"Baby boomers over sixty hanging up their guns and bows...
Worst line in the whole thing..."

Boca, I agree. That effect is happening across the nation. Fact is though, something else is making OUR ranks drop by OVER DOUBLE the national average. I think its quite obvious what that thing is.

Pawildman says: "Cornelius....You can go on and on all you want about what you seem to refer to as exaggerations made by the PGC as to the amount of bigger bucks being taken since AR was put into effect."

GROSS exaggerations.

"I live in 2D and in the past several years have seen larger bucks being harvested than any time I can remember in the past, and I've been around for awhile."

Not saying its not happening anywhere. Just most places its not. The numbers prove it. IFyou hunt highly off limits property orwhere pgcs agenda has not yet been fulfilled, in part of a wmu that wasspared excessive reduction, and there is an extra 16" buck or two within those square miles, more power to ya. But that is far from the norm.

We arent killing more when we have 40+ year low buck harvests.
More dont exist when many areas have had 50+% ow reduction.
The measuring sessions were a flop.

We cant "assume" we have more bigger bucks based on the views of a few, when most arent seeing it, and the numbers tell a different story.

"A friend does custom deer butchering just down the road from me, and he concurs also."

A local archery shop in our area has an annual big buck contest. Currently there is ONE entry and its far from a "hawg". Usually by this time there are a few to several.

"One of my long-time friends who lives just over the hill from me has killed the biggest bucks he has ever taken in archery season sine AR went into effect."

Ive killed my biggest by far, and know most other that have beforethis program came into being.

"Two years ago he killed a 12 pt. with a 21" spread.
The local newspaper prints pictures of succesful hunters who are willing to take the time to go to the paper and have their pictures taken with their deer. Perhaps you would be interested in looking at all the nice racks that are being taken around here. It doesn't take much to cough up the e-mail address of the Indiana Gazette and watch as they come in. And that's only the hunters who bother to take the time to do it. "

Thats great. But I seem to recall seeing big bucks in the paper EVERY year.

"You paint everything with the same brush. I know what I see............. "

No. Not everything with the same brush. I am speaking of my area, and the state in general as a whole. My assessment in those regards are accurate. When pgc speaks of more and bigger bucks they didnt mean in just a few select areas widely spread and far fewer everywhere else....Well thats what we have!

Also, my main problem as most I believe is with very excessive doe allocations far more than needed and continues to be. With that problem addressed, you'd see far more big buck existing than there ever could be currently.

Simply not true. According to the NSSF who has been monitoring hunting license sales for years, we are solidly on the middle of the national average. The States that have experienced better results are those with relaxed youth regulations. We didtake a step in the right direction with the mentored hunts but that needs to be expanded considerably.

Your opinion. We all know what they say about opinions.....


Now there we have some gross exaggerations!

Funny howmost articles outside of the USP publications tell a bit different story. Most articles I see are very much like the one Muzzyman linked us to here.

One contest one example. Funny though, most archery shops around here that run contests will tell you that it's always slow till around the end of October for the big bucks

Again, one mans opinion. That wouldn't be the consensus around here


That is true, but the overwhelming reports from taxidermists tell a story of more nice bucks than ever before

The doe allocations were dropped considerably after only two years in many cases yet the herd has not rebounded. The problem lies with fawn recruitment and the root cause is not the much reduced doe tag allocations.

In 2001 when we had 1.5 M PS deer they allocated 780K antlerless tags. After the herd had been reduced by 30-40% they issued 869,000 tags ,plus 20-30K DMAP tags in 2007. The only reason we have much lower fawn recruitment is because we have harvested too many doe.

"Simply not true. According to the NSSF who has been monitoring hunting license sales for years, we are solidly on the middle of the national average.

According to US fish and wildlife the national averagefrom 2001 to 2006 has been a 4% per year decline. According to PGC's own website and license sales record, the decline in that exact same period in Pennsylvaniawas 10%.THATS OVER DOUBLE.


"Now there we have some gross exaggerations! "

Not hardly. I wish it was.

"Funny howmost articles outside of the USP publications tell a bit different story. Most articles I see are very much like the one Muzzyman linked us to here. "

Ive never seen a "usp publication" and havent seen many rave reviews in any other where our herd level currently and doe allocations are concerned.

"One contest one example. Funny though, most archery shops around here that run contests will tell you that it's always slow till around the end of October for the big bucks "

Yes. One example, to counter ONE EXAMPLE that was given. I have plenty of others... Also, no kiddin' about slower in early season. But funny thing is, up to this point, its even far slower than it used to be. Even though the season started later than many years and even though the first week had excellent weather with very nice cool morning temps compared to most years.



"That is true, but the overwhelming reports from taxidermists tell a story of more nice bucks than ever before "

Ha ha ha. Wanna talk about OPINIONS! (LOL) Most Ive spoken with are madder about the results than most hunters are!


"The doe allocations were dropped considerably"

OVerall the total allocation isnt significantly lower. Nowhere near appropriate. How many doe tags do you think are necessary to keep so many fewer deerstable anyways? The cuts were very insignificant across most of the state, and in some areas not cut at all. Others were cut, but only because they have ROCK BOTTOM deer numbers and thats all they need to prevent single and barely double digit densities from expanding!

As only one example. 2A had reduction with 16,500 harvest and 45k tags. The goal ever since was 18k, 55-60,000 tagswith a goal of stabilization for the last 3 years!! Can you say CONTRADICTION! The allocation here is a rediculous 55k, again this year,the herd health fine, the habitat here NEVER rated as poor and human conflict rated as loweven by pgcs standards...Yet we were ripped, and the slaughter continues... Cut that allocation backto lower than reduction days levels and see if that herd doesnt respond accordingly.

"In 2001 when we had 1.5 M PS deer they allocated 780K antlerless tags. After the herd had been reduced by 30-40% they issued 869,000 tags ,plus 20-30K DMAP tags in 2007. The only reason we have much lower fawn recruitment is because we have harvested too many doe.

Very good point my friend.

This is what Alt predicted ARs would produce in PA.
Now here is what Dr. R. said in the article.

IF ARs tripled the number of 8 pt. buck there is no way the average rack would be only 7 pts. When I ask Dr. R. if rack sizes increased or decreased he said he didn't know, because ARs prevent the harvest of bucks with less than 3 pts. on on side. Therefore , he can not say that the average buck in PA now has 7 pts.

You can beat the dead horse about Alts misstatements all you want. (yes of course he didn't get it 100% right)

The fact remains that much of PA's deer hunting quality has improved. Is it all that Alt said it would be? No. Is it better everywhere? No. Is it pefect anywhere? No. Better overall? YES! More good than bad? YES!

Alt wasnt right on ANYTHING.

MOre areas are worse off than previously.

Only areas not so, are those where hrs effects were minimal like in the sras and a few other isolated areas.

Are very few areas (gasp) better? perhaps. But most arent. Also, the numbers show OVERALL a very miserably failed plan.

107k buck harvests and hunter numbers declining over twice the national average tell us things arent satisfactory.

.
So harvesting 47% fewer buck than in 2001 is a good thing in your opinion. So harvesting fewer 2.5+ buck than in 2002 is a good thing in your opinion.

So, can you please tell us how low you want the buck harvest to decrease before the PGC has accomplished their goal.

Hunting quality improved,Just another man's opion.And like my dad used to say "opions are ike ***HOLES",everyone has them and most of them stink.
Please do not quote facts that either have no real basis,meritand have been manipulated by the people in charge.If you're happy with the state of affairs here,God Bless You,but if your not please don't sugar coat the situation and tell us all's right with the world.