Pawildman

............and your can rattles louder than ever..........I'm done with your inability to answer a direct question. I'm going hunting.

Cornelius08

"Why should people believe anything you have to say over the word of the trained professionals?"

When the "paid professionals" are of dubious intent,they are affiliated with VERY unfriendly to the hunter"entitities",and they have been proven to have lied all along, and just about every claim theyve made has beenproven false byTHEYRE OWN DATA... I think a betterquestion would be why shouldwe believeanything at all from them?

"Why don’t you work on correcting the problems within the medical profession and do something even more useful, like saving lives, since you obviously know so much more then highly educated and trained professionals?"

I dont think the cure for cancer is quite as simple as the cure for what has driven our deer herd into the ground. I promise though, if I see them attempting to worsen the problem of cancer by spreading it more,we'll make mention of our lack of support for them!

"You SIR, in my honest opinion are nothing more then a fraud and a flim-flam artist"

Directed at Dr. Alt?

"Now, I have to ask any logical thinking person just what reason would the Game Commission have for not doing what the professionals are fully convinced to be the best possible direction for the long term management of our deer herds?"

None are convinced. You point to a few complete extremist clowns that have other agendas. There is not a state in the nation that has gone to the rediculous slaughterextent Pa has, and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM has biologists. So who is wrong? Some of the best biologists in the country that are not from Pa? Or Pa's that were hand selected by extreme conservation oriented biodiversity seeking commissioners?

"The answer is very simple they would have nothing to gain and everything to lose, so what makes anyone think they are doing the wrong thing?"

How would they lose? They are an independent agency and basically untouchable.That is a huge problem initself an needs to be addressed.

"It is the deer themselves, combined with measuring their food supply, that are providing the direction of the deer management program. Doesn’t it make more sense to put your trust in the deer"

They say they are breeding at same rates they were before, in the same time frame and carrying just as many fawns. What more do you need them to tell you? Do they need to learn to speak english and tell you that you are full of beans?

"and the trained professionals that monitor the data the deer provide then to listen to a handful of screw-balls that have absolutely no training in deer management or even any type of wildlife or resource management? "

Which is better A handful of screwballs vs. trained professionals with a very anti-deer, terrible for our sport agenda? Id say those scales are balanced fairly evenly brother.

"Will things improve in the future? "

No. No reason for them to feel any differently in the future as long as pgc is run by the same types that it has been for the last several years. Unless you meant better fortheir new "friends"because of even fewer deer perhaps?

FiveMiler

I'll take the screwballs. In fact, as disillusioned as I am with this deer program, I are one.

cnyguy

Bluebird,
Since you know so much about deer management, in what circumstance would this be possible?

Answer, then I refer you to the study that shows how or why this can happen.

One thing I do agree with you on is AR's are simply a "feel good" response to a bigger problem. There are many states that have never practiced AR's and have incredible deer populations with monster bucks.

The 10 fold number I talked about was Ohio...23,431 deer killed in 1976. In the 2006-2007 season 237,316. Seasons now run from Oct to Jan, hence 06-07.
There was no "late" season hunting in 1976 to carry into 1977. There were only 22k killed in 1977 and 1978.

Many other midwest states have had population increases similar to this, including Ind, Ill, Iowa. Pa has always had a lot of deer. My brothers used to hunt Potter county and kill deer every year, rarely did the bucks go much over a 100 lbs (field dressed) even if they did have 6-8 points. The "dozens" of does they saw looked like they came out of a cookie cutter, 60-80 lbs.

bluebird2

What is the "this" to which you are referring?
What were the antlerless harvests compared to the buck harvest during that period? did the harvests exceed recruitment or were they much less than recruitment? Just throwing out a few harvest data stats tells us little or nothing about what really happened in Ohio!!
So your brothers were satisfied with shooting small 1.5 buck and fawns. That's just fine with me , but what is your problem with your brothers?

cnyguy

"This" is the quote I posted about browse recovery. Please explain why the browse does not recover when there are few deer.

It doesn't matter what the ratio was in 1976 compared to 2006. The management needs change with the herd. Ratios will have to adjusted at times.

I have no problem with my brothers, I love them very much. Both of them have forgotten more about deer management then you will ever know. I was trying to point out that your deer have been overpopulated for years. Puny bucks and undersized does. Son, some of the bucks they killed were 2.5-3.5, none compared in body size to deer in herds less than a hundred miles away. They quit hunting the region because the deer weren't worth the $100 or so for tags.

Just because there is a high population of deer and they are not starving, doesn't mean the herd is completely healthy. There are studies the prove this...lots of little deer is a BAD thing.

Coalcracker

My son purchased 90 acres last year and built a home on it. We posted the land and didn't even bother to hunt it, all that was there were spikes and tiny Y bucks. This is located in Newark Valley, which isn't far from you, I met another hunter on one of these sights that was so helpful to us that he is the only one that has been hunting it for the last two years. My son put a three points to a side limit on it, this year my friend from up has seen a six pointer with a wide rack and he knows of an eight pointer and also a few other bucks around. He didn't shoot the six because it was first thing in the morning on the first day of rifle, he also doesn't want to harvest doe, with is a big plus as far as we are concerned.

I see your sportsmen up there are no better than anywhere else, last year this friend of mine had to chase the local off because they always hunted there. As he is from Newark Valley he knew most of them, they hunt everybody else land and save their own land for later in the week. This year I had a camera stolen from on top of the hill, my son told my friend to arrest anybody he finds on the property.

I'm reallynot too please with the numbers and quality of deer up there, I've already invested over $15,000 in equipment, plus seeds, fertilizer and expenses travelling the three hours up there to work on the food plots. There is nothing in that area for the deer to eat, most if not all the fields are weeds and grass, which they seem to bail for horses and cattle.

Based on what i see,it is no wonder your brothers came to the N/C to shoot a deer. This friend of mine came down to my place last year, shot a nice eight pointer and said it was the biggest bodied deer he ever had gotten and thesecond largest rack. He'll be coming down again tomorrow and will have a great chance of harvest a nice buck,rack on this one will put last year buck to shame.

Moral of this story is, doe hunter aren't welcome at my place in PA or my sons in N.Y.

bluebird2

Browse may certainly increase as the herd is reduced. But, there will be no significant increase in the browse in stands of pole and saw timber because shade, not deer ,is the limiting factor.
When you use terms like ,"completely healthy" and ." lots of little deer' shows you don't know enough about deer management to discuss it intelligently. Who determines how many little deer is a bad thing? What criteria do you use to determine if the deer are healthy? Do you know what criteria the PGC uses to establish herd health? Do you know how they establish the carrying capacity of the habitat.

bluebird2

Actually it was quite easy to deuce what the outcome would be as the herd was reduced by 50%. All one had to do is look at the history of the herd and harvests to predict the outcome, since it was simply impossible for increased breeding rates and recruitment to compensate for the loss of a significant percentage of the adult doe. That is why Alt's and RSB's predictions were wrong and my predictions were right. They told hunters what they wanted to hear while I based my predictions on the facts and reality.

cnyguy

, You continually quote research from PGC. You know, there are other states with deer, and they have done research, too. Maybe you ought to expand your horizons. Other studies have proven deer populations can exist in a conditions where population exceeds carrying capacity. They also prove the deer gradually get smaller (weight wise), the longer this continues. About the browse issue, you indicate the browse getting worse, yet you want the deer population to increase??? Bad idea. Ever thought about this, the fewer deer are eating more of their prefered browse, thereby slowing the comeback of some of the food. Plain and simply, some of it is aging and will never comeback, which I pointed out to you in previous posts. Fewer deer eating more browse is a good thing, it helps them to obtain the genetically predisposed weight, which to many game biologists is a healthier deer. Again, read studies from other states.

Its up to the individual if they want to shoot does, but every state that has shown it has to be done to some degree. There are lots of variables that biologist must look at, some things are unforeseen and can't be fully accounted for. All in all, they do a very good job. I don't think the deer population anywhere is going extinct anytime soon. But, lots of does is not necessarily a healthy herd.