RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

"Sample size too small and sampling emphasis shifted to poorer habitat. Asked and answered. You attempted to distort the evidence and were exposed"

Actually IF that is indeed the case, it doesnt support the program any more than if the results are what they appear to be.

"Less deer equals less deer. Yes, Gary Alt madethemore and bigger bucks statement but he's gone and it's been estabished that statement was very misleading. "

That makes it no better. And Pgc is still pgc , Alt simply represented them. Others other than Alt have also made the claim on several occassions.


"Scientific surveys of rack sizes? no. But the overwhelming evidence from taxidermists, hunters, buck contests, news reports indicates a substantial improvement to all who have their heads out of their butt "

Hardly. The big buck contests around here have gone to hell in a handbag. Far fewer entries and top end is around the same if not slightly less. You are grossly generalizing.



"Not true in 2F at least. The browse lines have faded away, Deer numbers are fewer but still good, body size seems to have improved and rack size is way better"

As you are so fond of saying to others, That is your opinion.

"You continue to cling to Alts "more and bigger bucks" blooper and old, recanted estimates because it suits your negative anti everything PGC "

As should be. Pgc should be held accountable for every intentionally misleading statement and misrepresentation, because it only enforces what most already know. Pgc are liars, frauds and are catering to ecofools and others totally forsaking the hunters of this state.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

You should really stick to what you do best, throwing insults at BB.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

And forest health in 2F is still worse than in 2G and according to RSB and the PGC it is due to overbrowsing by deer. The answer to the overbrowsing is to kill more deer,so why won't the PGC let hunters kill more deer in 2F by issuing more tags? I'm sure you would support this because I know you want a healthy forest.:)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

I guess I wasn't concise enough.
How many oaks grow in the glaciated regions of 2F?

The better answer Bob, is that it depends on where your feet are.
BB2 likes to think all habitat is of the same make-up.
We know better.;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

And what, exactly should you stick to? Defending your illegal doe killing activities and training young kids to ignore the law as well? If we should all stick to what we do best, maybe you need to start an "outlaws only"thread

I notice you didnt have a credible dispute for what I said about 2F.
Either you don't know 2F or you don't know what an oak tree is.

As for 2G I asked those who should know for verification of what Isaid was an opinion based on limited exposure. Unlike BB, I'm willing to admit when I don't have all the facts and ask for them I'm willing to listen to most all until they expose themselves as liars like BB has.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Yes...there are VASTLY different habitat structures in 2f and 2g. You can bet that the areas that do have good soils are or have been farmed for many years. The areas with virtually no soils, the glaciated regions, are left to forestland.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Yep! It was Big Joe! We had many a good time in my younger days. I did as many stockings with the big old hunkyas time allowed. Had I lived in his county instead of simply having my other home there, I would've deputied with him in a minute. A day with Big Joe was always a good time. An evening when he wasn't working and where the occasional adult beverage was involved was even better. A couple of the funniest stories I have to tell even today involve Big Joe. He is sadly missed by many!

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

The answer is your question is irrelevant because the PGC doesn't manage the herd based on the quality of the habitat or the amount of mast that it produces. That is the way the herd was managed when we had deer densities goals. Now the carrying capacity of the habitat doesn't matter and the only things that matter are herd health ,the percent regeneration and deer human conflicts.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

There are regions of both 2f and 2g where you could not grow an oak if your life depended on it. Then there are areas where oaks are indeed, as Bob said, the seemingly dominant species. It is no surprise that the privately held parcels tend to have the better soils and the public lands are owned by the state and federal gov. because they were considered wasteland that no settler wanted or could use.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

And that has absolutely nothing to do with why 2F is being managed at a higher DD than 2G.