VO CM to to r-. 00 t^ vO rH vD <7» to rH LO O to cn to to LO vO (M CM LO o^ vO rH rH CM CM iH rH CM •P tp 3 < c3 vO (M cn 00 VD -O CO LO 00 CM O'^ r^ O LO LO vO u> o CM to r-^ CM C>4 M^ rH rH 1-i tf) t^ to . r^ t^ c^ cr> en en CT> >- t-t fi rH rH rH fH fi rH V) -p +J o nl V) C •H u 3 CS C •H o o o> tiO rH o P! 1 u C* C" o J2 O Cu U O^ r-H p o o vO u CTi 60 rHi c 1 rt 00 ^ vO CJ C7> 1— 1 cc- tOrH CD ^ v£) p o f-4 o rH to rH o CO 00 r>» »-( (M o LO CO o un to • in rH + fvj 00 to CM CO o o rH to c rH lO a. • • (M r-l t-O + + o LO CM • CM to Ci to CM to + to en • CM CM CO -vj- Cfi •<=!• r^ LO Cr> 1-4 to iH CM O LO 00 CM cn. o t^ in C5 00 o o CM rH o CO LO to + CM O •^ O CO CM rH vO «* vO o •^ O h- CT) n «v •% •» rH iH CM CM 00 to CM VO vO CO cr» r- CO LO rH to vO oc o O rH CTs 9\ ^ •\ rH CM CM \0 -M i-H tf) ^>4 rt O P P O S > fH c rH • H •H u P o 3 P s a TJ •H 'O cd •H ft ce P 03 cti i-H 3 s U) o 'a rH T3 Pa T3 c r-t CD 3 bO rH 1 pj CM r- r^ u a\ rH CM CM . . o O^ O MrH O C I P 6^ c^ LO t^ o •^ VO o vO CO vO .H vO o rH to m to CM to CM O o o VO to to VO CO to o 00 CM 00 o CM to o CM + to CM o to vO ^0 CM LO • to r-4 00 o o rH LO 00 LO to CM o 00 •^ to CO o o VO LO to vD LO lO to to CM r>- o^ to to o CM vD i-H to I-H rH O (X5 CO t>- r»~ I-H CM o to cn •\ •t •t •t fi f-t CM »* I-H p tH tn « rt o 4-> P o S > rH C rH .H •H u 3 o 3 P Im vd d •H -O «} •H rC ctf P C^J rH 3 S o T) rH TJ t:v, t3 c t-i O 3 (U o CD o a P iO, P cu P •H s rt o nj CS P rH Pa rH O rH CCS p 3 3 rH 3 rH rH CJ 0) o Pi o 3 3 rH .H rH S rH cx '^ Cti ?1 C^5 to s 3 O O •H ■M 03 u >> c g- m +j c o o f-1 (D M IX, o CT» CO CT> CO r-l 00 vO t^ • (NJ to PL, i-i r-( •P i-H 3 na < • o vo '^ o i-< t^ "=^f a* 00 \0 CNJ Ln fH ,-) to Ji— If) «— I to CM I— 1 t-H ^t^OOOtOLOtO r-lr-HCNlrHtOi— ICNJ'tt to to O to i-H lO »H CO ^^ r^ to \0 r-i CM to 00 '*'<*inoooor^t^ rt t-H rH to cr» o to CM rH •?t"*tocoLncotoo vo CM»HtOrH(MOCMf-H O • ••••••• • OrHCMCMTfO^vOrH fH to '^t rH 00 LO to CM CM to i-ltOvO'-H\0 0>C^O vO O vO rj- CM rH r>. vO ^O «-l rH «=* \o C^ rH r-i r>« rH O o o CM C ^ V) S a. C7^ O vO O O T3- 00 LO LO CD LO to o cr> Tf vO CO O LO vD LO to vO CO to to CM P ,^ o P 03 S tn p o CO o p •H S to CM CM o P o * to p •H s to P •H e a, o c 03 •-J I f-i (U s u to T) r-( o c: H a. •73 •H o u rH u b •?? cr [X, • tn CT> ^ Ol VO (M r-l b i-H r>- to tO'!:ftOCOO totocMcgrvi(M3 r» to to r^j CO CM LOC7>'^tO^Ov£) iH rH • iH P T) < • LOtOtOvOr^rHOOtO t=j t^ r^ th t*~ to a» to CM rH CM o to to LO LO r^ OJ 00 CO o rH C7i O '^t ^ LO vD CM rH t^ r>. 'tt to CM rH o cy> CO rH Xi +-> to g o fH •H U •H rH w ni 0) p. E <1> •H X O c3 oa ca w ci, a rt 'H o T* '^;? 'r^ ►H lii f^ 3 rH o o e ^ iH 3 u O O O to to CM lO cn CM o o o to O O O o to CM o in o o o o lO LO o to LO LO LO C7i o o o •P o s o a, CO 4h +j O .H O O 2 Cl, CM 00 o NO o o to 00 o o 00 LO CM o o o VD CO m 00 o o vO to 3 Q G (n •P o CO trt O -H e • u O (U 2 a. vO O O •* ^o:) vO o o CO vO CM 00 00 LO to LO to lO o o o CO LO LO vO o o •p o S V) +J fH O O. CO o w •H e f^ a, vO CM to LO o CM fH <0 * Xi in S -P 3 'H s e rH « Ctf O, P O 4h H O P •H e U o I fH a) s u nJ a. CO s OS O C 3 3 S ^ (0 o -p ft ft «w o p^p w) C (U Hh o O Fm O ft Ph fli O O g -^ P P c •xi c ^ rt P p «.H P c •H 3 3 ft a> P Pu c O P e w c P! ft c4 rt ft X ft • ft O 'd- o o r>- O t3 a\ TJ t-^ tp s ° ft W) W ^ P Q) O rH «5 A -H o w -o «$ X o TO -P o p g •> w 3 P o W -H f-4 <§ • C4 0) r-l ^ CJ H o o c -P P (U cr rH 05 ft SS ^ 0) P P U, fH C 3 a> 4J n3 O rH < ft P a. < cd ft p H Q * to o rH 6 p w > I 3 S (.:

h«. CM CM tH r^ to to ir> CM to LO 00 CJ> 00 NO to vD rH to CM CM o vO to to LO in to o CM to CM CM '5^ VO CM CM NO o o CM o o o o to r>. o o o o ■«;r to o o o CM o o CM o o vO o «> rH O O *P ft ft , o o u P.S 0) T3 P ^ C P 03 O O C (t> r-t •H to &. to O P r-l T3 t3 n3 03 P S rH nj O r-» • +J 3 X to rH W Jh o3 (0 CO O u-i to o to o ft CJ -o o -g P rH O to O C ? -H *P t-l (-H <1> C fi rH O O Ctf -H .H £ &0 &0 a> a> o ti, a: oc: * * * * tJH o iH •H 0 ^ ^ ■P to © > f-l a ft u • (i> ^-\ 0) ■>rf -« r^ Ci V) rH +J •p ^ © to w D :3 O ^ fH o ^ oJ P w tf) t^ rt \D C\ rH rH v_/ 03 •»-> >-, o .'.J +J C P N H-< rCl o 0) >-. to u n rt rt 1 ^ 3 Vh w <1> u> < "d •H p to C4 o CO in o •H {^ b. a> fH •H in ^1 fl> rH 03 O O ^ N V 1 i i / ■ { / I 1 { \v \ f t^ . vH o 00 O o o o CD t^ O P to C9 P '/) O o o >H •H <-• r«« i- ^ i* 0 rr t--- y h/ ( 1 ^ 1 t I 1 \- \ CO LO o O c LO o o V to o 00 Ln « o o o '■Si * o o M C cU ^4 u o <0 -o IH O - V) C3-) rH u o rC f5< Kn 3 X O o ^ V) X +J X ^ t^ o 4J CTi V) i-H o s— ' > u to nJ o ,ci •H ■M U C o P Q) o TS u w +J >•-> o +J ^ a> o tf) *-< s 4-) ^ c o rt rt 1— Tt. W) irt TJ J3 c r^ rt i-i v> cd 0 ■M M O ■a •M Q 0> •* /3 TJ •P % t*H r-i O C •H >s nJ fH e JS E (D i 4: V) c < 0 CM o •H O o o to o 04 ■^ « r-^ to i-i CN| 4-> r». <0 0 i-H M t^ 0 ■p 0 I^ S CO 1 1- 1 ^ . 1,^ • 0 o in o o to o CM o « 10 o to o CM < •* to t^ - <^ r^ <0 ■" 1—1 V} G t^ 0 0 ^ u. •••.. -^^ g \ \ . cr> vO ) - CO 0 1 « 10 • 0 \ to CM 0 rH *• ^ 1— 1 T) rt /I 0 r-i -■^ ' t>. c lI •H li : Cj ¥ CT> vO \ CO 0 1 LO • 0 ^ JOB PERFORMANCE REPORT ^ State Cooperator: Project No. : Job No. : Period Covered Summary: Objectives: Procedures: Findings: "-^ f>. MASSACHUSETTS Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game W-35-R-I7 Project Title: Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey lll-l Job Title Mourning Dove Census 21 May to I July 1974 Calling doves were counted on three randomized routes In cooperation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service's an- nual mourning dove breeding population census. The total number of calling doves decreased nearly two-thirds as compared to 1973 counts. One route was relocated due to an impassable road. To obtain an index of the spring breeding population of mourning doves. In accordance with instructions from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, doves were censused on two of the three randomized routes established in 1967. The third route, 8A (0081) was permanently relocated since part of the old route became Inaccessible due to washouts. Doves were censused by roadside coo counts on these routes between 21 and 30 May. Division personnel conducted two counts and a Fish and Wildlife Service cooperator conducted the third. Results of the 1974 call count of mourning doves are com- pared with previous years of data in Table I. The total number of calling doves for all routes combined decreased 62 percent from 1973 results. Taken individually. Route 8 decreased by 100 percent, and Route 8A and 10 re- mained unchanged. The weighted mean number of doves heard per comparable Massachusetts route was 6.1 in 1973 and 4.8 in 1974 (Ruos, 1974). Ruos further reports that the breeding population index for the Eastern Management Unit decreased 3.1 percent from 16.2 doves per route in 1973 to 15.7 doves per route in 1974. Long-term trends also show a de- cline though regression analysis indicated a slight upward trend In the combined non-hunting states. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 I vo vo 0 +- o a: ® ro ro o. E o o c O TJ L. (0 o o Si 0^ CM ON o C3N VO CO vo 0^ vo o\ VO vo 0^ +- o o o o CM VO ^MH ' ' o o o o o VO •«w M«* 1 + 1 o o 1 o o + o o + o in 1 o o o ro CM VO 1 + 1 o o 1 o o + o o + o in + o o 1 o o + o o + o in 1 o o o o (SI 00 1 4- 1 1 o o * fO ro VO 0^ O ro O CM c^ CM ON O o 0^ — o> VO o> Csj CO vo ~ vo 0^ VO CM vo vO CM CM CM CM CM CM CM ro — r- ro vD VO vo Csl VO CM ro in CM O O CM ro ro in rO rO • in o o ro ro in ro ro O O ro ro ro ro 00 tr) * (D sz * 4- 03 <. o o CI) 00 h- ">- TJ June, one of about nine poults OoS Icn (0,2 miles) north of Prescott four- corners s, and one of about seven poults near lit. Pleasant. Fei-x birds remain in the Barre and Douglas State Forest areas. One unhanded bird V7as kil3.ed by a car near the Barre Falls Dam in June 1974, and one bird uas seen that fall in Douglas near the Pvhode Island line. Flocks of game-farm ancestry turkeys in the Berkshires have declined considerably. Only two to three birds were reported in the Toxm of lit. Washington, and no birds were reported from lliddlef ield. Forest personnel did report tv70 birds- — one unmarked and one with a red wing tag — from October liountain State Forest. Since the last serai-wild bird marked with a red tag any';;here in this area was an adult hen released in Iliddlefield in spring 1963, I suspect that either marked birds from Beartov7n moved into this area or else the tag color V7as not correctly recorded. Single turkeys V7ere seen in Sunderland, ^/Ihately, and Peru, Ti70 or three birds seen in llonson are probably survivors of an illegal release by private individuals. The project leader gave one slide shoxj and taped one television commentary on the turkey project. Acknowledgment ; I extend my appreciation to personnel of the BeartovTn State Forest, the Division of Law Enforcement, the Metropolitan District Commission, and the iiassachusetts Cooperative Uildlife Pesearch Unit for their cooperation and assistance in reporting turkey sightings. ■k a tfe * Job IV-2 Evaluation of Habitat Utilized by Transplanted Wild Turkeys Job Objectives: Habitat utilized by transplanted wild turkeys will be evaluated in relation to total habitat available, with special reference being given to habitats selected for winter roosting, winter feeding, nesting, and brood rearing . This job was inactive during this segment . MASSACHUSETTS DIVISIO!! OF FISHERIES A^TD WILDLIFE Bureau of Wildlife Research and llanagement Prepared by James E. Cardoza Game Biologist Approved by Colton H. Bridges Deputy Director Date PERFORMANCE REPORT State Project IIo. : Project Title: Project Type: Period Covered: I'asGachusetts V7-35-R-17 .a i^ _rj i ■iJ. c iw « .^. I Game Population Trend and Harvest Survey Research and Survey 1 June 1'374 to 31 Hay 1975 Work Plan VI Black Bear Study Work Plan Objective: To define the range of the black bear in liassachusetts and to determine its population characteristics and rate of harvest by hunting. Job VI-1 Job Objectives: Summary : Target Date: Black Bear Population Dynamics To define the range of the black bear in liassachusetts and to determine its population characteristics and rate of harvest by hunting. Applications for bear hunting permits were received from 390 sportsmen. T\7o bear were taken during the open season, and one was killed by an automobile. New reports of 29 observations totalling 38 bear were re- ceived from five counties. Two instances of problem bears were investigated. 31 May IS 79. Status of Progress: On schedule. Significant Deviations: Hone Recommendations: Continue evaluation of bear harvest through checking stations and periodic questionnaires. Continue determination of bear range and populations through recording of sightings. Investigate nuisance complaints as necessary. Promote public education programs to lessen nan-bear conflicts , Cost: Remarks: $555.46 (project leader man days - 7-1/2) Procedures: Current bear hunting regulations include mandatory re- porting and tagging of bear. Bear checking stations were maintained daily during bear week at three lo- cations: Birch Hill Wildlife Management Area, Baldwin- ville; Bitzer State Fish Hatchery, Montague; Western Wildlife District Headquarters, Pitts field. Publication approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent #5146 IJIien bear vrere presented for examination, station per- sonnel affixed a metal gane seal to the bear, removed a premolar tooth, and recorded the following inforna- tion: tovm of hill, date killed 3 sex and weight of bear, and method of kill. The Information-Education Section issued periodic news releases asking for reports of bear. The project leader gave one slide talk on the bear study. Several sight irgs uete reported by cooper ators from the Uni- versity of Massachusetts and the Division of Lav; En- forcement . Findings: Bear hunting permit applications were received from 390 individuals during the 1974 season (Table 1), with two hunters succeeding in taking a bear. One 37,2 kg (192 lb.) sow \-jas shot in Hiddlefield, Hampshire County, on the first day of the season (18 November) by a hunter using dogs. The second, a 123.5 kg (272 lb,) boar, was taken without dogs in Savoy, Berkshire County, on 22 November, the fifth day of the season. These are the second and third bears legally talcen since the season was shortened in 1970. One cub , sex undetermined , was killed by a car on Route 2 in North Adams on 5 September. The bear v/as retained to be mounted whole as a display specimen. A cooper ator reported finding a dead bear near Thunder Mountain in Ashfield in December and sportsmen reported a second dead bear near the Middlefield-Washington tovm line dur- ing deer week. Division personnel investigated, but could not confirm either of these reports. Table 1, Number of bear permit applications and number of bear taken in llassachusetts from 1970-1974. Year No, Permits No. Bear Taken Other Mortalities 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 214 200 423 309 390 1 illegal kill; 1 road kill 1 illegal kill 1 road kills 1 captured bear 1 road kill New reports of bear received during this segment in- cluded 21 sightings, five reports of track or sign, two hunter kills, and one road kill, totalling 38 bear seen in 19 towns. Reports by county for the period 1952 to 1975 are presented in Table 2. Records of 512 bear noted on 415 occasions in 77 tovms have been collected for the period 1952 to liay 1975. Table 2, Reports of black bear by county for llassachusetts, 1952 to Hay 1975 County 1952 -May 1974 June 1974-IIny 1975 Total Percent Berkshire 129 9 13 G 33.4 Franklin 154 6 160 38.8 Hampden 19 '} 21 5,1 Hampshire 64 o o 72 17.4 Middlesex 1 0 1 0.2 Worcester 17 3G4 4 29 21 413 5.1 100 oO Four family groups were observed, two v/ith one cub each, one with tvro cubs, and one with three cubs. Two problem situations were investigated. The first, in Westminster, Worcester County, in late July 1974, in- volved a bear which was frequenting woodland adjacent to a local golf course. The owner, having located several spots where the bear had dug into logs and stone vjalls, vras concerned that the bear would dig up the golf greens. Also, since bear are rarely seen in this area, the tovmspeople x^ere fearful of it and were keeping their children inside. Division personnel con- tacted the local police and the golf course owner, examined the area where the diggings were found, and explained that the bear would not dig up the greens or attack the children. The bear and bear sign was seen a few more times in subsequent weeks but no damage occurred, and the bear apparently left the area that fall. The second incident involved bear depredation on several hives in lliddlefield in late October. Since the bear hunting season opened a few weeks later, Division per- sonnel did not attempt to control the animal. The bear remained in the area and was shot by a hunter on the first day of the season. Acknowledgments; I appreciate the efforts of the Division of Law Enforce- ment in investigating complaints and sightings. ****** Job VI-2 Job Objectives; Summary Historical Records of the Black Bear in llassachusetts To determine trends in black bear populations and dis- tribution in llassachusetts from pre-Colonial times to the present. Trends in black bear populations from pre-Colonial times to the present were determined by an intensive literature search of published and unpublished records Maps have been prepared showing fluctuations in bear distribution. Instances of nuisance bear situations have been compiled and described and possible solutions discussed. The historical aspects of bear manaf^einent have been examined and the present hunting regulations for the Northeast tabulated. The effect of various management programs on the beards status is discussed and recom- mendations for Massachusetts are presented. Target Dates 31 May 1976. Status of Progress". On schedule. Significant Deviations: None Recommendations; Publish findings of this job, and accrued data from Job VI-lj as a Division research bulletin. Cost: $3j9S8.2S (project leader man days, 93.5) Remarks: The first draft of a comprehensive report on the history and status of the bear in Massachusetts and adjacent states has nearly been completed. The outline for this report is as follows: I. Introduction II. Procedures III. Regional background A. Topgraphy and vegetation B. Indian population and hunting methods C. Discovery and settlement D. Civil history E. Land use and general wildlife situation IV. Eistory and Status of the Black Bear A. Pre-Colonial B. Massachusetts 1. 1620-1750 2. 1750-1850 3. 1850-1950 4. Present (1950-date) C. Connecticut D. Rhode Island E. New Hampshire F. Vermont V. Bears and Han VI „ Bear Ilanac'ement VII, Summary and Conclusions Prior to European settlements bears x/ere well distributed throughout New England with the possible exception of parts of southeastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Tribal hunting for food and clothing may have had some effect on those peripheral areas, where bears were scarce, but Indian numbers away from the coast and river valleys were low and the overall bear population was probably not threatened by native hunting. After colonization, though, human populations climbed rapidly and bears were severely persecuted because of their depredations on crops and flocks and their reputed danger to man. The clearing of the land for farms and settlements restricted the bears' available habitat and brought them into closer contact with man v7ho persisted in killing the shaggy varmints xi/hich dared to infringe on human territory. This V7idespread eradication of the forests, coupled with the unrestricted year-round shoot- ing of bears resulted in a serious slump in populations . After 1300, bears were uncommon in southern New England, and by 1870-1830 were at a low point regionwide, being restricted to the more remote mountainous sections of Vermont, Nex^ Hampshire and extreme northwestern Massa- chusetts . Persecution slackened as bear numbers dropped and agriculture declined, and after 1900 remnant populations began expanding as Bruin straggled back into the wood- lands springing up on long abandoned farmsteads. After World ITar II, with bear numbers apparently increasing, its popularity grew and its status gradually shifted from despised vermin to favored game animal, v/ith com- mensurate legislative protection and research and man- agement programs being initiated. Bears are now found at least as stragglers, in all Nev; Hampshire and main- land Vermont counties, and the v/estern half of Massachu- setts and adjacent areas of Connecticut. Bear problems may arise, not so much from unencouraged attacks on man or depredations on crops or livestock, but from close contact situations where careless or heedless persons feed or harass wild bears, V7ith sub- sequent potential for injury or property damage. Man- agement programs should incorporate public education efforts aimed at decreasing this adverse conflict. Response to "nuisance" or depredation situations should be flexible, and solutions short of destroying the bear be emplojred x-jherever possible. Bears in the Northeast are maintaining populations at huntable levels, though seasonal changes nay be necessary in some instances. In Iiassachusetts, bear populations are niniraal and seasonal limits should be regulated so that the annual harvest does not greatly exceed present levels. Use of checking stations, hunt- er report forms, and distributional surveys should be employed as necessary to monitor and assess bear har- vests and distribution, MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE Bureau of Wildlife Research and tianagement Approved: Colton II. Bridges Deputy Director Prepared by Date James E. Cardoza Game Biologist q^UM'? ' ACME fOOKR'^OiNn CO.. INC. AUG Z'3 1984 100 CAMBRIDGE STREET CHARLESTOWN, MASS.