Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
10-28-2008, 06:42 PM
#381
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Stanton PA USA
Posts: 2,213
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
What are the consequences down the road? genetics weren't a problem ,breeding rates weren't a problem ,so what was the problem created by harvesting 80% of our 1.5 buck.
Couple those numbers with the rampant desire by the rank and file PA deer hunter to kill "his" buck, regardless of age of the deer, and damn the consequences down the road....
Very eloquently stated.
Wrong, but well put..........
Breeding rates play a huge part in population....when that population is too large from the start. Many areas were severely overpopulated for years now. Reducing numbers was the right thing to do. Did we go too far in certain areas? I don`t know, as I have pretty much given up on the state I has hunted in since 1972. I do believe the word I get from a few individuals that tell me we are under ideal levels in various areas of the state. I can state from personal knowledge that despite big antlerless allocations, and a serious case of EHD, we still have some high deer densities in the southwest corner of the state.
As to shooting 80% of the 1.5 year old crop............playing armchair biologist only works with some of us.
10-28-2008, 06:48 PM
#382
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
1st. the southwest corner of the state is being far too general. You have areas of 2B with very high densities and areas like 2C with MUCH lower densities...With others in between.
2nd the ehd hardest hit areas are still VERY low dd.
3rd. Many areas of the southwest, much of 2Afor example have far fewer than could be and should be had. The habitat never rated poor. Human conflict rated as low, and the 50%+ overwinter reduction by pgcs data,was completely overkill.
More deer than many areas of the state. But should be due to some of the best habitat type. Overkill all the same. And whats worse, continuing the decline despite the claims of "stabilization" for the last 3 years. The allocations and harvest goals that are much higher now, than the supposedlast year of reduction doesnt lie.
Only places Im aware of that havent been over harvested and may be above carry capacity, aside from an isolated pocket here or there, would be the sras.
2nd the ehd hardest hit areas are still VERY low dd.
3rd. Many areas of the southwest, much of 2Afor example have far fewer than could be and should be had. The habitat never rated poor. Human conflict rated as low, and the 50%+ overwinter reduction by pgcs data,was completely overkill.
More deer than many areas of the state. But should be due to some of the best habitat type. Overkill all the same. And whats worse, continuing the decline despite the claims of "stabilization" for the last 3 years. The allocations and harvest goals that are much higher now, than the supposedlast year of reduction doesnt lie.
Only places Im aware of that havent been over harvested and may be above carry capacity, aside from an isolated pocket here or there, would be the sras.
10-28-2008, 07:11 PM
#383
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Stanton PA USA
Posts: 2,213
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
While I do not perform deer density checks here in the southwest, I can safely say that around my hometown of New Stanton, we have ample number of deer.
In the Dunbar area in 2A where I do a lot of turkey hunting.......lots of deer.
In Greene county near Aleppo where I have a camp, despite finding 80 deer that succumbed to EHD last fall, we still have WAY too many deer on the 600 acres we have.
In the Dunbar area in 2A where I do a lot of turkey hunting.......lots of deer.
In Greene county near Aleppo where I have a camp, despite finding 80 deer that succumbed to EHD last fall, we still have WAY too many deer on the 600 acres we have.
10-28-2008, 07:22 PM
#384
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
Breeding rates play a huge part in population....when that population is too large from the start. Many areas were severely overpopulated for years now. Reducing numbers was the right thing to do. Did we go too far in certain areas? I don`t know, as I have pretty much given up on the state I has hunted in since 1972. I do believe the word I get from a few individuals that tell me we are under ideal levels in various areas of the state. I can state from personal knowledge that despite big antlerless allocations, and a serious case of EHD, we still have some high deer densities in the southwest corner of the state.
As to shooting 80% of the 1.5 year old crop............playing armchair biologist only works with some of us.
As to shooting 80% of the 1.5 year old crop............playing armchair biologist only works with some of us.
The harvest rate of 80% for 1.5 buck is from the PGC, not from an armchair biologist.
10-28-2008, 07:36 PM
#385
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Stanton PA USA
Posts: 2,213
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
You failed to answer my question regarding the negative impact of the previous deer management plan. breeding rates and productivity have decreased instead of increasing as predicted. can you explain why?
The harvest rate of 80% for 1.5 buck is from the PGC, not from an armchair biologist.
Breeding rates play a huge part in population....when that population is too large from the start. Many areas were severely overpopulated for years now. Reducing numbers was the right thing to do. Did we go too far in certain areas? I don`t know, as I have pretty much given up on the state I has hunted in since 1972. I do believe the word I get from a few individuals that tell me we are under ideal levels in various areas of the state. I can state from personal knowledge that despite big antlerless allocations, and a serious case of EHD, we still have some high deer densities in the southwest corner of the state.
As to shooting 80% of the 1.5 year old crop............playing armchair biologist only works with some of us.
As to shooting 80% of the 1.5 year old crop............playing armchair biologist only works with some of us.
The harvest rate of 80% for 1.5 buck is from the PGC, not from an armchair biologist.
Second, I do not dispute that PA hunters kill 80% of the 1.5 year old crop of bucks......my comment regarding armchair biologists was a reference to you.
You seemed to feel that this was an acceptable practice.
10-28-2008, 07:41 PM
#386
Spike
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location:
Posts: 79
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
Only places Im aware of that havent been over harvested and may be above carry capacity, aside from an isolated pocket here or there, would be the sras.
And imagine we got AR in 2-B now that makes a whole lot of sense.
And imagine we got AR in 2-B now that makes a whole lot of sense.
10-28-2008, 07:50 PM
#387
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
First, I would need to see where breeding rates have decreased? Where did this info come from? Why would breeding rates decrease? Obviously, with deer numbers down, fawn counts would drop accordingly, but breeding rates
Second, I do not dispute that PA hunters kill 80% of the 1.5 year old crop of bucks......my comment regarding armchair biologists was a reference to you.
You seemed to feel that this was an acceptable practice.
You seemed to feel that this was an acceptable practice.
yes ,it is an acceptable practice and it resulted in a harvest of 52k ,2.5+ buck in 2002 ,compared to a harvest of 48K 2.5+ buck in 2007.
10-28-2008, 07:54 PM
#388
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Stanton PA USA
Posts: 2,213
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
The data is from the PGC and is available in their Annual Wildlife Reports on the pGC website.
I will look into that.....
yes ,it is an acceptable practice and it resulted in a harvest of 52k ,2.5+ buck in 2002 ,compared to a harvest of 48K 2.5+ buck in 2007.
First, I would need to see where breeding rates have decreased? Where did this info come from? Why would breeding rates decrease? Obviously, with deer numbers down, fawn counts would drop accordingly, but breeding rates
I will look into that.....
Second, I do not dispute that PA hunters kill 80% of the 1.5 year old crop of bucks......my comment regarding armchair biologists was a reference to you.
You seemed to feel that this was an acceptable practice.
You seemed to feel that this was an acceptable practice.
yes ,it is an acceptable practice and it resulted in a harvest of 52k ,2.5+ buck in 2002 ,compared to a harvest of 48K 2.5+ buck in 2007.
BTW, statistically speaking, what are the odds of a twice banned members survival rate?
I`m just asking?
10-28-2008, 08:10 PM
#389
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
"While I do not perform deer density checks here in the southwest, I can safely say that around my hometown of New Stanton, we have ample number of deer. "
Yeah. "ample". That doesnt mean much in the way of deer management and proving it success or failure. Id hardly call that area "ample" but thats a to each his own opinion dealI guess.
"In the Dunbar area in 2A where I do a lot of turkey hunting.......lots of deer."
Oh yeah. Tons. I too hunt the area. One can certainly find deer. To say there are "lots" would be a bit strong of a statement however.
"In Greene county near Aleppo where I have a camp, despite finding 80 deer that succumbed to EHD last fall, we still have WAY too many deer on the 600 acres we have."
Id say you have a problem and should have opened the area to the public. I hunton about a dozen properties, maybe more In Greene. I travel here daily and live there. I assure you, if that is true, and I have my doubts, then thats a rediculous extreme, and about as far from the norm as one can get.
Aside from my observations, or your extreme example,[8D]According to pgcs datathe wmu has had the ow density cut by over 50%. Id say thats very conservative. And considering the things they were supposed to look at to determine acceptable herd levels....Well...NONE of them supported reduction. The habitat wasnt poor, the human conflict low etc. The average dd is now approximately 25 dpfsm in the wmu according to pgc data.According to your observationsIf one takes into account YOUR spot and leaves it out, Im guessing that overall average would drop.(LOL).
Most ehd areas, some of which I have friends at daily (they live there) and I have hunted the areas just for kicks, not wanting to harvest anything but a coyote or huge buck maybe if seen, but not likely. Mainly to get an idea of whats going on... WAAAAAY down. We're talking single digit ow deer density in some areas last year and being generous, low double digit densities preseason this year. I wouldnt shoot a deer on several of those properties if pgc paid me to do it.
They do like to do damage control and say things about the area like no damage done etc. We who have lived and hunted in the wmu for many years know better. Its a pr stunt and their desire is to kick the herd here while its down. Dont get me wrong, there are huntable areas very good areas. Most are a shadow of what they were. Some due to way too many tags. Some due to ehd and the worst areas, thanks to both.
Yet the pen never waivers when it comes time to add up the next years rediculous allocation.
Yeah. "ample". That doesnt mean much in the way of deer management and proving it success or failure. Id hardly call that area "ample" but thats a to each his own opinion dealI guess.
"In the Dunbar area in 2A where I do a lot of turkey hunting.......lots of deer."
Oh yeah. Tons.
I too hunt the area. One can certainly find deer. To say there are "lots" would be a bit strong of a statement however."In Greene county near Aleppo where I have a camp, despite finding 80 deer that succumbed to EHD last fall, we still have WAY too many deer on the 600 acres we have."
Id say you have a problem and should have opened the area to the public. I hunton about a dozen properties, maybe more In Greene. I travel here daily and live there. I assure you, if that is true, and I have my doubts, then thats a rediculous extreme, and about as far from the norm as one can get.
Aside from my observations, or your extreme example,[8D]According to pgcs datathe wmu has had the ow density cut by over 50%. Id say thats very conservative. And considering the things they were supposed to look at to determine acceptable herd levels....Well...NONE of them supported reduction. The habitat wasnt poor, the human conflict low etc. The average dd is now approximately 25 dpfsm in the wmu according to pgc data.According to your observationsIf one takes into account YOUR spot and leaves it out, Im guessing that overall average would drop.
(LOL).Most ehd areas, some of which I have friends at daily (they live there) and I have hunted the areas just for kicks, not wanting to harvest anything but a coyote or huge buck maybe if seen, but not likely. Mainly to get an idea of whats going on... WAAAAAY down. We're talking single digit ow deer density in some areas last year and being generous, low double digit densities preseason this year. I wouldnt shoot a deer on several of those properties if pgc paid me to do it.
They do like to do damage control and say things about the area like no damage done etc. We who have lived and hunted in the wmu for many years know better. Its a pr stunt and their desire is to kick the herd here while its down. Dont get me wrong, there are huntable areas very good areas. Most are a shadow of what they were. Some due to way too many tags. Some due to ehd and the worst areas, thanks to both.
Yet the pen never waivers when it comes time to add up the next years rediculous allocation.
10-28-2008, 08:19 PM
#390
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
"First, I would need to see where breeding rates have decreased? Where did this info come from? Why would breeding rates decrease? Obviously, with deer numbers down, fawn counts would drop accordingly, but breeding rates? "
Yep Its fact. And these are the more recent years when most reduction has been achieved and the rates where supposed to be at their best.
Percentages of adult does bred:
2003----93%
2004----90%
2005----90%
2006----89%
More importantly the embryos per adult doe DECLINED.
2000---1.60
2001---1.58
2002---1.64
2003---1.60
2004---1.53
2005---1.51
2006---1.53
If this didnt INCREASE as it was supposed to, Id say that the data doesnt support the unnecessarily extreme plan. Since it actually shows SIGNIFICANT DECLINE, when couple with all the other failed predictions and unbased claims, and conflicting data...Id call it a MISERABLY FAILED PROGRAM.
"BTW, statistically speaking, what are the odds of a twice banned members survival rate? "
Why not stick with debate instead of throwing around accusations just because you arent faring well with the facts. Ive seen bluebird be nothing butpolite with you and havent seen any board rules broken. If you think otherwise, feel free to contact whoever you need to. I dont see a need to keep throwing out accusations. Pgc will survive without you having to try and have anyone who challenges them banned.[:@]
Yep Its fact. And these are the more recent years when most reduction has been achieved and the rates where supposed to be at their best.
Percentages of adult does bred:
2003----93%
2004----90%
2005----90%
2006----89%
More importantly the embryos per adult doe DECLINED.
2000---1.60
2001---1.58
2002---1.64
2003---1.60
2004---1.53
2005---1.51
2006---1.53
If this didnt INCREASE as it was supposed to, Id say that the data doesnt support the unnecessarily extreme plan. Since it actually shows SIGNIFICANT DECLINE, when couple with all the other failed predictions and unbased claims, and conflicting data...Id call it a MISERABLY FAILED PROGRAM.
"BTW, statistically speaking, what are the odds of a twice banned members survival rate? "
Why not stick with debate instead of throwing around accusations just because you arent faring well with the facts. Ive seen bluebird be nothing butpolite with you and havent seen any board rules broken. If you think otherwise, feel free to contact whoever you need to. I dont see a need to keep throwing out accusations. Pgc will survive without you having to try and have anyone who challenges them banned.[:@]