|
PA Fall deer Chronicles
Here is the link to the PGC's "Fall Deer Chronicles"
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/p...onfall2008.pdf The PGC is basically admitting that ARs protect buck that are inferior for the rate of antler development. Therefore, the average buck saved by ARs will have a smaller rack at 2.5 than the average buck carried over before ARs. That explains why the PGC has failed to release any data on the size of the buck harvested since ARs were implemented. |
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
ORIGINAL: bluebird2 Here is the link to the PGC's "Fall Deer Chronicles" http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/pgc/deer/deerchronfall2008.pdf The PGC is basically admitting that ARs protect buck that are inferior for the rate of antler development. Therefore, the average buck saved by ARs will have a smaller rack at 2.5 than the average buck carried over before ARs. That explains why the PGC has failed to release any data on the size of the buck harvested since ARs were implemented. Getting that out of what those Chronicles say is very valid proof that you either have a serious reading comprehension problem or just plan twist things in your head and then totally misrepresent the facts from that point on. Have you no honor at all? Point out to us just where you got that total nonsense you just posted concerning the 2.5 year old bucksfrom before to after antler restrictions out of those Chronicles. R.S. Bodenhorn |
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
Have you no honor at all? Point out to us just where you got that total nonsense you just posted concerning the 2.5 year old bucks from before to after antler restrictions out of those Chronicles. Here is the quote from the study. So what did they find? By the time a white-tailed male reaches 4.5 years of age, there is no difference in antler measurements regardless of the size of their first set of antlers as a yearling. The study compared yearlings with ≤3 antler points to those with ≥4 antler points. While all measurements remained smaller in yearlings with ≤3 antler points at 2.5 and 3.5 years old compared with those with ≥4 antler points, by the time they reached maturity at 4.5 years old, those differences disappeared. In fact by their third set of antlers, ≤3 antler point yearlings appeared to be accelerating their antler growth at a faster rate than the ≥4 antler point yearlings. Furthermore, the study did not address the negative effects of harvesting the best buck in each age class. If the best of the 1.5 buck with <3pts. were harvested at 2.5, as they would be in PA and the same thing happened at at 3.5, it is obvious that the results of the study would be quite different and the <3pt. group would have not equaled the <4pt. group. |
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
Gotta say that's what I read into it too !
|
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
ORIGINAL: bluebird2 Have you no honor at all? Point out to us just where you got that total nonsense you just posted concerning the 2.5 year old bucksfrom before to after antler restrictions out of those Chronicles. Here is the quote from the study. So what did they find? By the time a white-tailed male reaches 4.5 years of age, there is no difference in antler measurements regardless of the size of their first set of antlers as a yearling. The study compared yearlings with ≤3 antler points to those with ≥4 antler points. While all measurements remained smaller in yearlings with ≤3 antler points at 2.5 and 3.5 years old compared with those with ≥4 antler points, by the time they reached maturity at 4.5 years old, those differences disappeared. In fact by their third set of antlers, ≤3 antler point yearlings appeared to be accelerating their antler growth at a faster rate than the ≥4 antler point yearlings. Furthermore, the study did not address the negative effects of harvesting the best buck in each age class. If the best of the 1.5 buck with <3pts. were harvested at 2.5, as they would be in PA and the same thing happened at at 3.5, it is obvious that the results of the study would be quite different and the <3pt. group would have not equaled the <4pt. group. Here is what you posted in your original post: The PGC is basically admitting that ARs protect buck that are inferior for the rate of antler development. Therefore, the average buck saved by ARs will have a smaller rack at 2.5 than the average buck carried over before ARs. That is not what the study showed at all. You are simply once again either misrepresenting the facts with what you posted or you simply can’t comprehend what is being reported. This study has nothing to do with the bucks before antler restrictions as compared to the bucks since antler restrictions. The results of this study as they relate toall age class ofbucks were just as true before antler restrictions as they are now. Antler restrictions has had no affect what so ever on the quality of the antlers for the same age class of bucks. What affects the antlers for a particular age class are primarily the nutritional and environmental factors that buck had to deal with in the early stages of life before they have reached mature body weights. Oncebucks have reached full mature body weight, at aboutfour to five years old,then their antlers are more a result of their genetic potential and bucks of the same age can be more fairly evaluated. Therefore, there was not one single thing in the Deer Chronicles that indicated any change in buck antlers from before to since antler restrictions other then the fact that older bucks have better antlers then the younger bucks have. That was true before antler restrictions and it is still true today with antler restrictions. Nothing has changed other then we have more older bucks then ever before and they have better antlers then the younger bucks that once dominated the buck population. R.S. Bodenhorn |
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
Here is what the PGC had to say about the study.
When it comes to yearling buck antlers, there are two schools of thought: the “once a spike, always a spike” crowd and those who disagree. Some believe that spike or small antlered yearling bucks are “inferior,” meaning they lack the potential for future antler growth compared to those yearlings that produce larger antlers. A recent article published in the Journal of Wildlife Management in 2008 titled “Juvenile-to- Adult Antler Development in White-Tailed Deer in South Texas” might finally put an end to the debate. Antler restrictions has had no affect what so ever on the quality of the antlers for the same age class of bucks. Nothing has changed other then we have more older bucks then ever before and they have better antlers then the younger bucks that once dominated the buck population BTW, younger bucks still dominate the buck population just as they always have and always will. ARs just made 50% of them illegal. If you want to be taken seriously ,you should be more careful about making claims you can't back up. |
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
ORIGINAL: bluebird2 Here is what the PGC had to say about the study. When it comes to yearling buck antlers, there are two schools of thought: the “once a spike, always a spike” crowd and those who disagree. Some believe that spike or small antlered yearling bucks are “inferior,” meaning they lack the potential for future antler growth compared to those yearlings that produce larger antlers. A recent article published in the Journal of Wildlife Management in 2008 titled “Juvenile-to- Adult Antler Development in White-Tailed Deer in South Texas” might finally put an end to the debate. Antler restrictions has had no affect what so ever on the quality of the antlers for the same age class of bucks. Nothing has changed other then we have more older bucks then ever before and they have better antlers then the younger bucks that once dominated the buck population BTW, younger bucks still dominate the buck population just as they always have and always will. ARs just made 50% of them illegal. If you want to be taken seriously ,you should be more careful about making claims you can't back up. It is your claims that aren’t backed up with the real deer studies. Those computer simulated studies you keep trying to hang your hat on have been very well discredited by a number of other studies that showed totally different results when real deer were studied instead of the make believe deer in your studies. You still haven’t produced anything that supports your comments concerning the Deer Chronicles either. Nor is there anything, not one single shred of anything, that gives any indication that the antlers of the Pennsylvania bucks being adversely affected since the introduction of antler restrictions regardless of how much you wish there was. You keep saying that the bucks are being high graded and the antler are getting smaller but you are full of bologna because it just isn’t happening the way you say it is. In fact a sample of 1052 semi local bucks from the four years before antler restrictions compared to 1607 bucks from the same core areas sampled during the past five years show that the antlers have improved instead of declining. Since antler restrictions the average points on the bucks going to the taxidermists has increase by 2.2% while the spread has increased by 5.5%. Your opinions of antler restrictions resulting of high grading in a wild herd simply aren’t supported by the real facts, other then from some make believe deer in a computer simulation. R.S. Bodenhorn |
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
Please don't tell me that we're resorting to using info from taxidermists.I personally can't think of a more ridiculous sample group to take.Not onlt that,but if all we can expect is a 2% increase in point # and 5% increase in antler spread,we've wasted a lot of time and effort on what is a unpopular program already.Sorry,but think about it, 2% means all of 2 deer out of 100 is all it would take to back up these numbers. 2 DEER !!!! Give me a break.
|
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
Those computer simulated studies you keep trying to hang your hat on have been very well discredited by a number of other studies that showed totally different results when real deer were studied instead of the make believe deer in your studies. Nor is there anything, not one single shred of anything, that gives any indication that the antlers of the Pennsylvania bucks being adversely affected since the introduction of antler restrictions regardless of how much you wish there was. You keep saying that the bucks are being high graded and the antler are getting smaller but you are full of bologna because it just isn’t happening the way you say it is. Here is what Miss. had to say about ARs and high grading and please note they are not talking about computer models. MDWFP DEER COMMITTEE Chad M.Dacus Deer Program Coordinator (601) 432-2177 • [email protected] William T.McKinley Regional Deer Biologist (601) 582-6111 • [email protected] Chris McDonald Regional Deer Biologist (601) 757-2313 • [email protected] Why not the 4-Point Law? Research conducted by the MDWFP and Mississippi State University indicates the 4-point law has reduced the antler size of harvested 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks across the state. Researchers and biologists believe the 4-point law allows the harvest of better quality yearling bucks, while protecting lesser quality spikes and 3- point bucks. The result has been a decrease in antler size within age classes of older bucks. The combination ofthe 4-point law, high hunting pressure, and lower reproduction has resulted in the over-harvest of bucks and decreased antler size in deer herds across Mississippi. To correct these problems, quality yearling bucks must be allowed to reach older age classes. Antler restrictions that protect a high percentage of 1.5 year old bucks while limiting the high-grading of 2.5 year old bucks are needed. This protection will prevent over-harvest of bucks and improve antler size as bucks get older. These protected bucks will also improve skewed buck:doe ratios, resulting in a shorter breeding season. A shorter breeding season will provide a more uniform fawn crop with regards to future body weights and antler production. Then we have this from Arkansas about their ARs. The 3-point rule has now been in use for five years here in Arkansas. Are we on the verge of seeing antler size beginning to decrease? Catherine Helm is one of the prime forces behind the annual Arkansas Big Buck Classic, one of the nation's largest deer shows. She is directly involved with the event's highly popular statewide big buck contest. "When the 3-point rule first went into effect we saw an immediate and dramatic increase in antler size of the bucks entered in our contest," Helm stated. "But in the last couple of years that trend has leveled off and maybe even decreased a little bit." |
RE: PA Fall deer Chronicles
ORIGINAL: bluebird2 Those computer simulated studies you keep trying to hang your hat on have been very well discredited by a number of other studies that showed totally different results when real deer were studied instead of the make believe deer in your studies. Nor is there anything, not one single shred of anything, that gives any indication that the antlers of the Pennsylvania bucks being adversely affected since the introduction of antler restrictions regardless of how much you wish there was. You keep saying that the bucks are being high graded and the antler are getting smaller but you are full of bologna because it just isn’t happening the way you say it is. Here is what Miss. had to say about ARs and high grading and please note they are not talking about computer models. MDWFP DEER COMMITTEE Chad M.Dacus Deer Program Coordinator (601) 432-2177 • [email protected] William T.McKinley Regional Deer Biologist (601) 582-6111 • [email protected] Chris McDonald Regional Deer Biologist (601) 757-2313 • [email protected] Why not the 4-Point Law? Research conducted by the MDWFP and Mississippi State University indicates the 4-point law has reduced the antler size of harvested 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks across the state. Researchers and biologists believe the 4-point law allows the harvest of better quality yearling bucks, while protecting lesser quality spikes and 3- point bucks. The result has been a decrease in antler size within age classes of older bucks. The combination ofthe 4-point law, high hunting pressure, and lower reproduction has resulted in the over-harvest of bucks and decreased antler size in deer herds across Mississippi. To correct these problems, quality yearling bucks must be allowed to reach older age classes. Antler restrictions that protect a high percentage of 1.5 year old bucks while limiting the high-grading of 2.5 year old bucks are needed. This protection will prevent over-harvest of bucks and improve antler size as bucks get older. These protected bucks will also improve skewed buck:doe ratios, resulting in a shorter breeding season. A shorter breeding season will provide a more uniform fawn crop with regards to future body weights and antler production. Then we have this from Arkansas about their ARs. The 3-point rule has now been in use for five years here in Arkansas. Are we on the verge of seeing antler size beginning to decrease? Catherine Helm is one of the prime forces behind the annual Arkansas Big Buck Classic, one of the nation's largest deer shows. She is directly involved with the event's highly popular statewide big buck contest. "When the 3-point rule first went into effect we saw an immediate and dramatic increase in antler size of the bucks entered in our contest," Helm stated. "But in the last couple of years that trend has leveled off and maybe even decreased a little bit." Didn’t you also notice that in Mississippi and Arkansas they harvest their bucks before the peek of their breeding season. That means that not all of their bucks were getting to contribute to the gene pool and indeed many of their best bucks had been harvested before ever breeding even once. That is not the case in Pennsylvania, where our season occurs after the rut and all adult bucks including the best and the worst of the even those 1 ½ year old have already had the chance to contribute to the gene pool before they are available for harvest. Furthermore, what measures of other possible contributing factors, such as other environmental factor influence, having on the antler development either before or after antler restrictions, did either of those state evaluate. If they didn’t evaluate the other possible influencing factors then they simply don’t know what caused any change in the antler development of their bucks. To help illustrate that point I am going to post the antler development results collected by the Elk County volunteer wildlife survey teams for the past few years. From this you can see just how much the change in the previous fall mast and winter weather conditions can have on the antler development of the bucks from one year to another. Year…………..% of bucks spikes…………….% of bucks antler legal 2002.…………….24.1 %………………………………51.7 % 2003.…………….26.7 %………………………………46.7 % 2004.…………….55.2 %………………………………27.6 % 2005.…………….42.9 %………………………………38.1 % 2006.…………….16.7 %………………………………66.7 % 2007.…………….24.1 %………………………………34.5 % 2008.…………….13.5 %………………………………64.9 % Since those spikes are either all, or very nearly all, 1 ½ year old bucks people should be able to see that their antler development is very much affected by a whole host of factors other then their genetic potential. Thus, the simple fact is that the studies in Mississippi and Arkansas not only have correlation to reality in Pennsylvania and might not even have any reality to what really occurred as far as genetic influence in their own study area. The simple fact is that the best genealogists and deer researchers in the Nation clear say that the affects of antler restrictions need more study but to date they find nothing that indicates any adverse affects to the genetics of wild deer populations where the harvest occurs after the peek of the breeding season as occurs in Pennsylvania. Why don’t you just admit that you just can’t stand the fact that you and your group of family hunters can’t just shot the first deer you see with a piece of antler on his head and don’t really care about what is best for the long term management of the species as long as you get what most benefits you? If the present management objectives weren’t based on what the deer provided as evidence that indicate to be best for the future of the species and their long term habitat then I assure you the professional managers would be leading the initiative for changes. But, those professionals are for presently just doing what is best for the long term benefit of the species instead of caving in to the demands of a few vocal hunters that have never known what they were talking and have done more damage to the deer herds, their habitat and the future of hunting then any other group of people, including the anti-hunters. You have proven yourself to be a leading among those adversely affecting the future of hunting in this state and the nation. Congratulations. R.S. Bodenhorn |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:02 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.