1. 3" rule worked fine, however during that time a smaller percentage of buck equalled the size of the buck more hunters are harvesting today. This isn't saying more buck are being harvested just a higher percentage of those buck are larger.

2. Gene Pool Harm: Larger bucks breeddoes. Smaller buck with inferior genetics are left out. In short... better genes being passed on = good thing.

3. Breeding Rates Decrease: Less Deer = Less deer being bred. Unassociated with the size of a bucks antlers.

4.Reduced Buck Harvest: Less Deer being harvested across the state because there are LESS DEER!

5. Less License Sales: Less deer = less hunter satisfaction. More meat hunters than trophy hunters. Again population unrelated to antler size. Why would an out-of-stater pay for a Pa license when you can go to states like Ohio for similar cost and increased odds of harvesting bigger buck?

6. Pa Game Commission Lost Credibility: I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU. So.... STOP QUOTING THEIR ESTIMATES!

7. "Why aren't people bragging about all the Big Buck Harvested" My question is this... Why aren't people bragging about all the deer in general being harvested? There aren't as many deer. And further more most guys don't have the time or the desire to sit for lengths of time sometimes needed to catch the older wiser buck making a mistake. They want to shoot the first thing they see that meets the base requirement. I wouldn't have harvested any of the dozen deer which scored over 110" if I shot the first 6 pointer I saw.

I enjoy this discussing of viewpoints. And I can see you have your mind made up and there is nothing anyone is going to say or do to change that. I havea studied biology and I have spent enough time in the woods to see the good and the bad of the PAGC's policies. The whole system needs scrapped and priorities need to be changed. Work needs to be done for the betterment of the deer herd. This costs money and Executive Director Roe will continue to sell pipe dreams and make empty promises till the commission implodes and the commonwealth struggles to resurrect a sunken shipwreck. It seems this is the natural course of government and state agencies.

4evrhtn

First of all Welcome to Huntingnet!. You'll be happy to know you are in good company.According to Blueburd, none of us knows anything about deer management.Asa matter of fact, according to our expert here, Dr James Kroll,Dr Dave Samuel DrAlt and whole gang of wildlife biologists don't understand deer management either!

Thanks for the welcome. I guess I knew better than to add my views but I couldn't resist. You can't show a blind man the light.

Good point! This blind man will never see the light. We continue to challenge him for only one reason.To prevent him from leading others into the darkness. One of the principles of ditributing propaganda is to repeat repeat repeat.Another is tofabricateand quote "facts"to back it up. A third is to never falter from the lies and one day, some will accept them as truth.

God that seems tiresome. If he'd spend half the energy doing something for the deer population even if it is minimal, I think it just may give him some greater purpose in life. It's all up from where he stands now.

It's taking him an awefully long time. He must be doing some more "research"

you are right.

i saw 7 deer from archery last year until 2nd week of gun season in wmu 2g clinton county.

Rack size does not determine which bucks do the most breeding. The inferior bucks that weren't AR legal as 1.5 buck will still do their share of breeding.
That is not true. Breeding rates are not based on the number of does bred,they are based on the percentage of does bred . Therefore, breeding rates should not decrease as the herd is decreased.

ARs also contribute to a decrease in the harvest because more buck are lost due to non-hunting mortality and there is also a lower percentage of deer in the herd to produce fawns.
They bought more licenses for many years before ARs were implemented.

Bluebird have you started to wonder yet why your perspective of "so-called" facts is not even close to the "norm"? You need to start worrying about that! Do yourself a favor and start getting some professional opinions about your condition!

There are no "so-called" facts. They are either factual or they are not. The facts I post are from the PGC, Dr. Kroll , Dr. Demarais and WMU 118 in MI.

If you truly believe I have a problem,would you be so kind as to provide the facts you have that show I have a problem that needs to be treated.

Thanks in advance!!