# Red Oak Bear Population Study



## Wayne Sitton

Just wanted to clarify the marked bear issues on this forum. We are conducting a bear population density study in the red oak area under a DNR permit. This activity is a result of the Bear Consultation Team which I sat on and the concern of overpopulation in the red oak unit. We trapped and marked 48 bear in 3 weeks on the Turtle Lake Club property and will expand these efforts starting early spring 2010. There is great concern over densities, inbreeding and interaction with the local folks. We are running infra-red cameras and are seeing about 1 marked bear out of every dozen, so the numbers speak for themselves, too many bear on private lands. The goal is to help the state manage the resource by determining the factors that hold such a high population and mirror that practice on state and private lands where the population needs help. We strongly feel the resource needs some type of managment that will insure a healthy huntable population for future generations and this study is the beginning of that effort. If you harvest a marked bear in the area or have valid questions about the study, feel free to send me a message and I will do my best to keep everyone in the loop. This study is being conducted by biologist and Dr. Daniel Scognimilo, a population expert out of Argentina who specilizes in carnivours. Thanks....Wayne Sitton...Turtle Lake Club


----------



## jmc

wayne sitton,as an advid bear hunter in the red oak bmu,i am interested in your data.if you expand your study area i would like to have some correspondence with your and offer any assistance you may need at my expense.i spend approximately 300 days a year in the red oak bmu north of the study area,and i am extremely familiar with the northern part of the bmu.anyway if you like,i will pm you my phone number.thanks for your time. jerry mcneight


----------



## chingescook

every 5 yrs.


----------



## chingescook

xxx


----------



## Rooster Cogburn

Anybody care to enlighten us on just what is Club Country. Heard a lot of negative things. Even law enforcement claims they openly violate deer baiting regulations based on fly-over observations.


----------



## Linda G.

very interesting. And yes, there's a LOT of bears on private land in the Red Oak unit. They really need to look at some of the other areas in Red Oak, I get reports of bears now almost every day over here.


----------



## Spartan88

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Anybody care to enlighten us on just what is Club Country. Heard a lot of negative things. Even law enforcement claims they openly violate deer baiting regulations based on fly-over observations.


"Club Country" is the area pretty much east of M33, camps that have been established for a very long time. As for the baiting accusations, not all camps can be painted with that brush.


----------



## Bearboy

In the UP we surely cannot boast a robust bear population anymore. I would like to point out that inbreeding is the result of underpopulation, not over. I am concerned in that the UP suddenly has an increase in color phase bear. Although I would love to harvest a color phase bear someday....I am greatly concerned that inbreeding in concentrating recessive genes. Like the big cat populations in Africa, underpopulation in the result of inbreeding. The other problems mentioned are overpopulation problems(human)....hopefully responsible harvest quota's will be established to reduce negative interactions with humans.....this is a fine line when you have an animal that reproduces slowly.....but just one bear can cause lots of damage.


----------



## beer and nuts

Interesting...just curious, how many "outside" hunters is Turtle Lake Club allowing this year???


----------



## Bearboy

Its the White Oak thing....that's what the population study is all about. Remember the bear management meetings? "We will not split any BMU's, it would skew historical data".....unless of course you have a few bucks! :yikes:


----------



## braiga27

Hello All,
I am the graduate student leading the bear study currently taking place in the northern lower peninsula of MI (i.e. "Club Country"); there are numerous objectives for the project. The main objective is to generate a population estimate for black bear in the area. As Wayne mentioned we intend to expand our effort on to neighboring properties in the spring. If you have any questions or would like to discuss the project you can find me at [email protected] (underscores look like spaces) Id be more than happy to get the information out. If you do get a picture of one of the marked bear, harvest one or see one wed love to hear about it; you can send it to the above e-mail and Ill get back to you and let you know a few things about the bear you saw if youre interested. My role is purely scientific and my job is to provide the community with a more detailed understanding of the black bear population. I hope to continue to see increased interest and involvement. Sincerely, Amy Braig
Stephen F. Austin State University


----------



## Spartan88

Comments about bear numbers in club country have fallen on deaf ears in the past. I'm glad this survey is being conducted so the "experts" in the DNR have some solid data to digest for future bear management in the area.


----------



## solohunter

Red Oak BMU has been to wide an area to properly manage and with the lack of hunters in some areas, not that people dont want to hunt but being locked out by the clubs for what ever reason, I lived in "club country" most of my life, never saw many bears as a kid, was rare to see tracks, now they are a nusince problem in my area, (Curran) reducing the area size will allow more tags in the n/e 1/2 of michigan where the population is much higher than traverse city area and maybe less bear will get hit and killed on the highway in my area, Friends have as many as 7 bears coming into bait this year on camera, I had three in the rye patch last year on camera, I now have 5 points for next year,,
glad the area will hopefully be split down the middle at I-75 or thru oscoda/crawford line and up the line, 

Its also nice to see the DNR "Experts" hired someone to actually go out and see that is really going on uotside of thier offices in lansing ne_eye:


----------



## solohunter

beer and nuts said:


> Interesting...just curious, how many "outside" hunters is Turtle Lake Club allowing this year???


 but as turtle lake butts against reed ranch, camp barakel and nawaka all large area / limited private members/guest only clubs that will skew results even more,,,,,,
while turtle lake is commended for allowing this and several other surveys the area is not typical of the rest of the eastern area. so expanding the survey area will give a better view of the real world of smaller camps and hunting in general.


----------



## rwenglish1

Clubs and big private lands have big feeding, ( baiting ) programs. So they draw in lots of bears, after a few years lots of bears are born and raised on these food farms. It makes it hard for them to want to leave. They are raised around people and don't fear them as such that a real wild bear does. 

I don't agree with the maiming of the black bears snared by the leg, just to justify more tags for these big bait farms. They will not shoot a three legged bear that they helped create, it will probably just be gut shot as a nuisense bear.


----------



## griffondog

rwenglish1 said:


> Clubs and big private lands have big feeding, ( baiting ) programs. So they draw in lots of bears, after a few years lots of bears are born and raised on these food farms. It makes it hard for them to want to leave. They are raised around people and don't fear them as such that a real wild bear does.
> 
> I don't agree with the maiming of the black bears snared by the leg, just to justify more tags for these big bait farms. They will not shoot a three legged bear that they helped create, it will probably just be gut shot as a nuisense bear.


Maybe I missed something but where does it say what methods they were using to capture the bears? And please fill me in with all your vast knowledge on how foot snares work.

Griff


----------



## rwenglish1

griffondog said:


> Maybe I missed something but where does it say what methods they were using to capture the bears? And please fill me in with all your vast knowledge on how foot snares work.
> 
> Griff


WoW are you always ths friendly when asking a question? How else do you think they catch them? How does the egg trap work on a Raccoon? Contact the man in charge, [email protected] if he is honest he will tell you, if not, just keep asking and it will surface eventaly, and you will see what a sham this is, just to give the privilidged some bear tags. Once they get their own permit system from tagging bears, they will tag all bears on their land, and it will be illegal to shoot one if it wandered off for a walk about.


----------



## griffondog

rwenglish1 said:


> WoW are you always ths friendly when asking a question? How else do you think they catch them? How does the egg trap work on a Raccoon? Contact the man in charge, [email protected] if he is honest he will tell you, if not, just keep asking and it will surface eventaly, and you will see what a sham this is, just to give the privilidged some bear tags. Once they get their own permit system from tagging bears, they will tag all bears on their land, and it will be illegal to shoot one if it wandered off for a walk about.


Since I had the pleasure of sitting through the furbearer workgroup this weekend and this is one of the issues brought up. I think you owe Amy a apology for claiming she maimed and turned 48 bears into three legged animals. That is a flat out lie! If there is a political agenda for this study you dont have to falsely discredit the research to stop it. 

How can knowing the population densities of a area be a bad thing?
Do you really think this research is going to promote making it illegal to shoot a bear that wanders off private land? I wonder how many black copters their going to need to keep track of the bears.:lol: I think at the next bear workgroup meeting this study will get a little time.

Griff


----------



## Spartan88

rwenglish1 said:


> Clubs and big private lands have big feeding, ( baiting ) programs. So they draw in lots of bears, after a few years lots of bears are born and raised on these food farms. It makes it hard for them to want to leave. They are raised around people and don't fear them as such that a real wild bear does.


You obviously dont know what you are talking about, there are no such bear feeding programs in club country. It is only legal to bait bear one month prior to season. 

The area has lots of bear because of the habitat. 

As for them being used to humans and not being afraid, another misconception on your part.

I wont even touch your claims of how the bear are trapped.


----------



## solohunter

If I recall correctly they tag them in the winter hibernation period, sneak in on them while they is sleeping and dart them, molest them  tag and weigh them, push them back into the den and leave before they wake up Pi ssed,,,,, no leg trapping involved,,, must have been an old black and white movie you saw the leg snare on,, I do have an old leg trap,,,, its from around 1900 and hand made, very illegal to use not,:yikes::yikes:


----------



## rwenglish1

Well, you all just keep on piling it on me. But in the end, TIME TELLS AND SHOWS ALL.

Now, thats all I got to say on this subject. I will check back when the truth and nothing but the truth is finally out.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn

Never got much of an answer last time I posted asking..."what is club country?" I get the impression from bits & pieces of information it is made up of mostly private land owned by ultra-wealthy individuals and hunting clubs. I have also received information from law enforcement individuals...there is mass deer baiting going on, openly defying the ban on deer baiting. So, just why is it club country should be measured off into its own bear management zone? Is this in the best interest of the resource, or is it something else?


----------



## Spartan88

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Never got much of an answer last time I posted asking..."what is club country?" I get the impression from bits & pieces of information it is made up of mostly private land owned by ultra-wealthy individuals and hunting clubs. I have also received information from law enforcement individuals...there is mass deer baiting going on, openly defying the ban on deer baiting. So, just why is it club country should be measured off into its own bear management zone? Is this in the best interest of the resource, or is it something else?


I answered your club country question in post #7 of this thread. Many of the camps in this area were founded in the early 20th century, and not by ultra wealthy people. Maybe a few rolling in the money but not all. You seem like a reasonable guy, even if one camp was busted baiting are you going to think all of them are doing it? I hope not. By the way, the DNR flies club country just like they do on state land or Uncle Joe's back 40. 

This study will give a good idea of the bear numbers in the area. And after the data is collected then the DNR can decide what to do about the bear population in this specific area. Split and make another BMU, issue more tags, or keep it the same as is.


----------



## Nick Adams

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Never got much of an answer last time I posted asking..."what is club country?"


It is the remnant of the last big chunk of commercial timberland in the lower peninsula; around 30,000 acres west of Alpena. This was owned by Abitibi Consolidated (aka ABTCO) as recently as 20 or 30 years ago. When they closed down operations the last 30k acres went to some developer who has been selling it off to groups who have been buying it up in fairly large chunks for use as hunting clubs.

The area coincides fairly well with the NLP Bovine TB zone. It has an unusually high, large acreage, private landowner (i.e. hunt club) ownership pattern for Michigan.

-na


----------



## Spartan88

Nick Adams said:


> It is the remnant of the last big chunk of commercial timberland in the lower peninsula; around 30,000 acres west of Alpena. This was owned by Abitibi Consolidated (aka ABTCO) as recently as 20 or 30 years ago. When they closed down operations the last 30k acres went to some developer who has been selling it off to groups who have been buying it up in fairly large chunks for use as hunting clubs.
> 
> The area coincides fairly well with the NLP Bovine TB zone. It has an unusually high, large acreage, private landowner (i.e. hunt club) ownership pattern for Michigan.
> 
> -na


Many of the camps were established in the 1920's. Richard P Smith covers TB in club country quite well in Deer Hunting 3rd Edition.


----------



## Nick Adams

Spartan88 said:


> Many of the camps were established in the 1920's. Richard P Smith covers TB in club country quite well in Deer Hunting 3rd Edition.


You are correct. Club Country is larger than just the remnants of the ABTCO lands. What distinguishes it from other portions of the NLP are:
- The concentrated, large acreage, private ownership pattern
- Being the core of the TB zone (DMU 452)
- Very low levels of of public ownership compared to other portions of the NLP.

-na


----------



## Wayne Sitton

Ok, a lot of chatter about club country, baiting and maimed bear. Here is the truth from the horses mouth. Turtle lake club was established in 1884 and purchased from the state of michigan. The guys were wealthy for the day but sportsmen none the less. I have managed the place for a dozen years or so, recieved the QDMA Al Brothers Deer Manager of the Year award this year, give seminars *FOR FREE! *Sat on the Bear Advisory Team *FOR FREE t*he deer advisory *board FOR FREE* and the 452 committee again *for FREE*. Work 75 hours a week, get paid for about 1/2 of my efforts and most of the time and expense is making certain sportsmen in the area are represented on committies no one else can seem to work into their schedule. I have harvested lots of game and could care less if I ever harvest another deer or bear. We are attempting to do what is right for the particular resource based on scientific research. We do use a combination of foot snares and live traps which is a practice nation wide. No bear were harmed, no 3 legged bear, no poaching or spotlighting or harrassing in dens. We do not and would not shoot a 3 legged bear in the guts to let die. Our rules are very strict, no baiting is allowed, violation results in termination, period. DNR is on our property a lot and have an open invitation. If a DNR officer comments about illegal baiting he needs to be issuing tickets. I work with most of the private clubs in the area and baiting is prohibited and not tolerated by anyone I know . Private clubs mean private, so not a lot of invitations going out to the public to hunt. Say what you will but let the larger landowners sell off their property in 40 acre chunks and see what happens then. We need to be thankfull people with a little money are intrested in preserving wildlife and habitat. Most of the guys who belong in club country are plumbers, electricians and trades people who work everyday. No big money just good sportsmen who choose to fund projects for the good of everyone. Enough said.


----------



## GrouseHntr

Turtle Lake always did stuff right, my grandfather always told me. Anyways, when is the Bear study going to work its way farther south of the doctors club? get more into the smaller chunks of private land closer to Curran?


----------



## giver108

A quick Google search revealed some interesting articles about the Turtle Lake Club. Sounds like the guys who hunt there that are tradesmen must have did that for a living before working their way up to CEO. They sure don't seem too popular to the locals.

http://www.alpenanow.com/news/2009/aug/11/taxing-authorities-meet-discuss-turtle-lake-club/

http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/eric-sharp/2007/09/ah-deer-camp

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/28/us/fenced-in-deer-stir-dispute-over-bovine-tb.html

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-6219.html


----------



## BigDog25

I heard you guys feed bears year around with supposed "Turkey Feeders" that are big enough to support a 1/2 ton of weight and accessible to the bears? With steel ramps and platforms on them and trusses that would hold a small truck up in the air.

I also heard that your study is biased and the graduate student is either related or in a relationship with someone from the club. I don't think that provides an unbiased study what so ever and of course you are going to Taylor it to your liking so you can get more tags for your hunts....I believe I've heard quotes that you guys want to eventually become your own BMU, this makes total sense now.

Care to enlighten everyone??


----------



## Wayne Sitton

I was in hopes this forum could be a place to share data collected on scientific studies and area conservation efforts so we could work together for a common good. Apparently I was mistaken. We will continue to do what is right despite the people who spend their efforts on a witch hunt, I personally don't have time to justify rumors. Good luck to everyone.


----------



## braiga27

Well Im amazed at how accusations can be thrown around by some of you about me when you havent ever met me, talked with me or inquired as to my objectives or opinions. I am a student of a research university not a DNR employee and Im certainly not being paid to produce specific results for anyones agenda or any agency. All of my data will be critically scrutinized by professional from my university, other universities and field professional before it can be approved for publication; and if any grotesque bias is found I will not be given my Masters degree. This study is the foundation on which I will build my career in the field of research which is why it is so important for me to do the best research I can with what I am given. It is ridiculous to claim I would destroy my reputation as a sound biologist by manifesting unfounded data! 

Addressing a few legitimate questions and concerns: Yes TLC isnt like your average 40ac spread, which is why I intend to have a study area that encompasses hunting clubs/private lands that also make up club country so as to incorporate various habitat types and management styles.
Wayne addressed the feeding programs so I will not allow my self to be drug into the heated politics and rumors circulating. I will however assure you that all resources (from native vegetation like berries and acorns to introduce man-made resources like bird feeders and garbage dumps, nothing will be ignored or left out) available to black bear will be taken into account. 
Specifically, rwenglish1 your ignorant, tasteless and presumptuous claims baffle me. I dont know who you think I am that I would completely disregard animal health and well being. But to entertain your ignorance and inform those with legitimate interest; I would NEVER release an animal incapable of surviving and leading a full normal healthy existence. If an animal were injured beyond repair we would legally euthanize it which follows state research procedures that we are required to adhere to. None of our captures resulted in euthanasia. 
It is perfectly legal for any tag holding citizen to harvest any tagged, tattooed, collared or otherwise marked bear. This study has put no restrictions on harvestable bears. Harvest restrictions is a legislative matter, I bare no weight in such matters.
Young bear recently dispersed from their sow are less likely to show fear because of their inquisitive nature but I have yet to find a bear that wont run away from me, if I could it would make this study much simpler. 
Last but not least my personal relationships are exactly that, my own! I started dating John Varnell back when we were both undergraduate at our university long before Michigan ever showed up on our radar. He serves to help the club manage its deer herd and habitat and has always welcomed questions from other local private landowners to help them better manage their herd as well. Im not sure how you see our relationship biasing this study, since we are both independent biologist working to enhance our knowledge and skills while also improving the natural resources available to everyone.
Thank you to those who have shown interest and who sincerely want to see black bears as a resource managed properly. Please continue to direct your questions to me at my e-mail where I look forward to speaking with you.
Amy 
[email protected]


----------



## braiga27

*Attention*​ 

Black Bear Hunters​ 



Research is currently under way to produce a population estimate for black bear within Club Country. 
The study is a cooperative effort between Stephen F. Austin State University and theTurtle Lake Wildlife Foundation.​ 

Bears have been marked in the Northeastern Lower Peninsula for a survey to be conducted throughout the next 2-3 years. Marked bear are perfectly legal for harvesting and any harvested or sighted bear with a mark like those detailed below should be reported to the contact information given at the bottom of this page. Any data received will be useful for analyzing their behavior and movements. 

*Marks to Look for:*
· Small round button ear tags
Tags are numbered 01-99 and colored (light blue, light green, yellow or orange)
· Freeze branded numbers on the hindquarter
Branded sites will grow back with white hair byNovember.

*What to Do If You See a Marked Bear:*
· Record the place (township range and section, coordinates if possible) date and time where you saw the animal and the animals ID number if possible; report the information to the contact list below. 

*What to Do If You Harvest a Marked Bear:*
· Follow normal post harvest procedures:
Check stations will be collecting data on animal ID, place, date and time of harvest as well as weight, chest circumference, head circumference, head length and contour length (total length).
*Mounting a Marked Bear:*
· Your taxidermist can remove any ear tags present and dye discolored hair back to its natural color at your request.

*Thank you for your cooperation*​ 

Good Luck this Hunting Season!​ 

*Research Objectives:*
· Generate a population abundance estimate for private lands in Club Country
· Assess three separate capture-mark-recapture population estimate methods to determine which method is most accurate, cost effective and efficient.
· Evaluate habitat and management practices for their suitability in supporting a healthy black bear population. 
· Determine utility of digital cameras in monitoring bear movements.
· Deploy collars and monitor movements, survival, home range and behavior.



To report any sightings of marked bear or for questions concerning the project, its objectives or methods please e-mail Amy Braig at *[email protected]*​ 

This is the flyer we sent to all check stations to let the public know about the project, hopefully this helps describe our intentions for the study.
Amy


----------



## 7mm man

My wife took tag #31 opening day 2 miles due west of intersection of M-65 and Bugg rd. She weighed in at 248 dressed. Could you tell me more about where and when she was tagged? We also have seen a sow about 200 pounds with 2 yearlings weighing about 80 pounds each all having white tags but cannot read numbers in the same area. I would be happy with any info you could pass on thanks.


----------



## braiga27

Congrats on your wife's bear, she really packed on the pounds since her capture, ~100lbs! Green 31 was captured the morning of July 31st in Montmorency County at 29N 4E in the northwest quarter of section 27. She was in good condition when we captured her and weighted in at 174lbs. We noted that she was not lactating and appeared old with worn teeth. I'll be aging all the teeth from this season and should have a more precise age by the end of the week if your interested. Some of her measurements were: head length 32cm, head circumfrence 55cm, chest circumfrence 89cm and contour length was 153.5 cm. If you'd like all her measurement I can fax you or mail you her complete capture record. 
The other marked bear you've seen, could the tags have been yellow? We didn't put out any white tags but they tend to look white on camera especially at night. If you have any pics of them that you can send me I can try to identify them and give you their info as well. 
Thanks for the harvest info & the sighting info, it's very helpful.
Amy
[email protected]


----------



## 7mm man

I would appreciate it if you would let me know the age of the bear. The other bears tags could have been yellow. I will go back and find pictures for you. thank you


----------



## Nimrod1

Nick Adams said:


> It is the remnant of the last big chunk of commercial timberland in the lower peninsula; around 30,000 acres west of Alpena. This was owned by Abitibi Consolidated (aka ABTCO) as recently as 20 or 30 years ago. When they closed down operations the last 30k acres went to some developer who has been selling it off to groups who have been buying it up in fairly large chunks for use as hunting clubs.
> 
> The area coincides fairly well with the NLP Bovine TB zone. It has an unusually high, large acreage, private landowner (i.e. hunt club) ownership pattern for Michigan.
> 
> -na


Since we all know how misinformation seems to travel farther & faster than good info, I would like to clear this up. The Abitibi property is not west of Alpena, or in the core of the TB area. The property Nick speaks of is south of Cheboygan, and stradles the Cheboygan/Presque Isle county line. 

This map will show the location of the Abitibi Deer Management Co-op, which encompasses much of the old Abitibi property.

http://www.bing.com/maps/default.as...=0&phscl=1&encType=1&cid=42671C7A4F1D0A9C!126


----------



## solohunter

My understanding of the "club lands" area is from the lincoln area north and west, north of lincoln almost to alpena worth road, and west across turtle lake clubs area, the south line is about M-72, From lincoln at 72 west to 65, up to 72 & across to fairview and north on m-33 to comins then n/east around turtle lake areas. quite an area, when they marked the "core" area it was the corner of alcona,alpena, montmorency,oscoda countys 4 corners. thats what I remember the area as,


----------



## braiga27

Hey 7mm man, I didn't forget about ya, I finally got back the ages on all our captured and harvested bears. Green 31 was 8 years old and the second oldest of all our captured bears, the oldest being 10 years old and she's still around. The overall oldest was a 20 year old unmarked sow harvested on the property. Green 31's tooth show that she likely had cubs at 2, 4, and 6 years of age. If you think of anything else let me know, Thanks for your questions.
Amy
[email protected]


----------



## solohunter

Bear snapped off my small apple trees 10-15 ft tall, the second week of OCT, SPent 10-12 years of getting them going in the woods by my blind to avoid the baiting ban- trail cam pictures of bear pulling them down,, 
another year with no permit and bear walking everywhere,, 452, curran area.


----------



## braiga27

Typo just want to correct one thing, Green 31 was shown to likely have cubs at 3, 5 and 7 which would have been in 2004, 2006, and 2008 in 2009 she would have had yearlings in the spring which she would have kicked out of the family prior to hunting season. Again Congrats on a big mature sow!
Amy
[email protected]


----------



## Spartan88

Bump this back to page 1


----------



## solohunter

Hmm I sent my bear response back - second one,, last week, seems they have already made public opinion before reading the surveys,, typical,, they will scrw this up also,, DNR = Do- Nothing- Right.....


----------



## Rooster Cogburn

Solo,

Wish you could have attended the Bear management meeting in St. Ignace. It would have been good to get your perspective. 

Coyote Dave, bear management is a statewide issue. Should the White Oak proposal be adopted it could very well set a precedence where private lanowners, or consortiums with political suck can begin leveraging for special control of our wildlife on their private property. So, as a Yooper I do have a position on this statewide issue. 

It is very important to get both sides of the White Oak controversey. Nobody spoke out in favor at the meeting and I have not seen any specifics supporting it on this site...just gut reaction from some folks favoring the proposal.


----------



## Neal

Amy, Welcome to the site. I see you've met the welcoming party :lol:
Feel free to use the ignore feature on this site. It can be your friend.

Neal


----------



## solohunter

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Solo,
> 
> Wish you could have attended the Bear management meeting in St. Ignace. It would have been good to get your perspective.


I wish I had known about it, seems like the club country was under represented, and its not just the club country now, the bears are moving out away from that area and becoming a problem, I do not own in club country but very near it, I knew most of the clubs and the caretakers up to 10 years ago.


----------



## solohunter

Neal said:


> Amy, Welcome to the site. I see you've met the welcoming party :lol:
> Feel free to use the ignore feature on this site. It can be your friend.
> 
> Neal


 
The deer decoy pic? is that dave Rock?? if so does he still have the scope scar between his eyes from my .35 :lol::lol:


----------



## coyote/dave

rooster......... never said you were wrong... your approach needs polishing... negative comments generate negative responses....if you want to know the white oak side of the story ask the right questions... i am sure you will get some honest feedback ..... keep these guys informed when the meetings are maybe they just might get involved


----------



## solohunter

The Upper Peninsula contains 16,452 square miles (42,610 km²), almost one-third of the land area of the state Source of data;
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_Peninsula_of_Michigan"]wikipedia org/wiki/Upper_Peninsula_of_Michigan[/ame]

Red Oak Area

Alcona  674 square miles
Antrim  602 square miles
Alpena  574 square miles
Presque isle  660 square miles
Emmet  882 square m
Oscoda  572 square miles (
Otsego  526 
Missaukee  574 square mile
Roscommon  580 
Montmorency 562 square m
Cheboygan  885 square mile
Charlevoix 417 square miles 
Kalkaska  380 2/3 0f 571 square mile
Crawford 375 2/3 of 563 square miles 
Ogemaw 383 2/3 of 575 square miles 

 RED OAK aprox 5254 miles One area,
 UP Bear areas 16452 miles seven areas / 7 , = @ 2350 per area average 
 ( actually most are smaller due to the large size of newberry area. ) 

These are estimates due to three countys being split by approx 1/3 

So why not split up such a large area when there is a marked increase of bear on one side of the state?? This area is to big and diverse to manage as one unit with the growth of the bear population in certain areas.
Maybe the DNR will wake up and see this problem is present and act accordingly, unlike when the deer population in club country went out of control and it took the TB scare to start reducing the herd.


----------



## Spartan88

Any tagged bear taken this year?


----------



## shephard1993

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Never got much of an answer last time I posted asking..."what is club country?" I get the impression from bits & pieces of information it is made up of mostly private land owned by ultra-wealthy individuals and hunting clubs. I have also received information from law enforcement individuals...there is mass deer baiting going on, openly defying the ban on deer baiting. So, just why is it club country should be measured off into its own bear management zone? Is this in the best interest of the resource, or is it something else?


Rooster,

I am over in the pigeon river country, and would love to see a seperate management unit in the (club country area). They are claiming to many bear, but the majority of red oak tag holders are not allowed to hunt this area do to private property. The DNR allows out a certain number of tags and most are filled outside the clubs were bear numbers are much lower. I hunt with hounds every weekend of training season and most of kill season in the pigeon. If they study over here and tag 48 bear they are going to have to bring some bear with them. We have some bear over here, but they are not thick, and size seems to be deminishing. I can count on one hand the bear we found this summer over 200 pounds. It takes a bear a few years to get some size, but the bear here dont get much age. On a brighter note there has seemed to be a increase in cubs this year, and this should help the numbers a bit. The pigeon river folks seem to be more concerned about the guides then the population. I think the number of bear harvested should be more important then the means they were harvested. I am with JMC and will gladly help any study in this area at my own exspence.


----------



## ac87096

I hunted on Beaver Lake Hunt Club last year and took a nice bear. I was also aware of the study that was taking place in the area. To put bear numbers in perspective, I actually had 7 bears in on me the first night, ALL at the same time. I saw 11 bears in 4 days. On the same night I had 7 in, another guy had 3 in at his stand a mile away. The third guy in camp had one. 11 bears in at 3 hunters sites.

Speaking with the guys maintaining the pumps, and other workers on the property, the amount of bears they were seeing were incredible. I am convinced that the Beaver Lake, Turtle Lake, Doctor's Club, club country area has entirely too many bears. Problem is, getting a foot in the door for these properties to let you hunt, or allowing them to "guide."

I know 3 hunted BLHC in 2010, and they took 5 guys this year. Turtle Lake I believe was raffling a hunt, but I don't know if they took on more guys. There are a lot of bears, just not a lot of hunters. Make it it's own unit.


----------



## swampbuck

I believe the problem wasnt splitting the BMU, The Club(s) was seeking to start having private land only tags.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn

Swampbuck, did you notice how quickly the White Oak/Private Property bear tag issue vanished? Interesting how some key players suddenly back away from it.


----------



## swampbuck

Yea, I think upper management realised that they couldnt white wash that one. The special influence groups got their big buck rules though......We havnt heard the last of those guys.


----------



## Spartan88

swampbuck said:


> Yea, I think upper management realised that they couldnt white wash that one. The special influence groups got their big buck rules though......We havnt heard the last of those guys.


If you knew people who hunt that area and asked them what they thought of the APRS, most would tell you it was a dumb move.

Why do you hate club country hunters so much? I happen to be one and your attacks got old two years ago...


----------



## billbrown

Spartan88 said:


> If you knew people who hunt that area and asked them what they thought of the APRS, most would tell you it was a dumb move.
> 
> Why do you hate club country hunters so much? I happen to be one and your attacks got old two years ago...


It's called jealousy. Just because swampbuck hasn't heard anything about white oak doesn't mean it isn't gonna happen. It will happen.


----------



## swampbuck

Spartan88 said:


> If you knew people who hunt that area and asked them what they thought of the APRS, most would tell you it was a dumb move.
> 
> Why do you hate club country hunters so much? I happen to be one and your attacks got old two years ago...


I dont hate club country hunters at all, And I do know some people including relatives in that area and you are right they think apr's was a stupid move...support for apr's there is only 35 percent or so. And jealousy has nothing to do with it, I can hunt that area and have.

The are 2 things that bother me....

-The influence that certain parties seem to have with MDNR management and the NRC....The APR's and disease risk would be a prime example and the push for private land bear tags is another. Wildlife should be managed by science not influence.

- Past activities that played a role in the TB problem and current practices that I believe are taking us back down the same path again.

I am well are that it is not all, probably not even many of those in the area that are responsible for the issues that I have with "club country" 

Look the TB problem is what it is. I live near the Roscommon/Crawford county, we border the TB zone. Our counties have each had confirmed TB deer and I strongly prefer that we never need to be added to the Zone.

When I see something going on that I believe poses a risk of increased TB prevalance and the spread of TB, I am going to address it, as should all sportsmen concerned with the spread of disease.

As far as the Bear issue...... I have no problem at all with the split, currently red oak is too large and there is the potential to have a disproportionate number of hunters in a small area, A split is a wise move from a management perspective.

Regarding the private land license issue, I am opposed due to the limited availability of tags. It would not be right to Private land hunters recieving a tag every year while others have a 5 or 6 year wait. And if that was approved for one zone, How long before landowners/clubs in other zones want the same.....Best not to open that can of worms. Unlike deer, Bear are a very limited resource it should remain equal access for ALL hunters.


----------



## shephard1993

There is no reason to bash the club country, or the study they are commited to. The bear in there need to be studied, and a solution needs to be accomplished. It dosnt matter if or if not they are feeding, or who Amy is dateing. The state just needs to relize they are dealing with two seperate populations, and trying to manage them as one. To many bear in there and to few bear outside the clubs need diffrent treatment. The only way I can see this goal being met would be to split the red oak unit. I dont claim to be a biologist, but it seems pretty simple to me. I do a little guiding and alot of bear hunting with hounds, and relize both these statments probly cause me to be public enemy number one in many of your eyes. I am much more concerned about the overall red oak bear population then what some folks think of me.


----------



## rwenglish1

I feel that for the study to be apples to apples, the club country should have to be under the same rules as the hunters on public land.

No barrels for bait, and only bait the legal time or face a fine for dirty bait.

The bear numbers are only up in the club area's because of the constant amount of food that is being put out for them, period.

Or the state should let all hunters use barrels, and start feeding bears as soon as the snow melts.

Why should one group get to bait a certain way, and 100 yds from that spot, a public land hunter can not??? Is there some nasty evil going to take place that does not take place on private land?? 

I would even venture to say, if barrels were placed on trees with in 1/2 miles of club land, many of there bears would move over night. There club land bear problem solved, you only need to make the baiting rules equal accross the board.

I for one think all the baiting rules should be the same, whether it is on private or public land.


----------

