RSB, is that your own compilation of data/ percentages or the summary of the official PGC data?
That is the data from the highway killed deer I have examined and submitted, to Harrisburg, for the breeding and reproductive rates. The deer that provided that data came from both WMU 2F and 2G, for both before and after antler restrictions.
Since it was the deer that provided the data I have great confidence in it being reflective of what is happening in this area. I don’t think the deer have the ability to provide incorrect data, especially when the other supporting data in the buck/doe ratios and fawn recruitment rates from the volunteer survey routes shows the same improving trends.
If your district breeding rates are so high now, then you should forward that memo to the PGC so they can save face with the 5% decline overall.
The data I collect does go to the biologists in Harrisburg. It is the Biologists who set up the methods and precedures for collecting the data and then those of us in the field use those methods for recovering the data.
It is then combined with the data from the other WCOs in the units, compiled and used for developing the management objectives and goals for those respective management units.
Your staement about the six week breeding window even for doe fawns would be hard to prove.
What do you mean hard to prove?
When I remove embryos from a dead doe I have a length measurement scale that tells me how many days old those embryos are. Another part of the scale can be used to determine the date that doe was bred based on the age of the embryos. I do that on every fawn embryo I pull out of a dead doe and have been doing so for many years now.
Therefore, I do know when those does from before to after antler restrictions were being bred. Prior to antler restrictions I found adult does bred as late as February 23rd. Since antler restrictions started putting more bucks into the fall deer population I have not had any does bred later then the middle of December.
That is a major improvement that I believe in time could lead to even more juvenile does reaching breeding weight during the normal period November and December. As we have fewer late born fawns, from the adult does that are now being bred during the correct time period it is very possible that we will see an increase in the number of juvenile does being bred even in the northern tier areas.
Even in great habitat, doe fawns usually do not achieve sufficient weight to enter estrous until January.
That isn’t necessarily true. Though a high percentage of the does bred in December and January have typically been the juvenile does we might find that a higher percentage of them will be bred in the more traditional time period of November once the late breeding of the adult does improves and more of the fawns are born on time to reach the correct weight by their first fall.
Even if they aren’t bred until January that is still better then not having been bred at all which is what was happening before antler restrictions. We are starting to see fawns that are up to breeding weight in the November and December and also seeing a more of them being bred then was occurring before.
If the habitta in your are is as terrible as you claim, that would be quite a feat, indeed. try to keep track of your earlier B.S. comments from time to time to avoid looking like a fool. remember, you already stated that the habitat and predation is controlling the herd there, because the herd still exceeds the max cc according to you.
Though the habitat in this part of the state has been seriously damaged, by the decades of far too many deer, that deer population in recent yearsdeclined to the point the habitat has started the process of recovery. I am pleased to say that it is even recovering faster then I and many other expected.
Absolutely it was that poor habitat, combined with the lack of mast and back to back harsh winters that set up the environmental conditions, that resulted in the horribly low fawn recruitment rates and low deer numbers we experienced for several years.
There is also no question that hunters harvested more deer in those years then were recruited but it was the sharp decline in recruitment that set that stage for those low deer numbers over the past few years. That was really nothing more then nature doing what man failed to do in it promise that nothign can long exist in populations higher then its food supply.
With the lower deer number the habitat started to improve. That improving habitat, theslowing increasing fawn recruitment and deer numbers will just be a short lived improvement though if hunters aren’t wise enough to continue holding those over winter deer numbers at a level that allows for continuing habitat recovery.
If you think that makes me look foolish then about all I can say is that perhaps it is really just due to a lack of knowledge of the person doing the viewing.
R.S. Bodenhorn