HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - PGC WANTS USP MEMBER NAMES
View Single Post
Old 02-20-2009 | 07:53 AM
  #61  
sproulman
Giant Nontypical
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,195
Likes: 0
From: PA.
Default RE: PGC WANTS USP MEMBER NAMES

ORIGINAL: Screamin Steel

ORIGINAL: BTBowhunter

ORIGINAL: bluebird2

Years……………….antler less allocation……………….antler less harvest
1983-1987.……………..12.90.…………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.3.98
1988-1992.……………..16.21.…………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.5.48
1993-1997.……………..13.08.…………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.4.36
1998-2002.……………..12.30.…………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.4.66
2003-2007.………………8.65.…………………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.2.35
2008.…………………….6.32.…………… ……………….Not yet available

As you can see that argument about fewer deer in unit 2G today because of increased antler less license and higher harvests is false, unless you consider the higher harvests of fifteen year ago or longer the reason for lower deer numbers now.
Thank you very much for doing an excellent job in demonstrating how the high antlerless harvests during the bonus tag years of 1988 to 2002 produced harvests that reduced the herd. Once the herd was reduced it took lower allocations and lower harvests too reduce the herd even more and that is why 2G was the only county at it's deer density goal in 2000. Then the high allocations in 2002 and 2003 produced harvests that greatly exceeded recruitment resulting in a sustainable antlerless harvest that was less than half of what it was when the herd peaked in the late 80's.

This is an excellent example of how the PGC used antlerless allocations to reduce the herd in 2G to less than 50% of the MSY carrying capacity of the habitat. Unfortunately forest health is still rated as poor in 2G after 20 years of herd reduction and herd health is no better than it was back then.

And there we have it.

Thank you Bluebird for proving a point I have contended all along. The point being that the Uniformed Silly People and the Bluebirds of this world have been crying about the doe harvest for decades.

They cried when the first bonus tag was issued and have gotten louder with each passing year.

Even though doe tags are less than half what they once were PSM, the BB's and USP's are still crying the same old song.

It will never change
Yes, but whenever harvest exceeds recruitment you have a net loss. A smaller herd obviously requires less tags to reduce it. Thedegree of tag allocation has not kept pace with the size of the herd, and that is why the herd is still decreasing, despite their claim of stabilization. Less tags, yes. But still too many for that herd. I know you really don't wan't BB to be right any time, but he is spot on with this. Do you really not understand that, or are you just arguing with your old nemesis for old time's sake?
well,we are down to3 things causing FEW FAWNS..

LESS DOE
PREDATORS
HABITAT
sproulman is offline  
Reply