This is a few days old but I didnt see it on here. A long read, but more fat for you boys to chew on,,,

Radio collars indicate hunters weren't finding the deer
Sportsmen have complained of a scarcity. In the Sproul study area, however, hunters passed up 90 pct. of the does.
By Don Sapatkin
Inquirer Staff Writer

If you want to turn up the volume of an already raucous debate over the future of deer hunting, equip a bunch of does with radio transmitters and follow them through all the just ended hunting seasons.

Then tell longtime sportsmen who insist almost no deer are left in Sproul State Forest that they apparently missed a whole lot of them.

Researchers at Penn State University were surprised by their preliminary finding, which showed that hunters didn't see or passed up more than 90 percent of the does in the Sproul study area. So were deer experts in other states, who said far higher doe kills would normally be required to control the population. The small sample size could be skewing results.

The top deer manager at the Pennsylvania Game Commission, a cosponsor of the continuing study, said the statistic wasn't useful and he could not infer anything from it.

The report, which applies only to the areas studied, is certain to come up for discussion and interpretation tomorrow in Harrisburg, the commission's annual public comment period after hunting season.

One question typically dominates the afternoon: Are there too many or too few whitetail deer in the Big Woods? (Everyone agrees that there are far too many in the suburbs.)

Several years ago, agency biologists began a crash program in herd reduction. They said ravenous deer had destroyed so much vegetation that some forests could neither regenerate nor supply enough food to sustain the animals through harsh winters.

Last January, tradition-minded sportsmen complained bitterly about sharp declines in deer sightings. Some blamed overzealous biologists, and predicted that disillusionment would thin the volunteer army needed to keep deer in check.

The commissioners backed down just enough to satisfy virtually no one.

A new executive director, Carl Roe, took over the agency on Jan. 1. Roe, 57, who spent his childhood around the Philadelphia suburbs, said this week that improving communication and credibility on deer issues with hunters and the general public would be top priorities.

The credibility gap is wide. Some sportsmen say the hunting was even worse this past season. License sales were down 7 percent through November, with resignation likely part of the reason.

"People are not seeing deer and they are not getting deer," said Bill Miller, 62, a mechanical engineer from Roxborough and president of the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, a constant thorn in the side of the game commission.

Miller owns a cabin on 25 acres adjoining Tioga State Forest, not far from the New York border. These Big Woods of north-central Pennsylvania rose from early 20th-century clear-cuts. The forests generated more and more deer - and hunters - as they matured over generations. People bought land; traditions were reinforced; deer boomed.

Last year's 56 percent drop in total harvest for the region hit hunters with the wallop that investors might get from a stock market crash. North-central cemented its reputation as the most egregious example in the too many vs. too few debate.

Scientists, meanwhile, began studying the interrelationships among deer, hunters, terrain and other variables that affect wildlife biologists' success in managing growth of the herd.

"What I find most interesting," said Duane Diefenbach, who teaches wildlife ecology at Penn State and is assistant director of the Pennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, "is to see where hunters are and where deer are harvested."

How far will hunters drag a doe carcass uphill to a road? How often can deer elude them by hiding in thick laurel? What percentage of does survive from one year to the next?

Diefenbach and Christopher Rosenberry, head of the game commission's deer management team, designed a two-year, multifaceted study in the poor habitat of Sproul State Forest and, for comparison, in somewhat healthier Tuscarora State Forest to the south:

Radio-collared does would be monitored twice a week to confirm survival or estimate location and cause of death.

The movements of a small number, fitted with global positioning system devices, would be mapped in detail.

Twice a day during the main deer season, a low-flying Cessna would carry observers trained to detect the glow of hunters' orange safety vests through vermilion glasses. GPS-linked laptops would display 3-D images so hunters' locations could be charted like the target of a smart bomb.

With year one nearly completed, preliminary data for Sproul show that 54 radio-collared does were "on air" before the first hunting season, four were killed by hunters, and all the rest were accounted for.

Hunters harvested just 7.4 percent of available does.

Populations are reduced by ensuring that more deer are removed each year through mortality than are added through births. Managers estimate deaths from natural causes, then set hunting goals to make up the difference. Killing does, which produce one or two fawns a year, is most efficient.

Matt Keenan, a graduate student who is coordinating the study for his master's thesis, wondered whether traditional hunters were simply refusing to shoot does, or perhaps enthusiasm was lagging. He's noticed that sportsmen in Pennsylvania complain about deer that are far more abundant than where he's hunted in Vermont, New York and Massachusetts.

Bryon Shissler, a wildlife biologist and consultant, said the harvest rate showed that poor habitat, not hunting, was responsible for most mortality, and he questioned whether recreational hunters had the skills or commitment to kill enough deer to save dying forests.

Shissler is close to Gary Alt, the biologist who set up an aggressive deer program but quit a year ago as a hunter backlash grew. Both now say they believe the game commission's mission and structure - charged with managing all wildlife but funded largely by hunting license-sales - are incompatible: hunters wield too much power.

Diefenbach cautioned against focusing on the numbers, particularly after just one year. He said the issue is habitat survival, for deer and everything else.

"They're talking about whether there are too many or too few and skipping over the question of how many should there be?"

Online and on Cable

Some thoughts as to why the percentage of does killed was not higher.
1. The aerial flyovers with Infrared mapping of deer showed that preseason populations in Sproul State Forest were in the five to ten deer per square mile range. With populations this low, hunting is really a lot tougher than when there were four times as many.
2. We start hunting with guns for deer in October now with the early muzzleloader season, the last few days of which we have kids with rifles. I know many don't want to hear this, but the deer are scared early on and are more wary than they used to be when we didn't hunt them with rifles until after Thanksgiving. I know that the deer where I hunt are more wary. Yours might be different.
3. I don't hunt in Sproul, but in the area of southern Huntingdon County where I do hunt, I am finding much more sign than I thought I would, based upon the numbers of deer I saw during the fall seasons. There are more deer out there than I am seeing. I see no reason for Sproul to be different. I estimate that our overwintering population is between ten and fifteen deer per square mile. My estimate is very much unscientific. I hope we get some snow so I can do a better inventory.
4. I don't believe hunters are refusing to shoot does, at least not huge numbers of hunters are doing so. The hunters around here are killing what they see, and many are killing the first deer they see. A few, like me, hold out for a few days to see if they can get a nice buck and turn to doe hunting later in the first week. I can afford to do so since I am retired and hunt every day. Many can't.

As to hunters hunting hard, I have this story to relate. I shot my eight point on the second Thursday of rifle season. After I hung the deer at my camp and was skinning it, a truck stopped in my driveway. Two "hunters" got out and one asked me, "Where the hell did you get that one?" I replied, "High up on the mountain in the foot rocks." His reply, "No deer is worth that climb."
Obviously, we disagree. Not many nice eight points are taken from the front seat of a pickup unless at night.

I'm not siding with any one on this issue. I do find the following statement hilarious. How many is a "bunch of deer". Is it 10 - 20 - 50.

It goes on to say hunters didn't see or passed up more than 90% of the deer(bunch of deer I presume). What does "passed up" mean in the Penn state study.

Is this what Penn State calls a study

AJ,
Read the entire article and you'll find your answer.

"It goes on to say hunters didn't see or passed up more than 90% of the deer(bunch of deer I presume). What does "passed up" mean in the Penn state study."

My take on it would be that either the hunters didn't see the does in question or they decided not to shoot them (passed them up). Either way, fifty out of the fifty-four does starting the study were alive when hunting season was over.

I have a slightly different take on the situation.Ilive and hunt in 2G and saw more deer preeason and more sign this year than last year.Ihad 15 oppourtunities to kill deer this season but I didn't see as many asI did prior to herd reductions.Three thing will always effect deer movement.1 weather2.pressure3. food availability.I personally thought archery season was warmer and windier than usual and the first two days of rifle season were lousy in places.Pressure wasso low in every place where I huntedand you need hunters to move deer.The mast crop was heavy and widespread.The deer simplydidn't have to travel to find deer.I have to admit that post season,I'm seeing alot of deer and alot of sign.Next year should be a great year,especially considering that the deer went into winter in good shape and this winter is so mild.I have no complaints at all.

I don't believe that the early muzzleloader season has had any effect on spooking the deer.There used to be far more small game hunters shooting the woods up not toomany years ago.i don't know if I've ever seen a muzzleloader hunter in the woods when I was archery hunting.

How many hunters knew you could kill the deer with radio collars on ?
Most hunters I know do notshoot if they don't know if it is legal.

ihunt up there and werent many hunters up there this year i hunted there for 3 years and yet to see abuck so i didnt go this year but there is buck sign and since i m out of state i can only hunt bucks

Doesn't matter how many deer were or weren't shot if the number of hunters is unknown. If 8 hunters harvested 8 doe, then the success rate is 100%. If 100 hunters harvested 8 doe, then the success rate is 8%.This is the same area of the Sproul that had the GPSstudy done a few years ago to gauge the whereabouts of hunters. I don't remember the exact average, but it was something like 1/3 of a mile from the road. What they don't tell you is that this area is extremely rugged terrain and most hunters that have earned enough vacation time to stay at camp for a week or two are old enough to think twice about getting more than 1/3 of a mile up the mountain.

If these people are going to spend our money to do studies, thenI wish they'd do them in a scientific manner so that theresults would be meaningfull.

Ah - Yes I now see the 54(bunch of deer).I guess I was LMAO so hard I missed the 54.

Still can't figure out what is so scientific about the harvest vs deer radio tagged.Did they survey the hunters before or after the harvest or advise hunters there were xx taged deer for a study - I better go back and check article one more time.