Originally Posted by
germain
liv I didn't say reducing the tags wouldn't help.Explain what I said that has no logic.
BT,Doug also says the habitat is keeping the numbers down but I disagree.
In the 80,s that poor habitat pole timber in some cases supported alot more deer then we have today.Now before anybody gets excited I'm not saying that should be the case or those deer were healthy back then.
Beats me what the buggers ate but somehow they survived and continued the higher numbers.Again I do agree we needed some reductions.
Anyway back to my point,while Doug says habitat is keeping the numbers down from what I have witnessed and seen the populations were brought down through HR and now where those numbers dropped very low the coyotes are now keeping them in check.And in certain areas bears.It stands to reason the less deer you have the more impact coyotes will have on the lower numbers.
Before anybody misinterprets my post I am not asking for more deer in a pole timber woods then there should be.That's not my point.
First, I guess part of the difference is interperetation. When I say the habitat may be controlling the numbers more than hunting, I'm including predation. I cant say for certain whether we have more or the same amount of predators. This is one of those rare times where I kind of agree with corn. Are we just more acutely aware of the predators now or are their numbers up? Bears are up considerably IMHO but coyotes?.... I dunno.
You are also correct when you say that pole timber did have more deer in past years but what quality? I remember hunting 2G near East Branch Dam on the game lands and seeing 30-40 deer a day in archery but they were all knee high and many of the spikes werent even the 3" legal length. I dont know what all they ate but there was zero visible vegetation below the browse line.
I think 90% of all our issues could be solved by smaller WMU's each being managed seperately by the habitat and herd. Counties arent the solution either. Counties are man made units that dont consider habiata differences at all. Besides, roads and streams make much better boundaries. The PGC is against smaller WMU's but I suspect funds are the big problem. Managing by smaller WMU's is going to take a lot more work by people that aint gonna come cheap. How can we blame the PGC for avoiding a management plan that will be way more expensive when they have to jump through hoops and beg for an extra 5-10 bucks every ten years or so? And I'm not just talking about the current fee increase controversy. When was the last time a license increase ever happened without a long fight?