AR changes.
01-09-2002, 06:20 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Industry Pa. USA
Posts: 242
AR changes.
New proposal eases antler restrictions
Alt revises original plan, including county for six-point minimum
Intelligencer Journal (Lancaster, PA.)
01/03/02
By: P.J. Reilly
Six-point bucks will be fair game in Lancaster County next year.
Gary Alt, the Pennsylvania Game Commission's chief deer biologist, has revised his proposed antler restrictions by lumping Lancaster and surrounding counties in with the bulk of the state.
Whew!
Two months ago, Alt announced that he planned to ask the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners in two weeks for mandatory antler restrictions for the 2002-03 deer seasons.
He said he wanted to impose a three-points-per-antler minimum across the northern tier and down through central and southcentral counties.
Counties in the southeast and west would be under a four-points-per-side minimum.
As an avid Lancaster and Chester County deer hunter, that proposal didn't sit well with me.
I don't mind passing up spikes and four-pointers, but six-pointers? That seemed a bit much.
Wednesday, Alt said he had revised his proposal so that all of the state would be under a three-points-per-antler restriction, except for 11 western counties.
Those counties would have the four-points-per-antler restriction.
Though relieved my hunting area is off the hook for the more stringent restriction, I was still curious as to why there are two different minimums.
According to Alt, biological studies say that's what's needed to allow a significant number of young bucks to advance to the next age class.
"In Pennsylvania, we essentially exterminate all of our bucks before they reach the prime age," Alt said. "In a more natural breeding ecology, the older, dominant, 4-to-8-year-old bucks stop the yearlings from breeding altogether.
"In Pennsylvania, less than 1 in 100 bucks reaches its fourth birthday, so basically (any buck) is free to breed, no matter how good or bad their genetics are."
` Alt's deer-management plan for Pennsylvania has two basic goals. One is to reduce the overall deer population so that the habitat the deer have overbrowsed for 70 years can regenerate.
We've heard Alt preach about this goal the past few years, so there's no need to discuss it in detail here.
The second goal of his program is to establish a more balanced herd. This is the goal that will take Pennsylvania hunters into uncharted waters.
"For 70 years, we've been overkilling the bucks and underkilling the does," he said. "We've got to stop that."
A closer ratio between bucks and does means a more healthy herd, Alt said.
Here's what's happened in Pennsylvania over the last 70 years, according to Alt.
Hunters every year kill about 90 percent of each class of yearling bucks. And the bucks they don't shoot the first year they have antlers are left with little chance of reaching their peak sexual maturity.
With only a three-day doe season (prior to this year's two-week season), hunters have had virtually no effect on controlling the doe population -- except to help it explode.
So every fall, the woods are polluted with does, which are being bred by yearling bucks that face no competition from mature bucks, because there really aren't any around.
Yearling bucks, Alt said, should be spending their second fall in the woods fattening up for winter, rather than breeding.
"They should be non-factors in the breeding cycle," he said. "They should be like does. If you look at our elk herd, you don't see spike bulls herding any cows. They're grazing, while the mature bulls take care of the breeding.
"The big bulls wouldn't allow the spikes to get into the game."
Yearling bucks that spend their second fall running around breeding does enter winter more stressed than they would otherwise, Alt said.
That leads to poor antler growth following their second birthday -- assuming they've beaten the odds and lived that long.
"In a more normal breeding ecology, there is a lot less wasted energy," Alt said. "The dominant bucks fight with each other to do the breeding, and that's it. The yearlings aren't involved."
In order to help bolster the state's population of mature bucks, Alt said, we have to protect the yearlings from being shot.
And there's really only two ways of doing that, he said. One is to limit the total number of bucks that can be killed by distributing buck tags on a lottery basis.
"It would be insane for me to even suggest that one," Alt said. "Our hunters are not willing to give up the opportunity to go buck hunting."
The second is to increase the minimum size of legal bucks. Right now, the minimum size is a buck with spikes at least three inches long, or a buck with two or more points on one antler.
"We have antler restrictions now," Alt said. "All I'm talking about doing is raising the bar so we're not only protecting the very smallest bucks."
` For the past three years, crews of game commission technicians have visited butcher shops to examine more than 60,000 bucks taken by hunters.
They've recorded the deer's sex, age, county in which they were shot and number of points on their antlers.
Based on that data, Alt has been able to determine that between 87 and 93 percent of all the bucks shot each year are yearlings.
"We're shooting our bucks the second they sprout antlers," he said.
By raising the minimum antler restrictions to three points per side in most of the state, and four points per side out west, Alt said he hopes to protect about half of the yearling class of bucks.
Across much of the state, Alt said, protecting spikes and forkhorns will protect a sufficient number of yearlings.
But out west, where the data shows deer tend to grow bigger antlers, Alt said he has to increase the minimum size to protect a sufficient number of yearlings.
"Lawrence County absolutely has the biggest bucks in the state," Alt said. "We know that 54 percent of the yearling bucks in Lawrence County have eight points or better on their first racks."
Alt said the game commission's studies showed yearling bucks in Lancaster and surrounding southeast counties also tend to have bigger racks than bucks in other parts of the state, and that's why the southeast region was originally marked for a four-points-per-antler minimum.
But Alt said protecting deer in the corner of the state with the highest human population conflicted with the game commission's goal of significantly reducing total deer numbers there.
"So we decided to stick with the three points minimum," Alt said. "That will protect some bucks there, but not as many as a four-point minimum would."
With his proposed antler restrictions, Alt figures the statewide buck kill next year will be cut in half.
"But after two years, it'll pick up again, and hunters won't believe the bucks they'll see," he said. "This is one program where I strongly believe that the hunters who are opposed to this now will be thrilled with it in two years."
Alt revises original plan, including county for six-point minimum
Intelligencer Journal (Lancaster, PA.)
01/03/02
By: P.J. Reilly
Six-point bucks will be fair game in Lancaster County next year.
Gary Alt, the Pennsylvania Game Commission's chief deer biologist, has revised his proposed antler restrictions by lumping Lancaster and surrounding counties in with the bulk of the state.
Whew!
Two months ago, Alt announced that he planned to ask the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners in two weeks for mandatory antler restrictions for the 2002-03 deer seasons.
He said he wanted to impose a three-points-per-antler minimum across the northern tier and down through central and southcentral counties.
Counties in the southeast and west would be under a four-points-per-side minimum.
As an avid Lancaster and Chester County deer hunter, that proposal didn't sit well with me.
I don't mind passing up spikes and four-pointers, but six-pointers? That seemed a bit much.
Wednesday, Alt said he had revised his proposal so that all of the state would be under a three-points-per-antler restriction, except for 11 western counties.
Those counties would have the four-points-per-antler restriction.
Though relieved my hunting area is off the hook for the more stringent restriction, I was still curious as to why there are two different minimums.
According to Alt, biological studies say that's what's needed to allow a significant number of young bucks to advance to the next age class.
"In Pennsylvania, we essentially exterminate all of our bucks before they reach the prime age," Alt said. "In a more natural breeding ecology, the older, dominant, 4-to-8-year-old bucks stop the yearlings from breeding altogether.
"In Pennsylvania, less than 1 in 100 bucks reaches its fourth birthday, so basically (any buck) is free to breed, no matter how good or bad their genetics are."
` Alt's deer-management plan for Pennsylvania has two basic goals. One is to reduce the overall deer population so that the habitat the deer have overbrowsed for 70 years can regenerate.
We've heard Alt preach about this goal the past few years, so there's no need to discuss it in detail here.
The second goal of his program is to establish a more balanced herd. This is the goal that will take Pennsylvania hunters into uncharted waters.
"For 70 years, we've been overkilling the bucks and underkilling the does," he said. "We've got to stop that."
A closer ratio between bucks and does means a more healthy herd, Alt said.
Here's what's happened in Pennsylvania over the last 70 years, according to Alt.
Hunters every year kill about 90 percent of each class of yearling bucks. And the bucks they don't shoot the first year they have antlers are left with little chance of reaching their peak sexual maturity.
With only a three-day doe season (prior to this year's two-week season), hunters have had virtually no effect on controlling the doe population -- except to help it explode.
So every fall, the woods are polluted with does, which are being bred by yearling bucks that face no competition from mature bucks, because there really aren't any around.
Yearling bucks, Alt said, should be spending their second fall in the woods fattening up for winter, rather than breeding.
"They should be non-factors in the breeding cycle," he said. "They should be like does. If you look at our elk herd, you don't see spike bulls herding any cows. They're grazing, while the mature bulls take care of the breeding.
"The big bulls wouldn't allow the spikes to get into the game."
Yearling bucks that spend their second fall running around breeding does enter winter more stressed than they would otherwise, Alt said.
That leads to poor antler growth following their second birthday -- assuming they've beaten the odds and lived that long.
"In a more normal breeding ecology, there is a lot less wasted energy," Alt said. "The dominant bucks fight with each other to do the breeding, and that's it. The yearlings aren't involved."
In order to help bolster the state's population of mature bucks, Alt said, we have to protect the yearlings from being shot.
And there's really only two ways of doing that, he said. One is to limit the total number of bucks that can be killed by distributing buck tags on a lottery basis.
"It would be insane for me to even suggest that one," Alt said. "Our hunters are not willing to give up the opportunity to go buck hunting."
The second is to increase the minimum size of legal bucks. Right now, the minimum size is a buck with spikes at least three inches long, or a buck with two or more points on one antler.
"We have antler restrictions now," Alt said. "All I'm talking about doing is raising the bar so we're not only protecting the very smallest bucks."
` For the past three years, crews of game commission technicians have visited butcher shops to examine more than 60,000 bucks taken by hunters.
They've recorded the deer's sex, age, county in which they were shot and number of points on their antlers.
Based on that data, Alt has been able to determine that between 87 and 93 percent of all the bucks shot each year are yearlings.
"We're shooting our bucks the second they sprout antlers," he said.
By raising the minimum antler restrictions to three points per side in most of the state, and four points per side out west, Alt said he hopes to protect about half of the yearling class of bucks.
Across much of the state, Alt said, protecting spikes and forkhorns will protect a sufficient number of yearlings.
But out west, where the data shows deer tend to grow bigger antlers, Alt said he has to increase the minimum size to protect a sufficient number of yearlings.
"Lawrence County absolutely has the biggest bucks in the state," Alt said. "We know that 54 percent of the yearling bucks in Lawrence County have eight points or better on their first racks."
Alt said the game commission's studies showed yearling bucks in Lancaster and surrounding southeast counties also tend to have bigger racks than bucks in other parts of the state, and that's why the southeast region was originally marked for a four-points-per-antler minimum.
But Alt said protecting deer in the corner of the state with the highest human population conflicted with the game commission's goal of significantly reducing total deer numbers there.
"So we decided to stick with the three points minimum," Alt said. "That will protect some bucks there, but not as many as a four-point minimum would."
With his proposed antler restrictions, Alt figures the statewide buck kill next year will be cut in half.
"But after two years, it'll pick up again, and hunters won't believe the bucks they'll see," he said. "This is one program where I strongly believe that the hunters who are opposed to this now will be thrilled with it in two years."
01-09-2002, 02:21 PM
#9
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Galeton PA USA
Posts: 28
RE: AR changes.
uhhh...I hope thats 3 points on at least one side. 3 points on each side will lead to too many mistakes. I would imagine that is a typo or is just not made clear.
I'm all for AR. It has the potential to do negative damage if the "whole package" is not dealt with as well. Actually would like to see a lottery (but liberal) draw on buck tags as well (by weapon/season). Make it to where you have to choose a weapon, and apply fo ra buck tag within that season. That would go over like a fart in church....but would be effective. But AR as it is proposed should prove to be a great benefit to the herd.
SEE....I'm not just against the man Mark. Just some of his decisions
<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
I'm all for AR. It has the potential to do negative damage if the "whole package" is not dealt with as well. Actually would like to see a lottery (but liberal) draw on buck tags as well (by weapon/season). Make it to where you have to choose a weapon, and apply fo ra buck tag within that season. That would go over like a fart in church....but would be effective. But AR as it is proposed should prove to be a great benefit to the herd.
SEE....I'm not just against the man Mark. Just some of his decisions
<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
01-09-2002, 02:55 PM
#10
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: AR changes.
Maybe you choose what you want to buck hunt with. I could live with only being able to buck hunt with my bow, but I still think we'd need some AR and you're right Ralph, it would only be feasible if it were one side of the rack.