ORIGINAL: DougE
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
To make it easier to see the wide variation between reproductive rates, regeneration and deer density, I added the the PS deer density for 2005 to the data RSB provided. I used the 2005 data sincethat was the last year the PGC provided the PS deer density estimates.
Now that we have explained the methods lets take a look at what those various wildlife management units have to say about their ability to support deer. To do that I took each unit and placed them in descending order based on the combined results of their herd and forest health indicators.
Rank………Unit……Reproductive rate……Habitat value –PS DD 2005
1.…………..4E……………….1.66.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..74 % -- 21
2.…………..5A……………….1.64.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..66-------21
3.…………..2B……………….1.59.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..59-------36
4.…………..2D……………….1.60.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..57-------32
5.…………..4B……………….1.50.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..63-------19
6.…………..5B……………….1.55.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..58 ------18
7.…………..2E……………….1.58.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..54-------32
8.…………..3A……………….1.50.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..61-------28
9.…………..4A……………….1.52.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..58-------29
10.…………4D……………….1.55.……… ……………………..53-------21
11.…………3C……………….1.53.……… ……………………..53-------24
12.…………1A……………….1.50.……… ……………………..53-------25
13.…………2G……………….1.68.……… ……………………..42-------12
14.…………1B……………….1.69.……… ……………………..35-------27
15.…………4C……………….1.36.……… ……………………..60-------29
16.…………3B……………….1.36.……… ……………………..59-------20
17.…………2C……………….1.38.……… ……………………..56-------20
18.…………5C……………….1.60.……… ……………………..23-------32
19.…………3D……………….1.28.……… ……………………..54-------19
20.…………2A……………….1.37.……… ……………………..46-------40
21.…………2F………………..1.39.……†¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..34------22
Note that some WMUs with low DD have poorer regeneration that other units with much higher DD. Also some units with high DD have good productivity and in other units it is much lower.
Yep,once the habitat get's stressed to the point it is in many areas,it takes far less deer to continue to impact it.In these areas,hunters will be forced to deal with alot less deer forlong periods of time.It makes sense to me if we fix the problem before it becomes a problem like it did in 2G.
If that is true, then why the high regeneration (74%) in 4E, with the same DD essentially as 2F with 34%? And why are the DD goals in 2F higher than 2G which has significantly higher regeneration?
THIS PLAN JUST MAKES NO SENSE!!! Admit that it is the biggest crock of #$%^ you have ever seen! There are NO constants being used as criteria and goals to manage the WMU's, other than reduce the herd at all costs. For God's sake 5A with regen. of 66% and second highest reproduction in the state has a target DD of 6dpsm. When you say get used to low deer numbers for a long time, I believe you mean indefinitely. Or do you really expect that when they finally achieve their desired effect, they will allow the herd to increase only to do it all over again?Nope. This isd the future of deer hunitng in PA, unless we sportsmen force a change. If it makes a lick ofsense to anyone, I worry about your comprehension skills, not to mention your sanity!