Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Regional Forums > Northeast
 lOSE-LOSE SITUATION >

lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

Community
Northeast ME, NH, VT, NY, CT, RI, MA, PA, DE, WV, MD, NJ Remember, the Regional forums are for hunting topics only.

lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

Thread Tools
 
Old 05-16-2005, 06:49 PM
  #11  
Giant Nontypical
 
BTBowhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

BT,I didn't mean to rehash the same old topic but at the same time I don't think we can turn our heads on a serious problem.A merger would be very bad news for all of us and we need to pay attention to it.On the other hand the numbers desired by the DCNR are unhuntable and as a result will lead to fewer hunters in PA which will make the financial shortfalls even more of a problem for the PGC.
I gotta tell ya I think groups such as DCNR and audobon are the threat to hunting in PA.
Germain,
I didnt mean to imply that you were rehashing anything and I sincerely apologize if I gave you that impression. You actually brought up a very good point that has a lot of merit. My comments were directed towards those that have nothing constructive to say and I dont think any of us include you in that VERY small group. If you just look back in this short thread, its apparent who simply wants to discredit the PGC without offering anything constructive to go with the constant criticism.
BTBowhunter is offline  
Old 05-16-2005, 07:18 PM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 232
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

If you just look back in this short thread, its apparent who simply wants to discredit the PGC without offering anything constructive to go with the constant criticism.
If some one is oposed to the direction the PGC is taking ,why would you expect commments that you would consider to be "constructive" however yoy may define it ? The fact is there are two opposing groups. Your side apparentlty feels that the PGC can do nothing wrong and the opposition questions whether the PGC knows what hey are doing. The fact that they abandoned the new computer model after just two years ,indicates the PGC doen't know what it is doing.

Now, if you want to be constructive , explain how the PGC plans to assign OWDD goals in the future and how they will determine anterless allocations. You might also explain where they will get te additional manpower to implement this plan. Thanks.
ddear is offline  
Old 05-16-2005, 07:58 PM
  #13  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,149
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

thank-you BT.

DDEAR,do you have any info on how the PGC will determine the owdd?Or how this will take more manpower?
germain is offline  
Old 05-16-2005, 11:36 PM
  #14  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Slower Lower Delaware 1st State
Posts: 1,776
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

We welcome any new ideas or comments on this topic. We will not however entertain ANY OLD rehashed data on the topic.
AJ52 is offline  
Old 05-17-2005, 05:54 AM
  #15  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 232
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

ORIGINAL: germain

thank-you BT.

DDEAR,do you have any info on how the PGC will determine the owdd?Or how this will take more manpower?

According to Dr. R. the PGC will no longer calculate OWDD's or use OWDD goals . Instead they are in the process of developing an entirely new management system as outline in this quote from Dr. R.


Implementing the current deer management plan will involve development of new measures to assess management goals. The PGC is developing a new deer population monitoring system that will use quantifiable measures to determine if deer populations are at healthy and socially acceptable densities.

These measures may include hunter success, deer-human interactions and habitat inventories, as well as measurements of deer productivity and densities.

These measures will be used to correlate with and track the agency's efforts to either raise or lower deer numbers.
Note that the plan includes habitat inventories which will have to be conducted yearly in order to determine the effects of the previous years harvests. Before, they simply used the USFS aerial surveys to determine the number of SM's of each class of forest habitat there was in each WMU . Now they will need the manpower to conduct habitat inventories in enough areas of each WMU to determine the average condition of the habitat.

Since they are also going to use deer-human interactions, they will need to compile data on deer/car collisons, crop damage complaints, and home owners complaints . This will also require additional staff to collect and imput the data and to develop a plan to factor in this information when determining future anterless allocations.
ddear is offline  
Old 05-17-2005, 10:28 AM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

The PCG put themselves in this position. With all there lies and untrue statements. Think about the quotes from the so called deer managment team. There is no way I would belive anything they say now. Every year there is less deer, hunters and places to hunt.
Now they think they are going to hurt us buy taking a couple of phasant away. The only ones I see are the ones the local gun club puts out. They need to reduce the PGC before I will agree on an increase
Mark99 is offline  
Old 05-17-2005, 03:47 PM
  #17  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,149
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

Thanks for the info ddear.With the shortfall of funds I don't see how they can get more manpower.Our future in hunting and the changes it brings will be interesting.I just hope that we can avoid a merger.
germain is offline  
Old 05-18-2005, 04:02 PM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 232
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

If the PGC continues on it's currrent course it won't matter if the PGC merges with the DCNR ,since the results will be the same. When the PGC switches to the new system , the OWDD goals will be totally subjective and arbitrary and hunters will have no voice . It won't matter if the PGC or the DCNR sets the goals , since both agencies are more concerned about growing commercially valuable timber rather than providing good deer hunting for hunters.
ddear is offline  
Old 05-18-2005, 08:11 PM
  #19  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Slower Lower Delaware 1st State
Posts: 1,776
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

Are there any positive prospects in the "Doom and Gloom Theory" for PA Hunters?

It sounds like PA is doomed to a "Wildlife Arrmageddon (s)" in the near future.
AJ52 is offline  
Old 05-18-2005, 09:49 PM
  #20  
Nontypical Buck
 
bullmoose38's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,689
Default RE: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION

ORIGINAL: AJ52

Are there any positive prospects in the "Doom and Gloom Theory" for PA Hunters?

It sounds like PA is doomed to a "Wildlife Arrmageddon (s)" in the near future.
AJ52 I know one thing. If my hunting was as bad as some peoples hunting is on this thread. I would spend little less time on the computer and be knocking on more doors looking for new places to hunt.
Here is an example.
I didnt shoot a spring gobbler in 5 years in PA. Was it because there were no turkeys in PA? No it was because I was to lazy to do my homework. 2005 I did my homework and got permission for new land guess what? I shot 10 5/8 inch long beard opening morning. The same goes with deer hunting. If you are not seeing any deer change your approach next season. I will agree some places are hurting for deer but there are plenty of places to find plenty of deer. To find these places effort is required.
bullmoose38 is offline  


Quick Reply: lOSE-LOSE SITUATION


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.