Once again you disagree with the professional deer managers with the PGC. The data from the 2006 harvest showed the herd in 2G increased by 42% so they increased the antlerless allocation for 2007 by 37%.The PGC has the recruitment data from 2G during years with severe winters and years with mild winters so there is no need to do more research. Even after the severe winters of 2003 and 2004 it still required significant antlerless allocations and harvests to control the herd so your claim that the habitat is controlling the herd is bogus.
I’m not disagreeing with the deer management team in the least.
I know the difference between an increase in one year’s buck harvest verses a herd in crease though too which appears to be less then true for you.
Yes the evidence does suggest that the deer herd is increasing in unit 2G the past few years. But it is only increasing because the habitat has started to improve and we have had very mild winters the past couple years.
If the Game Commission had sufficient annual fawn recruitment data they wouldn’t have to work from three year averages or from deer that 1.5 to 2.5 years after they were born. The reason we don’t have that data is because of the lack of funding to get it. If you think more research isn’t needed to have better management then it speaks volumes about how misguided you truly are.
No they didn’t need to harvest more antler less deer in unit 2G to control the herd after the harsh winters of 2003 and 2004. It just took that long forreality to catch up the management model becasue we have to work with recruitment from three year averages.
That is just an example of what I already explained about wildlife management always playing catch up to what has already occurred. We could narrow some of those lengthy catch up problems with adequate funding to do the required research, but a bunch of your fellow USP guys have been standing in the way of progress for decades now.
Now ,would you care to explain why the overbrowsed habitat in 2G could support an antlerless harvest of almost 5 DPSM from 1988 to 2002, and now can only support a harvest of 2.35 DPSM?
The fact is the habitat wasn’t able to sustain those higher populations following the two back to back harsh winters. We over protected the deer for way too long but we were getting away with it because we were having mostly years with good mast and mild winters. But, nature came along with a couple of hard winters and did what they hunters had failed to do. The winters reduced both the adult deer herds and the fawn recruitment over a couple years.
Plus hunters have simply gone to the areas where there are more deer that are easier to hunt. Thus the deer harvests have stayed lower then they should be. That isn’t a good thing for the long term future of deer populations within the unit, either.
R.S. Bodenhorn