|
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
DDear,
Just curious ... what does the 2004 data show ?? 99er |
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
To all my Dodge lovin friends....Dodges are OK, I guess, if you cant find a Chevy.....Was joking of course but not in the context of disparaging those of you who enjoy gettin "rammed";).
It was to poke a little jab at our resident "outof context, use the numbers how he wants to"bean counter. If our new deer model really used chevy roadkills as part of the formula, he'd lilkley insert dodge data when it suited him. He likes old outdated data too so maybe I shoulda said he drives a Studebaker? |
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
What the 2004 data shows is that HR has been much more effective than the PGC is willing to admit. The 39% reduction in the buck harvest mens the statewide herd has been reduced by at least 30%. Therefore, the small reduction in the antlerless allocation is meaningless and will resul tin further HR and lower buck harvests.
|
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
Where was this data generated? In the past few years wasitderived from that same puter program that didn't accurately estimate the deer harvest?
ORIGINAL: ddear Year-------buck harvest------% 2.5 plus years old---# of 2.5 year old buck harvested 1981--------N/A------------------18.4------------------------N/A 1982--------122,264-------------20.3------------------------24,819 1983--------120,291-------------21.7------------------------26,103 1984--------135,388-------------22.8------------------------30,868 1985--------136,104-------------20.0------------------------27,221 1986--------150,363-------------21.2------------------------31,877 1987--------157,559-------------18.9------------------------29,779 1988--------163,113-------------19.0------------------------30,991 1989--------169,814-------------19.4------------------------32,944 1990--------170,099-------------17.9------------------------30,448 1991--------149,633-------------18.0------------------------26,934 1992--------163,195-------------18.5------------------------30,191 1993--------165,250-------------20.8------------------------34,372 1994--------157,030-------------17.5------------------------27,480 1995--------182,235-------------17.4------------------------31,709 1996--------153,432-------------16.2------------------------24,856 1997--------176,677-------------18.6------------------------32,862 1998--------181,449-------------19.4------------------------35,201 1999--------194,371-------------20.0------------------------38,874 2000--------203,221-------------18.3------------------------37,189 2001--------203,247-------------21.6------------------------43,901 2002--------165,416-------------31.8------------------------52,602 2003--------142,270-------------43.6------------------------62,030 |
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
Just a question for ddear.
In your perfect world after we hunted down Alt and shot him like a mad dog. You are now the PA deer king what would you do to bring euporia back to the deer hunters in PA.Don't let time or money influnce your choices, just in the order you would implement them lets here your ideas. |
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
Alt is gone. It certainly appears there has been a mud slinging contest since he left with some insiders that didn't like his method or style - He's GONE and you you still can't let it go.
ALT might be gone from PA but you can bet he will have an effect on the future of deer hunting someplace in the northeast. The guy had the nads to make change. Now you have Dr R. You'll be bashing him by spring of 06. Armchair biologists are a dime a dozen on the WEB. dd, You still have not produced ALL the QDM managers you refer to. You have DR R?? Reading your posts with respect to late breeding is almost comical. If you would truly look beyond the WEB you might find numerous other cause and effects of late breeding. It's not a PA thing. To be perfectly honest I don't believe you Hunt Deer. You've never posted anything here that would lead anybody to believe otherwise. |
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
ddear I see your out there come on lets play[:@]
|
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
The computer model that was flawed was the one that computed the OWDD and the PS population. The harvest data was calculalted the same way it has been calculated since 1986.
|
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
I am no fan of Alt but deer hunting is going to change weather we as hunters change with it is up to each of us.We are loseing huntable land at alarming rates.Alts plan was based on lowering deer numbers to what bad habitat could support, I believe its is a better idea to raise thequality of habitat to support a more huntable deer herd. I see things this way because I am a deer hunter.Non hunters like to look at big trees,but big trees do not make good deer habitat.here lies the problem. We need more and larger tracks of land timbered. I live in Crawford county and we are blessed with mostly private land, small farms and large wood lots.Deer thrive here .Better cover will help your turkeys & grouse numbers also. Support timber harvest on all state land. If you don't have any ideas don't bitch about what you get. |
RE: PGC and Gary Alt' Newspaper comments?
Ddear go back to page two and use my model.Plug in your numbers and tell us all the suprising results.
#owdd = no deer live here in the winter #dpsm =are square miles are small so no deer live here #2.5year old bucks = no deer live here so we have no 2.5 year old bucks #deer in PA = Alt minus 30% multply by pie-r-squared plus no deer live here= 17 |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:52 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.