HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - Pa doe tags 2005 vs 2006

08-31-2006 | 08:59 AM

#37

Gr8ful Deer

Joined: Dec 2005

Posts: 39

Likes: 0

RE: Pa doe tags 2005 vs 2006

"I believe that is exactly what we just experienced here in the northern tier and across our more mountainous regions of the southern tier. We just had a year with a good mast crop followed by a more mild winter so I suspect we will also see some deer population improvement this year, but we also have to remember that it was compounding of bad years that got us to the low level and it will take a compounding of years to fully recover from the lean year."

I understand fully what RSB is saying here, but there is one issue I see that is being totally missed:What happens when the PGC keeps adding more and more days, seasons, DMAP programs, combined buck/doe seasons, and more liberal bag limits EVERY YEAR over the course of a long term period WITHOUTtaking into account fawn recruitment or winter severity EVERY YEAR?

Does thePGC eversay "well we had bad fawn recrutiment this spring, so we will cut out the early muzzleloader season", or "we had alot of deep snow and ice this winter, so we aren't going toallow kids/seniors to kill either bucks or does this year?" No they do not! Instead, every year, they come up with some new fangled method/season of killing more deer ... especially does. [:@]

Consequently, there really is no opportunity for a "compounding of years to fully recover from the lean year." Instead, any slight improvement in the population in the short term is immediately negated by increased harvest pressure due to theincreased availability of opportunities for hunters to fill their tags in the short term.

Also, the claim that it will take the compounding of several good years to overcome the lean one takes a very "optimistic" stance that the following years will be good ones as well. The next few years could just as easily be the worst ever just as it easily as they could be good. it seems to me that it would be best to have the deer population At or NEARits carrying cpacity NOT WELL BELOW it in order to maintain some insurance that the population would not be subject to a total crash in the event of a widespread environmental disaster.

I just wish someone could explain to me how all the available browse and habitat for deer in the NC part of the state deteriorated to the point that it could no longer support a healthy deer herd when it was able to supportlarger herds for decades with only a 2-day anterless season and 2 weeks of buck.Shouldn't the regeneration of food and browse been able to take advantage of the reduced pressure by deer IMMEDIATELY after the removal of more deer, sincemost browse and low level food sources do not take decades to mature?

In most of my ecology and biology studies, Ilearned that population dynamics were directly related to the carrying capacity of the land. (i.e. the population is controlled by its available food sources.) If the deer were truly eating themselves out of house and home like the PGC claims, wouldn't their numbers have been shrinking on their own rather than burgeoning even without any hunter predation at all?

I say get rid of early muzzleloader, get rid of DMAP, get rid of seniors/youths having the opportunity to shoot either sex, get rid of late muzzleloader/bow & go back to an early archery, 2 weeks of AR buck and 2 days of doe.Almost like it was when very few hunters were _itching, deer were plentiful, and PA was one of the premier deer hunting states in the entire country (albeit without the spike and forkhorn harvest.)

I truly belivethat the AR program is a great wayto allow bucks to live longer. However, the effectiveness of AR is being negated by the increased anterless harvests and increased hutner participation opportunites. After all,they aren't getting a chance to grow larger racks if they are being killed as button bucks, killed in late muzzleloader afterthey drop their antlers,etc.

Havinglived and hunted my entire life on PA public lands, and recently moving from PA to NJ, I know that I am on the fence about purchasing an expensive out-of-state license this year after seeing so few deer during the past 2 seasons. I am sure that there are multitudes of others that have already thrown in the towel. Unfortunatley,PA will continue to loserevenue sources if they can't provide a decent enough population of animals for hunters tofeel it is worththe money and effort to pursue them.

Now, if anyone wants to try to tell me that "I don't see as many deer becasue I don't hunt hard enough" I will extend you an invitation to go hunting with me for the entire first week of buck in 3B this year.I am sure you will find out that many of us are not lazy "stump sitters" that keep planting their butts in the same stand loctaions every year, and we are definitely not seeing many deer at all anymore.

Also, does anyone know whether the PGChas any factorsto increase the harvest rate to account for illegal poaching,animals killed by vehicles that are able to limp off of the orad before they perish, or the # of young and adult animals that are being killed by the SIGNIFICANTLY increased coyote population?

- Gr8ful

Reply

0