RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Have you considered trying to find a new and better defense of the PGC's flawed deer management plan? The anger management defense is getting old ,just like the nonsense being spewed by RSB.

The PGC data has shown that the plan has failed to produce the predicted results,so what facts can you provide that shows the plan was a success?

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

"Have you considered anger managemet counseling?"

No anger involved. A little disbelief maybe, but no anger. My "bolded" wording is something Ilike to use to separate my statements from those Im replying to.Easier to read. I also like to keep the"wheat separate from the chaff".;)

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Both bills went down in a ball of flames. Thank goodness !!

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

talk was it would pass,thanks for update.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Thats what you think alright. have a look at my new thread. More and more, people are seeing that things are working. Still lots of bugs to work out but at least we're not sitting around doing nothing while the herd eats itself out of house and home any more
:D

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Could you please point out where your other article supports the incorrect assumption deer are eating themselves out of house and home? I dont see it. Nor is it even mentioned in the article.

Sorry to hear about the hunter minded legislation getting shot down. 1214. Was the most hunter friendly-should be common sense legislation to be initiated in years. Seems the house these days are pro-hunter and some of the Senate is where the problem is. The eco-flakes have their "talons" (LOL) dug in deep with some of the Senators.

Btbowhunter,the only "bugs to work out" are the eco-extreme views of our current boc. Thoseobtuse viewsneed to be squashed like a bug, and Elmerton avenue needs a thourough fumigation.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

The article says nothing about the current plan working. It simply says the monitoring methods used in the buck dispersal study were acceptable and that doe density and competition between bucks are "likely" both causes for dispersal. The study did nothing to improve deer management in PA and simply duplicated studies that were done in MD and Virginia.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

For someone who loves to use selected littlebits of the whole picture, thats really amusing. What the article does is show one more way the PGC is trying to manage the herd with science on their side.

You definitely have an exceptional ability with figures. Too bad your neanderthal "deer behind every tree" agenda has clouded your judgement in how to use that ability.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Please explain how this study helps the PGC manage our herd. Will they have hunters shoot more doe in a given area to reduce dispersal or will they have them shoot more BB to reduce the effects of having a lot of 1.5 buck? Or ,will they have them shoot more doe and more BB to reduce dispersal? That is what they have been doing for the last 7 years and we all know how that benefited hunters by reducing the buck harvest by 47%. Sure glad they did that study, since it really helped the PGC improve deer management in PA!![:@]

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

The fact that you askhow these studies are helpful in managing the herd shows exactly howone sidedyour agenda is. You deserve no further explanation. You wil simply blow it off or claim bias or tell us all why they are irrelevant. What is irrelevant is your antiquated view of how deer should be managed.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

In other words , you can't think of one single way the dispersal study will help the PGC manage the herd and that's not a surprise ,because the PGC couldn't think of any benefit either!!

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Thats not what I said, I said that YOU dont deserve a response because...

1you discount or ignore every bit of information that doesnt fit your PGC bashing agenda

2 If you cant see the value in a doe mortality study, you simply have a very narrow capacity for understanding any of the principles of game management and there is therefore no point in trying to explain anything to you

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

That is simply impossible,since as yet you haven't provided a single fact to support the PGC for me to ignore. Furthermore, I don't ignore the stuff RSB posts, I simply refute it with PGC data.
The experts that conducted the study said that the harvest data was not representative of doe that were not collared, so therefore it was worthless for determining hunter harvest rates and that was it's main purpose of the study.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

What I'm sure you meant to say is that I havent presented a single fact that you didn't manage to twist into your own agenda with your distortions.

I consider your criticism a compliment. You've made similar claims aboutmany very well respected game biologists. Being criticized by the likes of you just reinforces my faith in letting the professionals do their job.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Now you know you don't rely on facts to support your position. Instead you resort to name calling and insults in an attempt to hide your lack of knowledge of the issues being discussed. This fact is exceedingly obvious since the PGC has as yet failed to produce ant data that shows the plan has succeeded as predicted .

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

We all know that you don't consider anything a "fact" unless it's presented in such a way that it supports your agenda. Whether quoting PGC data, Dr Kroll, Dr Samuel, Charles Alsheimer, Dr Alt or a host of other sources, your response is either "thats simply not true" "wrong again" or "He's biased" or something equally dismissive.

All the experts are either wrong or biased according to you. And yet you still have failed to mention any qualifications that make you better able to judge the data than all the folks who do it for a living. You simply refuse to consider any viewpoint but your own.Attempting to give youany facts has proven to be futile.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Once again that is not true. I accept the theory of MSY yield and i accept the theory behind high grading along with many other facts regarding deer management. But ,when the so called experts make claims that are not supported by the facts, I feel I am qualified to challenge their opinions.

Remember Alsheimer has no formal training in deer management and Dr. Kroll's claims are contradicted by Dr. Demarais and the deer have proven Alt's claims were bogus and that my predictions were right.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Remember that Alsheimer is far more qualified than you'll ever hope to be and that DR Kroll refuted Dr Demaris study and pointed out the flaws in Dr D's assumptions. Also remember that Alt got this started but he has been gone for years. When he started this, he stated that changes would undoubtedly need to be made. This is no longer Alts plan. It stopped being Alts plan when he left

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Kroll totally misrepresented what Dr. Demarais said and therefore he demonstrated his lack of knowledge rather than refuting Dr. D's work.

Now that's just plain silly . All of the principles of Alt's plan are still in effect and it doesn't matter what you call it. The fact remains the plan decreased breeding rates and productivity without decreasing the breeding window. Breeding rates and productivity also decreased at the Kinzua QDM area where the herd was reduced by 48%.

Obviously the experts were wrong and this armchair biologist was right, which proves you don't have to be an expert to understand the basics of deer management.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Kroll simply pointed out that Dr Demarais failed to consider the inadequate doe harvest and also that Dr Demaraisfailed to consider that past studies have shown conclusively that antler size in the first year has no genetic significance. Kroll didn't misreresent what Dr D said, he merely pointed out that Dr D failed to consider certain relevant data in drawing his conclusions. Lets see, he came to the conclusion he wanted by leaving out certain relevant data.... No wonder you chose to quote him. He must be your disinformation hero.


When I heard Alt speak about his plan he EMPHATICALLY stressed that it was likely to need to be changed and molded as it went. he leftalmost immediately afterit got started. The point is that I'm neither defending or condemning Alt's part in the plan but it is no longer his plan as he had nothing to say about how it continued once he was gone.

You have produced nothing that shows a correllation betweenthe reduction in the herd and the decrease in breeding rates.You are declaring a conclusion without any real support for it other than you "think" that HR is the cause. It's easy to be an armchair biologist when you don't have to follow the principles of good research. RSB has laid out plenty of other plausible causes for the reduced breeding and recruitment rates but you stubbornly cling to only one conclusion (theone that fits your agenda) with no proof to back you up.

You complained relentlessly a while back as deaddeer and deerfly before you got banned that all your hunting party could to shoot find was button bucks (of course you shot 5 out of 6)and you expect us to beleive you don't have a heavy bias yourself?

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

That is why I said Kroll misrepresented Dr. Demarais's position ,because Dr. D addressed both the problem of excess doe and the genetic significance of 1.5 buck. Dr. D never claimed the decrease in rack sizes was due to a change in genetics or that he agreed that once a spike always a spike as Kroll implied.

I produced the PGC data that showed both breeding rates and productivity declined as the herd was reduced. Implementing ARs should have had a positive effect on breeding ,not a negative effect. Fewer deer and more food per deer should have increased breeding rates and productivity, not decrease them. RSB provided nothing to explain the statewide decrease in breeding rates and productivity. We did not have severe winters across the entire state and even with the severe winters there should have been a lot more food /OWD than in 2000 when we had at least 40% more deer.

Personally, I find it amusing that RSB offers nothing but excuses when the answer for the decreased productivity is obvious. But some times the obvious is the hardest to see when your personal biases and agenda prevent you from viewing things objectively.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

You're assuming the cause and effect. Yes, both HR and a decrease in productivity per animal happened at the same time but that does not prove a cause and effect relationship. There may be one, but there is no evidence to support your THEORY. For now it's merely a theory. the problem with listening to armchair biologists is that they tend to make knee jerk judgements based on the results they want o see. Your posts are a prime example. It flies in the face of logic that less deer competing for more food wouldhave a negative effect of breeding productivitywhen there are obviously still plenty of deer out there to breed.

Your oversimplification is likeme saying it rained on Wednesday so you'd better take an umbrella next wednesday

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

[quote]You're assuming the cause and effect. Yes, both HR and a decrease in productivity per animal happened at the same time but that does not prove a cause and effect relationship[/quote

It certainly does if you can't identify any other factor that would account for the decrease in breeding and productivity. What you are missing is that HR not only reduces the number of deer , it has another effect that should be obvious to every one with an open mind and it explains why breeding rates and productivity have decreased. Can you identify that effect?

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Would Viagra or Cialis help?

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Give it a try, it just might solve your problem.:)

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

"It flies in the face of logic that less deer competing for more food wouldhave a negative effect of breeding productivitywhen there are obviously still plenty of deer out there to breed. "

Bluebirds reaction is not a "knee jerk" since the data clearly shows the rates have declined over the period of years, not simply one or two, but basically the results of the deer plan are shown quite clearly, and one need'nt cherry pick one year to point out the fact that the "improvements" that were predicted DID NOT occur.

Its also quite clear that the reason was, there was nothing wrong with the herd health in most areas to begin with. If there was, it certainly would have shown drastic improvement in the several years we have been reducing the herd, in some areas by over half, and in most areas significantly. I was under the impression Pgc was to use this "health" indicating data towards managing the herd. I guess thats only the case if it would have fit within the deer slaughter agenda.

The fact Pgc has consistently been opposed to change shows that the reasons for the excessive reduction are most likely due to some of the "conspiracy theories"[:-]actually being true, like their catering to eco-extremists demands and others.

Conclusion= miserably failed program, and a management agency badly in need of restructuring. A strict set of checks and balances including performance evaluations should be part of the restructuring to prevent furthered corruption and abuse of duty towards our sportsmen and the resources of our state. Many of which arent recieving the attention they should, due to Pgc preventing themselves from gaining further funding, thanks to irresponsible choices they choose to adhere to, andbasically forced ourlegislators to take actions.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

RSB likes to blame the decrease in productivity on the decrease in the number of does checked in the areas with high productivity. But , the results from the Kinzua QDM Coop . shows that this is not the case. Fawn production dropped from 56 fawns/100 does in 2001 to 44 fawns/100 doe in 2005. During that period the herd was reduced by 48% so the food supply/doe should have doubled during the period when fawn production dropped by 14%.

So can anyone one explain why fawn production decreased instead of increasing as predicted?

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Has anyone else seen this? Sounds like the next thing DCNR will advocate to reduce the herd is road hunting. I hate the fact that I try to get way back in to avoid other hunters, and they open up more roads.

ADDITIONAL STATE FOREST ROADS OPEN FOR START OF DEER HUNTING SEASONS

HARRISBURG (October 1, 2008) — Deer hunters heading into Pennsylvania’s state forests Saturday for the start of archery season will find additional roads open in 17 of the 20 state forest districts, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Secretary Michael DiBerardinis announced today.

“A total of 415 miles of newly opened forest roads will be available to archery hunters when they take to the woods in search of deer on opening day,” DiBerardinis said. “By opening normally locked gates, the Bureau of Forestry hopes to improve accessibility while promoting hunting in often remote areas where hunting pressure is needed to benefit forest regeneration.”

During archery season, which closes Nov. 15, and the state’s other deer hunting seasons running into January 2009, hunters will find more than 3,030 miles of roadway open in state forestlands.

“Hunters seeking whitetail deer in our state forest will find more than 90 percent of all state forestland is now within one-half mile of an open road,” DiBerardinis said. “We view the archers and other deer hunters as invaluable partners in wildlife management and forest stewardship.”

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

So invaluable they permit, no check that....CAUSE our ranks to dwindle at over twice the national average thanks to hunter non-friendly attitudes and half baked eco-extreme policies.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

100% agree. This is sad, close the roads...create a longer walk and let the hunters enjoy it that much more.

There is a great spot I found at Hickory run. A small road was about 40-80 yards from my stand. Was not bad to hear the occasional hiker but... now I hears cars the entire time. WHY???? there are enough road trails up there. oh well. Just don't need the roads. Peace and quiet is nice.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

food may have a affect on number of fawns.

i dont doubt it does but i still feel the coyotes are killing a lot of fawns.

also alt told me killing doe in oct will reduce the number of fawns..

we had fawns before HR went into affect.

we DID NOT HAVE COYOTES like we do now before HR.

i saw coyotes kill 2 fawns at alvin bush dam,now, that was only 1 incident.

if herd is down , a coyote could do a lot of damage.

i have picture of 2 coyotes going after a doe and her fawn.shows doe looking and 13 seconds next picture and doe are gone.

IF THOSE COYOTES WERE NOT KILLING FAWNS,THOSE DOE WOULD NOT BE ALARMED AND RUN.

i have fox in my yard on film also, he walks right up to my 2 bucks and 5 doe and fawn and none seem alarmed,yet my pictures of coyote and deer are out of area quick.

i cant get my name off picture so i can post it here or btb putting it on for me.

also hunters are shooting the doe in feb ,they even told me that they had fawns in the doe.

we NEVER killed a doe in late muzzleloader season,only bucks.

i feel its HR,COYOTES,EARLY OCT. HUNT,FEB HUNT,FOOD.

PENN STATE SAYS BEARS,yet i never saw bear kill a fawn but i did coyotes.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Sproul, you doggone right they kill fawns! Ugliest thing you ever seen what the leftovers look like. We have seen them w/ a placenta attached, scared these yotes off a fresh kill . they did not have the time to eat it. They had to have been scenting this doe or following her for a while, it almost looked as thought they pulled it out of her. Momma was about 50 yards off in a thicket watching. I am sure there is some bear predation but them coyotes , man they do some damage!
I was told kill or fill your doe tag before the traditional rut. That way you ain't killing pregnant does, usually bow hunting is closer and you can see the little spikers/buttons. Everyone got an opinion, can't keep track of them all. I guess I just gota use common sense.............

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

It's been over a month since I have posted this thread. Ihunted the first 9 days ofOhio's archery season before having to return to Pa.
Here is my Ohio experience... At minimum, I saw 5 buck per day (most were young buck). However nearly every day I hunted I passed up deer which would have scored 120 plus. I had opportunities to shoot at 3 deer which would have scored over 130 - 145?Two of those shots I didn't feel comfortable taking and the third was blown when a 3 pointer saw me draw back on the biggest of the deer I had seen.The 3 pointercame in from my right (when hunting out of a blind) while I was focused on the shooter standing at 20 yds. to my far left. He blew just as I was ready to release, spooking the deer I was ready to seal the deal on. He distanced himself and never gave me another opportunity.

Here is my PA experience... I have hunted 33 hours here in Pa. This is what I have seen. 1 yearling doe at 20 yds. I passed her up hoping for an older doe to come along or a decent buck worth shooting. I haven't seen a deer since and I have hunted 4 different stands. I didn't think I could be more disgusted with hunting in PA.
I haven't heard of anyone seeing many deer this season and only know of 3 buck in my area having been shot. It's no hotter this year than last and there are less acorns than last. It's not the heat and it's not like there is so much food that they don't need to travel.Plus the deer have lost about 300 acres of cover habitat due to the local clubs timbering off the majority of their land. Those deer should be now inhabitating the surrounding areas that I hunt but they aren't. So where are all the deer? Every day last season I was able to see at least 3 doe each morning in the beginning of the season and now I have seen one deer this year.

This is the real proof of the effectiveness of the PAGC's deer management program. You can take their surveys and their studies and their practices and stick them up your arse since that is where your head is if you believe they are doing a good job across the whole state.
I'm disappointed and angry. I hope the rest of you are having a better experience.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

4evr. I agree. Ohio is so much better its not even funny.

Im not hunting there this year unfortunately but have several.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

They arent trying to destroy the deer herd, and they do not have an unaccoutable rogue independant management agency that thinks it can do whatever it wants and they dont cater to whatever non-huning interest group they like (audubon society and other eco-extreme antideer organizations) The hunter/management agency relations are also very good, compared to Pa, absolutely fantastic! They also dont have our rediculous deer wars.

Ohio with Tonkovich at the helm,is a nationalleader in deer management and are so far ahead of Pa its rediculous.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

The thing I hate is this.. I enjoy hunting turkey, grouse and coyotes but I Hate the idea of funding our Game commission by purchasing the general license just to hunt these. I am giving it some very serious consideration that this might be my last year purchasing a PA license. I wish it was like in Ohio.. If you own land whether an acre or a thousand acres you do not need to buy a license to hunt your property. I am tired of paying the PAGC for the ability to recieve a benefit from my hard work.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

I agree 100%. If Ohio or WV were a little closer, Id hunt one or the other and never give pgc another stinkin' dime! We are paying them to slit our own throats and further eco-extremeist agendas!! I think its absolutely a crime that We must pay to have them mismanage our deer herd, to constant lie to us, to belittle the hunters of our state such as has been done on a regular basis by some of the boc etc. To pay them so they waste our money on things like all the pr materials and time spent trying to sell the failed program to the public, tons of pamphlets all saying the same thing kill the deer!, openhouses, habitat brainwash tours, videos, man hours and studies necessary to continue the failed program...etc.

And they want us to pay MORE money to do it? HA! Ive contacted our legislators and we do have some fine ones who are also very avidhunters who like Pgcs policies about the same as we do! Hopefully they stick to their guns and keep denying that license fee increase until it makes a difference. They do need our support so Id encourage anyone who disagrees with pgc rediculous current direction to contact the legislators and let them know you DO NOT support having to pay more money until some reasonable changes are made. Eco-extremist days of dictating what we must accept are numbered. Without "other" forms of funding, like they have strongly been pushing for, they cannot continue "eco-extreme" wildlife mismanagement if our legislators "stay the course" and dont allow further funding for the nonsense to continue and expand.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

Once agains,RSB,as I said before just because the PGC is doin it,don't make it right.It's real easy to follow the program when your people write it.
That does not necessarily mean it works.When you write the rules,it's easy to justify why you're doing what you're doing.Just another case of overanylizing like I said before.

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: bluebird2


RSB listed plenty of other possible factors. You simply chose to ignore those possibilities

RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
 

RSB only listed two other factors , severe winters and a poor mast crop. Severe winters and a poor mast crop will occur periodically whether there are 8 DPSM or 15 DPSM. Under the same conditions the PS deer density will be higher with 15 OWDPSM than with a herd with only 8 OWD PSM. The effects of predation and non-hunting mortality increase with low deer densities so once again RSB was just blowing smoke.