bowhunter2117

http://www.tribune-democrat.com/local/local_story_296001008.html


Pa doe tag controversy is growing it was only a matter of time until hunters demanded answers. In 2C last year the PAGC increased the doe tags by 25,000 tags that was a jump of 50% and the harvest dropped by 14%. Mismanagement at its best an 0 accountability

jcchartboy

bowhunter2117

No just stating fact and that the discontent runs deeper than USP. What went on in this WMU was a disgrace and no reason was ever given as how numbers were acquired and tag allocations set to see a drop of 14% with a 50% increase

MikeE51848

It's not a dead horse to those who hunt PA's public forests.

MikeVT

They did the same thing up here in Vermont in the early 80's and our kill has been declining ever since. The mountain herds were decimated and have still not recovered. I hope you guys in PA have better luck than we did.

livbucks

All I can say is...who was it that killed them all? The folks who hunt there didn't worry about it when they were packing the freezer. I bet that most guys that hunt there were more than happy to fill all their tags. Now they are mad at someone else for the lack of deer. I would only take a doe in an area if it is obvious to me that there is an adequate abundance to permit it. I guess I am an odd hunter in the fact that I decide when and where to spend a tag and not the Game Commission.

I read the article link and must say that the hunters decision to get together and destroy their tags and ban doe hunting on farms is a proactive approach and puts the power back in hunters hands.
Each and every hunter can decide (for himself) when to pull that trigger

kevin1

I hope y'all don't mind an outsider's opinion here , but the thought occurs to me that destroying a tag you paid good money for doesn't make much sense . All they've done is put your state one step closer to the PGC being forced to hire sharpshooters like some other areas have . Here's what it can lead to:Hired guns Another thing that doesn't make sense is a bunch of civillians who think they're wildlife biologists trying to second guess the real ones . The people of Pensylania have an investment in their biologists , and are generally ill equipped to second guess them . The reason y'all had so many deer in the first place was because your game commission made the same mistake that ours did , they listened to the armchair quarterbacks who wanted ever more deer , and did so to our detriment . We are now overrun with deer , far beyond our carrying capacity , and now we face the painful decision to reduce their numbers to somewhat more manageable figures .

The region where I live now has several countes where you can not only take 4 extra does , but another 4 on top of them without affecting your bag limit . There are something like a dozen counties like this here . This may come as a surprise to most Pennsylvanians , but it's neither normal or natural to see 50-100 deer in a day . If that's what you were accustomed to then you did have too many deer to begin with . They're eating your forests and farms alive , and the population crash that was coming may have been temporarily avoided by the PGC's decision to sharply reduce the doe herd . All it would have taken would have been a more severe Winter than average and your deer would have died by the tens or even hundreds of thousands whether the PGC had stepped in or not .

Next time you think that you know more about your herd than the folks you pay to manage them try going to one of your public input sessions as I have and talk to one of them . You'd be amazed by how little you really know .

cardeer

There has been a big reduction in the heard .If we dont like that ,well then dont shoot one. I took a doe already this year ,but at a place the heard is like 25 deer for every acre. I will not hunt does in a low populated deer area. it starts with us every individual doing their part.If everyone of us who are complaing about the deer heard loss would not shoot one for several years we as hunters could overcome the PGC.

livbucks

Kevin,
You are right to a point that biologists know better, BUT..
Does the fact that the Game Commission issues excess tags in an area that has few deer to begin with, obligate every hunter to buy those tags and be obligated to fill them all regardless of ability or want? We have butchered this whole issue to death in PA. There are areas in PA that make no sense at all as far as deer management. All I was proposing is, those folks who complain of seeing ZERO deer on most outings in an area that they enjoy hunting, should be very thoughtful and deliberate in the amount of deer they kill there.....just makes COMMON sense.

jcchartboy

The hunters that participated in that rally are the problem not the answer. Their actions have zero biological backing. This was a purely political rally and little else.

Consider what was accomplished....

The hunters who purchased these tags with no intent on using them are fools. The game department will simply respond by issuing MORE TAGS the following year.

This is simple logic. Every year the game department has a stated harvest goal for each unit. The numbers of tags issued is calculated in a very simple manner...

Tags= harvest goal / historical success rate.

These fools will only succeed in artificial lowering the success rate in their unit, thereby reducing the divisor in the equation and resulting in the issuance of MORE TAGS the following years!

Intentional creating misleading harvest statistics is the last thing a true conservationist would be interested in doing...plain and simple!

These guys want to "change the system", sounds like they are..and not for the better.

Hunters work with biologist not against them!