RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Bigcountry, I missed this exact wording previously, and its pretty far out there, so thought I better address it.

"As to greene county, still too many deer, and it is not limited to the private ground I hunt"

Greene has far fewer than it did, far fewer than it could have and far fewer than it should.

But 1st, your contention of "too many". 1st by all pgc measurement variables, the herd is NOT too large (and your property with 100 or the property on the other end of the county with 3 have nothing to do with it. They dont micromanage remember? Its wmu wide antlerless allocations and currently the wmu is WELLunder the cc.

Pgcs own assessment shows adequate regeneration, and also herd health. They decided based on that data to "stabilize" the much smaller herd for the last 3 years and this year as well. The citizen advisory committee, although a joke, comprised of a few "eco-weineys" which threw a monkey wrench into the works STILL ended up being a consensus of STABILIZATION. Also, pgc human conflict rating for the wmu was LOW.

THEREFORE your contention too many deer in the wmu is FAR off base.

Now, why should there be more? Because we have the best habitat type in the state, and I dont believe NOWHERE IN THE STATE can have 25 dpfsm ow.or more,responsibly. I know better.

Second. We had 69 ow dpsm back in the 90's and they STILL didnt degrade the habitat to unacceptable standards,since the habitatNEVER rated poor.Also, the people around here STILL werent crying slaughter the deer.

While I'll agree we couldve used some reduction as preventative measure generally speaking, and the herd was a bit unnecessarily high, NOTHING and I mean NOTHING warranted the rediculous extreme reduction we recieved. Which despite pgcs claim of stabilization, is STILL being reduced. Thanksto higher antlerless harvest goals and higher allocations than we had while the herd was according to pgc being reduced.

1.Most hunters from the wmu dont think there are too many.
2.Most nonhunters I speak with on a daily basis dont think there are too many.
3.Despite the inappropritate allocations, evenpgc claims there arent too many deer in the wmu, and is why they are claiming to stabilize.
4.The cac believed the herd wasnt too high in the wmu. In fact of the people surveyed by the cac members the people wanted INCREASE by a HUGE margin.


Seems you, along with maybe 1% of the farmers in the wmu, who want zero deer (most farmers are currently quite content as is here) are the only ones complaining. And the farmers in question have plenty of options to address. Dmap. Red tags. And new legislation permitting 'em to shoot deer 24/7. So i fail to see reason to keep the entire wmus herd at rediculous for the wmu lows or worse, go lower.

Btw, as for your "dodging deer", it used to be, on nice evenings in late summer early fall just before dark, you could see deer every quarter mile or so in fields etc. Now you might, if lucky, see 3 to 10 the entire way across the county from Wind Ridge to Carmichaels .

As for assesements by area, all of which Im VERY familiar with, Carmichaels area, way down too many tags for too long. Garards fort area, way down tons of hunting pressure, Kirby,down same reason, Sycamore down due to ehd and tags, Wind ridge practically dead due to ehd, Kuhntown, Down Deep Valley, Down, and on and on.... ONly place Ive heard tons and tons of deer still is Aleppo!:D;) In my opinion still good huntable numbers in most, with exceptions maybe of a few where I think the herd should be allowed to rebound and I wouldnt dream of killing antlerless in those areas. Mostly, areas infar western part of Greene. Many landowners in the area have closed the land due to the devastating ehd. Others now allow no doe hunting for a couple years. From what Id seen, that extremely responsible of them!

And most of these arent public lands. They are mostly private unposted land that are willing to allow hunting with the asking. A couple public, and some posted that is hunted by friends and family of the landowners.

I see very little areas that the "plan" has missed. I know they exist. but are few and far between, and even exist in some of the absolute worst counties.

The excessive reduction may have taken lesser habitat areas of the state far lower, but most areas werent spared unnecessary excessive slaughter including this one.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

fellas 2, i have 100 acres here in clinton county i dont even hunt deer on.

i had about 15 deer 2 years ago, then it went to 6 last year and i saw 2 this year.

why, because of poaching or just hunters walk right by signs.

they dont care and MOST are local hunters..

you know what 1 said to me one day.

he said,SPROUL IF YOU THINK WE ARE GOING TO LET CAMP OWNERS AND THE OUT OF TOWN HUNTERS COME IN AND KILL OUR DEER, YOU ARE CRAZY,WE ARE GOING TO GET THEM BEFORE THEM.[:@]

poaching is being done mostly by locals too,not many but i would say about 10 do it IN WESTERN CLINTON COUNTY.

out of towners that POACH do it the friday/saturday/sunday before the opening of the 2 week deer season.

a lot put feed outside their camps and shoot the deer there after dark.
some ride around and do it.

you would not believe the number of cans hanging from trees last year in 1 area I HUNTEDfilled with vanilla extract or sardine oil.

they were baiting in BEAR and i feel it was not locals doing that, it is CAMP OWNERS.

SO, I GUESS WE CAN SEE WHY NO ONE WANTS US ON PRIVATELAND.

illegal things are done there and honest owners get poached/tresspassers are on property.

ones that are doing it ARE very dangerous people,if they find out you turned them in, there goes your camp.:(

i had my camp burned 6 times,all i caught before it caught the floor on fire.a friend who has camp in summerson mtn saw them coming from his camp, he went to door and door was burned.

they were on motorcycles and ages run from 12 to 15.:eek:

these are kids that POACH or will be next full time POACHERS.[:@]

WHY DID THEY TRY TO BURN HIS CAMP, BECAUSE HE IS IN A GOOD HUNTING AREA AND THEY DONT WANT HIM GETTING THE BIG BUCK.:eek:

why were they burning my camp?

because i would not let them on my land to kill all doe off and i turned the poachers into the local WCO .;)


GOOD DAY!

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Correct me if I am wrong here, but the above stated data seems to point out that our current deer management system is indeed producing a higher percentage of closer to mature bucks?

Fellas2, one could definately look at me, and others of similar mindset as a problem for hunters looking to hunt wherever they please.

Here is how I look at it.........whether it is ground I own and pay the taxes on, or ground I lease, why in the world would I let perfect strangers do what they want on land I am paying for? Why would I let others reap the reward of my game management, hard work, foodplots, etc.?

That said, you are mistaken when you stated that I do not allow anyone else hunt. That is not true. It is not open for hunting by the masses, but there are other hunters that hunt at will.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

I am glad that you know more about my land and the land surrounding it than I do.:D

There is one fundimental difference between your thoughts on deer herds and hunting, and my thoughts on the same...........

You seem to want high densities at any cost, and I want a balanced, mature herd.

I make no apologies for wanting to hunt big, mature bucks. I will go as far to say that I have always questioned why an adult hunter, with a few bucks under his/her belt, would EVER shoot another small buck? If you want meat, shoot a doe.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

ARs always produce a higher percentage of 2.5+ buck in the herd , but it is a meaningless figure to the hunters in the field. To them the meaningful figure is the number of 2.5+ buck available to be harvested and that number was less in 2007 than in 2002, the first year of ARs.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

It may be a meaningless number to YOU, but please do not attempt to portray it as a meaningless number to ALL hunters.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

"I am glad that you know more about my land and the land surrounding it than I do.:D "

Dont know about your little 600 acre honeyhole, but Ive hunted every single corner of Greene county for the last 30 years. Family did long before that.

"You seem to want high densities at any cost, and I want a balanced, mature herd. "

Oh no no no. Dont try and paint me with the ol' irresponsible deer behind every tree brush!! I have repeated stated I want the deer inline with habitat. But on the other end, I think if it is well below that point, it should be increased, and anytime thats mentioned doesnt make one wrong, it should be common sense, but currently with pgc, sadly,it isnt.They care about taking us below what is acceptable habitatwise, but dont care HOW MUCH lower. Huntings well beingis not even a consideration. THAT is why we are losing hunters at over double the national average. It also not about "my opinions" as Ive shown you, we are within pgc pre-set guidelines as far as herd size goes.

"I make no apologies for wanting to hunt big, mature bucks."

Nor doI. And I understand you have no way ofknowing who you are talking to, but if you did, you'd realize you are preaching to thechoir. I havent shot dink bucks in years. Long before ar. As for ar, If it can be shown non-detrimental. Great I support it. if it cant, Id like to see some other way of protect more bucks. But at any rate, My problem is with EXCESSIVE UNNECESSARY reductions. There is ZERO way we, who hunt in Greene county can have MORE BIG BUCKS than we did pre-deer plan, when currently our deer density is less than half the previous overwinterdensity!!! ITSI-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E. And I have a big problem with that as well. The herd had not damaged the habitat, and its debatable if they would have. But this aint the northwoods, and this area can support far more deer than currently IN BALANCE WITH THE HABITAT. And if you also support ar, it will save more bucks that get to actually be born in the first place.

"I will go as far to say that I have always questioned why an adult hunter, with a few bucks under his/her belt, would EVER shoot another small buck? If you want meat, shoot a doe."

I shootwhat I consider a decent buck, or none at all. Currently if I want meat, I dont need to shoot a doe. Dad killed a ten point. And hunting bud, killed a decent 8 - 17" inside spread. That I passed on and let him shoot.

Id also give myself about 70% odds on the last two weeks of archery coming. I will probably lower standards a littleat the end, but still well above the barely legal minimum. I dont rifle hunt andusually take a bow then too, if necessary.

Alpha and proud of it chief.;):D

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

The statement of increased percentage aloneis meaningless like bt said bigcountry.

IF we have 100 bucks and 30% of them are good buck, we have 30.

If we drop the total bucks to start with to due to less born due to reduction and less button buck to40, yet increase the PERCENTAGE of good bucks to 50%. You havent gained a thing, and actually have far fewer good bucks at 20, compared to 30 previously.

Just random figures to illistrate how in itself, higher PERCENTAGE is meaningless if it is still lower in total.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

2 years after the AR went into affect we did start seeing bigger horn bucks,so you said 2002,that would be 2004.

in 2006 i saw real nice bucks,then in 2007,last year,i saw LESS bucks, and only few real large racks.

this year, so far has been TERRIBLE here in WMU2G IN CLINTON COUNTY.

I HAVE NOT SEEN ABUCK.

I BLAME THIS TO THE brown its down with kids tag groups.

i feel they are killing most small bucks which is reducing the large rack bucks numbers.also coyotes and the fawn killer hunters are too.

i seen more small bucks killed last year in clinton county than i did in 2004,2005,2006.

actually more small bucks than doe,like 1 gang had 7 spikes and 2 doe.

they had 7 kids in crew of 20 hunters, so, they got 7 spikes.

if we dont stop the AR exemption for kids, its not going to work.
if stopped,i believe that the number of hunters would INCREASE bigtime,you would have older buck,out of state lic sales would go up a lot.

of course, the BROWN ITS DOWN CREWS WITH KIDS TAG would now have to LOOK at horns, no more shooting and calling on radio or waiting for drive to be over so kid tag can be on the little buck and i believe the comment,I HAVE A FREEZER FULL OF MEAT SPROUL would end.;)

dont for 1 minute think that this AR rule is not being abused,it is and we should be real mad over it.[:@]

time to stop it,make it AR for all.

as paul harvey said,GOOD DAY!;)

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

You know, I've worked with WCOs on many cases involving baiting, illegal treestands on SGLs, hunters killing deer in one WMU and tagging it with a tag from another WMU, poaching etc. Some of these occurances were found while I was hunting, other infractions were heard being talked about on portable radios. In every case, it was important to document what you seen, what you heard, and what you know. In just about every case, I had to give up my hunting time, back out of the area, and notify the authorities. Small things like making note of communications on certain channels, license plate numbers, vehicle make and model, can all make the investigation much easier to a WCO. Nonchalantly taking notice to small details helps alot. When I hear things going on on the radio nearby, I make a beeline to my vehicle and stand there with the trunk open making like I'm getting ready to pack it in, while waiting for the suspicious party to drive by. When they do, I non chalantly fall in behind them. After I get a plate number, I turn off. Very simple.

Nailing these slobs has to start with us. WCOs can't be everywhere, but they sure can be somewhere through our eyes and ears. I'm not doubtingSproul one bit concerning a camp that had 7 spikes hanging. But in order for this kind of activity to be noticed, LEO has to know about it. I don't know much about the WCOs in Clinton County. But I can tell you that the WCOs in 3 counties that I hunt regularly would have a field day with a crew that had 7 spikes hanging, and would probably walk away with several citations having been written out on that day. If there were infractions in that camp, they'd surely find them. They have their methods, all they need is a few clues.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

OK, so you want basically the same things I want regarding our deer herd. This is a good start......

That said, do you have a better plan than the PGC has implemented?

I realize that the current plan is too broad in scope, and that we have gone too far in reducing numbers in many area`s.......

How can ANY plan work in this state with the sheer volume of hunters, and the majority mindset of said hunters?

A question.........why would the PGC want to carry less than is easily sustainable in regardess to the deer herd?

Less deer equals less hunters equals less money?

The old wives tale about auto insurance companies simply does not wash?

Although I would be willing to entertain the notion that the PGC is being stubborn at this juncture, what possible motive would they have for carrying well under the capacity in whitetails?

There simply is no legitimate motive that comes to mind.....

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

bIG cOUNTRY, first I never said YOU didn't allow other hunters on your property,I said that the norm now in Greene is not to let outsiders or Joe public to hunt even if permission is asked.You are the one who stated you do not allow any public hunting on it.It's yours so you have evry right to allow who you want on it and when.What I said was you don't have any complaint about too many deer if you and other landowners don't allow public hunting.I know of many many farms that do not allow hunting at all or limit it to a few buddies and are the first to complain about deer damage.You are more than entiltled to try to manage the deer that reside on property you either pay taxes on or lease,but you don't own the deer.They're just a fringe benefit of having the luxury of being a property owner.I must agree with Cornelius08.There are nowhere near the deer today there were as little as 7-10 years ago.All of the places he named including a few more like Bristoria,Swartz,Nineveh and others contain nowhere near the deer that were there a few years back.And last year when EHD ran rampant through that area,our PGC continued to sell antlerless licenses to the very end without a care in the world of how the herd was affected.I personally know of three farms were the #'s of EHD deaths were close to 100 but they kept on selling.You are entitled to want to shoot a large,mature buck as all of us would but don't denegrate the others out there for wanting to shoot a smaller buck.They pay the same amount for their license as you do and are entitled to a deer just as much as you.A balanced and mature herd maybe something you desire,but in this state with the restrictions being put on hunters by the PCG and landowners,it's nothing but a pipe dream.Far too many guys are getting caught up in watching Bill Jordan,Tom Miranda ,and other shows trying to make this state into something it's just not capable of.All i'm looking for is a nice safe place for me and my 3 sons to hunt.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Oh, the state itself is capable of producing much larger numbers of big bucks.......just not with the prevailing hunter mentality.

I did not say that people were not "entitled" to a deer. They are, but they could be a little more selective. Entitled is a word that Barack Obama loves to throw around......[:o]

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Cornelius08,you and I have a lot in common.You hit the nail directly on the head.Years ago there were just as many big bucks in Greene as there are today,just way fewer bucks (doe as well).Since the AR was instituted,I personally have only killed one legal buck,a 7 point last year,but have see a minimun of 20-25 non-legal ones.Using the PGC's theory,where did they go? What happened the the massive sets of horns they should have now? It's been quite a few years now and we should have a boatload of 5,6,and 7 year old bucks with mature antlers.If some one is shooting them,I'd like to know who and where cause it sure isn't anyone I know of.Every year the harvest in that area goes down,but these bucks are never seen or heard from so something has to be amiss.By the way,next time i'm in Greene,i'll buy you a beer if you give me a call.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

I guess my question is who wants to change the current hunters mentality ? Is it a select few landowners,is it the PGC, is it special interest groups ?
My dad always told me ,if it ain't broke don't fix it.With the years of hunting under my belt and the number of deer I've killed,I don't want to shoot the first scrub buck that walks by either,but I don't want a exercise in futility trying to find a place to hunt and when I do, waste days upon days with my sons hoping to get a a glimpse of something.We harp on the fact of getting kids involved in the sport,not just to keep the out of trouble but to share the love of the outdoors like I have for the past 40 years, but it's a tough task when things are headed in the direction they are.Soon the only people who will be able to hunt are the guys willing to pay $15.00 an acre for a lease or $1500.00 for a five day hunt on some one elses private preserve.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

this TRUE example was done over 6 day week.first week of deer.

FIRST DAY 2 SPIKES, SECOND DAY 2 SPIKES,6TH DAY SAT 3 SPIKES.this is example, may be they got 3 spikes first day.

they even were sawing off horns, yes, thats right, they are carrying HACKSAWS SO IT LOOKS LIKE DOE .

spike still has to be 3 inchs long,brown its down crews or hunters carrying HACKSAWS,that makes it doe.SEE. THAT GROUP ONLYS SHOOTS,THEY DONT LOOK AT HORN LENGTH, SO,AHHHHHHHHHHH,OUT COMES HACKSAWS.


also, THEY dont hang spikes out,i did not see 1 CAMP with spike/2point etchanging on porch, not one.

i talked to camp with 12 senior hunters,theysaid they saw groups of hunters shooting at any deer.

they also told me the kid was in truck, dad shot the small buck, called on radio for kid to come tag it.

kid was in truck with heater on and dad was hunting.:eek:

dont get me wrong, this is not what everyone is doing but a LOT are and if the WCO is not stopping hunters and talking about this stuff, its going to continue.

this also was reported to WCO.

only way to slow it down is to make the AR for all of us,i would like to see that and will be bringing it up to our reps.

did you know that most of sportsmans clubs still want the AR to stay same.

why,because most of ones i know STILL WANT TO FILL FREEZER AND THEY FOUND A WAY TO DO IT.

its called,AR for kids.[:@]

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

I admit I have only read a fraction of this thread as I just started reading it today. So, if its been touched on already, I apologize in advance. First as far as the insurance companies go, West Virginia and Michigan both are higher ranked in deer vs car accident states, we still top off the list at #3. Now insurance companies figure in all sorts of accident scenarios for all motorists, stats on single vehicle, multiple vehicle, etc all go into the mix. If you want to reduce the deer vs car issues, in most areas you need to reduce the deer heards. Many of these accidents occur in residential suburban areasnot it true rural areas (while that also happens, just drive I80 from the Deleware Water Gap to the middle of the state and you can't count the number of deer on the side of the road this time of year on one hand). Anyway, a certain Bucks County (Eastern, PA) township actually spent $500,000 (yes, of hard earned tax payers dollars)! to have snipers come in and shoot the deer from a residential area because the population is such that they were experiencing daily car vs deer accidents and people "wanted something done" until bambi and his mother were shot and then they didn't want anything done....but that is a different story for a different post. My point of all this is simple, there needs to be some change to have some results. One thing that I personally see as a benefit would be to open hunting on Sunday. I am from NY originally, I work a f/t Monday - Friday 9-5 HA! job, I cant hunt the peak rut because darkness falls before I leave work, this leaves me Saturday only. The numbers would increase and deer taken on Sunday's reported - we all know that people hunt private land on Sunday, I am not acusing anybody, but I know it happens. Deer sits until Monday for processing and nobody saw or says nothing about nothing. The number of actual deer reported would increase with the implementation of legal Sunday hunting. I don't have my own land to hunt, I don't hunt Sunday, but I am sure there are many out there that do. Plus, the HS courses harp on how each year fewer and fewer hunters buy tags (so our costs will increase) and that it is going to be a dying ( no pun intended) sport. For all those parents that want to take their kids out between school, soccor, football, etc. this time of year, they only have Saturday and any kid playing other sports wont have the exposure because of lack of time. I have rambled enough, stepping off the soap box and passing it on to the next person.

P.S. Insurance companies do not want to pay claims, they arent happy when they have to pay claims, but they do have to charge to cover those claims or they dont exist next year. It's called their Combined Ratio

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

OK, so you want basically the same things I want regarding our deer herd. This is a good start......

That said, do you have a better plan than the PGC has implemented?

"I realize that the current plan is too broad in scope, and that we have gone too far in reducing numbers in many area`s.......

How can ANY plan work in this state with the sheer volume of hunters, and the majority mindset of said hunters?

A question.........why would the PGC want to carry less than is easily sustainable in regardess to the deer herd?

Less deer equals less hunters equals less money? "

Good question. Why dont you ask them. Its undeniable that currently that is exactly whats happening since the data and numbers show it clearly. Only things I can figure are the few who do want fewer deer yet, are simply getting their ways. Audubon/ecoextremists wants far fewer than most deem necessary as does the timber industry. These people would have been addressed to some extent with ANY reduction we would have implemented. I think that exactly who is on the board of commissioners currently has MUCH to do with the mindset and the direction we are headed. Also, less deer equal less money. Some on the board see that as a good thing short term. Some are STRONGLY in favor of alternate funding. What better way to acheive that than to make it the only option? Not saying I have all the answers, just throwing out some possibilities and there are more. Others paying the bills limits even further hunters "say" in wildlife management and more say to eco-extremists, timber etc.

"The old wives tale about auto insurance companies simply does not wash?"

Wether they play any role or not, From my perspective, Id say insurance companies are the least of our worries. I know some of the "ties" that some of the commissioners have, especially those who consistently support less and less deer and everything it takes to get that,and understand full well how theyare seeing these issues and why....and it aint the insurance companies.;)

"Although I would be willing to entertain the notion that the PGC is being stubborn at this juncture, what possible motive would they have for carrying well under the capacity in whitetails?"

Well, many possibilities of motives exist. Wether you may be willing toentertain them or not, doesnt dismiss the fact there are many possibilities. Its not as important why as it is to address the problems. I just care what is occurring and what our future holds.

Do I have better ideas? Absolutely. Just as a start and very significant in all regards would be smaller wmus. In my opinion, not even debatable. Its the way to manage if all things are to be considered and not just kill the deer widescale... 2nd. Put the deer where the deer can be. Thats absolutely not being done. I believe it has everything to do with whose making the decisions and whyand very little with the "measuring" techniques they are supposed to be following, but seem to only follow when it equates to fewer deer. If it does not, they ignore it, and strive for fewer anyway.

I also dont look highly upon the fact we had an eco-extremist pgc insider placed on the 2a CAC.Person wasnt from 2A, didnt own land in 2A and works with pgc. Also is seeking seat on the board. She voted FOR REDUCTION despite the huge majority of people she surveyed saying they wanted stabilization or increase and a tiny fraction only, wanted reduction. She voted reduction. Despite the fact pgc has been supposedly "stabilizing" the herd, and the fact we already had 50%+ ow herd reduction to this point.

The cacs are a huge farce. Makes any reasonable herd increase nearly impossible. Just generally speaking to make the point, If 6 people in the entire county want less deer, they can effectively prevent increase for the next 15 years as long as 2 of them go every five years and say NO to increase. Doesnt matter if every single person in the county wants more. Its just too bad... Then, if ever that huge obstacle were overcome by some miracle, pgc can just point to any vague unchallengable statitistic in regards to habitat they like, and simply say no!Herd should be scientifically evaluated first, then MAJORITY RULE as long as the desired goal isnt unacceptable. Its not majority rule. Its "If anyone wants less deer at all for any reason no matter how few" they rule.

Only "increases" that will ever be seen are on very few areas of the state that have gone past rock bottom. And thats a real shame.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Just to add to the smaller WMUs comment, how about making them easier to follow too. North of X South of Y East of A and West of B makes it harder to follow, I live on a border of two and still really dont understand what WMU I am in some of the outlines are do vague or are roads I cant identify.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Maybe when the pa game commission learns how to treat hunters with respect,all the hunterswont hate them so much.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: 4evrhtn


I don’t know where you are hunting so it is pretty hard for me to offer you much advice on where to find deer in your hunting area. I don’t think you are looking for advice anyway but just in case you really are I’ll give my take on the situation.

All I can say is that I hunt in units 2G and 2F where everyone says there almost no deer yet I seem to find deer in pretty much all of the places I expect deer to be living. During the day I can find them in the places that are so think you can’t get close enough to see one. I know they are there though because of all the sign they have left behind.

During the early morning and late evening I find them on the edges of the bedding areas that are so think hunters don’t ever go in them as they are moving toward the best food item areas. I might be miles from the vehicle when it gets to dark to see for a clean or safe shot and find that the deer simply don’t move until most other hunters have already quit for the day.
What I can tell you is that I and the majority of the other hunters I know, who spend their time hunting instead of complaining, are still being pretty darn successful, even if they aren’t seeing as many deer as they once did. I will agree though that there are certainly a lot more pockets of poor habitat areas that aren’t worth hunting anymore since the deer don’t have to live in the areas with worthless habitat just to find enough food to go around any more.

As for the scent free clothing and other such gimmicks and gadgets I don’t think they really make that much difference unless you can first place your self in the place where deer are most likely to want to be. Can you tell us five of the best deer browse species in your hunting area? Can you identify each of those most preferred browse species. Even finding the best food source isn’t enough though if you can’t figure out where the deer are spending their daytime hours and then figure out just how close you can set up that area without spooking them. Also remember that a deer will know every place a person has walked or been for almost a week after they were there. Most deer avoid those people trails until well after dark.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

You certainly can’t say that is an accurate statement. In fact I can pretty much guarantee that is not an accurate statement.

In 2002 hunters harvested 52,607 bucks 2 ½ and older under pretty good hunting conditions on the peek hunting days of that season. The harvest of 2 ½ and older bucks was higher then that every year from 2003 through 2006 and ranged between a low of 57,961 in 2005 to a high of 62,399 in 2004. Last year, 2007, there were 48,048 bucks 2 ½ and older harvested during a season with the worst hunting conditions on the peek days of any season in my hunting or working career.

That is only a slight decrease in the harvested number of 2 ½ and older bucks last year then during the 2002 season, or for that matter the seasons in between. There is nothing that accounts for how many bucks of that age classavailable and escaped harvest during each of,or any of, those years.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

That is a some darn good advice.

I want to thank you for not only a good post but also for taking an active stand as a responsible hunter and citizen. My hat is off to you Sir!

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Do you mean to tell me that deadeer, I mean bluebird was coughing up cherry picked data?[:-]

Intellectual dishonesty is usually a telltale sign of a weak argument, and I don`t see this being an exception to th rule........;)

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

sadly, you are right.

this is why i said in wmu2g, that the only hunters that can shoot a doe is a kid.not us.

but kid must go by the AR rule,as it is being abused bigtime .

this would get kids interested,maybe.:eek:

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Just what is the time periodthat you believe this over harvesting of the deer occurred in Greene County and unit 2A? When you did notice there were fewer deer in Greene County?

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

dang, i cant get anyone to ask me question?:(

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Isn't that oldlaw still in effect about being out of the woods within an hour after quitting time? Be mighty hard to do that miles from the road, let alone if you shoot one back in there. Maybe quarter it and pack it out like an elk....or would that be illegal to butcher it in the woods to the dergree to permit easy transport? Don't want to think about dragging even a small deer for miles and miles, esp in rough mountainous terrain.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

RSB,surely you don't expect us to fall into the trap you're setting with that question! No matter how we answer that one,you'll dazzle us with statistics and baffle us with the brilliant reasoning of the PGC to explain and justify what they've been doing.I ain't goin there,i'm just telling it like it is.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: RSB



Being Sincere here, Thanks for your advice. I am doingthe same thingsas you are, just in a different wmu. All I can say is this... hunting in PA is not remotely close to being as enjoyable and exciting as it used to be when I was younger. Those in the higher positions within the PAGC are not doing what is right. THEY NEED TO BE REMOVED!!!!

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Rsb, speaking for most of my hunting areas in Greene, Id say the high point of the population was definately in mid to late nineties, just going by memory. Lowest point in decades is currently.

Seems Pgc data shows this trend Ive seen for the most part. I'll get to the "lesser part" at the end.

According to pgc annual reports, the PREHUNT density in 2A in 2005 was 40.

In 99/2000 season, POSTSEASON after the herd was shotup, the total was 69 dpfsm (and 74 for washington!!)

I dont think it hard to see the decline. Even by pgcs skewed veryhigh endestimates.

Now fast forward to 06/07 and pgc said the herd actually slightly increased from 2005. Did it? Oh no no my friend. Not when we had 55,000 tags and harvested 19,600 doe!! Which was more than the 45,000 tags and 16,500 harvestthat reduced it previously 7% according to pgc...In a larger herd, with a lesser buck to doe ratio!!!;)....AndId imagine you are wondering whatwas the reason for increase in doeharvest to 19K if 45,000 tags reduced the herd with a harvest of 16,500? simple. Ten thousand more doe tags that year!


Also, Rosenberry says all else equal, buck harvest trendsis good herd trend indicator. Lets look at the years in question, since weve supposedly been stabilizing... 05/06 buck harvest was 8500. Fell next year to 8100. Fell again this year to 6600.

Now the doe harvest. Can see a trend with the doe harvest as well in this case, because the allocation didnt change....Until this past years all time high of 60k....which still resulted in a LOWER harvest.

2005 doe harvest--19,600 (really got smacked unwarranted significantallocation raise)
200617000 same allocations.
2007 14300

In 2007 Allocations were unjustly increased by 5kand harvest still decreased.

Looks like further decreases to me on top of the "main" reduction previously. When we were supposed to be stabilizing theyears I postedaccording to the gameless commission.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Another interesting snippet from the "heart of the slaughter".

In our first year of ar we had no "saved" class of buck, since we didnt have ar the year before. Still, we harvested 3956 bucks in Greene county.

The following year, we harvested a rediculous 2200.... And that was with a "saved" bunch of bucks prior!

Needless to say, you know the rest of the story. County data was no longer given from that point on, and for good reason, the average joe could no longer make comparisons due to parts of counties being divided up and lumped together. The comparison, thanks to reduction became a joke, . Assuming Greene is about 1/3 of the land mass of the wmu, that would put our harvest right there at the pitiful 2200 mark now, as well. Couple that with the fact our herd is made up of more buck per doe and that equals much smaller herd when compared to first year of ar with basically 4000 buck harvested. Not only do you have the large obvious numerical difference, which speaks for itself, and points to significant reduction, but when applying to TOTAL herd size you must factor in the better buck doe ratio as well to see the trend as even a much moresmaller herd.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

RSBused to tell me he saw 12 deer from sinnnamahoning/keating,pa. about 15 miles that there are a LOT of deer..:)

some of areas he saw deer are PRIIVATELAND TOO.

he felt that if he can DRIVE along the road and see 12 deer,then there must be 100S wayback in woods.:D

first, best food is along the roads, this is WHY you have so many road hunters,its not because they are lazy, its because the deer are near roads for food.:eek:

soooooooooooo, you should be able to gage how many deer are in area by how many are in fields and near roads.

idont needplane with IR to count deer:D

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Well, let's see how good your guarantee really is. In 2002 we harvested 112,814 and if ARs saved 50% of the 1.5 buck than we carried over 112,814 buck to become 2.5+ buck. But in 2003 we only harvested 80K 2.5+ buck or 54% of the 1.5 buck that were carried over. If you apply the same harvest rate to the 2.5+ buck harvest in 2002 then there were over 96K 2.

Now compare that to the harvest of 61K , 1.5 buck in 2007 and the 61K that will be carried over to become 2.5+ buck and you will see we had a lot more 2.5 plus buck in 2002 than we had in 2007 or 2008.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Data can be read to mean whatever you want it to mean.........

It is painfully obvious what you WANT it to mean.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

If you choose to make that claim it is incumbent on you to point out where i manipulated the data to mean whatever I wanted it to mean. But, you can't do it because you don't understand what the data shows.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

That would maybe be a valid argument if the numbers of legal bucks within each age group remained static each year, but the reality is they don’t. The number of 1 ½ year old bucks that are legal for harvest each year is variable depending on a number of environmental factors for the previous year.

In 2001, when the 1 ½ year old bucks of 2002 were just button bucks we had a good mast crop followed by almost no winter snow. That allowed all of the button bucks to go through the winter in better then normal condition and grain weight through the winter. Then during the next summer, prior to the 2002 season a higher then normal percentage of the 1 ½ year old bucks grew legal antlers. Thus it is very unlikely that 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks were protected from harvest during the 2002 season.

To support that fact I will post the number of 1 ½ year old bucks harvested for the year prior to and since 2002.

Year……………….1 ½ year old buck harvest……………….2 ½ and older bucks harvested
1998.……………………146,700.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.......34,749
1999.……………………155,429.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.......38,942
2000.……………………165,960.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.......37,261
2001.……………………159,392.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.......43,855
2002.……………………112,809.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦.......52,607
2003.…………………….80,276.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦........61,994
2004.…………………….62,011.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦........62,399
2005.…………………….62,540.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦........57,961
2006.…………………….75,762.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦........59,528
2007.…………………….61,152.…………⠀¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦........48,048

As anyone being objective can see from the comparison of the number of 1 ½ year old bucks being harvested in the years prior to 2002 and those harvested during the 2002 season it is simply not realistic to believe that 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks were protected from harvest in that 2002 season. That failure to protect 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks also has a reducing affect on the next years harvest of older bucks, since they aren't available as older bucks when they are harvested as 1 ½ year old bucks.

Other things that will adversely affect the number of 1 ½ year old bucks harvested during any given year is the number that were recruited into the deer herd as button bucks the previous year. If they don’t survive as fawns they are never available as 1 ½ year old bucks or as older bucks in even later years. That has been a large part of the buck harvest problem during the years since those hard winters of 2002/2003 and 2003/2004.

To further illustrate the variance in the buck antler development from one year to the next I will also post the percentage of spike bucksalong with the percentage of antler legal bucks seen each yearduring the Elk County fallwildlife survey routes since 2002.

Year……………….% of bucks spikes………………..% of bucks with antler legal racks
2002.………………….24.1 %………………………………....51.7 %
2003.………………….26.7 %………………………………....46.7 %
2004.………………….55.2 %………………………………....27.6 %
2005.………………….42.9 %………………………………....38.1 %
2006.………………….14.3 %………………………………....67.9 %
2007.………………….24.1 %………………………………....34.5 %
2008.………………….13.5 %………………………………....64.9 %

From this data an objective person should be able see the reality of just how much both the number and percentage of 1 ½ year old bucks being harvested can change from one year to another year by the percentage that would be legal from one year to another. It is also pretty easy to see just how much affect the fall mast crop and winter snow conditions can have on the following year's antler development. That antler development on the 1 ½ year old bucks not only determines how many will be legal for harvest that year but also how many will be left as 2 ½ and older bucks in th following years.

One other thing that any objective person should be able to see is just how Bluebird cherry picks data andmisrepresents it in order to make it seem like it supports his misguided agenda when in reality it doesn’t support his point if you fully evaluate and understand the real facts and the rest of the story along with the data.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

i can say i observed this last year.

the bucks with nice racks, say 6 poiint were all small looking deer.
i would guess and say they were 1.5 yr old deer with big racks.

i never saw that in awhile but as you said, acorns were great for 2 years and bucks grew big horns.

i dont think i see many bucks 2.5 years old harvested in clinton county, most i feel are 1.5 years old.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Hard winters of 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 in Greene County ??? Not to my recollection.In fact,I can't remember the last hard winter we had there.
It's hard to remember the last time it snowed there and lasted for more than a couple of days.Deer manage to survive in states with 10 times worse winters than we have in PA so I don't think you can blame the winters in SW PA for that.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

....So it goes with the game commission and their antideer stance on management.

Any time harvest is down. Its the weather, poor mast crop the year before,great mast crop this year spreading out the deer, hunters not getting far enough off the roads or something else....Pgcs solution?kill more to make up for it next year.

Harvest is up. Shows the herd is growing, kill more, gotta prevent widescale total forest loss.:D

Brother,the hunters of our statejust cant win.