2002 NEW HAMPSHIRE
Wildlife Harvest
SUMMARY
HANNAH CLEMENTS PHOTO
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department www.wildlife.state.nh.us
2002 NEW HAMPSHIRE
Wildlife Harvest
SUMMARY
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department 2 Hazen Drive Concord, NH 03301 (603) 271-2461 www.wildlife.state.nh.us
We thank our partners in wildlife conservation, hunters and shooters, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and private industry. Excise taxes collected on firearms, ammunition and archery equipment are distributed to state agencies like N.H. Fish and Game Department to conduct research, restore and manage wildlife populations, purchase habitat, conduct hunter education programs and create opportunities for hunting and other wildlifeassociated recreation. You are the key to wildlife restoration success in New Hampshire!
This program receives Federal financial assistance from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, The US Department of the Interior and its bureaus prohibit discrimination on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, age or sex (in educational programs), If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire additional information please write to: The US Fish and Wildlife Service, Office for Diversity and Civil Rights Programs – External Affairs, 4040 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 130, Arlington, VA 22203.
© NHF&G, 2003. F&W02022.P7
2
Printed on Recycled Paper
CONTENTS 2002 WHITE-TAILED DEER REPORT ................................................................ 5 DEER POPULATION GOALS BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT ......................................................... 6 NEW HAMPSHIRE DEER WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNITS .................................................................. 7 TOTAL AND SEX-SPECIFIC DEER HARVEST FOR 1960-2002 HUNTING SEASONS ........................... 8 DEER KILL BY SEX, SEASON AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT IN 2002 ....................................... 9 ADULT MALE KILL BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (1963-2002) ................................................... 10 MALE KILL BY SEASON AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT DURING 2002 .................................... 11 YEARLING ANTLER BEAM DIAMETER BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (1998-2002) .................. 12 YEARLING MALE FRACTION BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (1998-2002) ................................. 13 NEW HAMPSHIRE TROPHY DEER PROGRAM ............................................................................... 14-15 DEER KILL BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 ............................................................................... 16-21 DEER KILL BY COUNTY, HUNTER RESIDENCY AND SEX DURING 2002 .......................................... 21
2002 BLACK BEAR REPORT .......................................................................... 22 NEW HAMPSHIRE BEAR MANAGEMENT REGIONS ............................................................................ 23 REGIONAL BEAR POPULATION MANAGEMENT GOALS .................................................................... 24 TOTAL BEAR HARVEST FOR 1983-2002 HUNTING SEASONS ........................................................... 24 BEAR HARVEST BY METHOD (1990-2002) ........................................................................................... 25 REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF BEAR HARVEST (1990-2002) .............................................................. 25 BEAR HARVEST SEX RATIOS (1990-2002) ........................................................................................... 26 BEAR HARVEST BY REGION, WMU AND METHOD DURING 2002 ..................................................... 27 BEAR HARVEST BY METHOD AND SEX DURING 2002 ....................................................................... 28 BEAR HARVEST BY REGION AND SEX DURING 2002 ........................................................................ 28 AVERAGE AGE IN YEARS OF HARVESTED BEARS (1991-2001) ........................................................ 29 NEW HAMPSHIRE HEAVY-WEIGHTS .................................................................................................... 29 BEAR HARVEST BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 ...................................................................... 30-32
2002 MOOSE REPORT .................................................................................. 33 NEW HAMPSHIRE MOOSE MANAGEMENT REGIONS ........................................................................ 34 N.H. MOOSE POPULATION MANAGEMENT GOALS BY REGION ....................................................... 35 SUMMARY OF N.H. MOOSE APPLICATIONS, PERMITS AND STATEWIDE MOOSE HARVEST BY YEAR (1988-2002) .............................................................................................................................. 35 AGE AND SEX OF THE 2002 MOOSE HARVEST BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND UNIT ................. 36
3
CONTENTS, continued PERMITS ISSUED, HARVEST, SUCCESS RATE AND HARVEST PER SQUARE MILE FOR THE 2002 MOOSE HUNT BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND UNIT .............................................. 37 SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 2002 MOOSE HARVEST BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND AGE .................................................................................................. 38 MOOSE HUNTER SUCCESS RATES BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND UNIT FOR 1988 TO 2002 .... 38
2002 WILD TURKEY REPORT ......................................................................... 39 2002 TURKEY HARVEST BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (WMU) ................................................. 40 SPRING HARVEST BY WMU AND YEAR (1987-2002) ........................................................................... 40 2002 SPRING TURKEY HARVEST BY TOWN INCLUDING THE KILL PER SQUARE MILE OF LAND AREA. ............................................................................................... 41-45 2002 TURKEY HARVEST BY COUNTY ................................................................................................... 45 TOP 10 SPRING GOBBLERS FOR 2002 RANKED BY WEIGHT AND THEN BY BEARD LENGTH ...... 46
2001/2002 FURBEARER REPORT .................................................................. 47 NH FURBEARER HARVEST BY COUNTY (2001/02) ............................................................................. 48 NH STATEWIDE CATCH PER 100 TRAP-NIGHTS (1989-2001) ............................................................. 48 NH HARVEST RECORDS FOR SELECT SPECIES DURING 1989-2001 .............................................. 48
4
2002 WHITE-TAILED DEER REPORT The winter of 2001-02 proved to be one of the mildest from a deer management perspective since the Fish and Game Department began keeping records in 1964. Based on average conditions around the state, one has to go back to the winter of 1982-83 to find a winter that was comparable. This was good news for New Hampshire’s deer herd since it was still recovering from the extraordinarily severe winter of 2000-01. While the deer population can recover and increase in spite of the normal winter mortality associated with “average” winters, last year’s mild winter probably allowed for better than average population growth in portions of the state. The 2002 deer harvest reflects this and was influenced by several other factors as well. The total kill for 2002 was 11,089, which was up 21% from the 2001 kill of 9,143. The 2002 statewide adult male kill was 6,855, up 15% from 5,981 in 2001. This adult male kill broke the previous statewide record of 6,554 set in 2000. The statewide female kill in 2002 was 3,362, which was 30% above that of 2001 but was still the second lowest female kill since 1994 and was consistent with our desire to continue to allow for deer population growth in many Wildlife Management Units (WMUs) by limiting female harvests. As usual, the kill varied across WMUs in 2002 due to differences in deer density. The kill was also affected by snow cover that resulted in excellent hunting conditions. This was most pronounced in the southern portions of the state where record adult buck kills were set in WMUs H2, J2, K and L. In addition, WMUs C2 and I2 had the highest adult buck kills they have experienced since before 1970. In 2002, youth hunters killed 260 deer during their special weekend. This was a 28% increase over the 203 deer killed in 2001. Archery hunters took 1,854 deer in 2002, up 18% from 1,577 in 2001 but below 1999-00 levels of almost 2,000. The muzzleloader harvest in 2002 was 2,911, up 29% from 2,261 in 2001. Firearms hunters took 6,064 deer in 2002, up 19% from 5,102 in 2001. Firearm hunters took advantage of late-season opportunities with snow cover as 30% of the firearm buck kill occurred from Thanksgiving to the end of the season compared with about 20% on average. Tables included in this report give additional details on the harvest by season, sex and WMU. Information gathered at the 2002 deer biological check stations continue to indicate that New Hampshire’s deer are in good physical condition. Average yearling antler beam diameters remain above 17 millimeters, indicating that we are generally below the biological carrying capacity of our deer range. The statewide yearling male fraction (the percentage of adult males consisting of yearlings) for the 2002 harvest averaged 38%, slightly below the 5-year average, and was again consistent with a high quality deer herd with a good age distribution. Reflecting the slightly lower yearling male fraction, the 2002 harvest age distribution of older males was slightly higher than average with 5
28% at 2.5 years old, 21% at 3.5 years, 8% at 4.5 years and 4% at 5.5+ years old. Finally, over 73% of our yearling males produced at least one forked antler in 2002, an increase from the recent average of 66% and another indication of good health in New Hampshire’s deer. In summary, the 2002 deer harvest was slightly higher than expected due primarily to excellent hunting conditions with snow; and to greater than anticipated herd recovery in portions of the state, resulting in an increased buck harvest. Female kill was close to expectations and was consistent with long-term deer population management goals. We were fortunate that snow cover was not a significant factor earlier in November during “either sex” hunting days, or female kills might have greatly exceeded desired levels. New Hampshire’s deer herd is healthy and resilient and we look forward to continued quality hunting opportunities during the 2003 season.
DEER POPULATION GOALS BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT Deer management decisions are based on our existing Big Game Population Management Plan. The goals of this plan span the period 1997-2005 and are summarized in the following table. ADULT MALE DEER KILL GOAL WMU
LOWER LIMIT
UPPER LIMIT
CURRENT LEVEL1
GOAL
A
81
335
346
335
B
49
125
124
125
C1
29
103
68
99
C2
35
125
94
125
D
138
816
606
788
E
116
393
58
188
F
68
241
85
167
G
143
742
388
532
H1
102
464
354
464
H2
184
799
622
799
I1
69
412
210
331
I2
72
433
236
360
J1
126
539
298
487
J2
304
938
884
938
K
140
734
648
734
L
153
561
570
561
M
102
815
828
535
TOTAL
1,911
8,575
6,418
7,568
1
6
Average of 2001 and 2002 adult male kill.
NEW HAMPSHIRE DEER WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNITS
7
TOTAL AND SEX-SPECIFIC DEER HARVEST FOR 1960-2002 HUNTING SEASONS The graph below shows the number of male, female and total deer harvested during the past 43 deer seasons. The highest harvest (14,204 deer) occurred in 1967 and the second-highest occurred in 1968. These harvests contained nearly equal portions of males and females and were the result of very liberal either-sex hunting seasons. High female harvest rates, combined with severe winter weather, caused the state’s deer population to decrease from the late 1960s until the early 1980s. In 1983, the Department reduced the number of either-sex hunting days from 22 to 5 for most areas of the state.
Year Males
8
Females
Total
02
99
20
96
19
93
19
90
19
87
19
84
19
81
19
19
78
75
19
72
19
69
19
66
19
19
19
19
63
16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 60
Number Harvested
The graph below shows a highly variable deer harvest over the past 4 decades. Several factors can affect the number of deer harvested in any given year such as deer population density, habitat availability and productivity, hunter density and access, weather severity (all seasons), natural food production and the Department’s season objectives (with respect to management plan goals). All of the above factors have changed with time and will continue to change in years to come. For example, notice that the deer kill in the first half of the graph contains nearly equal percentages of males and females, while the second half contains nearly twice the percentage of males as females. This change in harvest ratio is the result of the Department’s goal to increase the deer population, which was at an all-time low in 1983, but has since rebounded because of restricted antlerless seasons and reduced female harvests. It is noteworthy that when the deer population reaches the management plan goal, the total harvest will be similar to the harvests of 1967-68, but the herd will be at a higher level, and more importantly, the harvests will be sustainable.
DEER KILL BY SEX, SEASON AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT IN 2002
MALE KILL BY SEASON AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT DURING 2002 SEASON A B C1 C2 ARCHERY 38 7 9 6 YOUTH 6 0 0 2 MUZZL. 83 23 7 17 FIREARM 305 102 58 89 TOTAL 432 132 74 114 KILL/ 0.76 0.36 SQ.MI. 0.38 0.46
D 96 28 128 419 671 0.93
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT F G H1 H2 I1 I2 J1 J2 K L 3 54 44 77 23 27 14 120 91 112 1 6 10 9 2 2 3 9 2 12 11 94 97 161 45 64 59 258 193 257 70 286 267 460 170 203 248 676 497 351 85 440 418 707 240 296 324 1063 783 732 0.18 1.02 0.66 0.68 1.21 0.08 0.67 1.00 0.78 1.28 1.48 E 2 0 8 53 63
M ALL 202 925 9 101 357 1862 585 4839 1153 7727 1.60 0.86
FEMALE KILL BY SEASON AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT DURING 2002 SEASON A B C1 C2 ARCHERY 16 3 0 2 YOUTH 12 1 1 2 MUZZL. 62 5 6 10 FIREARM 67 6 0 0 TOTAL 157 15 7 14 KILL/ 0.27 0.03 SQ.MI. 0.04 0.06
D 106 42 138 0 286 0.40
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT F G H1 H2 I1 I2 J1 J2 K L 8 61 53 88 25 12 22 124 94 95 1 13 20 23 3 1 5 17 7 5 5 49 72 78 13 21 22 127 66 140 0 0 49 70 2 0 31 152 67 174 14 123 194 259 43 34 80 420 234 414 0.03 0.47 0.12 0.17 0.36 0.01 0.19 0.37 0.09 0.51 0.84 E 4 3 2 0 9
M 216 3 233 607 1059 1.47
ALL 929 159 1049 1225 3362 0.37
TOTAL KILL BY SEASON AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT DURING 2002 SEASON ARCHERY YOUTH MUZZL. FIREARM TOTAL KILL/ SQ.MI.
A 54 18 145 372 589 1.03
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT C1 C2 D E F G H1 H2 I1 I2 J1 J2 K L 9 8 202 6 11 115 97 165 48 39 36 244 185 207 1 4 70 3 2 19 30 32 5 3 8 26 9 17 13 27 266 10 16 143 169 239 58 85 81 385 259 397 58 89 419 53 70 286 316 530 172 203 279 828 564 525 81 128 957 72 99 563 612 966 283 330 404 1483 1017 1146 0.39 1.33 0.21 1.50 0.78 0.85 1.57 0.43 0.51 0.09 0.86 1.37 0.86 1.79 2.32 B 10 1 28 108 147
M 418 12 590 1192 2212 3.08
ALL 1854 260 2911 6064 11089 1.23
9
ADULT MALE KILL BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (1963-2002) Adult male kill is the most consistent index of total deer population on a historical basis. While either-sex hunting seasons have varied widely through time, adult male seasons have remained fairly constant, and the adult male kill provides an accurate and consistent index to change in population levels. Adult male kill figures prior to 1987 (the first year we have good data on a WMU basis) are estimated based on town of kill and current WMU boundaries. Since the number of deer killed in any given year can vary significantly as a result of snow cover, weather and natural food production, we use two-year averages to assess population change relative to our management efforts. Wildlife Management Unit YEAR 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
10
A 158 244 301 240 310 353 235 215 166 143 138 113 116 141 109 43 22 73 94 82 79 155 190 190 189 279 270 328 248 221 212 213 388 315 382 306 421 428 306 387
B 169 185 207 168 278 232 200 134 85 79 53 47 61 83 63 28 19 41 46 39 36 63 56 65 82 71 90 102 122 93 99 82 152 106 138 118 142 169 119 128
C1 63 66 87 67 109 99 82 63 55 58 42 41 54 65 49 18 10 26 23 13 15 24 32 25 18 32 45 40 54 40 38 24 48 43 59 45 50 77 66 71
C2 109 134 167 137 177 163 137 102 65 72 36 52 60 80 56 25 12 39 40 26 20 25 54 42 44 38 51 60 58 40 45 38 85 47 81 67 62 98 81 106
D 392 391 532 479 768 650 548 427 408 493 340 398 470 470 360 229 178 167 252 153 126 257 252 229 270 236 335 288 389 404 421 376 539 546 675 624 620 722 571 642
E 157 158 236 201 234 245 166 164 121 150 90 95 121 126 103 41 24 47 54 28 20 41 69 52 37 44 66 66 68 79 68 70 92 72 89 73 62 74 53 62
F 122 110 170 152 192 178 183 146 119 99 85 101 106 133 98 41 45 46 46 25 34 33 48 42 36 47 63 62 74 74 74 53 81 66 75 69 74 89 85 85
G 402 333 506 440 491 457 472 354 317 281 187 235 294 276 211 122 128 113 134 80 141 139 173 180 144 169 222 227 309 342 343 286 376 365 389 309 373 430 357 420
H1 238 217 228 215 286 236 182 133 133 113 99 128 169 180 168 151 152 154 180 137 130 143 171 221 204 196 204 221 329 358 320 327 412 348 349 263 273 335 333 375
H2 286 211 244 277 371 322 210 156 186 139 107 162 237 272 221 174 176 234 256 173 149 231 327 363 340 369 443 457 535 611 595 486 599 590 575 491 478 550 601 642
I1 184 123 158 147 184 139 101 84 84 86 60 87 111 140 94 85 93 93 100 71 58 78 112 132 127 131 165 141 187 248 237 234 220 220 199 157 155 195 186 234
I2 210 147 160 199 236 180 141 93 106 75 49 76 96 132 104 109 103 118 142 85 94 97 130 147 128 151 176 151 185 225 254 210 265 218 249 126 157 196 185 288
J1 288 306 399 406 523 467 371 313 332 295 270 353 360 363 255 170 216 220 228 139 112 191 257 328 231 245 260 248 303 331 318 257 343 317 374 253 292 319 287 308
J2 312 254 355 402 596 494 262 260 337 294 288 402 526 613 441 398 403 428 459 323 280 372 494 571 499 527 655 618 713 906 874 772 939 960 899 714 714 816 799 969
K 298 207 225 241 374 234 124 88 108 100 88 122 140 211 132 125 139 130 211 130 123 149 244 255 252 296 410 388 464 482 489 429 539 487 580 450 466 600 581 714
L 139 104 128 150 209 195 122 138 216 150 137 207 243 253 170 174 208 217 255 169 161 209 288 320 265 397 448 428 474 484 473 445 502 475 536 447 579 593 543 597
M 120 66 69 75 123 75 46 64 69 71 41 89 116 145 90 117 92 125 138 114 92 143 202 228 276 332 384 410 414 496 488 489 546 564 657 615 724 863 828 827
TOTAL 3647 3256 4172 3996 5461 4719 3582 2934 2907 2698 2110 2708 3280 3683 2724 2050 2020 2271 2658 1787 1670 2350 3099 3390 3144 3559 4287 4234 4926 5433 5348 4790 6125 5740 6305 5127 5642 6554 5981 6855
MALE KILL BY SEASON AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT DURING 2002 Male and female harvests vary widely by day during the hunting season. Changes are primarily influenced by differences in hunting pressure and weather conditions. The typical distribution of harvest includes a high opening day kill in the muzzleloader and firearms seasons, high kills during the first 5 days of the firearms season, and high kills on weekends for both seasons. The Thanksgiving weekend also produces high adult male harvests. The number of males listed in this table is the total male kill (including fawns), thus the numbers are somewhat larger than those in the previous table. DATE
A
B
C1
C2
TOTAL
38
7
9
6
Nov. 02 Nov. 03 Nov. 04 Nov. 05 Nov. 06 Nov. 07 Nov. 08 Nov. 09 Nov. 10 Nov. 11 Nov. 12 TOTAL
30 13 11 5 1 3 5 10 4 1 0 83
3 3 1 3 0 1 0 4 4 2 2 23
4 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 7
5 2 3 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 2 17
6
0
0
2
9 5 7 1 3 2 4 6 2 3 4 7 1 0 1 4 3 7 8 1 3 3 4 4 7 3 102 132
2 2 0 3 2 3 1 7 1 2 5 4 0 0 4 0 2 5 3 2 1 0 0 2 2 5 58 74
2 2 2 6 5 1 2 2 2 3 2 5 4 4 4 2 3 12 5 1 2 3 1 5 5 4 89 114
TOTAL
Nov. 13 35 Nov. 14 25 Nov. 15 7 Nov. 16 11 Nov. 17 16 Nov. 18 5 Nov. 19 6 Nov. 20 13 Nov. 21 10 Nov. 22 8 Nov. 23 14 Nov. 24 16 Nov. 25 7 Nov. 26 6 Nov. 27 9 Nov. 28 10 Nov. 29 11 Nov. 30 20 Dec. 01 8 Dec. 02 9 Dec. 03 11 Dec. 04 13 Dec. 05 8 Dec. 06 15 Dec. 07 9 Dec. 08 3 TOTAL 305 GRAND 432 TOTAL
D
E
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT F G H1 H2 I1
I2
J1
J2
K
L
M
ALL
ARCHERY SEASON (15 SEPTEMBER-15 DECEMBER) 96 2 3 54 44 77 23 27 14
120
91
112
202
925
35 19 19 6 6 6 4 12 12 2 7 128
MUZZLELOADER SEASON (2-12 NOVEMBER) 1 1 27 37 38 14 17 2 0 13 16 32 6 11 0 3 8 9 22 4 7 1 0 6 1 4 4 2 1 0 2 2 3 0 3 0 0 3 3 6 0 2 0 0 4 4 6 3 2 2 1 9 11 24 8 11 1 2 14 9 20 4 4 0 2 5 3 1 0 3 0 2 3 2 5 2 2 8 11 94 97 161 45 64
12 11 4 3 0 0 5 10 7 5 2 59
74 53 16 7 7 9 12 35 33 9 3 258
56 33 18 6 2 8 11 30 20 2 7 193
71 31 17 13 4 18 16 35 33 15 4 257
62 66 21 25 8 19 17 67 44 15 13 357
487 312 163 87 39 80 89 271 213 65 56 1862
28
YOUTH WEEKEND (26-27 OCTOBER) 0 1 6 10 9 2 2
3
9
2
12
9
101
FIREARM SEASON (13 NOVEMBER-8 DECEMBER) 21 5 2 17 61 84 18 19 47 137 120 11 0 5 11 12 20 5 11 9 92 31 17 5 1 21 10 25 10 14 11 24 24 29 5 8 28 19 33 22 20 22 43 42 20 6 11 11 16 27 9 7 10 30 19 17 6 2 8 7 14 6 7 10 6 15 19 3 1 9 4 15 5 8 3 18 14 20 1 2 12 13 14 1 7 7 17 11 12 1 2 13 7 10 3 7 2 7 18 15 1 2 11 6 9 2 1 4 10 4 27 4 3 17 12 36 12 11 14 44 23 30 3 3 16 14 31 9 16 12 32 23 10 2 1 6 1 7 2 3 4 7 6 14 1 3 3 3 8 0 2 4 7 4 16 2 1 7 7 10 4 5 2 7 12 23 1 2 9 10 10 12 7 3 21 15 19 4 4 11 6 15 9 9 9 27 21 30 1 7 26 14 21 9 9 22 38 23 13 1 2 13 9 9 6 7 10 19 13 4 0 0 2 4 4 1 1 2 6 9 8 1 1 6 3 5 0 2 1 7 5 6 0 1 4 4 3 1 3 4 3 3 8 0 0 4 1 1 1 2 4 5 1 7 0 2 5 3 8 5 1 1 4 6 14 0 1 8 13 23 5 13 17 34 20 9 0 3 8 8 18 13 11 14 31 15 419 53 70 286 267 460 170 203 248 676 497 671 63 85 440 418 707 240 296 324 1063 783
30 39 648 39 36 316 34 41 253 77 76 445 33 31 256 15 17 141 10 16 138 21 20 174 11 20 128 12 19 112 6 29 263 10 28 259 1 2 64 3 4 66 5 15 111 4 25 158 8 29 190 5 28 277 2 22 150 1 3 50 1 5 62 2 3 56 1 9 50 2 8 78 7 36 214 11 24 180 351 585 4839 732 1153 7727
11
YEARLING ANTLER BEAM DIAMETER BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (1998-2002) The antler beam diameter of yearling (1.5 year old) males (YABD) is used to assess the quality of deer habitat. The biological maximum YABD on excellent range is around 24mm. This maximum is not reached anywhere in New Hampshire because of our relatively unproductive soils and harsh winters. As deer densities increase from low levels, YABDs in the 17-19mm range indicate deer are in good to excellent health and can easily be sustained on the available habitat. Average YABDs below 16mm on a consistent basis indicate deer densities may have exceeded the carrying capacity of the WMU. In the following table, the number in parenthesis following each average is the number of deer measured. YEAR WMU
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
5-YEAR AVERAGE
A B C1 C2 D E F G H1 H2 I1 I2 J1 J2 K L M ALL
18.1 (15) 20.7 ( 3) 17.8 ( 8) . ( 0) 17.1 (33) 16.6 ( 5) 16.5 ( 8) 17.2 ( 6) 18.4 ( 9) 18.4 ( 5) 17.7 ( 7) 19.2 (11) 17.6 (12) 17.8 (60) 18.6 (39) 18.4 (18) 19.4 (52) 18.2(291)
17.6 (17) 15.7 ( 3) 16.3 ( 8) 15.0 ( 1) 16.4 (45) 17.0 ( 2) 15.6 (13) 17.3 ( 9) 18.0 (30) 18.3 (10) 18.4 (14) 18.4 (12) 17.2 (13) 17.6 (37) 18.4 (45) 16.9 (38) 17.7 (30) 17.4(327)
17.8 (26) 18.5 ( 4) 17.0 ( 6) 19.0 ( 3) 15.9 (51) 16.4 ( 7) 15.0 (20) 15.2 (18) 17.5 (25) 17.8 (13) 17.7 (15) 19.3 (10) 16.1 (21) 16.9 (41) 18.6 (43) 17.3 (22) 18.2 (23) 17.1(348)
17.1 (29) 16.0 ( 5) 18.8 ( 5) 17.0 ( 1) 17.5 (38) 16.6 (11) 16.5 (15) 17.2 (23) 17.8 ( 6) 18.3 (12) 18.6 ( 7) 18.9 ( 8) 16.1 (20) 17.8 (51) 18.7 (37) 17.9 (28) 18.8 (51) 17.8(347)
17.9 (19) 18.0 ( 4) . ( 0) 22.0 ( 1) 18.9 (34) 19.3 ( 3) 16.7 ( 9) 16.6 ( 5) 17.5 (11) 18.3 ( 8) 17.4 (10) 20.0 ( 6) 16.9 (21) 17.4 (36) 18.5 (34) 18.8 (27) 18.3 (35) 18.1(263)
17.7 (106) 17.6 ( 19) 17.3 ( 27) 18.5 ( 6) 17.0 (201) 16.9 ( 28) 15.9 ( 65) 16.6 ( 61) 17.8 ( 81) 18.2 ( 48) 17.9 ( 53) 19.1 ( 47) 16.6 ( 87) 17.5 (225) 18.6 (198) 17.8 (133) 18.6 (191) 17.7(1576)
12
YEARLING MALE FRACTION BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (1998-2002) The yearling male fraction (YMF) is the percentage of harvested adult males that are yearlings. The YMF reflects the average annual mortality rate of all adult males in the population by estimating the percentage lost to all causes on an annual basis (about half of our annual all-cause mortality is from the hunting seasons). New Hampshire has a relatively low annual mortality rate when compared to other northeastern states, and this is a reason why we maintain good age structure in the male population. In 2002, about 28% of our adult males were 2 ½ years old and 33% were 3 ½ years or older. The number in parenthesis following each average is the number of aged yearling males in the sample. YEAR WMU
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
5-YEAR AVERAGE
A B C1 C2 D E F G H1 H2 I1 I2 J1 J2 K L M ALL
42.1 (16) 9.4 ( 3) 42.1 ( 8) 0.0 ( 0) 30.0 (33) 41.7 ( 5) 27.6 ( 8) 18.8 ( 6) 47.4 ( 9) 16.7 ( 5) 26.9 ( 7) 37.5 (12) 31.0 (13) 53.6 (60) 39.2 (40) 31.1 (19) 66.3 (55) 38.2(299)
28.3 (17) 33.3 ( 3) 47.1 ( 8) 100 ( 1) 35.4 (45) 25.0 ( 2) 36.1 (13) 32.1 ( 9) 53.6 (30) 31.6 (12) 50.0 (14) 60.0 (12) 40.6 (13) 41.3 (38) 54.8 (46) 63.3 (38) 44.9 (31) 43.4(332)
56.3 (27) 30.8 ( 4) 46.7 ( 7) 100 ( 3) 44.1 (52) 41.2 ( 7) 46.5 (20) 30.5 (18) 68.4 (26) 37.2 (16) 57.7 (15) 48.0 (12) 51.2 (21) 51.9 (41) 53.8 (43) 45.1 (23) 35.9 (23) 46.9(358)
53.4 (31) 41.7 ( 5) 45.5 ( 5) 100 ( 1) 37.1 (39) 50.0 (11) 35.7 (15) 46.0 (23) 25.0 ( 6) 35.3 (12) 41.2 ( 7) 42.1 ( 8) 42.9 (24) 55.0 (55) 50.7 (38) 38.2 (29) 62.1 (54) 46.0(363)
36.2 (21) 57.1 ( 4) 0.0 ( 0) 100 ( 1) 42.0 (34) 20.0 ( 3) 33.3 ( 9) 15.6 ( 5) 35.5 (11) 31.0 ( 9) 43.5 (10) 37.5 ( 6) 38.9 (21) 45.1 (37) 47.3 (35) 50.0 (31) 48.6 (36) 40.4(273)
42.7 (112) 26.0 ( 19) 39.4 ( 28) 66.7 ( 6) 37.5 (203) 37.8 ( 28) 36.7 ( 65) 30.3 ( 61) 48.8 ( 82) 31.0 ( 54) 44.2 ( 53) 44.6 ( 50) 40.9 ( 92) 49.7 (231) 48.7 (202) 45.2 (140) 52.8 (199) 43.1(1625)
13
NEW HAMPSHIRE TROPHY DEER PROGRAM Beginning in 1999, the New Hampshire Antler and Skull Trophy Club (NHASTC) assumed responsibility for the trophy deer program. The program annually recognizes hunters who take deer >200 pounds by each of three hunting methods (archery, muzzleloader and firearms). To qualify, deer must be >200 pounds with all internal organs (including heart, lungs and liver) removed. For complete entry information and an application form, look in the Hunting Digest published annually by Fish and Game and available at your license agent. For a complete listing of this year’s registry or information on trophy deer, moose and black bear, contact Roscoe Blaisdell, president of NHASTC, 22 Scribner Road, Raymond, NH 03077, or call 603-895-9947. The information below was generously provided by NHASTC. The following tables give the top ten deer by hunting method for 2002, and overall.
2002
ALL METHODS OVERALL YEAR NAME 1985 Arnold Girroir
RESIDENCE W. Newbury, MA
WEIGHT COUNTY NAME RESIDENCE 289.25 Coos Stephen R. Caldwell Barre, VT
1998 Mike Kenyon
Bradford, VT
284
Sutton, NH
258
Merri.
1998 Scott Magoon
Topsham, VT
277
Coos
Jeremiah Donaldson
Albany, NH
252
Carroll
1984 Dave Alonzo
Berlin, NH
273
Coos
Rodger Matthewman
Meredith, NH
273
Coos
Larry Duval
Cornish, NH Lancaster, NH
1984 William Robinson Northfield, NH
Grafton Harold Rowe Jr
WEIGHT 258
COUNTY Coos
251.5
Belknap
250
Sullivan
242.5
Coos
1985 Bradley Frizzell Pittsburg, NH
272
Coos
Dave Lufkin
1980 Robert Neil
Gorham, NH
267
Coos
Gordon H. Bashaw Jr Charlestown, NH
1994 Steven Young
Beecher Falls, VT
267
Coos
Francis LaRoche
Berlin, NH
235
Coos
1995 Lawrence Gonyer
Bow, NH
265
Coos
Lloyd Ingerson
Jefferson, NH
235
Coos
1986 Joe Daley Jr
Brentwood, NH
265
Kensington, NH
235
Coos
WEIGHT 258
COUNTY Coos
Rock. John Knowles
241.25 Sullivan
2002
FIREARMS OVERALL YEAR NAME 1985 Arnold Girroir
RESIDENCE W. Newbury, MA
WEIGHT 289.25
1998 Mike Kenyon
Bradford, VT
284
1984 Dave Alonzo
Berlin, NH
273
COUNTY NAME RESIDENCE Coos Stephen R. Caldwell Barre, VT Grafton Harold Rowe Jr Coos
Larry Duval
Sutton, NH
258
Merri.
Cornish, NH
250
Sullivan
1984 William Robinson Northfield, NH
273
Coos
Gordon H. Bashaw Jr Charlestown, NH 241.25 Sullivan
1985 Bradley Frizzell Pittsburg, NH
272
Coos
Francis LaRoche
Berlin, NH
235
1980 Robert Neil
Gorham, NH
267
Coos
Lloyd Ingerson
Jefferson, NH
235
Coos
1995 Lawrence Gonyer
Bow, NH
265
Coos
John Knowles
Kensington, NH
235
Coos
1986 Joe Daley Jr
Brentwood, NH
265
Rock. Kelly Gray
Berlin, NH
232
Coos
1983 Perry Taylor
Moultonboro, NH
262
Coos
Gary McPhail
Danbury, NH
232
Merri.
261
Coos
Leo Laroche
Berlin, NH
230.1
Coos
1994 Howard Fields Jr Saline, MI
14
Coos
NEW HAMPSHIRE TROPHY DEER PROGRAM, cont.
2002
ARCHERY OVERALL
NAME RESIDENCE WEIGHT COUNTY 252 Carroll Jeremiah Donaldson Albany, NH
YEAR NAME RESIDENCE 2002 Jeremiah Donaldson Albany, NH
WEIGHT
COUNTY
252
Carroll Belknap
2002 Rodger Matthewman Meredith, NH
251.5 Belknap Rodger Matthewman
Meredith, NH
251.5
2002 Dave Lufkin
Lancaster, NH
242.5
Lancaster, NH
242.5
Coos
1995 Gregory Herbert
Laconia, NH
237.5 Belknap Dwayne Wilder
219
Chesh.
2001 Fred Schobel
Rehoboth, MA
237.5
Rock. Daniel P. Locke
Columbia, NH
215
Coos
1991 Johnny Smith III
Milford, NH
237
Hills. Ronald Carpenter
Plymouth, NH
210
Grafton
1989 Robert Maneely 1999 Scott Ellis
Andover, NH Keene, NH
235 234
Merri. Rodger Matthewman Chesh. Don Goodwin
Meredith, NH West Lebanon, NH
1994 Robert Daniels
Tilton, NH
233
1993 Greg Bath
Alstead, NH
229
Chesh. Nathan H. Simard
1992 Jim Gagoriault
St. Johnsbury, VT
229
Hills.
Coos
Dave Lufkin
Belknap Bill Cummings
RESIDENCE Topsham, VT
1994 Steven Young
Beecher Falls, VT
2001 Larry Miles
North Conway, NH
1994 Dennis McLaughlin Barre, VT
NAME WEIGHT COUNTY 277 Coos Roland Eldridge 267
202.5 Belknap 202 Sullivan
Colebrook, NH
202
Coos
Northwood, NH
200
Rock.
WEIGHT
COUNTY
2002
MUZZLELOADER OVERALL YEAR NAME 1998 Scott Magoon
Dublin, NH
Coos
John Wentworth
RESIDENCE Rochester, NH
240
Coos
Durham, NH
236
Strafford
260.6
Coos
Roger Brisson
Candia, NH
234
Rock.
257
Coos
Don Hardy
Hudson, NH
231
Merri.
Goshen, NH
231
Sullivan
Deerfield, NH
231
Rock.
1992 Colby Morrison
Wentworth, NH
254
2000 Carl Baker
Hyde Park, VT
254
Grafton Ray Porter
1995 Jeffrey Caulder
N. Woodstock, NH
250
Grafton John A. Day
Auburn, NH
231
Merri.
2001 Michael Colby
Lyman, NH
249
Grafton Mike Wright
Wakefield, NH
229
Carroll
1995 Lloyd Witham
Northwood, NH
247
Dalton, NH
225
Coos
1990 Gary Bisson
Berlin, NH
247
Jeffrey W. Prehemo Pittsburg, NH
224
Coos
Rick Noyes
224
Hills.
Coos
Ross King
Rock. Russell Mooney Coos
Hancock, NH
15
DEER KILL BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 This is an alphabetical listing of New Hampshire towns with reported deer harvest in 2002. It gives the Wildlife Management Units (WMUs) that the town is part of, as well as the deer kill by sex and per square mile. Towns not listed below had no registered deer harvest. TOWN ACWORTH ALBANY
WMUs IN TOWN
BUCKS
DOES
TOTAL
KILL/ SQ.MI.
(H1)
33
15
48
1.24 0.16
(E/F/J1)
11
1
12
ALEXANDRIA
(G/I1)
15
0
15
0.35
ALLENSTOWN
(L)
37
16
53
2.59
ALSTEAD
(H1/H2)
50
13
63
1.61
(J2)
96
18
114
1.78
AMHERST
(K/M)
26
21
47
1.36
ANDOVER
(G/I1)
19
4
23
0.59
(H2/I2/K)
31
9
40
1.11
(F/G/J2)
5
0
5
0.44
(M)
26
21
47
4.27
ALTON
ANTRIM ASHLAND ATKINSON ATKINSON & GIL. AC. GR. AUBURN BARNSTEAD BARRINGTON BARTLETT BATH
(A)
1
2
3
0.11
(L/M)
45
53
98
3.92 1.75
(J2)
52
23
75
(J2/L)
78
41
119
2.53
(E)
9
1
10
0.14
(D)
90
54
144
3.66
BEDFORD
(K/L/M)
19
14
33
0.96
BELMONT
(J2)
35
17
52
1.74
(H2/K)
18
7
25
2.17
BENTON
(D)
8
2
10
0.21
BERLIN
(C1/C2)
13
1
14
0.25
(D/E)
27
1
28
0.31
(I1)
16
3
19
0.75
(I1/K/L)
43
20
63
2.20
(I2)
19
1
20
0.57
(L/M)
27
34
61
3.63
(G)
7
0
7
0.33
(G/I1)
9
3
12
0.68
BENNINGTON
BETHLEHEM BOSCAWEN BOW BRADFORD BRENTWOOD BRIDGEWATER BRISTOL BROOKFIELD
(J1/J2)
20
5
25
1.09
BROOKLINE
(K/M)
29
24
53
2.64
CAMBRIDGE
(B/C2)
18
1
19
0.37
(F)
14
3
17
0.32
CANAAN
(G)
53
22
75
1.42
CANDIA
(L/M)
53
37
90
3.01
(I1/J2)
37
16
53
1.19 0.23
CAMPTON
CANTERBURY CARROLL CENTER HARBOR CHARLESTOWN
(D/E)
12
0
12
(J1/J2)
12
3
15
1.33
(H1)
40
23
63
1.75
CHATHAM
(E)
9
2
11
0.19
CHESTER
(M)
46
55
101
3.88
CHESTERFIELD CHICHESTER CLAREMONT
16
(H2)
37
7
44
0.95
(J2/L)
32
20
52
2.45
(H1)
61
16
77
1.80
DEER KILL BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 TOWN CLARKSVILLE COLEBROOK COLUMBIA CONCORD CONWAY CORNISH CRAWFORD’S PURCHASE CROYDON DALTON DANBURY DANVILLE DEERFIELD DEERING DERRY DIX’S GRANT DIXVILLE DORCHESTER DOVER DUBLIN DUMMER DUNBARTON DURHAM EAST KINGSTON EASTON EATON EFFINGHAM ENFIELD EPPING EPSOM ERROL EXETER FARMINGTON FITZWILLIAM FRANCESTOWN FRANCONIA FRANKLIN FREEDOM FREMONT GILFORD GILMANTON GILSUM GOFFSTOWN GORHAM GOSHEN GRAFTON GRANTHAM GREENFIELD
WMUs IN TOWN (A) (A/B) (B) (I1/J2/K/L) (E/F/J1) (H1) (E) (H1/I2) (D) (G/I1) (M) (L) (K) (M) (A) (A/B) (G) (L) (H2) (B/C1/C2) (K) (L) (M) (D) (J1) (J1) (G/H1) (L/M) (J2/L) (A/B/C2) (L/M) (J2) (H2) (K) (D/E) (I1) (J1) (M) (J2) (J2) (H2) (K) (C1/C2/E) (I2/H1) (G) (G/H1/I2) (K)
BUCKS 59 43 30 60 29 39 1 26 19 14 26 96 44 61 3 12 24 48 27 61 51 36 28 13 8 26 58 48 70 30 46 39 41 37 13 15 24 30 53 91 29 42 7 21 12 15 35
DOES 28 13 2 35 7 17 0 1 3 2 21 52 14 43 2 2 0 28 10 6 10 24 24 0 3 6 19 23 35 3 39 13 13 10 1 3 10 30 10 38 10 14 2 5 1 10 5
TOTAL 87 56 32 95 36 56 1 27 22 16 47 148 58 104 5 14 24 76 37 67 61 60 52 13 11 32 77 71 105 33 85 52 54 47 14 18 34 60 63 129 39 56 9 26 13 25 40
KILL/ SQ.MI. 1.60 1.35 0.52 1.48 0.50 1.33 0.13 0.73 0.79 0.43 4.05 2.91 1.86 2.97 0.25 0.28 0.53 2.92 1.28 1.39 1.93 2.58 5.31 0.42 0.43 0.82 1.91 2.71 3.11 0.53 4.36 1.39 1.52 1.56 0.21 0.64 0.96 3.49 1.64 2.22 2.28 1.49 0.26 1.19 0.31 0.93 1.48
17
DEER KILL BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 TOWN GREENLAND GREENVILLE GROTON HAMPSTEAD HAMPTON HAMPTON FALLS HANCOCK HANOVER HARRISVILLE HAVERHILL HEBRON HENNIKER HILL HILLSBORO HINSDALE HOLDERNESS HOLLIS HOOKSETT HOPKINTON HUDSON JACKSON JAFFREY JEFFERSON KEENE KENSINGTON KILKENNY KINGSTON LACONIA LANCASTER LANDAFF LANGDON LEBANON LEE LEMPSTER LISBON LITCHFIELD LITTLETON LONDONDERRY LOUDON LOW & BURS GRANT LYMAN LYME LYNDEBOROUGH MADBURY MADISON MANCHESTER MARLBOROUGH
18
WMUs IN TOWN (M) (K) (G) (M) (M) (M) (H2/K) (G) (H2) (D) (G) (I2/K) (I1) (H2/I2/K) (H2) (F/G/J1/J2) (M) (K/L) (I1/I2/K) (M) (E) (H2/K) (C1/D/E) (H2) (M) (C1) (M) (J2) (C1/D) (D) (H1/H2) (G/H1) (L) (H1/I2) (D) (M) (D) (M) (J2) (E) (D) (G) (K) (L) (F/J1) (K/L/M) (H2)
BUCKS 32 6 9 15 18 21 35 59 9 52 8 35 10 40 26 9 70 50 52 40 5 47 41 35 33 1 36 10 66 25 18 70 23 23 46 15 76 49 72 1 67 61 39 20 26 0 26
DOES 30 1 0 11 13 22 7 20 5 26 2 7 1 2 5 0 49 14 14 39 0 11 14 10 29 0 22 6 12 8 12 35 17 6 35 14 30 46 52 0 40 14 9 14 6 4 8
TOTAL 62 7 9 26 31 43 42 79 14 78 10 42 11 42 31 9 119 64 66 79 5 58 55 45 62 1 58 16 78 33 30 105 40 29 81 29 106 95 124 1 107 75 48 34 32 4 34
KILL/ SQ.MI. 5.59 0.99 0.22 1.91 2.35 3.52 1.37 1.62 0.74 1.52 0.61 0.96 0.41 0.95 1.49 0.29 3.65 1.76 1.50 2.71 0.07 1.47 1.08 1.23 5.25 0.04 2.97 0.79 1.52 1.15 1.83 2.86 1.97 0.90 1.86 1.92 1.98 2.32 2.70 0.04 3.78 1.39 1.57 2.45 0.83 0.12 1.66
DEER KILL BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 TOWN MARLOW MASON MEREDITH MERRIMACK MIDDLETON MILAN MILFORD MILLSFIELD MILTON MONROE MONT VERNON MOULTONBORO NASHUA NELSON NEW BOSTON NEW CASTLE NEW DURHAM NEW HAMPTON NEW IPSWICH NEW LONDON NEWBURY NEWFIELDS NEWINGTON NEWMARKET NEWPORT NEWTON NORTH HAMPTON NORTHFIELD NORTHUMBERLAND NORTHWOOD NOTTINGHAM ODELL ORANGE ORFORD OSSIPEE PELHAM PEMBROKE PETERBOROUGH PIERMONT PITTSBURG PITTSFIELD PLAINFIELD PLAISTOW PLYMOUTH PORTSMOUTH RANDOLPH RAYMOND
WMUs IN TOWN (H1/H2/I2) (K) (I1/J2) (M) (J2) (B/C1/C2) (K/M) (A/B) (J2) (D) (K) (J1/J2) (M) (H2) (K) (M) (J2) (G/I1/J2) (K) (G/I1/I2) (I2) (L) (M) (L) (H1/I2) (M) (M) (I1/J2) (B/C1/D) (J2/L) (L) (B) (G) (D/G) (J1) (M) (L) (H2/K) (D) (A) (J2) (H1) (M) (F/G) (M) (C1/E) (L/M)
BUCKS 24 34 22 45 27 19 27 11 42 53 16 60 16 12 55 2 50 25 46 13 22 14 13 23 35 21 34 25 34 43 47 4 3 33 50 35 29 52 25 242 36 70 27 10 21 4 50
DOES 7 14 8 44 4 2 12 4 21 33 7 29 11 11 9 0 13 3 18 4 2 5 13 16 17 21 21 7 7 12 28 1 1 14 11 17 27 23 10 95 20 37 14 3 21 1 43
TOTAL 31 48 30 89 31 21 39 15 63 86 23 89 27 23 64 2 63 28 64 17 24 19 26 39 52 42 55 32 41 55 75 5 4 47 61 52 56 75 35 337 56 107 41 13 42 5 93
KILL/ SQ.MI. 1.18 1.99 0.75 2.70 1.70 0.32 1.51 0.33 1.89 4.08 1.37 1.53 0.86 1.03 1.45 2.50 1.47 0.75 1.93 0.77 0.68 2.68 3.21 3.17 1.19 4.29 3.99 1.10 1.10 1.97 1.63 0.11 0.17 1.01 0.86 1.95 2.49 1.95 0.90 1.17 2.35 2.07 3.90 0.46 2.76 0.10 3.22
19
DEER KILL BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 TOWN RICHMOND RINDGE ROCHESTER ROLLINSFORD ROXBURY RUMNEY RYE SALEM SALISBURY SANBORNTON SANDOWN SANDWICH SEABROOK SECOND COLL GRANT SHARON SHELBURNE SOMERSWORTH SOUTH HAMPTON SPRINGFIELD STARK STEWARTSTOWN STODDARD STRAFFORD STRATFORD STRATHAM SUCCESS SUGAR HILL SULLIVAN SUNAPEE SURRY SUTTON SWANZEY TAMWORTH TEMPLE THORNTON TILTON TROY TUFTONBORO UNITY WAKEFIELD WALPOLE WARNER WARREN WASHINGTON WATERVILLE VALLEY WEARE WEBSTER
20
WMUs IN TOWN (H2) (H2/K) (J2/L) (L) (H2) (F/G) (M) (M) (I1) (I1/J2) (M) (F/J1) (M) (A) (K) (C2/E) (L) (M) (G/I2) (B/C1) (A) (H2/I2) (J2) (B) (L/M) (C2) (D) (H2) (G/I2) (H2) (I1/I2) (H2) (F/J1) (K) (F) (I1/J2) (H2) (J1/J2) (H1) (J1/J2) (H1/H2) (I1/I2) (D/F) (I2) (E/F) (K) (I1)
BUCKS 38 55 81 11 13 16 40 21 31 28 19 35 10 16 21 18 9 27 35 20 40 31 83 22 38 9 16 20 21 21 37 42 27 24 16 5 33 53 29 50 37 45 22 21 0 71 25
DOES 16 20 37 12 0 1 31 20 5 7 24 1 15 4 6 2 4 32 10 1 10 4 36 2 37 0 5 10 6 19 2 18 5 4 4 4 13 23 14 7 12 1 1 5 1 26 3
TOTAL 54 75 118 23 13 17 71 41 36 35 43 36 25 20 27 20 13 59 45 21 50 35 119 24 75 9 21 30 27 40 39 60 32 28 20 9 46 76 43 57 49 46 23 26 1 97 28
KILL/ SQ.MI. 1.41 2.00 2.53 3.03 1.08 0.41 5.63 1.67 0.92 0.74 3.12 0.39 2.78 0.47 1.88 0.42 1.29 7.56 1.04 0.35 1.06 0.67 2.38 0.30 4.93 0.17 1.05 1.59 1.23 2.48 0.93 1.31 0.54 1.18 0.39 0.78 2.61 1.84 1.17 1.43 1.36 0.83 0.47 0.57 0.02 1.62 1.01
DEER KILL BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 TOWN W ENT WO RT H W ENT WO RT H’ S LO CA TI ON W EST MO RE LA N D W HIT EF IE LD
WMUs IN TOWN
BUCKS
DOES
TOTAL
KILL/ SQ.MI.
( D/F / G)
16
4
20
0. 48
(A/ C2 ) ( H2)
11 36
1 15
12 51
0. 63 1. 42 0. 65
(D)
18
4
22
W ILM OT
(G/ I1 )
14
4
18
0. 62
W ILT ON
(K)
25
7
32
1. 23
( H2)
40
18
58
1. 05
W IND HA M
(M)
32
36
68
2. 59
W IND SO R
( I2)
5
0
5
0. 57
W OLF EB OR O
( J1/ J 2)
35
14
49
1. 01
W OOD ST OC K
( D/F )
7
0
7
0. 12
772 7
33 62
1 108 9
1. 23
W INC HE ST ER
T OTA L
DEER KILL BY COUNTY, HUNTER RESIDENCY AND SEX OF DEER DURING 2002 NH RESIDENTS
NONRESIDENTS
TOTAL
KILL/
COUNTY
BUCK
DOE
BUCK
DOE
BUCK
DOE
TOTAL
SQ.MI.
BELKNAP
395
123
34
14
429
137
566
1.41
CARROLL
378
101
99
30
477
131
608
0.65
CHESHIRE
571
204
158
51
729
255
984
1.37
COOS
614
165
272
60
886
225
1111
0.61
GRAFTON
807
282
240
111
1047
393
1440
0.83
HILLSBORO
878
386
120
55
998
441
1439
1.62
MERRIMACK
863
307
46
21
909
328
1237
1.33
ROCKINGHAM
1085
868
133
126
1218
994
2212
3.20
STRAFFORD
485
232
62
32
547
264
811
2.15
SULLIVAN
421
164
66
30
487
194
681
1.27
TOTAL
6497
2832
1230
530
7727
3362
11089
1.23
21
2002 BLACK BEAR REPORT Our 2002 bear season framework represented a continued effort to reduce bear populations in the White Mountains and the Central regions, and to stabilize populations in the Northern and Southern regions. Record high harvest during the period 19992001, coupled with age data that suggests our bear population may be stabilizing, prompted expectations for a 2002 harvest that was more similar to that of the mid- to late-1990s as compared to recent record harvests. Hunters took 338 black bears in New Hampshire during 2002; a 36% decrease in harvest from 2001. Good mast production appears to have allowed bears to feed in remote areas, decreasing vulnerability of bears to hunter harvest. Abundant early fall fruit production decreased the need for bears to search extensively for food, resulting in decreased harvest by bait hunters and stalkers. Fall beech and acorn crops kept bears active late into December, thus increasing the potential for lateseason bear harvest by deer hunters. Thirty-seven percent of the total still hunter harvest occurred during deer season (muzzleloader and rifle seasons) compared to 25% during 2001. During 2002, work continued on a research project investigating the daily and seasonal activity patterns and habitat use of nuisance bears. Objectives of this project include identification of nuisance bear seasonal habitat use and an assessment of vulnerability to fall harvest. During the past year, five bears wore global positioning system (GPS) collars. These collars collected location data (GPS fixes) at predefined time intervals throughout the year. Research objectives have been met by this multiple year study and therefore this study will come to a conclusion following recovery of a single active GPS collar through a den check this winter (2003). Two thousand two was another good year for bear management in New Hampshire. Hunter take was consistent with management expectations, and our field research studies provided valuable insight into nuisance bear movements and habitat use. Our bear program continues to generate the information required to ensure that our bear population is wisely managed for present and future New Hampshire generations.
22
NEW HAMPSHIRE BEAR MANAGEMENT REGIONS
23
REGIONAL BEAR POPULATION MANAGEMENT GOALS Black bear management decisions are based on our existing Big Game Population Management Plan. The goals of this plan span the period 1997 through 2005 and are summarized in the following table. BEARS PER SQUARE MILE LOWER UPPER MANAGEMENT LIMIT LIMIT GOAL 0.25 1 0.56 0.25 1 0.72 0.1 0.5 0.31 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.3 Low Low Low
REGION NORTH WHITE MOUNTAINS CENTRAL SOUTHWEST 1 SOUTHWEST 2 SOUTHEAST
2001 LEVEL FROM MODEL 0.53 0.88 0.45 0.43 0.25 Low
TOTAL BEAR HARVEST FOR 1983-2002 HUNTING SEASONS Total bear harvest is the combined harvest of bait, hound and still hunters. As illustrated below, bear harvest has increased notably during the past 2 decades. Periodic drops in harvest generally represent abundant mast years and a related decline in bear vulnerability to hunting. Conversely, peaks in harvest generally occur during poor mast years and reflect increased vulnerability to hunters as a result of increased bear movements associated with food searching.
24
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1983
Number of Bears
The highest bear harvests in New Hampshire history have occurred since 1999. Historic highs in bear harvest reflect 1) a strong bear population, 2) increased hunting pressure – the number of bear hunters has more than doubled in the past decade, and 3) increased hunting opportunity – the entire state was opened to bear hunting beginning in 1998, and seasons have been extended in many regions to control bear population growth.
BEAR HARVEST BY METHOD (1990-2002) A total of 338 bears were taken during the 2002 bear season. This represents a 19% decline from the preceding five-year average of 418 bears. Still-hunters accounted for 203 bears or 60% of the total. Sixty-three percent of the still-hunter harvest occurred prior to the start of the muzzleloader deer season compared to 75% in 2001. Bait hunters took 92 bears (27%), a 46% decline from 2001. Hound hunters took 43 bears (13%) compared to 63 bears in 2001. YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
STILL 105 79 157 171 153 301 62 202 181 313 294 295 203
HUNTING METHOD BAIT 114 15 34 52 39 72 52 69 53 117 118 169 92
HOUND 72 29 39 51 47 55 38 64 45 69 37 63 43
TOTAL 291 123 230 274 239 428 152 335 279 499 449 527 338
REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF BEAR HARVEST (1990-2002) For the first year since 1998, the Central region accounted for the largest regional harvest tally at 124 (37%) bears. The White Mountains and Northern regions followed with 101 (30%) and 65 (19%) bears, respectively. The Southwest 1 region had the highest harvest to date with 38 (11%) bears. The Southwest 2 region remained relatively consistent with 7 bears. The Southeast region experienced a modest increase in harvest over previous years with 3 bears.
YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
NORTH 108 28 55 78 48 100 46 99 68 144 116 134 65
WT-MTS 125 49 88 131 84 170 57 120 94 180 162 195 101
MANAGEMENT REGION CENTRAL S-WEST(1) 58 0 46 0 84 3 65 0 104 3 156 2 49 0 106 10 95 16 138 32 143 21 156 31 124 38
S-WEST(2) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 7 11 7
S-EAST 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3
TOTAL 291 123 230 274 239 428 152 335 279 499 449 527 338 25
BEAR HARVEST SEX RATIOS (1990-2002) For the third consecutive year, the bear harvest sex ratio was 1.4 males per female. This sex ratio is consistent with our desire to maintain a reasonable balance in our harvest. Doing so ensures that hunter impacts represent a viable means for affecting bear population growth. YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
26
FEMALE 112 46 91 112 103 206 55 127 124 216 190 223 141
MALE 179 77 139 162 136 222 97 206 155 283 259 304 197
UNKNOWN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
MALES:FEMALE 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4
TOTAL 291 123 230 274 239 428 152 335 279 499 449 527 338
BEAR HARVEST BY REGION, WMU AND METHOD DURING 2002 This table summarizes the 2002 bear harvest by region, wildlife management unit (WMU) and hunting method. The decision to manage on a regional rather than WMU basis is driven in part by sample size. At the individual WMU level, our samples are generally not large enough to allow for a meaningful assessment of local bear populations. The popularity and impact of bear hunting methods vary regionally in New Hampshire. Regional bear hunting preferences are documented from harvest statistics and are a result of tradition, landscape and access. The diversity of methods and habitats adds to the uniqueness of New Hampshire bear hunting. Statewide, still hunters accounted for 60% of the harvest while bait and hound hunters accounted for 27% and 13%, respectively. Variations in harvest by method are evident between bear management regions. For example, bait hunters accounted for 52% of the harvest in the North region but only 16% in the Central region.
REGION NORTH
NORTH WHITE MTNS
UNIT A B C2 D1 ALL
METHOD OF HARVEST STILL BAIT 5 12 4 15 3 2 9 5 21 34
HOUND 0 1 5 4 10
TOTAL 17 20 10 18 65
C1 D2 E F ALL
2 26 11 16 55
4 7 7 14 32
2 3 2 7 14
8 36 20 37 101
G I1 J1 J2 ALL
35 19 15 22 91
10 2 5 3 20
4 3 6 0 13
49 24 26 25 124
H1 I2 ALL
13 17 30
1 1 2
3 3 6
17 21 38
H2 K ALL
3 0 3
4 0 4
0 0 0
7 0 7
SOUTHEAST
L M ALL
2 1 3
0 0 0
0 0 0
2 1 3
STATEWIDE
ALL
203
92
43
338
WHITE MTNS CENTRAL
CENTRAL SOUTHWEST 1 SOUTHWEST 1 SOUTHWEST 2 SOUTHWEST 2 SOUTHEAST
27
BEAR HARVEST BY METHOD AND SEX DURING 2002 Harvest sex ratios play a role in management decision-making due to the impact the female harvest has on bear populations. Harvest sex ratios in New Hampshire vary slightly by year but vary substantially between hunting methods. Still hunters, for example, tend to harvest slightly more males than females, presumably due to increased movements by males that predispose them to increased harvest (and other mortality). Bait hunters tend to harvest a much higher percentage of males, partly because of the above stated reason and partly because bait hunters select for larger bears which tend to be males. During most years hound hunters also follow this trend, but in 2002 hound hunters took a higher number of females than males. METHOD STILL BAIT HOUND TOTAL
FEMALE 92 25 24 141
MALE 111 67 19 197
M:F 1.2 2.7 0.8 1.4
TOTAL 203 92 43 338
BEAR HARVEST BY REGION AND SEX DURING 2002 Harvest sex ratios were relatively balanced in the North, White Mountain and Central regions. High male harvest ratios in the southwest are thought to reflect the “pioneering” status of these newly established populations. We are pleased with the relatively balanced harvest sex ratios of the White Mountains and Central regions as this contributes to efforts to stabilize these regional populations. REGION NORTH WHITE MTN CENTRAL SOUTHWEST 1 SOUTHWEST 2 SOUTHEAST TOTAL
28
FEMALE 29 44 52 13 2 1 141
MALE 36 57 72 25 5 2 197
M:F 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.9 2.5 2.0 1.4
TOTAL 65 101 124 38 7 3 338
AVERAGE AGE IN YEARS OF HARVESTED BEARS (1991-2001) Age data derived from premolars collected during bear registration are the backbone of the bear management program. We use age data to calculate male and female mortality rates. Knowing these rates allows us to back-calculate a statewide minimum population estimate from annual mortality data. Regional sighting rates derived from hunter surveys, coupled with a knowledge of the amount of bear range in each management region, allows us to partition our “minimum” population across our 6 management regions. The New Hampshire bear management recipe is quite complex and places heavy reliance on bear age information.
SEX 1991 FEMALES 5.8 MALES 5.2
1992 5.0 5.3
1993 6.0 4.1
1994 6.1 5.4
1995 7.1 4.4
YEAR 1996 5.2 5.9
1997 5.9 4.4
1998 5.4 4.8
1999 5.5 3.8
2000 5.4 4.9
2001 5.4 3.7
Data for 2002 were not available for inclusion in this report at the time of printing.
NEW HAMPSHIRE HEAVY-WEIGHTS The following table summarizes record weights (actual dressed weights) for male black bears harvested in New Hampshire through 2002. It is important to note that not all harvested bears are weighed. However, it is likely that a higher percentage of large bears are weighed due to hunter interest. “494” is obviously the weight to beat!
RANK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
TEN HEAVIEST MALE BEARS HARVESTED IN NH YEAR WMU WEIGHT METHOD 1997 E 494 HOUND 2001 J1 494 HOUND 2002 D1 494 HOUND 1993 E 493 HOUND 2001 D1 486 HOUND 1993 C2 483 STILL 1986 B 475 STILL 1988 E 475 STILL 1998 E 473 HOUND 1989 C2 468 STILL
29
BEAR HARVEST BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 The following table summarizes the 2002 bear harvest by town. Towns where no bears were killed are excluded from this table. TOWN WMUs IN TOWN ACWORTH (H1) ALBANY (E/F/J1) ALEXANDRIA (G/I1) ALSTEAD (H1/H2) ALTON (J2) ANDOVER (G/I1) ASHLAND (F/G/J2) ATKINSON & GIL. AC. GR. (A) AUBURN (L/M) BARTLETT (E) BATH (D2) BENTON (D2) BERLIN (C1/C2) BETHLEHEM (D1/D2/E) BOSCAWEN (I1) BRADFORD (I2) BRIDGEWATER (G) BRISTOL (G/I1) BROOKFIELD (J1/J2) CAMBRIDGE (B/C2) CAMPTON (F) CANAAN (G) CANTERBURY (I1/J2) CARROLL (D1/E) CHARLESTOWN (H1) CHATHAM (E) CLAREMONT (H1) CLARKSVILLE (A) COLEBROOK (A/B) COLUMBIA (B) CONCORD (I1/J2/K/L) CONWAY (E/F/J1) CROYDON (H1/I2) DALTON (D1) DANBURY (G/I1) DORCHESTER (G) DUMMER (B/C1/C2) EASTON (D2) EFFINGHAM (J1) ELLSWORTH (F) ENFIELD (G/H1) EPSOM (J2/L) FARMINGTON (J2) FRANCONIA (D1/D2/E)
30
MALE FEMALE 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 0 0 2 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 3 2 1 1 2 1 0 5 1 1 0 0 1 4 1 2 0 5 1 3 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 3 1 0 1 0 2 3 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1
TOTAL 2 4 2 3 2 3 1 1 1 2 3 4 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 6 1 1 5 2 6 3 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 5 2 2 1 1 1 1
BEAR HARVEST BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 TOWN
WMUs IN TOWN
FRANKLIN FREEDOM GILFORD GILMANTON GILSUM GORHAM GOSHEN GRAFTON GROTON HALE’S LOCATION HANOVER HART’S LOCATION HAVERHILL HEBRON HENNIKER HILL HILLSBORO HINSDALE HOLDERNESS HOLLIS HOPKINTON JACKSON JEFFERSON LANCASTER LANDAFF LANGDON LEBANON LINCOLN LISBON LITTLETON LIVERMORE LOUDON LYMAN LYME MADISON MARLOW MEREDITH MIDDLETON MILAN MILLSFIELD MONROE MOULTONBORO NELSON NEW DURHAM NEW HAMPTON NEWBURY
(I1) (J1) (J2) (J2) (H2) (C1/C2/E) (I2/H1) (G) (G) (E) (G) (E) (D2) (G) (I2/K) (I1) (H2/I2/K) (H2) (F/G/J1/J2) (M) (I1/I2/K) (E) (C1/D1/E) (C1/D1) (D2) (H1/H2) (G/H1) (D2/E/F) (D2) (D1/D2) (E/F) (J2) (D2) (G) (F/J1) (H1/H2/I2) (I1/J2) (J2) (B/C1/C2) (A/B) (D2) (J1/J2) (H2) (J2) (G/I1/J2) (I2)
MALE FEMALE 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 2 1 1 4 0 2 2 1 1 1 0 3 3 4 3 1 4 1 0 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 3 2
0 1 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 4 0 1 2 1 2 3 1
TOTAL 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 4 1 3 4 1 2 1 1 3 5 7 3 1 4 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 1 4 1 5 2 1 3 3 2 6 3 31
BEAR HARVEST BY TOWN AND SEX DURING 2002 TOWN
WMUs IN TOWN
NORTHFIELD NORTHUMBERLAND ORANGE ORFORD OSSIPEE PIERMONT PITTSBURG PLAINFIELD PLYMOUTH RANDOLPH RUMNEY SALISBURY SANBORNTON SANDWICH SECOND COLL GRANT SHELBURNE SPRINGFIELD STARK STEWARTSTOWN STODDARD STRAFFORD STRATFORD SUCCESS SUGAR HILL SURRY TAMWORTH THORNTON TUFTONBORO UNITY WAKEFIELD WALPOLE WARNER WARREN WASHINGTON WATERVILLE VALLEY WEBSTER WENTWORTH WHITEFIELD WILMOT WOLFEBORO WOODSTOCK TOTAL
(I1/J2) (B/C1/D1) (G) (D2/G) (J1) (D2) (A) (H1) (F/G) (C1/E) (F/G) (I1) (I1/J2) (F/J1) (A) (C2/E) (G/I2) (B/C1) (A) (H2/I2) (J2) (B) (C2) (D1/D2) (H2) (F/J1) (F) (J1/J2) (H1) (J1/J2) (H1/H2) (I1/I2) (D2/F) (I2) (E/F) (I1) (D2/F/G) (D1) (G/I1) (J1/J2) (D2/F)
32
MALE FEMALE 2 1 4 2 2 1 3 2 2 1 1 6 1 4 1 0 3 1 3 0 0 4 1 0 1 4 3 1 1 1 2 1 4 2 3 1 3 1 0 2 2 197
0 1 2 3 2 4 2 0 1 0 2 1 1 4 0 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 1 1 0 3 4 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 0 0 2 1 1 1 141
TOTAL 2 2 6 5 4 5 5 2 3 1 3 7 2 8 1 1 4 3 5 1 1 8 2 1 1 7 7 3 1 1 2 2 5 3 6 1 3 3 1 3 3 338
2002 MOOSE REPORT The 2002 moose season experienced what was quite possibly the best hunting weather in the history of New Hampshire’s current moose management program. While two days were overcast and rainy, the remaining 7 were cool, crisp autumn days – perfect for hunters and moose alike. Temperatures were generally in the 30s in the mornings and remained cool throughout the day. One hundred fewer permits were issued for 2002 as compared to 2001. These reductions took place in the North (225j175), Southeast (60j35) and White Mountains (130j100) regions. These reductions were implemented in the North and Southeast because management goals for fewer moose in these regions had been reached. A reduction in permit numbers was required to maintain the populations at their current levels. The White Mountains reduction was made to facilitate population growth. Three hundred and fifty-five of the 484 permits were filled, yielding a 73% success rate, slightly higher than the 2001 success rate of 72%. Regional success rates were also similar to last year with the exception of the Southwest region, which had a 56% success rate compared to 80% in 2001. The north region had a 94% success rate for both antlerless-only permits and either-sex permits. The remaining regions’ either-sex success rates were: White Mountains 71%; Central 63%; and Southeast 35%. A total of 209 bulls, 127 cows and 19 calves (355 total moose) were taken. Hunters from 19 states and 1 Canadian province participated in this year’s hunt. Ninety-five percent of moose were taken with rifles. The remainder (18) were taken by muzzleloader (9), shotgun (6), handgun (2) and archery (1). The largest animal was a 935-pound bull taken in Columbia (unit B) by Gene Chandler of Bartlett. The bull with the greatest spread (62 in.) was taken in the town of Groton by Hydrick Stone Sr. of Laurens, SC. The largest cow (725 lbs.) was taken in the town of Berlin by William Odom of Maryville, TN. Eleven year old Ryan Valcourt of Goffstown was this year’s youngest hunter. He took a 595-pound cow in the town of Franconia. Eighty-six year old Robert Dorr of Groveton took a 520-pound cow in Jefferson. Fourteen of this year’s shooters were women. Two hundred and fifty-three moose were taken by permittees and the remaining 102 were taken by sub-permittees. Additional information on the lottery and season results can be found in the accompanying tables. The first table lists the management goals for each region as set through an extensive public input process in 1997. Moose goals are measured using the regional moose observation rates of deer hunters participating in an annual deer hunter mail survey. A negative value under “desired change” indicates a need to decrease the population to meet the desired goal while a positive value reflects a need for population growth. In 2000, the Fish and Game Commission acted to reduce the Southeast moose population below the established goal in order to reduce vehicle/moose collisions in the region. 33
NEW HAMPSHIRE MOOSE MANAGEMENT REGIONS
34
N.H. MOOSE POPULATION MANAGEMENT GOALS BY REGION As measured by moose seen per hundred hunter hours from an annual deer hunter mail survey. REGION NORTH WHITE MOUNTAINS CENTRAL SOUTHWEST SOUTHEAST
LOWER LIMIT 7.70 3.15 1.06 0.90 0.73
UPPER LIMIT 9.59 4.73 1.60 1.34 1.09
CURRENT LEVEL* 8.21 2.37 1.71 1.18 0.64
RECOMMENDED DESIRED GOAL % CHANGE 8.63 5% 3.94 66% 1.50 -12% 1.34 14% 1.00 56%
* Moose seen per hundred hunter hours during the three years 2000-2002.
NOTE: Moose in New Hampshire are managed by regions rather than units (i.e. WMUs). This is because sample sizes on data collected are too small at the unit level to yield reliable information. Thus, several WMUs are consolidated into each region.
SUMMARY OF N.H. MOOSE APPLICATIONS, PERMITS AND STATEWIDE MOOSE HARVEST BY YEAR (1988-2002) TOTAL PERMITS TOTAL DRAWN YEAR APPLICATIONS (ISSUED*) 1988 5,915 75 (75) 1989 5,504 75 (75) 1990 5,707 75 (75) 1991 5,122 100 (100) 1992 8,702 190 (190) 1993 10,044 317 (317) 1994 11,572 405 (405) 1995 14,150 495 (495) 1996 14,398 495 (493) 1997 15,161 570 (569) 1998 15,942 570 (569) 1999 13,090 570 (570) 2000 13,984 585 (581) 2001 14,943 585 (584) 2002 14,888 485 (484)
RESIDENT ODDS OF BEING DRAWN 1 IN 76 1 IN 71 1 IN 72 1 IN 49 1 IN 45 1 IN 30 1 IN 27 1 IN 26 1 IN 26 1 IN 23 1 IN 25 1 IN 20 1 IN 20 1 IN 20 1 IN 23
PERCENT HUNTER STATEWIDE HARVEST CALVES SUCCESS RATE BULLS COWS CALVES TOTAL & COWS 37 15 5 57 35% 76% 33 22 4 59 44% 79% 39 11 3 53 26% 71% 64 21 4 89 28% 89% 117 48 7 172 32% 91% 188 79 14 281 33% 89% 204 84 17 305 33% 75% 256 104 24 384 33% 78% 257 97 20 374 31% 76% 248 152 28 428 42% 75% 235 139 33 407 42% 72% 227 155 24 406 44% 71% 225 138 15 378 40% 65% 250 144 25 419 40% 72% 209 127 19 355 41% 73%
NOTES: * Permits issued may be less than permits drawn in the lottery due to the failure of potential permittees to attend a moose hunter seminar. DATES IN MOOSE-HUNT HISTORY 1988 First modern moose hunt. Season length was 3 days. Units A1, A2, B, C1, C2, D1, E1, E2, E3, F and J1 open to moose hunting. 1991 Season lengthened to 10 days. 1992 Season set at 9 days. Units D2 and G opened. 1993 Units H1, I and J2 opened. 1994 Units H2, K, L and M opened. 1997 Began issuance of either sex and antleress-only permits in Units A1, A2, B and C2. 2000 Units H2 and I split into H2N/H2S and I1/I2.
35
AGE AND SEX OF THE 2002 MOOSE HARVEST BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND UNIT
REGION NORTH
ADULT YEARLING ADULT YEARLING % COWS % ADULT BULLS BULLS COWS COWS AND BULLS UNIT (AGE 2.5+) (AGE 1.5) (AGE 2.5+) (AGE 1.5) CALVES TOTAL CALVES (AGE 2.5+) A1 A2 B C2 D1 ALL
4 26 15 15 8 68
1 7 5 4 0 17
5 10 18 11 6 50
4 9 5 0 0 18
0 5 3 3 0 11
14 57 46 33 14 164
64% 42% 57% 42% 43% 48%
29% 46% 33% 45% 57% 41%
C1 D2 E1 E2 E3 F ALL
9 10 4 3 3 9 38
2 1 1 1 0 3 8
4 4 0 0 3 6 17
0 2 2 0 0 0 4
0 2 0 0 1 1 4
15 19 7 4 7 19 71
27% 42% 29% 0% 57% 37% 35%
60% 53% 57% 75% 43% 47% 54%
G H1 I1 I2 J1 J2 ALL
15 3 5 9 5 11 48
5 1 0 3 0 1 10
9 2 1 2 4 1 19
6 2 0 0 0 2 10
1 0 0 0 0 1 2
36 8 6 14 9 16 89
44% 50% 17% 14% 44% 25% 35%
42% 38% 83% 64% 56% 69% 54%
H2N H2S K ALL
5 2 8 15
0 0 0 0
2 0 0 2
0 0 1 1
0 0 1 1
7 2 10 19
29% 0% 20% 21%
71% 100% 80% 79%
L M ALL
3 1 4
0 1 1
2 3 5
1 0 1
0 1 1
6 6 12
50% 67% 58%
50% 17% 33%
STATEWIDE ALL
173
36
93
34
19
355
41%
49%
NORTH W. MTN.
W. MTN. CENTRAL
CENTRAL S. WEST
S. WEST S. EAST S. EAST
36
PERMITS ISSUED, HARVEST, SUCCESS RATE AND HARVEST PER SQUARE MILE FOR THE 2002 MOOSE HUNT BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND UNIT
REGION NORTH
NORTH W. MTN.
UNIT A1 A2 B C2 D1 ALL
EITHER SEX PERMITS ISSUED 10 45 35 25 10 125
ANTLERLESS ONLY TOTAL PERMITS PERMITS ISSUED ISSUED 5 15 15 60 15 50 10 35 5 15 50 175
TOTAL HARVEST 14 57 46 33 14 164
HUNTER SUCCESS RATE 93% 95% 92% 94% 93% 94%
HARVEST PER SQUARE MILE 0.09 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.12
C1 D2 E1 E2 E3 F ALL
20 25 10 5 15 25 100
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 25 10 5 15 25 100
15 19 7 4 7 19 71
75% 76% 70% 80% 47% 76% 71%
0.07 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04
G H1 I1 I2 J1 J2 ALL
41 10 20 20 15 35 141
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
41 10 20 20 15 35 141
36 8 6 14 9 16 89
88% 80% 30% 70% 60% 46% 63%
0.06 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.03
H2N H2S K ALL
10 9 15 34
0 0 0 0
10 9 15 34
7 2 10 19
70% 22% 67% 56%
0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02
S. EAST
L M ALL
15 19 34
0 0 0
15 19 34
6 6 12
40% 32% 35%
0.01 0.01 0.01
STATEWIDE
ALL
434
50
484
355
73%
0.04
W. MTN. CENTRAL
CENTRAL S. WEST
S. WEST S. EAST
37
SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 2002 MOOSE HARVEST BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND AGE
MANAGEMENT REGION
NORTH
W. MTN.
CENTRAL
S. WEST
S. EAST
AGE IN YEARS 0.5 1.5 2.5-4.5 5.5+ 0.5 1.5 2.5-4.5 5.5+ 0.5 1.5 2.5-4.5 5.5+ 0.5 1.5 2.5-4.5 5.5+ 0.5 1.5 2.5-4.5 5.5+
-------------------BULLS------------------ANTLER BEAM ANTLER SPREAD WEIGHT DIAMETER (MM) (INCHES) (POUNDS) MEAN MAXIMUM MEAN MAXIMUM MEAN MAXIMUM . . . . 230 305 34.4 45.00 23.1 36.00 490 635 47.8 62.00 37.7 55.00 661 805 62.9 82.00 52.3 60.50 806 935 . . . . 333 360 32.6 43.00 22.1 26.50 429 565 45.4 54.00 35.1 43.50 626 780 60.2 66.00 50.2 58.50 784 875 . . . . 290 290 35.5 54.00 23.8 29.25 475 545 45.9 58.50 37.7 62.00 644 810 52.8 75.00 49.5 57.00 749 850 . . . . . . . . . . . . 47.2 55.00 38.1 46.00 621 760 48.2 58.00 40.2 49.00 658 735 . . . . . . 29.0 29.00 25.0 25.00 472 472 46.3 50.00 36.2 42.50 645 650 53.0 53.00 47.0 47.00 710 710
----COWS---WEIGHT (POUNDS) MEAN MAXIMUM 256 290 474 555 580 725 591 715 220 220 450 520 577 650 559 630 200 200 470 550 552 630 594 660 240 240 425 425 . . 560 560 240 240 . . 571 610 515 515
MOOSE HUNTER SUCCESS RATES BY MANAGEMENT REGION AND UNIT FOR 1988 TO 2002 REGION NORTH
S. EAST
UNIT 1988 A1 60% A2 80% B 57% C2 78% D1 100% ALL 74% C1 89% D2 NS E1 100% E2 67% E3 86% F 86% ALL 86% G NS H1 NS I1* NS I2* NS J1 20% J2 NS ALL 20% H2N* NS H2S* NS K NS ALL NS L NS M NS ALL NS
1989 60% 90% 100% 80% 75% 83% 80% NS 67% 67% 86% 71% 75% NS NS NS NS 67% NS 67% NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
1990 80% 90% 43% 80% 25% 69% 70% NS 83% 33% 100% 71% 72% NS NS NS NS 67% NS 67% NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
1991 80% 90% 86% 87% 100% 88% 90% NS 83% 100% 100% 100% 94% NS NS NS NS 75% NS 75% NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
1992 87% 92% 86% 100% 100% 93% 95% 100% 100% 67% 83% 100% 91% 100% NS NS NS 67% NS 78% NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
1993 100% 98% 100% 100% 80% 98% 100% 73% 90% 90% 80% 80% 86% 85% 86% 60% 60% 73% 60% 74% NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
1994 90% 98% 90% 92% 100% 95% 85% 80% 95% 95% 70% 52% 78% 80% 60% 33% 33% 53% 60% 61% 40% 40% 47% 43% 40% 50% 45%
1995 90% 99% 97% 95% 80% 95% 100% 85% 84% 80% 80% 80% 84% 67% 70% 60% 60% 70% 45% 63% 40% 40% 47% 43% 20% 33% 27%
1996 95% 95% 97% 85% 87% 92% 90% 70% 76% 68% 72% 67% 73% 70% 80% 55% 55% 75% 60% 67% 60% 60% 60% 60% 33% 40% 37%
1997 71% 97% 96% 95% 100% 92% 87% 77% 57% 75% 67% 80% 73% 67% 70% 75% 75% 75% 50% 67% 60% 60% 33% 49% 35% 30% 32%
1998 77% 93% 93% 95% 80% 90% 86% 73% 51% 75% 37% 60% 63% 83% 40% 55% 55% 60% 45% 62% 60% 60% 67% 63% 40% 30% 35%
1999 74% 92% 82% 88% 93% 87% 67% 77% 63% 50% 33% 72% 61% 83% 70% 70% 70% 47% 70% 71% 55% 55% 73% 63% 50% 25% 38%
2000 69% 84% 87% 85% 80% 82% 83% 52% 50% 50% 45% 63% 60% 77% 47% 67% 45% 40% 59% 59% 40% 40% 55% 49% 31% 34% 33%
2001 94% 83% 91% 95% 73% 88% 83% 63% 70% 60% 55% 63% 67% 80% 60% 67% 60% 73% 51% 65% 70% 80% 85% 80% 40% 23% 32%
2002 93% 95% 92% 94% 93% 94% 75% 76% 70% 80% 47% 76% 71% 88% 80% 30% 70% 60% 46% 63% 70% 22% 67% 56% 40% 32% 35%
STATEWIDE
ALL
79%
71%
89%
91%
89%
75%
78%
76%
75%
72%
71%
65%
72%
73%
NORTH W. MTN.
W. MTN. CENTRAL
CENTRAL S. WEST
S. WEST S. EAST
76%
NOTES: NS signifies no season. Success rates prior to 1996 based on old unit boundaries. * Values prior to 2000 are for units H2 or I as a whole.
38
2002 WILD TURKEY REPORT
May 2002 Spring Gobbler Season Results A total of 2,593 gobblers and 38 bearded hens were registered from 200 towns during the May 3 – May 31, 2002 season. This represents an increase of 371 turkeys (16.4%) from the previous year’s season total of 2,260 gobblers. The male harvest was comprised of 1,359 jakes (52.4%) and 1,234 toms (47.6%), for a harvest ratio of 1.10 jakes per tom. Opening day, May 3rd, recorded 645 gobblers (24.5%), and by May 12th, 77.5% of the season total had been registered. Nine of the state’s ten counties had an increase in harvest. Of the 14 wildlife management units, 12 had increases, and the other 2 had only very slight decreases. The gobbler harvest per square mile data indicates it would be premature to consider initiating a fall shotgun season. Only 56 towns had kill densities greater than 0.5 gobblers per sq. mile, and only 10 of these towns had harvests greater than 1.0 gobbler per sq. mile. The highest harvests for wildlife management units occurred in H1 (0.86 gobblers per square mile), H2 (0.61), and D2 (0.60). States generally like to see a spring harvest of 1.0 or more gobblers per square mile before opening a unit to fall shotgun hunting.
Fall 2002 Turkey Archery Season Results A total of 196 turkeys (128 hens, 68 gobblers) were registered during the September 15 – December 15, 2002 archery season compared to the record harvest of 256 turkeys for the fall 2001 season. Fall harvests are highly variable depending on food availability; good acorn years typically result in lower harvests.
Population Status of Turkeys in New Hampshire The statewide population as of August 2002 was estimated to be 23,000 wild turkeys. The population continues to expand and increase in central and northern New Hampshire. However, production of young turkeys for summer 2002 was below the long-term average, and much “renesting” occurred. It is thought that 5-inch snowfalls on April 27-28th and May 18-19th may have caused significant nest abandonment. Also, heavy rainfalls during May 31, June 6 and June 12 may have caused substantial hatch mortality.
Turkey Project Activities Two important studies pertaining to northern turkey ecology were wrapped up in 2002. One study focused on the winter energy budget of turkeys and the importance of supplemental food sources, and a second pertained to the importance of ground-stored silage to a northern population of turkeys, and their population dynamics. 39
The Department will open WMUs B, C1, and C2 to a conservative spring turkey season beginning in 2003. The Department also initiated discussions regarding a youth spring turkey hunt, based on constituent input and strong support expressed in a turkey hunting survey conducted during the fall of 2002. The Department declined as premature consideration of a second gobbler in the bag for the spring season, and the establishment of a fall firearms season for turkeys. 2002 TURKEY HARVEST BY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNIT (WMU) SPRING
FALL
BEARDED HENS
JAKES
TOMS
HENS
GOBBLERS
TOTAL
SPRING KILL /SQ.MI.
D1 D2
1 0
62 154
53 132
2 13
1 4
119 303
0.48 0.60
E F
1 1
20 34
11 33
2 2
0 1
34 71
0.04 0.14
G H1
4 8
97 160
132 183
11 27
6 7
250 385
0.36 0.86
H2 I1
7 0
235 58
191 72
17 4
16 4
466 138
0.61 0.36
I2 J1
6 3
76 70
97 52
8 5
4 3
191 133
0.47 0.26
J2 K
4 3
122 167
71 147
8 21
6 8
211 346
0.24 0.49
L M
0 0
60 44
39 21
3 5
2 6
104 76
0.20 0.09
38
1359
1234
128
68
2827
0.34
WMU
STATE TOTAL
SPRING HARVEST BY WMU AND YEAR WMU
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
D1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
4
8
63
84
89
116
D2 E
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 0
5 0
0 0
25 0
43 1
51 0
122 0
148 0
218 0
266 13
286 32
F G
0 2
0 1
0 1
0 8
0 4
0 7
0 14
0 15
0 20
1 22
6 48
19 74
27 101
55 141
61 208
68 233
H1 H2
15 34
28 36
45 52
47 65
69 71
80 109
91 120
67 134
110 202
141 231
145 243
198 235
240 282
303 324
362 385
351 433
I1 I2 J1
0 2 0
0 1 0
1 5 0
2 2 0
2 14 0
8 13 0
1 20 0
11 25 0
18 39 0
37 55 0
31 51 0
44 75 0
68 91 80
91 139 75
134 148 97
130 179 125
J2 K
0 0
3 0
2 3
4 3
4 7
8 51
6 31
6 44
0 81
5 101
13 107
17 161
57 154
101 254
144 250
197 317
L M
15 13
6 14
13 16
16 8
21 10
29 7
39 9
19 13
25 18
23 28
28 30
23 39
30 37
43 55
59 44
99 65
TOTAL
81
89
138
155
202
317
336
334
539
690
757 1015 1378 1883 2260 2631
* As of 2002, legal spring harvest of bearded hens is included in season totals
40
2002 SPRING TURKEY HARVEST BY TOWN INCLUDING THE KILL PER SQUARE MILE OF LAND AREA. Excludes towns with no turkey kill. SPRING FEMALE KILL
SPRING SPRING MALE KILL KILL /SQ.MI.
TOWN
WMUs IN TOWN
ACWORTH ALBANY
H1 E/F/J1
1 0
24 4
0.65 0.05
ALEXANDRIA ALSTEAD
G/I1 H1/H2
0 1
6 44
0.14 1.15
ALTON
J2
0
17
0.27
AMHERST ANDOVER
K/M G/I1
0 0
5 19
0.14 0.49
ANTRIM
H2/I2/K
0
23
0.64
ASHLAND ATKINSON
F/G/J2 M
0 0
5 1
0.44 0.09
AUBURN BARNSTEAD
L/M J2
0 0
1 4
0.04 0.09
BARRINGTON
J2/L
0
10
0.21
BARTLETT BATH
E D2
0 0
2 56
0.03 1.42
BEDFORD BELMONT
K/L/M J2
0 0
6 6
0.17 0.20
BENNINGTON
H2/K
0
13
1.13
BENTON BETHLEHEM
D2 D1/D2/E
0 0
5 11
0.10 0.12
BOSCAWEN BOW
I1 I1/K/L
0 0
17 11
0.67 0.38
BRADFORD
I2
1
13
0.40
BRENTWOOD BRIDGEWATER
L/M G
0 0
6 1
0.36 0.05
BRISTOL BROOKFIELD
G/I1 J1/J2
0 0
7 4
0.40 0.17
BROOKLINE
K/M
0
2
0.10
CAMPTON CANAAN
F G
0 1
19 36
0.36 0.70
CANDIA CANTERBURY
L/M I1/J2
0 0
1 12
0.03 0.27
CARROLL
D1/E
1
2
0.06
CENTER HARBOR CHARLESTOWN
J1/J2 H1
0 0
2 24
0.18 0.67
CHATHAM
E
0
11
0.19
CHESTER CHESTERFIELD
M H2
0 0
8 20
0.31 0.43
CHICHESTER CLAREMONT
J2/L H1
0 0
7 41
0.33 0.96
CONCORD
I1/J2/K/L
1
21
0.34
CONWAY CORNISH
E/F/J1 H1
0 2
8 30
0.11 0.76
CROYDON
H1/I2
0
27
0.73
41
2002 SPRING TURKEY HARVEST BY TOWN INCLUDING THE KILL PER SQUARE MILE OF LAND AREA. Excludes towns with no turkey kill. SPRING FEMALE KILL
SPRING SPRING MALE KILL KILL /SQ.MI.
TOWN
WMUs IN TOWN
DALTON DANBURY DEERFIELD
D1 G/I1 L
0 0 0
13 10 3
0.47 0.27 0.06
DEERING DERRY
K M
1 0
22 1
0.74 0.03
DORCHESTER DOVER
G L
0 0
9 12
0.20 0.46
DUBLIN DUNBARTON DURHAM
H2 K L
0 0 0
12 10 5
0.42 0.32 0.21
EASTON EATON
D2 J1
0 0
4 3
0.13 0.12
EFFINGHAM ENFIELD
J1 G/H1
0 1
12 35
0.31 0.89
EPPING EPSOM EXETER
L/M J2/L L/M
0 0 0
3 11 2
0.11 0.33 0.10
FARMINGTON FITZWILLIAM
J2 H2
1 0
10 19
0.29 0.54
FRANCESTOWN FRANCONIA
K D1/D2/E
0 0
22 7
0.73 0.11
FRANKLIN FREEDOM FREMONT
I1 J1 M
0 0 0
5 14 1
0.18 0.40 0.06
GILFORD GILMANTON
J2 J2
0 0
6 6
0.16 0.10
GILSUM GOFFSTOWN
H2 K
0 0
10 23
0.58 0.61
GORHAM GOSHEN
C1/C2/E I2/H1
0 0
2 19
0.06 0.87
GRAFTON GRANTHAM GREENFIELD
G G/H1/I2 K
1 0 0
16 11 14
0.40 0.41 0.52
GREENLAND GREENVILLE
M K
0 0
1 3
0.09 0.42
GROTON G HALE’S LOCATION E
0 0
3 1
0.07 1.67
HANCOCK HANOVER HARRISVILLE
H2/K G H2
0 0 0
20 14 12
0.65 0.29 0.64
HAVERHILL HEBRON
D2 G
0 0
41 3
0.80 0.18
HENNIKER HILL
I2/K I1
1 0
35 9
0.82 0.34
42
2002 SPRING TURKEY HARVEST BY TOWN INCLUDING THE KILL PER SQUARE MILE OF LAND AREA. Excludes towns with no turkey kill. SPRING FEMALE KILL
SPRING SPRING MALE KILL KILL /SQ.MI.
TOWN
WMUs IN TOWN
HILLSBORO HINSDALE HOLDERNESS
H2/I2/K H2 F/G/J1/J2
0 0 0
37 7 7
0.84 0.34 0.23
HOLLIS HOOKSETT
M K/L
0 0
6 6
0.18 0.17
HOPKINTON HUDSON
I1/I2/K M
0 0
19 1
0.43 0.03
JACKSON JAFFREY
E H2/K
1 0
4 26
0.07 0.66
JEFFERSON KEENE
C1/D1/E H2
0 0
17 15
0.33 0.41
KENSINGTON LACONIA LANCASTER
M J2 C1/D1
0 0 0
1 4 37
0.08 0.20 0.72
LANDAFF LANGDON
D2 H1/H2
0 2
23 13
0.80 0.91
LEBANON LEE
G/H1 L
0 0
29 8
0.79 0.39
LEMPSTER LISBON
H1/I2 D2
1 0
10 23
0.34 0.53
LITCHFIELD LITTLETON
M D1/D2
0 0
4 36
0.26 0.67
LONDONDERRY LOUDON LYMAN
M J2 D2
0 1 0
3 17 27
0.07 0.39 0.95
LYME LYNDEBOROUGH
G K
1 0
23 14
0.45 0.46
MADBURY MADISON
L F/J1
0 0
4 12
0.29 0.31
MANCHESTER MARLBOROUGH
K/L/M H2
0 0
1 11
0.03 0.54
MARLOW MASON
H1/H2/I2 K
0 0
12 6
0.46 0.25
MEREDITH MERRIMACK MIDDLETON
I1/J2 M J2
0 0 0
6 7 2
0.15 0.21 0.11
MILFORD MILTON
K/M J2
0 0
8 4
0.31 0.12
MONROE MONT VERNON
D2 K
0 0
28 5
1.33 0.30
MOULTONBORO NASHUA
J1/J2 M
0 0
20 3
0.34 0.10
NELSON NEW BOSTON
H2 K
0 1
9 24
0.40 0.57
43
2002 SPRING TURKEY HARVEST BY TOWN INCLUDING THE KILL PER SQUARE MILE OF LAND AREA. Excludes towns with no turkey kill.
TOWN
WMUs IN TOWN
SPRING FEMALE KILL
NEW DURHAM NEW HAMPTON NEW IPSWICH
J2 G/I1/J2 K
0 1 0
8 12 16
0.19 0.35 0.48
NEW LONDON NEWBURY
G/I1/I2 I2
0 1
5 18
0.23 0.54
NEWINGTON NEWMARKET
M L
0 0
4 2
0.49 0.16
NEWPORT NORTHFIELD
H1/I2 I1/J2
1 0
38 7
0.89 0.24
NORTHUMBERLAND NORTHWOOD
B/C1/D1 J2/L
0 0
1 3
0.03 0.11
NOTTINGHAM ORANGE ORFORD
L G D2/G
0 0 0
3 3 29
0.07 0.13 0.62
OSSIPEE PELHAM
J1 M
2 0
15 1
0.24 0.04
PEMBROKE PETERBOROUGH
L H2/K
0 0
5 26
0.22 0.68
PIERMONT PLAINFIELD
D2 H1
0 1
20 63
0.51 1.24
PLYMOUTH RANDOLPH
F/G C1/E
0 0
8 1
0.28 0.02
RICHMOND RINDGE ROCHESTER
H2 H2/K J2/L
0 0 0
11 2 18
0.29 0.05 0.39
ROLLINSFORD ROXBURY
L H2
0 0
10 3
1.32 0.25
RUMNEY SALISBURY
F/G I1
1 0
16 19
0.41 0.48
SANBORNTON SANDOWN
I1/J2 M
0 0
13 1
0.27 0.07
SANDWICH SOUTH HAMPTON
F/J1 M
0 0
13 1
0.14 0.13
SPRINGFIELD STODDARD STRAFFORD
G/I2 H2/I2 J2
0 2 0
17 8 5
0.39 0.19 0.10
STRATHAM SUGAR HILL
L/M D1/D2
0 0
9 5
0.59 0.25
SULLIVAN SUNAPEE
H2 G/I2
0 1
8 13
0.42 0.64
SURRY SUTTON
H2 I1/I2
2 1
15 21
1.06 0.52
SWANZEY TAMWORTH
H2 F/J1
0 0
26 12
0.57 0.20
44
SPRING SPRING MALE KILL KILL /SQ.MI.
2002 SPRING TURKEY HARVEST BY TOWN INCLUDING THE KILL PER SQUARE MILE OF LAND AREA. Excludes towns with no turkey kill. SPRING FEMALE KILL
SPRING SPRING MALE KILL KILL /SQ.MI.
TOWN
WMUs IN TOWN
TEMPLE THORNTON
K F
0 0
19 11
0.80 0.22
TILTON TROY
I1/J2 H2
0 0
1 2
0.09 0.11
TUFTONBORO UNITY
J1/J2 H1
0 2
12 22
0.29 0.65
WAKEFIELD WALPOLE
J1/J2 H1/H2
1 1
18 48
0.48 1.36
WARNER WARREN
I1/I2 D2/F
0 0
17 10
0.31 0.21
WASHINGTON WEARE
I2 K
0 0
12 38
0.26 0.64
WEBSTER
I1
0
17
0.62
WENTWORTH WESTMORELAND
D2/F/G H2
0 1
11 48
0.26 1.36
WHITEFIELD WILMOT
D1 G/I1
0 0
17 15
0.50 0.52
WILTON WINCHESTER
K H2
0 0
10 38
0.38 0.69
WINDSOR WOLFEBORO
I2 J1/J2
0 0
5 21
0.57 0.43
WOODSTOCK
D2/F
0
2
0.03
38
2593
0.34
TOTAL
2002 TURKEY HARVEST BY COUNTY SPRING
FALL
BEARDED HENS
JAKES
TOMS
HENS
GOBBLERS
TOTAL
BELKNAP CARROLL
1 4
45 108
32 78
5 7
4 4
87 201
CHESHIRE COOS
7 1
222 54
184 36
16 2
16 1
445 94
GRAFTON HILLSBORO
5 2
285 211
304 173
22 19
11 11
627 416
MERRIMACK ROCKINGHAM
6 0
169 39
177 16
17 6
8 5
377 66
STRAFFORD SULLIVAN
1 11
62 164
34 200
5 29
1 7
103 411
STATE TOTAL
38
1359
1234
128
68
2827
COUNTY
45
TOP 10 SPRING GOBBLERS FOR 2002 RANKED BY WEIGHT AND THEN BY BEARD LENGTH
HUNTER NAME - RESIDENCE KEVIN CLIFFORD - ENFIELD KEITH WOODWARD - CENTER CONWAY TODD TUCKER - ROXBURY GARY ADAMS - DOVER ARTHUR AUSTIN III - LOUDON WHITNEY ROBERTS - TAMWORTH ROBERT MARCHAND - BOSCAWEN ERIC DENSMORE - ENFIELD SHELLEY MURDOCK - RICHMOND GEORGE DOWNING - BOW
46
WEIGHT (LBS) 25 25 24.5 24 24 24 24 24 24 24
BEARD LENGTH (INCHES) 9.5 8 10.8 10.3 10 10 10 9.8 9.5 9.3
SPUR WMU LENGTH OF (INCHES) KILL TOWN OF KILL 0.8 G CANAAN 1.0 J1 MADISON 1.3 H2 KEENE 1.1 L DOVER 1.3 J2 CONCORD 1.1 J1 MADISON 1.0 I1 BOSCAWEN 0.9 G HANOVER 0.8 H2 SWANZEY 1.3 H1 CORNISH
2001/2002 FURBEARER REPORT Trapping is a highly specialized skill and one that provides substantial public benefit. Trappers continue to play a significant role in the management of furbearer populations. They provide important data to management programs and provide an important public service in their capacity as damage control specialists. This furbearer harvest report summarizes data collected during the months of October 2001 through April 2002 (i.e., the 2001 trapping season). New Hampshire furbearers remain abundant and widespread, as indicated by results from the 2001 New Hampshire trapping season. Trapper numbers and harvest rebounded from notable lows recorded during the 2000 season. The number of trapping licenses sold increased from a historic low of 387 in 2000 to 419 in 2001; an 8 percent increase. Average pelt values, derived from the annual winter fur auction conducted by the New Hampshire Trappers Association, were higher than they have been in nearly a decade. High pelt values encourage increased trapping effort and often result in higher harvest. The 2001 beaver harvest was 4,378, an increase of 55 percent over the 2000 harvest of 2,832. Beavers contribute significantly to the nuisance animal complaints received by our staff. Trappers play a significant role in managing the local populations and in reducing human/beaver conflicts. Harvest rate, measured as the catch per 100 trap-nights, serves as a useful indicator of species abundance. The 2001 beaver harvest rate (catch per 100 trap-nights) was 8.85. This value reflects high densities of beaver in our state. The otter harvest was up 64 percent from 242 in 2000 to 397 in 2001. Pelt values increased only 13 percent during the same period; from $42.86 to $48.25. Previous population analysis suggested that New Hampshire could sustain an annual harvest of 350 otters, and that a higher harvest over several years could lead to a decline. This finding appears to conflict with the 2001 otter harvest rate of 2.48, which is indicative of a relatively strong population (the rate is the second highest for otters in a decade). Further analysis will be conducted to assess population management needs. The 2001 mink harvest was 618, an increase of 141 percent from 2000 and a number not reached since 1988. This increase, in combination with a relatively high harvest rate (2.41), is reflective of a relatively strong mink population. The 2001 muskrat harvest was 3,604, which was up 69 percent from 2000. The catch per 100 trap-nights declined from 10.10 in 2000 to 7.97 in 2001. Interest in fisher trapping increased in 2001 in apparent response to improved pelt values. Fisher pelt values increased from $17.54 in 2000 to $25.05 in 2001, an increase of 43 percent. A total of 1,007 fisher were trapped in 2001 compared to 668 in 2000, an increase of 51 percent. Past analysis of fisher harvest data suggests that the population can sustain an annual harvest of approximately 1,100 animals. The catch per 100 trap-nights of 3.64 fisher indicates an abundant fisher population. In fact, this catch rate is the second highest rate in the past 13 years. 47
Raccoons, coyotes, gray and red foxes all experienced harvest increases during 2001. A record 556 coyotes were taken during the 2001 trapping season. N.H. FURBEARER HARVEST BY COUNTY (2001/02) County Name
Beaver
Coyote
Fisher
Gray Fox
Mink
Muskrat
Otter
Raccoon
Red Fox
283 248 422 405 354 634 774 713 342 203
42 23 47 112 110 71 57 32 27 35
65 51 73 106 120 179 135 154 64 60
18 18 7 3 27 19 18 16 33 24
61 50 27 109 99 54 123 48 28 19
126 48 184 1327 230 380 370 671 163 105
27 23 60 27 42 55 64 51 31 17
49 30 43 61 74 55 52 112 62 20
50 16 23 67 71 55 42 23 22 40
4378
556
1007
183
618
3604
397
558
409
Belknap Carroll Cheshire Coos Grafton Hillsboro Merrimack Rockingham Strafford Sullivan Total
N.H. STATEWIDE CATCH PER 100 TRAP-NIGHTS Catch per unit effort data are derived from mandatory trapping reports submitted from 19892001. Year Beaver Otter Mink Muskrat Fisher Red Fox Gray Fox Coyote Raccoon
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
7.12 5.9 7.33 6.51 9.74 6.58 7.91 7.66 8.51 7.04 9.28 9.87 8.85 2.91 3.39 2.39 2.08 2.06 1.43 2.02 2.21 2.29 1.19 2.81 1.88 2.48 1.21 1.16 1.58 1.21 1.32 1.01 1.76 1.75 1.77 2.40 4.20 1.89 2.41 8.78 7.96 10.8 7.34 7.69 6.92 6.90 6.73 10.16 7.90 11.20 10.10 7.97 1.31 2.28 2.61 3.14 3.10 2.56 2.91 3.32 3.78 3.24 3.45 2.77 3.64 1.66 2.19 2.24 1.93 2.01 1.99 2.66 1.86 2.78 2.36 2.04 2.55 3.26 1.11 4.43 1.74 1.09 0.91 1.37 0.94 1.42 1.98 2.04 2.35 2.09 3.02 0.87 1.15 1.36 1.64 1.76 1.81 1.18 1.83 3.00 2.32 2.01 1.34 2.47 4.02 18.04 17.58 24.94 19.21 20.91 14.36 26.48 24.53 30.66 8.22 3.62 3.87
N.H. HARVEST RECORDS FOR SELECT SPECIES DURING 1989-2001 Opening year 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
48
Licensed Trappers
Gray Fox
Red Fox
Mink
Beaver
Muskrat
Otter
Raccoon
Fisher
Coyote
643 624 457 418 380 439 393 403 411 400 397 387 419
58 63 76 86 76 97 75 129 104 120 89 75 183
504 415 426 381 378 444 343 264 324 195 181 208 409
465 358 537 381 441 513 386 587 429 453 416 256 618
3098 2589 3372 2059 3612 5901 4048 4752 3975 3784 3416 2832 4378
3746 2381 3886 2525 2273 4389 2731 2976 3980 3517 1714 2137 3604
329 271 316 285 405 504 317 451 344 288 291 242 397
890 796 965 854 994 888 902 519 96 459 374 241 558
406 440 442 426 525 722 426 642 1187 923 885 668 1007
169 155 227 260 298 342 380 345 398 318 279 358 556
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department’s mission: As the guardian of the state’s fish, wildlife and marine resources, the N.H. Fish and Game Department works in partnership with the public to: • conserve, manage and protect those resources and their habitats; • inform and educate the public about those resources; and • provide the public with opportunities to use and appreciate those resources.
$$ WE PAY CASH FOR VIOLATORS $$
CALL OPERATION GAME THIEF
VISIT: www.wildlife.state.nh.us
1-800-344-4262
• on-line license sales
REPORT THESE FACTS:
• latest Fish and Game news
Date Vehicle Description License Number Road/Route
Time Violation Travel Direction Description of Person(s)
Operation Game Thief, Inc. is made possible through the generosity of: Gun Owners of New Hampshire Kittery Trading Post Loon Preservation Committee Seacoast Seafood Dealers N.H. Fish and Game Commission Winni Derby Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc. Thompson/Center Arms Co. NE Safari Club International N.H. Wildlife Federation Merrimack County, Office of the Sheriff N.H. Commercial Fishermen’s Assn. Strafford County League of Sportsmen
• hunting and fishing regulations and reports • educational programs • Fish and Game merchandise • Wildlife Journal TV Show updates • Wildlife Journal magazine subscriptions • wildlife profiles • hiking, boating, OHRV, and more!
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department 2 Hazen Drive Concord, NH 03301 (603) 271-2461 www.wildlife.state.nh.us F&W02022A.P7
