"Mailman" said; "Really 80% could be lost as 20% harvest 80% of the deer..." If that is the case; and I have my doubts, it's obvious that those in the 20% would be glad to bear the extra burden ofpaying the increased cost. After all they are the 20% who benefit the most and fill their freezers with venison, so they would have no excuse whining about an increased licensing fee.

Sounds fair to me. In fact, if you harvest more than one buck and one doe there should be an escalating fee for additional deer taken. that might help to eleviate the money "shortfall" of the agency as well as improveopportunities for the other 80% to harvest a deer.

One should keep in mind that this is supposed to be a SPORT, and was never intended to be a major "Food (meat)Supply" for hunters. Many hunters are "harvesting" several deer each year through multiple available antlerless tags. And if their argument is that they give the meat away, I have to ask if those types of hunters have aphobia for killing?

Hahaha! This is so laughable.

Therein lies the concept of blindness and head-in-sand syndrome.
When one ignores all documented demographics and attributes trends to one single policy item (that many "agree" with) it is the flag of desperation waving wildly in the wind of a surplus of -- hot air!

This whole thread has been based on the flawed assumption that hunters numbers are declining in PA due to the deer program . The nationwide pattern as documented by the NSSF and others disproves that silly notion.

It has been proven that lack of time to hunt has been overwhelmingly cited as the most common reason throughout all the states for hunters who no longer hunt.

Thre overwhelming reason for lack of hunter recruitment has been obstacles and barriers for youth getting started. The PGC's mentored hunt program is a step in the right direction toward fixing that.

This thread is gonna go nowhere but into a flame war PGC bashfest. Especially with the posse of uninformed newbies and aliases that have very obviously been created by the few noisy USP types here.

Exactly, PAs hunter lose is right inline with the rest of the states, HR or AR has nothing to do with it. What we need to do is figure out a way to bring youngsters into the sport.

Hunter numbers are dropping and it's do to alot of things,less deer being one of them.Is less deer the reason for the 9% drop?Not likely.

HCC,The deer herd did in fact take a huge dive in Treasue lakeafter the winters of 2003 and 2004 and our pellet count surveys back that up.We had a mild winter last year and a great mast crop which brought recruitment back up.Still,we had 120 hunters in there hunting deer this year and only killed 4 bucks and 33 doe.I have all the facts and data since we first dtated studying the herd in Treasure lake.We'll be having another pelllet count and browse impact survey on april 7.the public is welcome to participate so you can come up and give usyour assessment.

I wish Wetern Md would impliment QDM

Crazyhorse,I shoot multiple year every year and eat it all except for some jerky,sausage,sticks and bologna that I share with other people,many that are non-hunters.I'll gladly pay more for a lisence and even donate more to unsuccessful hunters like yourself.However,I feelevery hunter should be charged for every extra pheasant they shoot.Why should Ihave to pay for guys like you that are so desperate to kill something and lack the necessary skills to shoot a wild animal that they have to shoot a farm raised bird?Many of these guys can't even find the birds on their own,they need a dog to point them out.Talk about desperation to kill.

How many members does the USP have?
The answer can sometimes be so obvious.

Unbelievable.

I think the whole "license decrease" card being played by the USP and those opposed to the PGC is way off base.

Here are some stats comparing PA to other states in 1988 and 1998.

State 1988 1998
PA 1.17m 1.06m
TX 1.19m975K
MI 957K926K
WI 742K 737K

Take whatever you want from this, but to blame the recent decrease in license saleson HR is yet anotherreach.