Moon And Deer Activity??

[kyler1945]

Weather or not?

 

[Plebe]

From previous thread on same topics:

Neither finding is at odds with the other.

This is why topics like this are impossible to discuss on the internet. The mechanics of it don’t allow for that level of detail.

Dr. Strickland is the PR apparatus of their work. He knows that for the diverse audience he’s communicating with, he can ONLY put forth general conclusions based on reliable data they’ve already gathered. His reputation, and that of their project, are at stake.

He necessarily HAS to say zero correlation between weather and daytime deer movement(or sightings, if that’s your jam). Because there isn’t one - IN THEIR DATA. If he tells people he thinks there is or isn’t, and he’s proven wrong, people will discount all of their work. People like to assume their intentions and past behavior matter in assessment of their own mistakes or wrong doings. But they don’t extend the same grace to others. He’s a brilliant fellow to be able to navigate this line.

Just because they can’t or haven’t measured it, doesn’t mean it’s not there.

Having said that, this isn’t the same as the moon phase conversation happening next door. We’ve been able to control for that variable, and it’s not a reliable predictor of daytime deer movement. Temperature was also controlled for, and a strong correlation, in fact the only useful correlation found, between relative temperature and daytime deer activity.(in the south, for the people who will say it’s useless because of that)

Dr. Strickland can do a study to replicate what’s already been observed, or disprove it. They just haven’t yet. And don’t have the money. It appears based on that conversation the Drury’s pride and ego being challenged may get that money spout pointed jn the right direction. Hopefully that challenge was strong enough. Again, my hat’s off to Dr. Strickland for threading that needle when the pressure is on. He’s missed his calling in high level public relations.

Starting at 4:40 in the video to about 11min in, Dr. Strickland presents his thesis.

I really don't have the same takeaway as you.

That MSU Deer lab are looking for false positives which challenge expected norms and vocally sharing those conclusions with the hunting community as bait for further investment seems a stretch, imo. That the data doesn't support those norms isn't.

That the study is too small to be conclusive or to consider numerous variables is another thing altogether. Almost immediately upon introduction, however, Dr. Strickland cites continuity of findings amongst other research projects across the US.

From the get-go, he touches on heated arguments with hunters and folks calling "BS" on the findings. To a degree, I imagine he has had to develop the skill of assuaging his opponents. To me the dialogue with the Drury's manifests that. But at no point do I feel like he abandons his initial position, nor does it all appear a brilliant charade to stoke egos and trap his next financial victim.

 

[kyler1945]

Starting at 4:40 in the video to about 11min in, Dr. Strickland presents his thesis.

I really don't have the same takeaway as you.

That MSU Deer lab are looking for false positives which challenge expected norms and vocally sharing those conclusions with the hunting community as bait for further investment seems a stretch, imo. That the data doesn't support those norms isn't.

That the study is too small to be conclusive or to consider numerous variables is another thing altogether. Almost immediately upon introduction, however, Dr. Strickland cites continuity of findings amongst other research projects across the US.

From the get-go, he touches on heated arguments with hunters and folks calling "BS" on the findings. To a degree, I imagine he has had to develop the skill of assuaging his opponents. To me the dialogue with the Drury's manifests that. But at no point do I feel like he abandons his initial position, nor does it all appear a brilliant charade to stoke egos and trap his next financial victim.

He says the exact thing I’m saying at around 11 minutes.

“The way I try to reconcile this as a hunter, and knowing what I’ve seen on these days, is we know the distance that they moved, we know how far they moved we know their movement rate. But we don’t know WHERE they move RELATIVE TO SOMEONE SEEING IT OR NOT. And that’s a very subtle difference, but I think it’s a really big difference. So in other words, my data may show that the deer did not move much today, or little. But that buck may have literally just moved a hundred or two hundred yards and moved into an opening, into a food plot or something like that, and someone see it and record it as the deer are moving today. But my data aren’t really showing that the deer are moving because they didn’t move a very far distance to trigger a signal of a big change in movement rates. And I really think it comes down to that.”

I first off agree with the larger point- hunt and dawn and dusk, and hunt the rut. The rest is noise if you’re the average hunter and can’t devote time or attention to detail.

But if you’re trying to take the next most effective step, he is admitting he can’t rule out weather. Why, is the quote above.

A second reason, is that they can’t tease out (due to the 15 minute interval) if deer move slightly earlier or later due to weather (specifically to me cold weather relative to prior day). A buck going to bed or getting up to feed 0-15 minutes earlier or later than they did the day before can have a large impact on hunter sightings.


He’s literally saying he knows that there are still variables they can’t tease out yet, due to study tools and technique. And that is easily explained by study showing temperature impact on deer sightings. The latter isn’t definitive, certainly - it relies on hunters telling the truth. But the scope and scale and ability to interpret the data properly make it very compelling. They can design the study. They just need money and time. And that whole interview got me fired up to think it may happen.

Also, it doesn’t have to be so conspiratorial- I don’t think Bronson is twirling his mustache in a dark room. I just think he’s a gifted person utilizing his talents to make progress on something that interests him.

 

[BTaylor]

I think without question moon position, temp, barometric pressure, wind speed and hunter pressure all influence deer movement. To what extent I think depends on the weighting of moon position, weather variables or pressure relative to time of season. For instance, above average temps during peak breeding will not stop the breeding but it may influence more of it to be under cover of darkness during periods of lower temps. That's just general movement considerations and doesnt account for the cyclical or changing nature of primary food sources, esp for doe groups. Distance and/or availability of prime food is going to influence when and where the does move. As that pattern changes it is going to influence when and where the bucks move. I am not smart enough to know for certain but considering the number variables that can and do seem to have some measure of influence over movement, I think it would be near impossible regardless of the depth of any particular study to definitively say one factor is more important than another because of how they are interlinked.

 

[Plebe]

He says the exact thing I’m saying at around 11 minutes.

“The way I try to reconcile this as a hunter, and knowing what I’ve seen on these days, is we know the distance that they moved, we know how far they moved we know their movement rate. But we don’t know WHERE they move RELATIVE TO SOMEONE SEEING IT OR NOT. And that’s a very subtle difference, but I think it’s a really big difference. So in other words, my data may show that the deer did not move much today, or little. But that buck may have literally just moved a hundred or two hundred yards and moved into an opening, into a food plot or something like that, and someone see it and record it as the deer are moving today. But my data aren’t really showing that the deer are moving because they didn’t move a very far distance to trigger a signal of a big change in movement rates. And I really think it comes down to that.”

I first off agree with the larger point- hunt and dawn and dusk, and hunt the rut. The rest is noise if you’re the average hunter and can’t devote time or attention to detail.

But if you’re trying to take the next most effective step, he is admitting he can’t rule out weather. Why, is the quote above.

A second reason, is that they can’t tease out (due to the 15 minute interval) if deer move slightly earlier or later due to weather (specifically to me cold weather relative to prior day). A buck going to bed or getting up to feed 0-15 minutes earlier or later than they did the day before can have a large impact on hunter sightings.

He’s literally saying he knows that there are still variables they can’t tease out yet, due to study tools and technique. And that is easily explained by study showing temperature impact on deer sightings. The latter isn’t definitive, certainly - it relies on hunters telling the truth. But the scope and scale and ability to interpret the data properly make it very compelling. They can design the study. They just need money and time. And that whole interview got me fired up to think it may happen.

Also, it doesn’t have to be so conspiratorial- I don’t think Bronson is twirling his mustache in a dark room. I just think he’s a gifted person utilizing his talents to make progress on something that interests him.

When it comes to data, hunter sightings says more about hunters than deer, comparatively.

A radio collar is permanently attached to the subject and transmits the subject's position every 15min day and night, every day.

A set of hunter's eyes is a one sensor system attached to a surveillant who is most often not sensing the subject of their surveillance at all, and can be detected and avoided as well. A trail camera is a poorer optical sensor than the hunter, with the upside of a longer periodicity of surveillance.

Talking about "weak signals", as a hunter, Dr. Strickland says "When you add 50 to 7000, it's not enough to motivate me to hunt a particular day or not. Because they're gonna move 7000yds, another 50 is kind of trivial."

With the kind of information hunters just can't gather, as a scientist and a hunter, that's how he processes it.

 

[kyler1945]

When it comes to data, hunter sightings says more about hunters than deer, comparatively.

A radio collar is permanently attached to the subject and transmits the subject's position every 15min day and night, every day.

A set of hunter's eyes is a one sensor system attached to a surveillant who is most often not sensing the subject of their surveillance at all, and can be detected and avoided as well. A trail camera is a poorer optical sensor than the hunter, with the upside of a longer periodicity of surveillance.

Talking about "weak signals", as a hunter, Dr. Strickland says "When you add 50 to 7000, it's not enough to motivate me to hunt a particular day or not. Because they're gonna move 7000yds, another 50 is kind of trivial."

With the kind of information hunters just can't gather, as a scientist and a hunter, that's how he processes it.

I acknowledged the weakness of human experience as a data point. But that weakness becomes less material as the data piles up. It can be controlled for in the study Sheppard did. But I leave open the possibility that a team of people with unlimited resources and statistical training could find that the relation is “weak” relative to other variables that impact “deer movement”. That still wouldn’t prove that the effect of weather on daytime deer movement observation wouldn’t remain strong.

You’re also picking a random quote before he reaches his conclusion, or lack of one really. He says 50 doesn’t matter on 7000 from a scientific perspective, when referencing how much a variable matters to “deer movement distance in a vacuum”. He then acknowledges that this does not line up with what he, Sheppard, the drurys, and millions of hunters observe. And that THAT is what is outside of the scope of their study. And that THAT could possibly be explained and important to hunters. But it would take time and money and techniques he didn’t have at his disposal.

I feel like I should email him and ask point blank - do you think it’s more probable than not, based on what you know, that weather (specifically low temperature relative to the day before, but I’m ok with “weather generally”) has a statistically significant impact on “rate of daylight deer sightings by hunters”?

I hate to put a scientist on such a human spot. It seems completely obvious to me that he is open to this possibility, if not believes it himself.


I’m still struggling to see the holes you see in Dr. Sheppard’s findings, nor how what MSU studies show somehow is at odds with his findings. Bronson doesn’t. Why do you? Asking in good faith, without any attitude(hard to get across in interweb forum).

 

[Plebe]

I acknowledged the weakness of human experience as a data point. But that weakness becomes less material as the data piles up. It can be controlled for in the study Sheppard did. But I leave open the possibility that a team of people with unlimited resources and statistical training could find that the relation is “weak” relative to other variables that impact “deer movement”. That still wouldn’t prove that the effect of weather on daytime deer movement observation wouldn’t remain strong.

You’re also picking a random quote before he reaches his conclusion, or lack of one really. He says 50 doesn’t matter on 7000 from a scientific perspective, when referencing how much a variable matters to “deer movement distance in a vacuum”. He then acknowledges that this does not line up with what he, Sheppard, the drurys, and millions of hunters observe. And that THAT is what is outside of the scope of their study. And that THAT could possibly be explained and important to hunters. But it would take time and money and techniques he didn’t have at his disposal.

I feel like I should email him and ask point blank - do you think it’s more probable than not, based on what you know, that weather (specifically low temperature relative to the day before, but I’m ok with “weather generally”) has a statistically significant impact on “rate of daylight deer sightings by hunters”?

I hate to put a scientist on such a human spot. It seems completely obvious to me that he is open to this possibility, if not believes it himself.


I’m still struggling to see the holes you see in Dr. Sheppard’s findings, nor how what MSU studies show somehow is at odds with his findings. Bronson doesn’t. Why do you? Asking in good faith, without any attitude(hard to get across in interweb forum).

It's not a random quote. It's a quote that I selected to share because it relates Dr. Strickland's personal response (as a hunter) to the data he has, directly, from his study.

Dr. Shepard, Dr. Strickland, doesn't really matter to me. I hunt when I can get time off to hunt. Someone mentioned weather as major factor in deer movement, so I shared this information from MSU that says "In general, we found minimal evidence that weather was having an influence on deer movements."

 

[kyler1945]

60/

It's not a random quote. It's a quote that I selected to share because it relates Dr. Strickland's personal response (as a hunter) to the data he has, directly, from his study.

Dr. Shepard, Dr. Strickland, doesn't really matter to me. I hunt when I can get time off to hunt. Someone mentioned weather as major factor in deer movement, so I shared this information from MSU that says "In general, we found minimal evidence that weather was having an influence on deer movements."

But the quote ignores his conclusion stated moments later - he’s pretty confident that there’s a “there there”, their study and data can’t tease it out.

Why quote the piece of information that informs his position, without stating his position, implying that the piece of information is his actual position?

 

[Will Harris]

Dr. Bob Sheppard's book - Whitetails. Probably one of the best books written on hunting whitetails, and written long before its time. I don't agree with everything he says, but its a very good read. I have also read and tried Jeff Murrays book - Moon Guide, but to be honest I cant make any sort of correlation between deer activity and Moon Times or Phases. Personally., I think pressure is the #1 factor that affects big deer movement, followed by things like weather etc...... When I look at the items that surround moon related data, I have more questions than answers.

+1

ive been at it a long time so i've seen what i've seen.

when i scout public ground this time of year, i can guess the moon phase and timing by deer sightings. easy peasy. when hunt this same ground in late October after 3 weeks of hunting pressure, the moon phase/times means little to nothing. hunting pressure has taken over as by far the primary movement factor. the deer change to either nocturnal or crepuscular movement pattern until rut kicks in.

so yes, the moon phase/timing has a lot to do with deer movement. until it doesnt.

i respect the work that UGA and MSU and others have done and this does help those that have properties that have light hunting pressure time their hunts to be more productive.

 

[Swampwalker]

Buttering up the popcorn. Enjoy the back and forth

 

[Plebe]

60/

But the quote ignores his conclusion stated moments later - he’s pretty confident that there’s a “there there”, their study and data can’t tease it out.

Why quote the piece of information that informs his position, without stating his position, implying that the piece of information is his actual position?

There is really no value in me quoting the entire hour long discussion.

I have stated his position. His point of view is that weather isn't a significant enough contributor to deer movement for him to specifically hunt a particular day or not.

I invite everyone to check it out and form his or her own takeaways.

 

[raisins]

There is really no value in me quoting the entire hour long discussion.

I have stated his position. His point of view is that weather isn't a significant enough contributor to deer movement for him to specifically hunt a particular day or not.

I invite everyone to check it out and form his or her own takeaways.

Did you mean "moon isn't a significant enough contributor...."?

Not trying to play a gotcha, just wanting to make sure I understand.

 

[Plebe]

Did you mean "moon isn't a significant enough contributor...."?

Not trying to play a gotcha, just wanting to make sure I understand.

Nope. I meant weather. But also moon, according to the folks at MSU.

"Researchers in this study claim if there was one weather factor slightly affecting deer movements, it was temperature. Barometric pressure, precipitation, and moon phase did not affect notable changes in deer movement The study claims: “Males during winter moved more when temperatures were lowest. Bucks may have moved more during winter evenings when temperatures were reduced, in preparation of further drops in temperature during night. Therefore, males may have foraged more intensively, or moved longer distances during the evening to reach favorable thermal habitats"

 

[Plebe]

 

[kyler1945]

Now we’re getting somewhere!

From a “how much distance total in a 24 hour period does a deer travel, relative to the day before” perspective, changes in weather don’t make a difference statistically, except at the extremes. Still not enough to matter from that perspective, but it does increase.

I don’t see how this is in any way incompatible with “from a hunters seeing deer while hunting, relative to the day before” perspective, extreme changes in temperature correlate strongly with increases in sightings.


Captured in “it’s a subtle difference, but it’s a big difference.”


This has fallen off my radar with the new baby bird. But I gotta follow up and see if they’re moving forward on anything with the drurys

 

[Plebe]

Now we’re getting somewhere!

From a “how much distance total in a 24 hour period does a deer travel, relative to the day before” perspective, changes in weather don’t make a difference statistically, except at the extremes. Still not enough to matter from that perspective, but it does increase.

I don’t see how this is in any way incompatible with “from a hunters seeing deer while hunting, relative to the day before” perspective, extreme changes in temperature correlate strongly with increases in sightings.


Captured in “it’s a subtle difference, but it’s a big difference.”


This has fallen off my radar with the new baby bird. But I gotta follow up and see if they’re moving forward on anything with the drurys

lol.

“When you add 50 to 7000, it's not enough to motivate me to hunt a particular day or not. Because they're gonna move 7000yds, another 50 is kind of trivial."

I wonder if the Drury’s are selling their hunting algorithm yet.