PA Deja-vu

[T_in_PA3]

''Perhaps you deer hunters had better sit down and brace yourselves before you read this. Because here are some predictions about the future of deer hunting in Pennsylvania which will probably hit you right between the eyes. Here are facts to prove that deer hunting in this state is about to enter a new era "” an era of more hunting and less shooting "” a period when the hunter will have to leave the highway to kill his deer.''

[missed_another]

you going to have to do more than leave the road. i think you are going to have to leave the state. i used to laugh also when guys told me there were no deer left in the woods. i thought the same thing that they were road hunters. well it took quite a few years for the deer massacre to catch up in my area but now it has and it is not so funny anymore. and when it affects your area i don't believe you will laugh either.

[PA GOBBLER]

"Riley also noted that other stakeholders "” namely the state's $5.4 billion hardwood industry and conservation groups such as the Audubon Society "” feel just as strongly about further herd reductions as hunters do about wanting more deer."

THATS ALL YOU NEED TO READ

[ddear]

The funny thing is Latham was dead wrong,since the population in the NC counties continued to increase until it reached almost 50 DPSM in 1975. The reported buck harvest increased from 37,384 in 1953 to 74,879 in 1978instaed of having the crisis Latham predicted the statewide herd continued to increased as did the amount of forested habitat.

[thesource]

Anybody else beginning to feel like "deer management" is one big trail and error graduate student expirement?

It certainly is not absolute science, like chemistry or physics.

They never really know what's going on until a year later, and when they react, they are a year behind.

[T_in_PA3]

beenthere,
Sure, deer #'s increased but at the same time habitat quality decreased and continued to decrease as deer herd was kept well above carrying capacities.

[ddear]

TH,

Are you saying that the herd can continue to increase while depleting the habitat ad infinitum? That's great news , now we don't have to reduce the herd by 50%.

The fact is Latham was wrong in 1953 ,Shoppe was wrong in 1984 and Alt was wrong in 2000. The habitat can support more deer than the PGC says it can and the deer have proved it over and over again .

[germain]

I've been hunting in the NC mountains for quite a time.True the herd needed some reduction but there has to be a balance to preserve our hunting tradition.
No matter how you slice it 5-10 or even 15 dpsm is unhuntable and there's no way you'll keep a youngster interested in hunting with those numbers.I know of quite a few kids that gave it a try inthe NC with their dads and after one year said "no thanks".And that's our future.
I've been paying alot of attention to the arguments and findings from biologists.
I keep notes of where oaks,beech,cherry,and maples thrive or don't thrive.I really believe acid rain and canopy are bigger factors in regen then deer.

[T_in_PA3]

I really believe acid rain and canopy are bigger factors in regen then deer.

Ok, so they are a factor. That just means there is less food for deer and thus a lower carrying capacity.

and the deer have proved it over and over again

How's that? By continueing to increase in numbers while degrading the habitat?

[PA GOBBLER]

when you say degrading habitat, are you saying that is state wide??

ORIGINAL: T_in_PA3

How's that? By continueing to increase in numbers while degrading the habitat?