|
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
the simple answer should be there are less deer because the pgc is/was trying to make pa have buck
with bigger racks suddenly after many years they finally said oh our habbitat is poor and alot of it is or was but imo the breeding rates have changed and pgc doesnt seem to care as rsb said south in pa breeding rate decline what have they done to fix it? Far as i have seen not a thing WHY? |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
That really means that there really might not even be a reduction in the breeding rates or reproductive rates anyplace other then on paper. It is just too soon to draw any definitive conclusions from the present statewide data.
Lets just wait till we have no deer to find out for sure then |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
ORIGINAL: R.S.B. ORIGINAL: yano ORIGINAL: R.S.B. We have been over the reason for the statewide decline time and again. The facts are obviously either to complicated for you to grasp or more likely they just don’t fit your twisted and misguided agenda. Once this law suit is a thing of the past I suspect more of the data showing just how far off base you are can be made available. Since you and the rest of Uninformed Silly People tend to twist things so much the Agency has to be pretty careful about what gets posted until your law suit is resolved. Until that time we will just have to work from published reports available on the web site. But, you even misunderstand and misrepresent them very frequently, just as you are doing right now concerning adult buck non hunting mortality. R.S. Bodenhorn  http://www.openrecordspa.org/  Yep, so now all you and the rest of Uninformed Silly People need to do is convince Mr. Mutchler to make those records and raw data available to you. Most records I suspect will be available as most have been in the past. But, I doubt that will extend to a lot of the raw data available within the Government achieves unless the person requesting has a legitimate reason for needing it. R.S. Bodenhorn  We'll see what the PGC can get by with now; who knows, we might find out more than we know already about past agency heads.[:-] |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
Statewide they might have. The sample size from the Southwest and Southeast areas of the state, where the traditionally highest breeding and reproductive rates have always occurred, continued to decline during that time as well. |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
The biggest gain in breeding rates should have occurred where breeding rates were the worst prior to AR's and HR. You said that they are the very areas where the sample size was effected the least. Therefore , if breeding rates actually increased in 2G and 2F, the effect would have been a significant increase in the statewide breeding rates rather than a 5% decrease since there was no reason for the breeding rates in the southwest or southeast to decrease. I suspect where the sample sizes stayed relatively consistent in units 2f and 2G the breeding and reproductive rates have increased. I know they have in my area. But, the sample size declined in some areas of the north central too for the some reason it declined in the southern areas, which is due to WCOs no longer handling the deer where the roads are under contract for dead deer removal. Since I don’t have roads under contract my samples size has stayed pretty consistent. The breeding rate for adult does in my area has increased by 16.1% since the first year the affects of antler restrictions had any bearing on the breeding rates. The adult reproductive rates increased by 5.1% during the same time period. That is based on using the five year averages before to after antler restrictions. But, even those increases can’t come close to overriding the sample size changes from those southern areas over the past decade. George block wrote that both the numbered measure and size decreased. the average rack measured was 10" smaller than in 2000. I’d have to see the sample size and years involved in that data collection before I would put much credence on that result. Perhaps this is just a good example of cherry picking just a couple of comparison years that would reduce the result desired instead of the truth? Of course the numbers in the books increased from 2000-2007, we had a record number of deer during that period. Really! Listening to hunters it seems most of them are saying that we have had far fewer deer during the years since 2000 and the harvest records indicate is undoubtedly true. Therefore, why shouldn’t a person have expected the number of record books to have declined instead of increasing. R.S. Bodenhorn |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
ORIGINAL: Cornelius08 "We have been over the reason for the statewide decline time and again." You've made unsubstantiated claims TIME AND AGAIN and little else. The results show declines as compared by pgc in the annual reports table. Unless you believe them to be complete idiots, the data was intended to be compared to previous years of it wouldnt have been presented in the manner in which it was. ------------------------ As for "more and bigger bucks as we'd been promised, its a big joke. Ive been regularly underwhelmed by the number of quality buck posted in the paper this year, and today is no exception. Seems Pgc is making their usual excuses. Seems prior to the season we were gonna have a BIG-BUCK free for all if you'd believe pgcs prediction for the coming year. The ehd hit area was supposed to be fabulous, thee place to be because according to pgc not many shot deer there and ehd deaths were insignificant.(although those of us whod seen the rotting corpses and single digit deer density afterwards in many areas knew better)[:'(] And the entire state benefited because of tons of bucks saved by rain on the first day... What Im seeing in the paper doesnt support those rediculous claims and the local wco has apparently taken notice because he is now making excuses as well. Excerpt from the article by Rod Shoener: GREENE DEER HERD STILL ON THE REBOUND Western Greene County Wildlife Conservation Officer Rod Burns said there were some trophy bucks roaming the county this year, but not as many as some hunters might have believed. He blames that on a "terrible" mast crop. Deer that would normally feed in the woods were forced into open fields to find nourishment. Many of those deer were productsof anter restrictions and sported some really impressive racks...(Ha ha ha[8D])....BUT they were not just the tip of the iceberg as many might have believed. In some cases that was the bulk of the population for the entire area! HA HA HA. The only reason some might have thought there'd be more is if they made the big mistake and listened to pgc ever since last season! (LOL)More and bigger bucks. What a joke! I loved the preseason headlines of hunter should have the best season for big bucks in 50 years etc. Has been high expectations and promises every year from pgc, yet the yield never comes. The scoring sessions were a joke. The bucks pictured in the papers usually dont even have as many big bucks as we did in the past, and the lies are more sickening to hear by the year. as long as the BROWN ITS DOWN WITH A:)TAG ,those little bucks will not make it. but still, we must find out why few fawns and take steps that we have fawns. some say its OLD DOE are dead, i now believe that too. some say its coyotes/bears, i believe that too. some say its habitat, i believe that too. but we must all find way to turn it around,if not things will keep getting worst UNLESS all doe hunting is stopped in WMU2G |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
But, even those increases can’t come close to overriding the sample size changes from those southern areas over the past decade. Listening to hunters it seems most of them are saying that we have had far fewer deer during the years since 2000 and the harvest records indicate is undoubtedly true. |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
ORIGINAL: bowtruck the simple answer should be there are less deer because the pgc is/was trying to make pa have buck with bigger racks suddenly after many years they finally said oh our habbitat is poor and alot of it is or was but imo the breeding rates have changed and pgc doesnt seem to care as rsb said south in pa breeding rate decline what have they done to fix it? Far as i have seen not a thing WHY? I think perhaps you are misunderstanding what I have posted. There is nothing that I am aware of that indicates that the breeding or reproductive rates have declined in the south west or the south east part of the state. What declined was the number of does they sample for the data each year. That decline in sample size, during recent years, from those areas has affected the statewide data though since those areas not only have the best breeding and reproductive rates but once lead the state in the number of data samples. The reason the sample size declined in those areas was from the fact that WCOs didn’t and still don’t have a suitable place to dispose of dead deer. They were having to haul dead deer for long distances to legally dispose of them. They simply didn’t have the time or equipment, a large enough truck, to meet the demand for dead deer removal. Therefore, Penn Dot took over the dead deer removal, (they got reimbursed from the Federal Government for doing so any way), and put the job for most highways out on contract. Those contractors have no interest or desire to remove deer embryos and jawbones. Thus much of that data is no longer available. The Game Commission has been not only concerned about the lost data but working diligently trying to find ways of correcting the problem. There was some improvement in the sample size last year too so it seems some headway is being made. This shift in data collection in no way means that the breeding or reproductive rates have declined in the southwest though. But, it really wouldn’t surprise to learn that the breeding or reproductive rates in various parts of those southern units was declining though since I believe we are still under harvesting those areas enough to fully protect the habitat there. If we can’t fully protect the habitat in those areas with high deer populations it is pretty much a guarantee that at some point they will experience declining breeding and reproductive rates. R.S. Bodenhorn |
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
but if that is fact,why does clinton county have very few fawns .
|
RE: Pa Antler Restrictions
There is nothing that I am aware of that indicates that the breeding or reproductive rates have declined in the south west or the south east part of the state. What declined was the number of does they sample for the data each year. That decline in sample size, during recent years, from those areas has affected the statewide data though since those areas not only have the best breeding and reproductive rates but once lead the state in the number of data samples. If breeding rates didn't decrease in any WMUs then the increases in the areas where breeding rates were poor ,would far outweigh any effects from the change in sample sizes. Therefore, it is obvious that breeding rates had to decrease in more WMUs than those that increased. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:42 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.