However it sounds like there are areas that have already been reduced below the goal of 12 DPSM. Would not smaller WMU's make it easier to get the tag alotments right or lowered in these areas??
1/9/2005 1:02:40 PM
The area that is at 12 DPSM is 2 G , which has the highest percentage of forested habitat of any WMU and therefore the least variation in carrying capacities. therefore smaller WMu's would have little effect on the OWDD goals .
The areas where significant changes in carrying capacity occur are WMU with farmland mixed with large blocks of forested land. But, since the PGC assigns no habitat value to farmland making the WMU's smaller would not increase the OWDD goals and the anterless allocations would remain the same,even though the true carrying capacity was much higher than the PGC goal.
Also, remember that PA has 45K SM of land ,so even if we had 100 WMU's they would still be 45 SM in each WMU. The PGC would assign a OWDD goal for those 45 SM,based solely on the average forested habitat in those 45 SM. Therefore areas like 5C and 5B would still have OWDD goals of 5 or 6 DPSM while a WMU with 45 SM of forest would still have a goal of 15 DPSM like 2G ,even though there was no farmland ,the soils were less fertile ,the winters are more severe and the growing season is at least 1 month shorter than in 5C or 5B...