Data………………………………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦..2G………………………………†¦5B………………………………………5C
Square miles of land in unit………..4114.04………………………⠀¦2767.79………………………………2169. 73
Public land……………………..............(49.2%)â €¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.(1.4%)…………†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦(0.5%)
Developed…………………………………0. 6%....................................6.7%........ .................9.9%
Forested…………………………………… 90.0%..................................27.6%...... ..................44.5%
Farmland………………………………….7. 6%....................................63.1%....... ................43.9%
Square miles of forest land………3702.64………………………… …..763.91……………………………965.53
Deer goal in deer/sq.mi…………….15……………………… …………………5………………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.6
Number of OWDD per/unit……..61,711…………………………†¦â€¦â€¦.13,839…………………………….13 ,018
Number OWDD/forested Sq.Mi….16.67……………………………… ….18.12………………………………13.48
Harvest for 2004……………………….17,200………… ……………………22,200………………†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..24,000
Harvest/sq.mile………………………….4.18……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.8.02…………†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..11.06
Harvest/ forested sq.mi…………….4.65……………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.29.06………………………… ………24.86
There is really nothing complicated about it for those that are trained to recognize the affects. The only problem is in educating those that aren’t trained to recognize the cause and affect of why the populations have crashed and how the habitat is the controlling factor. Until we succeed in that education we will continue to see more and more areas with damaged or possibly even destroyed habitat and declining deer densities.
Dick Bodenhorn
WCO, Elk County
Edited by R. S. B. (Mon May 02 2005 08:59 PM)
There is the source you ask for and I will be happy to provide a link if you feel you need one.
Note that the harvest rate for 2G was only 4.18 DPSM since that will be close to the harvest rate for the entire state if we reach the goal of 12 DPSM. Based on data provided by the WCo, the calculated harvest in 1982, the last time we were at the goal of 12 DPSM, was 121K buck an 122K anterless ,for a total harvest of 243k.
Now ,in your opinion ,does the 2004 harvest of 124K buck indicate the herd has been reduced significantly statewide and if not ,how do you account fror the exceptionally low buck harvest?