HuntingNet.com Forums - PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)

- Northeast (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/northeast-26/)

- - PGC Releases Preliminary Figures (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/northeast/21272-pgc-releases-preliminary-figures.html)

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quotequote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I don't believe people talk about it for one reason, it hasn't happened. If you have information that "proves AR's have failed", I'd sure like to see it. Oh, I'm sure some states have done away with it, but I believe every state that has used it has had the same results, an older age class of bucks. If you have data saying otherwise, like I said, I'd sure like to see it, it would be the first such evidence presented around here.
Your statement, "many, if not all" is completely untrue. I won't spoeculate on why you wrote that, but many states, and the two used in my example, continue to practice AR, with much success.
When you say ARs "fail", what exactly do you mean? They failed to increase the average age of bucks?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

6pt:
The biggest problem I see with this respones of yours I've quoted is you keep saying "I believe", when referring to what you provide as proof or evidence. I can tell you for a fact that the QDM measures that NJ has implememted in DMZ 35 have failed miserably. We have fewer bucks, and fewer big bucks than have been present since the mid 1970's. This isn't what I beleive, it's what I see, it's what other hunters in the area see, and it's what the numbers prove. Yes, a few nice bucks are still taken each season in that area, but nothing compared to what there used to be roaming the woodlands in that zone. Zones 27 and 29 aren't much better. They both have the QDM (AR) regs as well, and I've seen the same results in the area's I hunt there. Also, nearly to a man, every person I know that hunts there, and has hunted there for more than 10 years, says the number of big bucks has dropped off dramatically.

Now, take a look at zone 28: no antler restrictions, no other QDM regs (like killing every antlerless deer around) yet zone 28 produces some of the biggest deer every year from NJ, not ony for top-end antlers, but also for numbers of big bucks. Again, you do not have to "beleive" or "feel" this, it's all right there in the numbers. When you get the time to go over the numebrs from NJ's books, take a look at DMZ 37. There have been AR in place in that zone for 10 years now, yet very few, if any bucks entered in the Trophy Deer Prgram come from that area. In fact, I can't think of even one since the inception of the AR in that zone. As one last piece of evidence for you to look at, go down the list of entries of big bucks and tally up which counties have been hot the last six years or so. The one you find with the most entries doesn't have QDM anywhere in it, and the counties that used to be leaders of the pack (before AR), have nearly dropped off the map. I don't know what else you want as evidence, but let me know, I'm sure we can find it.

The evidence is there, all you have to do is look. Please don't be so quick to tell us what you "beleive", but take a few minutes to actually examine the data. As for the Western States I was referring to, I don't know why they considered it a failure, I was just relating the information from the DNR press releases that said they were discontinuing it. Again, instead of trying to insinuate that this was fabricated, just look it up for yourself.

One last thig to consider: which of the following states that are the "Go To" spots for trophy deer have antler restrictions? Montana,
Iowa, Kansas, Ill., Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, or how about Kentucky? That is an up and coming state for big bucks, do they have antler restrictions? I don't know the regs in all of these states, so if they do, please let me know. Or better yet, take a look at the Eastern Shore of Md. That is one of the best places in the country for Pope and Young bucks, and actually rivals even some areas in the midwest, does Md have a mandatory antler restriction policy? And please don't try to tell me that some landowners practice QDM and that is the same as what Pa is trying to do, because it's not. We are talking about state imposed antler restrictions and heavy antlerless deer harvests, not what some landowners who control large acreage can accomplish, I know it works there.

If you are having problems locating the data I suggested you look at, e-mail me, I point you in the right direction.

Edited by - NJ_Bowhntr on 01/20/2003 15:13:52

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

I'm not sure I follow any of that post, NJ, we were talkng about Antler restrictions, and the killing of young bucks.

None of your data, thanks anyway, relates to that.

Ask all these people you're quoting what they think is the problem with their area. Maybe the Jan shotgun season?
I doubt any of them will say, "they won't let us shoot small bucks, so now there's no big bucks". Hey, who knows, but I doubt it. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

We're talking about ARs, not increased do harvests, not QDM, just the taking of young 1.5yr old bucks.

I know you desperately want to prove some point, for whatever reason you're against ARs, but please try to present relevant facts, not go off on a tangent about something else.

If you have any data about ARs failing to increase the average age of male deer, I'd still love to hear it, seriously. Antecdotal evidence about this or that area has big bucks, but no ARs won't do it, I'm well aware of the large deer in states without ARs.

So do you have any data, once again, showing where ARs failed to increase the average age of male deer in a certain herd? Or are we going to talk about something else again?

We can start another thread about the reasons for the lack of big bucks in your area if you want, although I suspect we both agree it's due to the liberalized shotgun regs allowing a tremendous harvest of all tyopes of deer. We can discuss all the QDM issues you want, I suspect that except for this one, ARs, we'd pretty much agree, and agree it's a shame what NJ has done recently.

Let me know if you find anything relevant to this thread about ARs working or not.

"In heaven, even the fish have antlers"

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

BBTW, when I say "I believe", it means exactly that. Unlike some, I don't try to pass my opinions off as fact, hence putting in the disclaimer, "I believe". <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

"In heaven, even the fish have antlers"

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

6pt, that is a nice dodge, but you haven't said anything to refute what I've presented. You asked where such policies have failed, I pointed it out to you. All I can offer for proof is the results from such policies where they have been implemented, if that's isn't enough, nothing will be. And I appreciate your humble attitude, but I am not trying to push my beliefs as facts, just trying to show you the results, empirical evidence if you will, of what has happened here, please don't be offended.

You might want to go back and read my post more carefully, I never said I believed, as a rule, AR's do not work. The way they are being sold in Pa, and have been used in NJ, they have a higher chance of failure than success.

The best I can do to 'prove' what I'm saying is offer you the results from such policies in heavily hunted area's, because that is what we are talking about: heavily hunted areas. This typical scenario is what ACTUALLY HAPPENS in the zones in NJ I mentioned.

-Hunters are forced to pass on deer with less than 3 points on one side. This artifically shifts the harvest to the healthier yearlings (6 and 8, in some cases 10 points racks at 1.5 yrs. old), and the 2.5 yr old deer. Of course those who said antler restriction will result in more 2.5 and older deer being harvested look like prophets, but it is due mostly to the fact that many in the 1.5 yr. old range cannot be taken. Therefore, a hunter who would normally be satisfied with a spike or 4 point is forced to wait on the yearling with an 8 point rack, or a 2.5 or older deer. Being forced to shoot a 2.5 yr old deer when normally a 1.5 would have been shot certainly will result in more 2.5 yr olds being taken.

So, point one is that when hunters are forced to shoot deer that are likely 2.5 years old or older, of course more of them will be taken, but this is not an indication that there are more mature deer in the herd. This artifical shift of the buck harvest has two results. First, it makes those who said AR's will result in more big bucks being taken look like they really know what they are talking about, and therefore generates a cult following. Second, with more of those hunters who would normally shoot a spike and be out of the woods, waiting on the older deer, and more of those older deer being taken, there are FEWER of the older age class deer in the herd. Had the weekend warrior been permitted to shoot a scrubby spike, that 2.5 year old 8 point that came down the trail 30 minutes behind him would likely have lived to be a 3.5 yr old 8 or 10 point. This results in the age class being set back a year, not advanced, because now that yearling spike that was protected has to make it through two more seasons to reach the same age that our 2.5 yr old 8 point would have reached next season.

Even though there were no mandated restriction for those 2.5 and older deer, the fact that smaller deer could be shot first acts as protection for them. When you remove that protection, and you make those 2.5 yr. olds THE targeted class, there will certainly be fewer of them carrying over to 3.5 yrs old. Now, of course, the second year of such a program, the number of 1.5 yr olds that were protected become 2.5 yr olds, and since the little guys are once again protected, even more 2.5 yr olds are taken the following year. Again, our prophetic leader looks invincible, but as happened the previous year, more hunters were forced to wait on bucks instead of shooting the first one that came by, and therefore more mature deer were removed from the herd. In heavily hunted regions, where most of the bucks are killed each year without AR, once AR's are implemented more of the mature deer are killed each year in the place of the little guy's. This resulting in fewer mature bucks in that herd (by mature I'm talking about 4.5 or older).

Just how often this happens actually depends on the hunting pressure in the region. In heavily hunted areas, I assure you that more 2.5 and older bucks are taken with AR in place than without them, and therefore there are actually less older deer in the woods. Please understand this is not just a theory, but what has actually happened in the areas I spoke about.

Now, where a landowner can control large expanses of land, and can limit the amount of hunters and hunting pressure, these types of AR work very well. In fact, to get them to really work well, most of the 2.5 are passed up as well. This is the tye of AR that works in the midwest, and on the eastern shore. These types of things produce big bucks, not leaving 1.5 yr. olds in the woods to make up the majority of the buck population.

Something else that has to be considered. Even though a spike is not always a spike, it has been proven (plenty of scientific research available on this one too) that genetics DO play a role in antler quality. After numerous years of leaving the most genetically inferior bucks in the herd, antler quality will be degraded. When you make the superior yearlings (6, 8 or 10 point racks) the target, as well as the older deer, you are leaving the less desirable bucks to continue the species and may dilute the gene pool. As I said, not every spike will always be a spike, we all know that. However, a buck that sports 8,9 or 10 points as a yearling has a much better chance of becoming a larger buck, and in most cases, nutrition and birth age being constant, is genetically superior to his brother spike. When you protect the genetically inferior bucks, and target the yearlings with better antler characteristics for harvest, how does this propogate a healthier herd?

.5-------1.5------2.5--------3.5--------4.5------5.5

Another thing to look at is just how much excessive antlerless harvest add to this problem. Imagine a time line (above), starting with button bucks. Extend it down the line in yearly increments. So you begin with .5 yr olds, then go to 1.5, then 2.5 and so on. When you shift the hunting pressure to the right side (2.5 and up) of the scale, and then add additonal pressure on the left side (button bucks)through antlerless harvests, not only do you eliminate more of the mature deer, but you also reduce the number of yearling bucks recruited in from the button buck population. So, each year you will have fewer yearlings that are being protected, and therefore fewer of the protected class passing onto the targeted class (2.5) The area's in bold repesent the segments of the buck population targeted by these policies. It isn't hard to see that AR's, as used in NJ and Pa, actually function to keep the buck population comprised of bucks 2.5 yrs old or less.

This is what has actually happened with these policies in place. I'm not guessing here (as Alt, the PGC and NJ F & W did), this is the result of the current policies in NJ. For several years(about 10) I have spent opening day of shotgun, and the first day of early M/L season going to check stations in NJ to speak with the biologists. I have also spoken with Alt's NJ counterpart, Andy Burnett, and picked his brain on the subject. The biologists at the checks stations take information on the age and health of the deer brought in. This is where I have gotten my information. Without check stations in Pa, how will you guys even know what the results of your policies are? My "guess", "belief" or "feeling" is that they don't really want to know.

Edited by - NJ_Bowhntr on 01/21/2003 10:22:16

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

NJ_Bowhntr is right on the money the AR must focus on monitoring the harvest. There is no sound process in place to see how old the deer are in PA that get harvested. No check stations is proof postive of this.

Without a process to measures the age of animals harvested the QDM talks and theories are just smoke and mirrors. While staffing and manning of check stations would be a huge undertaking, I would think that in order to make arguements based on theories of the biologists(Alt) that the data must be there to support such claims. If the herd will get in balance how will we know without some data.

A policy should be based on more than just sound theory it needs to incorporate data to support its case. PGC misses the mark right now and with that said there would be a ton of people that wouldn't check their deer in, just the same way people now don't send in their report cards or leave deer in the woods but a few quick measurements of rack and tooth size would be enough to age the deer and provide a small glimpse into some details of the herd.

I agree with the NJ to his point of increased antlerless tags will serve to decrease the population of button bucks, however his logic in saying that just makes more hunting pressure on the 2.5 and older group of animals is a bit off bucks that were harvested in years past were 1.5 and younger in a lot of cases thus the average age increasing from 1.5 - 2.5 is significantly larger than the avergage age previously.

As far as the antlerless kills I agree yet again NJ earn a buck program or unlimted does has destroyed populations in a few areas accross the state. Everyone that has been on this board throughout the year has heard the tales of years before I would see 15-20 deer and now I am lucky to see one. It strikes at the heart of the policy to kill off too many does to bring the herd into a different balance but my guess is the boys follow and find the girls. if your area has been one of the places where a lot of does were removed then the bucks found areas that had more does and of course there won't be as many deer.

Alt wants fewer deer and larger bucks and there are valid argements for each side of that arguemnt. In certain areas the deer do damage the forests. I agree it is better to have hunters rather than PGC sharpshooters hunt the deer. If the damge to certain areas continues we will see more of this happening. A few years back sharpshooters got to hunt on the Gettysburg Battlefield. How many hunters would have shelled out a few bucks to be in a lottery for a partial morning hunt 6a-10a or something like that. Maybe just like the elk program have a guide, orientation meeting maybe even a shooting certification needed in order to take part in a controlled hunt. I mean wow to hunt deer on such hallowed ground is something that was reserved of PGC and national parks service shooters. The public would have loved to had a chance to participate in that.

Any ways be prepared to put your boots on and prepare for another year of hot air and BS. Because with out data it is all just speculation. I think Alt has a few points and there are some good points against it. It is what it is and without facts it is just theory.
They really don't want to know and there isn't much we can do to stop it so remember
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quotequote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Let them go to let them grow. But the boys won't stay if there are no does! <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

Well, NJ, I see we're still comparing apples to oranges.
Let's look at the zones you have so much experience in.
You point out the lack of big bucks. Guess what, I see the same thing!
However, you place the blame on ARs. Most of the hunters I talk to, as well as myself, place it on the unlimited shotgun tags given out in these zones.
Zone 35, yes, it has ARs, but it also has 27 days of shotgun hunting, in addition to the regular shotgun, bow, and blackpowder seasons! This January shotgun season allows the hunters unlimited tags, that's right, NO limit, as you know. However many deer you feel like dragging out. I've been hitting it hard the past few weeks on the Eastern Shore you spoke of, trying for one particular buck, and I can tell you 1/3 or more bucks have already shed, especially the older bucks who've rutted heavily. How many of those are shot in the Jaanuary shotgun season? How many button bucks? How many antlered bucks? You allow these clubs to kill as many deer as they want, in a month long gun season, IN ADDITION to the regular gun season, I think there's your lack of bucks right there. How can you possibly submit this zone as "proof" that Ars don't work, knowing this shotgun season exists? You won't admit even the slightest chance that may have somethingg to do with it? No chance at all?

Now, zones 27 and 29 have a January shotgun season that included every Sat in Jan, same regs, unlimited deer.
I believe zone 28 has no ARs, and little public land where the clubs can drive, no? I must admit I'm not as familiar with this zone.

When I say proof that Ars don't work, I'm not looking for a coincidence, but actual proof. There's ton of evidence they work in states in the South East, like Arkansas, etc, all you have to do is read the "deer forcast" in any hunting magazine's August issue, most states have a direct quote from the state biologist attributing larger bucks and an older age class of bucks to ARs. However, none of those states I looked at this morning allowed unlimited antlerless tags in a winter gun season when many of the big bucks count as "antlerless".

As for your explanations as to how AR works in a real world, I could refute everything you're saying, as could anyone. Many feel that the hunter who "would have" shot a 1.5yr old buck, didn't get a buck at all! Older buckls are harder to kill, and the fella sitting on a bucket 100yrds off the road ain't likely to kill too many of them. If your theory was accurate, PA would have had almost the same number of bucks killed this year, except mostly 2.5 and older. That wasn't the case. Lots of reasons why, many hunters only gun hunt, and only take a few days out of the year, those guys are much more likely to shoot a 1.5yr old, than to even see a mature buck, regardless of whether they hunt 2 hours opening morning and shoot a spike, or sit it out for three full days.
Anyway, we could argue theories all day, I was pointing out there were no "facts" to dispute ARs not working. Pointing out a lack of mature bcuks in a zone which also instituted an extra month long shotgun season with unlimited tags isn't proof of anything, except the states total managment plan sucks, and has failed, unless your goal is simply the eradication of all deer and deer related problems.

One other thing, I live in Mercer county, across the street from Mercer cty park. I can ride my bike 2 minutes and see all the bucks I could ever want, I have state game lands withing 10 minutes. But guess what, I think I've missed two weekends since 9/1/02 drivingg 3.5hrs to the Eastern Shore to hunt DE and MD. That shows you my frustration with NJ's managment. I'm looking for some solution to get behind, and like I said I try my best to keeep open minded, but I feel getting rid of ARs isn't the answer.

"In heaven, even the fish have antlers"

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quotequote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Well, NJ, I see we're still comparing apples to oranges.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

You keep saying that, and I guess that you could make that point as long as the things being compared aren't EXACTLY alike. I never said they were. In fact, I said the hunting pressure, terrain, and deer herds are very similar, so similar results can be expected. I never said that what has happened in NJ will absolutely happen in Pa, just that the chances are very likely, more likely than the states you used to for comparison. For example:

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
There's ton of evidence they work in states in the South East, like Arkansas, etc, all you have to do is read the "deer forcast" in any hunting magazine's August issue, most states have a direct quote from the state biologist attributing larger bucks and an older age class of bucks to ARs.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

The terrain, habitat and hunting pressure in Pa much more closely resemble what happens in NJ than Arkansas, or any western state you listed. You tried to make a much bigger strech than me. That's more like apples to oranges than anything I had posted. But again, I guess you will keep pulling out that cliche for everything I put up. I also find it funny that you take for gospel what is printed in some magazine about another state that you likely have never hunted (I don't know if you've hunted Arkansas or not, just guessing), yet ignore what is going on in your own backyard.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Let's look at the zones you have so much experience in.
You point out the lack of big bucks. Guess what, I see the same thing!
However, you place the blame on ARs. Most of the hunters I talk to, as well as myself, place it on the unlimited shotgun tags given out in these zones ...You won't admit even the slightest chance that may have somethingg to do with it? No chance at all?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
Yes, I think that has alot to do with the condition of the herd, I never said it didn't. In fact, when I referenced that, you took me to task and brought me back to the AR-only part of the discussion, which is why I drafted my comments as I did. Remember this from your earlier post:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
We're talking about ARs, not increased do(e) harvests, not QDM, just the taking of young 1.5yr old bucks.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
But you have to remember something, NJ only has about 1/10th of the number of hunters Pa has. One million hunters hit the woods each season in Pensylvania. Even though they have fewer days, they have more hunters to make up the difference. The pressure is very similar, so a comaprison can be drawn. You can't eliminate the pressure on antlerless deer from this discussion because both Pa and NJ have tremendous amount of it that does affect the deer herd, and the future results from any measure implemented in either state.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Now, zones 27 and 29 have a January shotgun season that included every Sat in Jan, same regs, unlimited deer.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
These two zones have 7 days total for antlerless gun season. I think that is less than Pa's, and it's far less than zone 35 in NJ. I know, I know, apples to oranges right? But this should produce favorable results because it's far fewer than my zone 35 example, which you have blasted out of the park, yet it didn't.

The point was, you asked me to show you where such policies have failed, and I pointed out a few. If you don't like the numbers from zone 35, 27 or 29, look at zone 37. Permit Shotgun is one day long, with a one deer limit. There have been antler restrictions in this zone for 10 years, what went wrong here?

Again 6ptsika, the point is you asked me to show you where AR's are in place, yet we have not had good results, that's what I did. You can try to pick every little thing about it apart, but the examples you use on the flip side to prove your point are just as flawed, if not more flawed, than the ones I'm using to show you what can happen. I think most will agree that hunting conditions and the deer herd of Pa is more similar to NJ than to the western states or southern states you have provided as your "proof".

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
As for your explanations as to how AR works in a real world, I could refute everything you're saying, as could anyone.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

No, you can't. I think you missed an important point. The examples I gave you were not theories of what I think could happen, those are things you could refute. What I gave you is what has already happened, and happens every season in the areas I spoke about. You cannot refute what has already happened. This is not my "guess" as to what will happen, it's what is really going on. I have seen numerous basket racked 8, 9 and 10 pointers shot when the guy would have been happy to shoot the spike or 4 pointer that preceded the bigger buck down the trail. You can't refute that, it happens all the time. Not a theory, a fact.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Many feel that the hunter who "would have" shot a 1.5yr old buck, didn't get a buck at all! Older buckls are harder to kill, and the fella sitting on a bucket 100yrds off the road ain't likely to kill too many of them. If your theory was accurate, PA would have had almost the same number of bucks killed this year, except mostly 2.5 and older.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I never said that every hunter who passed up a spike would kill a 2.5 yr old, so please don't twist my statements or put words on my keyboard. Actually, this is what was posted:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Therefore, a hunter who would normally be satisfied with a spike or 4 point is forced to wait on the yearling with an 8 point rack, or a 2.5 or older deer. Being forced to shoot a 2.5 yr old deer when normally a 1.5 would have been shot certainly will result in more 2.5 yr olds being taken. ...Just how often this happens actually depends on the hunting pressure in the region. ...
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I never said that it would be a one-for-one type deal. My point was that some bucks will be taken in place of the spike or forkie, which brings us back to this point from my earlier post...
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
with more (notice this says more, not all) of those hunters who would normally shoot a spike and be out of the woods, waiting on the older deer, and more of those older deer being taken, there are FEWER of the older age class deer in the herd. Had the weekend warrior been permitted to shoot a scrubby spike, that 2.5 year old 8 point that came down the trail 30 minutes behind him would likely have lived to be a 3.5 yr old 8 or 10 point. This results in the age class being set back a year, not advanced, because now that yearling spike that was protected has to make it through two more seasons to reach the same age that our 2.5 yr old 8 point would have reached next season.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

please read what I type and don't embelish my words to portray a worst case, extreme or absolute sense of dismay.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Anyway, we could argue theories all day, I was pointing out there were no "facts" to dispute ARs not working.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
You're right, we could debate theories all day long, but I don't think it would be much of a debate. We probably agree on many of the QDM theories out there. You asked me to show you where it hasn't worked. I gave you the zones and results since AR's were implemented. Look at it as an experiment. Look at the data before the implementation, and after the new regs, and analyze the results. In this case, the results were fewer bucks, and fewer big bucks in the places I cited. Also, zones with no AR's are pumping out big bucks. Coincidence? Maybe, but no more a coincidence than any example of AR success out there either.

One a side note, have you seen the pictures of the 196 inch deer taken during gun season?

Edited by - NJ_Bowhntr on 01/21/2003 13:52:29

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quotequote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I think I've missed two weekends since 9/1/02 drivingg 3.5hrs to the Eastern Shore to hunt DE and MD. That shows you my frustration with NJ's managment
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
6pt, there's no deer down there, no need to go telling anyone there is either. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> Everyone should just stay in Pa or NJ, no need to go to Delaware of Md., just a bunch of mosquitos and and some geese flying around. Besides, now that Pa has those AR's, I'm sure they will have so many mature bucks running around, that places like Delaware and Md will really stink in comparison.

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

Where to begin?
First, yes, I'm going to believe a direct quote from a state biologist, where he quotes facts and figures, over some guy with personal experience, and nothing else, to back him up. Every time.

Now, you say these states have little in common with PA, and Jersey does. Wow, I'm accused of using a state or area where my point is more easily proved, is that right? Well, feel free to use any state, county, or area you want to prove your point. Not argue your point based on personal experience, but PROVE it. With the thousands of state workers and researchers studying the results of ARs every year, you'd think you could find one, just one, example of AR not improving the buck age strucure. Just one example supported by facts, I'd be happy with that, and consider it an eye opener, and a reason to more closely scrutinize what's happening in our area. But theere's not one instance being shown.
How many times can I make the point, I'm asking for PROOF, not one guy's opinion. For every case where you show a guy who shot a 10pt after passing a spike, I can find a guy who got skunked and whined about not being able to shoot that 4pt opening day.
In truth, you haven't pointed out any FACTS supporting ARs don't work, not a one. Just examples from a few zones, examples that I, and many others, feel are much more attributed to the antlerless harvest.
I'm not saying I don't agree with you, I'm not saying I think your wrong, but I have to wonder, with all the research going on, naysayers would be able to point out one shred of PROOF. What you wrote isn't PROOF, it's data that you have to admit could be affected by numerous other changes in the management of the species.
There's lots of states where ARs have been added, but they didn't add an unlimited antlerless slaughter, can you find even one where the buck age structure didn't improve? I haven't been able to thus far, and I've looked quite a bit.
Again, NJ, you have no PROOF, no FACTS.
Yes, it's a fact those zones have suffered, but can you prove it was because of the ARs? I can't, the state can't, you can't.
Yes, I'm sure it's a fact you've seen many nice bucks shot after a guy passed up a small buck, but that's not the same thing as proving ARs don't work.
I'm asking for just one study, one statistic from a state, anything, showing that scientific evidence supports the fact that ARs lowered the overall buck age structure.
You can continue to write about what you and your buddiees have seen, and continue to point out these zones aren't putting out big buccks like they used to, it's interesting reading, and I agree with most of it, but it's a far cry from a FACT showing it's due to ARs.
In wilddlife management, facts aren gathered from studies, research, data collected from hunters, etc, but decisions are based on those facts, if the state game agency is doing their job correctly.
No accredited wildlife biologist or researcher would consider what happens in a few zones, zones that also included other very dynamic changes at the same time, as facts. Find a zone that kept all the other seasons and bag limits the same, with roughly the same harvest year to year, and implemented ARs and saw a decline in the buck age structure, and that's proof. Maybe it's out there, I'm not trying to show you're wrong, I honestly want to see it. I'm not wasting my time for the sake of argument, I rally want to know if there's any facts showing ARs didn't work. Not facts showing NJ's QDM program didn't work, facts showing ARs didn't work.

I'm not saying it's easy to do, I'm not even saying it's possible, I'm just wondering why supporters of ARs, for example Dr Alt, can show dozens of studies and state statistics showing ARs work, but those against them can't produce even one single instance.

I'm not expecting you to find any facts NJ, I don't even know if NJ implemented ARs in any zones without introducing an extra shotgun season at the same time, or EAB, or something else, and if that's the case, you'll have to look outside NJ to find anything.

Once again, has anybody ever come forward with hard data showing ARs decrease the overall buck age structure(don't work)?

Cableguy, I agree 100% that there are only theories suppporting Alt's plan. No hard evidencee, no real way to even collect meaningful data.

But how is that different then the way it's always been in PA?

"In heaven, even the fish have antlers"

RE: PGC Releases Preliminary Figures

<img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle> Oooh, I guess he told me.
Here's the thing 6pt. 3 years from now, if hunters in Pa are seeing more big bucks, and more bucks are being entered into the Pa record books, and the biologists say that more mature deer are being checked in, you and everyone else will say, "see, there is proof that AR's work". Yet when that same criteria is used to point out instances where it hasn't happened, that suddenly becomes no "proof" for you. When fewer big bucks, and fewer bucks in general are being taken, the data suggests fewer mature deer roam the woods, and areas without AR produce more big bucks than do areas with AR's you say it's not evidence, just a coincidence. You say that is not proof, you want facts.

I can't be any clearer than I have. The same criteria used to prove AR's work, where they do, is being used here to show where it hasn't worked. That is data from the biologists taking the information, and the statistics gathered by the entire state, as well as in the field observations.

I told you my information came from the state: both from examining their data and from speaking with the biologists for the last 10 years. Either you missed that part again because your reading comprehension skills are that of a 3rd grader, or you just blocked out the portions of my post that you didn't want to see. You seem to do that a lot. I don't know which it is, but trying to have a discussion with you is like talking to a brick wall. I've known autistic people that have better comprehension than you've displayed here. You haven't answered even one of my points. You just rant and rave like a six year old child, then talk about not having any "facts" to prove my point. No amount of factual data would suffice for you solely because you don't want to believe you could be wrong. I guess you need the same type of "facts" that would prove the sky is blue. By the way, what "facts" do you have that the sky is blue? If you can't show me the "facts", I guess it's not blue now is it.

I'm done with this thread, so call it a win if you want young Blatherwick, but don't pretend you are approaching this topic with an open mind, nothing could be further from the truth. Respond if you like, but you'll be taking to yourself, I have better things to do with my time.

Edited by - NJ_Bowhntr on 01/22/2003 14:17:23