bluebird2

Are you talking about NY or PA. the PGC assigns no habitat value or carrying capacity to farm land. They only consider the carrying capacity of forested habitat.
Because the harvests do not exceed recruitment. The same thing is happening in 2B in PA where limited hunter access is preventing the PGC from reducing the herd in many areas,while other areas in 2B may be over harvested.

cnyguy

I'm trying to tell you, even if they never killed another doe in these areas, you may not see a significant population increase...ever. I don't expect to see 100+ deer a season like I did 10-12 years ago. If I see 30% of that in a season, I'm happy. As long as I see the right one. NY, PA, OH, or Venus, it all works the same, no food, no deer. Throw in a little extra predation from coyotes on fawns, and the population balances out. Granted you could wipe out the population with unlimited hunting, but we have seasons, most of which haven't changed dramatically in the past 20 yrs. Golden rod is not as nutritious as corn, soy beans, clover and alfalfa. In forested habits, a good mast crop a couple years in row might give you a little boost in deer population. But deer have to compete with squirrel, turkey, chipmunks, mice, and other birds for mast.

Part of this is sociological, people want to see deer even if they can't kill them. Its a bragging thing, "I saw 30 deer this year" sounds better than "I only saw 8 deer this year". Is the guy who saw 30 a better hunter than the guy who saw 8? Many people wrongly think so. It boils down to whats best for the overall herd, not the hunter.

Its funny, many people on this board fear Obama's socialist regulation of government, i.e. guns. Yet we want the government to tell us which deer to shoot (AR). Huh? A bit ironic. Like I said, deer managment is at the tip of your trigger finger.

bluebird2

And , I am telling you that you have no idea what you are talking about, because the history of the herd proves you are dead wrong. if they hadn't over harvested the doe in 2G the herd would have increased just as it did in the past and there is nothing you can cite to refute that claim.

cnyguy

Define over harvest as it pertains to the area you are talking about. Can you prove the population is significantly below carrying capacity? Again, you miss the point, even with an excess harvest, deer populations will bounce back within 2-3 seasons if optimal habitat exists. Did you ever think the population was too high, and a correction was needed for the available habitat and a healthier herd? Maybe things are closer to what the proper balance should be.

AR's work great if you want to kill off the 2.5-3.5 bucks just when they're getting to a good breeding age. That's it, kill the basket racks, and let the forks and spikes breed the does. It's stupid to regulate "what" you kill, it much more important to limit how many bucks you kill. In most states, including my state of NY the buck harvest is way too high. If your interested in better bucks only 2 things work:

1 buck per season and self control.

cuernos1

OMW... Carrying capacity is the key.. my farm has been overbrowsed for years... the deer get so hungry they eat the cat food on the porch... PA is the most backwards place I have ever lived when it comes to change... Gary Alt was right.. and he was not permitted to finish... no one bothered him on bears when he was fixing that and now due to his efforts there are plenty of bear.. Deer get some much attention they caused focus that drove him out.. I don't blame the man...

I have hunted all over and PA is still in Jurasic Park with regards to deer management... Doe reduction is needed.. It helps.. I have seen and harvested better bucks on our farm over the last 6 yrs than ever before.... All the BS about no deer is just that...BS...

Look at states where the deer herd is managed for quality.... or elk in Colorado vs other states Colorado is managed for volume not quality with the exception of a few areas... they got plenty of elk but not a lot of biggins...New Mexico humm.. biggins...

hell you guys re-elected Murtha again... and he called us all rednecks and racists... talk about an idiot... let the biologists do their jobs and deal with it for a few years.. it will be better... Georgia kills a ton of does.. you get7 doe tags and a buck.. .. Alabama look at those rules... we have plenty of deer in PA..

cuernos1

Sounds like bluebird was the campaign manager for Murtha... dude you are so far from on track...try reading a book... USA Today is not an dictionary.... his data is very very moving..

PA is not an agricultural state.. I live in a farming area and our farm along with all of the others on our road are shut down.. we boys left and had to get jobs to pay for stuff... along my road over 2500 acres is DORMANT... nothing but weeds.. Acorns are not every year... years ago when you are citing your stats there was a far greater agricultural base and farming left food..... Now that is dead..

Our state is like Ill or Ohio but minus the volume of farming... Have you hunted in Ill or Ohio?? It is fantastic....

I'm tired of this.. BS... that is why I left there some many years ago... I kept the farm but with progress like this it will probably be a subdivision soon...

RSB

You don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

Breeding rates and fawn recruitment were both horrible in many areas of the state prior to antler restrictions.

Fawn recruitment is still horrible in much of the state though it and the breeding rates have improved some in this part of the state. The recruitment rates are still almost completely influenced by the annual changes in the winter and environmental conditions for the year though.
That is exactly what the map and data I presented in the beginning of this topic proved even though you obviously weren’t open minded or intelligent enough to grasp it.

R. S. Bodenhorn

RSB

No the history of the herd, the harvests and the habitat prove he is right and you are wrong.

It is obvious that cnyguy and cuernos1 are both light years ahead of you in their knowledge of sound wildlife management principles. BT bowhunter and DCE had proven they are light year ahead of you a long time ago as well.

R.S. Bodenhorn

bluebird2

You have no idea what you are talking about and can not provide the data that supports your misguided theories. The fact is Elk Co. only had 21 DPFSM in 1991 because of the high antlerless harvests from 1988 to 1990. The herd then increased to 30 DPFSM in 1994, despite the fact that you and the PGC claim the habitat was overbrowsed for over 50 years. Now, the herd has been reduced to around 9 or 10 DPFSM as a result of many years where harvests exceeded recruitment. Even the SCS Report stated that an overbrowsed forest can support 40 DPSM at the MSY carrying capacity and you claim it has a hard time supporting 9 or 10. You simply have lost touch with reality and refuse to listen to the deer or to what the experts are telling you.

The PGC experts say that based on breeding rates , the herd is at it's target goal for herd health in all but one WMU,so once again you are just blowing smoke. The only reason recruitment is horrible in 2G is because there are so few OW doe producing fawns.

If fawn recruitment is as terrible as you claim, why isn't the PGC trying to reduce the herd even more in order to improve recruitment? Could the answer be that it didn't work in the past ,so there is no reason to expect it to work now?

bluebird2

An over harvest is a harvest that reduces the herd below the MSY Carrying Capacity of the habitat. The MSY CC for 2G is over 30 DPSM and the herd has been reduced to 8-9 DPSM. If the herd was above the MSY CC at 30 DPSM , then breeding rates and recruitment would have increased as the herd was reduced , but that didn't happen. that fact proves the herd was not above the MSY CC at 30 DPSM.

Even with optimal habitat a population will not recover when the PGC issues enough antlerless tags to produce a harvest that equals or exceed recruitment.