How should Wildlife Management be funded?
02-17-2009 | 05:05 PM
#402
Thread Starter
Typical Buck
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
RSB is the clown with the warped agenda and you support his propaganda on deer management without question. The habitat IN VF supported over 200 DPSM which was below the MSY carrying capacity while 2G has less than 10 DPSM and RSB claims the habitat is controlling the herd and you support him. You are both hopelessly ignorant.
Alas, I can see that is not likely to happen. It's clear that your posts are destined to always be clouded with your warped agenda and your personal hatreds.
It is very obvious that nature and the deer in both areas disagree with your perspective of how many deer can be supported long term.
If either area could support more deer the numbers wouldn’t have been I a state of decline.
You simply refuse to accept the facts and laws of nature while I am constantly encouraging people to learn more about both since deer are forced to live within the means of the habitat they live or die with.
R.S. Bodenhorn
02-17-2009 | 05:21 PM
#403
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
It is very obvious that nature and the deer in both areas disagree with your perspective of how many deer can be supported long term.
If either area could support more deer the numbers wouldn’t have been I a state of decline.
If either area could support more deer the numbers wouldn’t have been I a state of decline.
02-17-2009 | 05:49 PM
#404
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,195
Likes: 0
From: PA.
RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
That is pure unadulterated nonsense. In 2000 2g supported 15 OWD PSM and now it supports less than 10 OWD PSM simply because harvests exceeded recruitment. At the same time the unhunted herd in VF is at over 200 DPSM even though the habitat is overbrowsed to a much greater degree than in 2g. If hunting was banned in 2g the herd would increase to over 40DPSM with the existing habitat and it still wouldn't be at the MSY carrying capacity.
It is very obvious that nature and the deer in both areas disagree with your perspective of how many deer can be supported long term.
If either area could support more deer the numbers wouldn’t have been I a state of decline.
If either area could support more deer the numbers wouldn’t have been I a state of decline.
is there a study done on habitat in wmu2g that says that it can hold over 12 dpsm.
you stated 40 dpsm it can hold.
right now we are at about 4 deer dpsm in clinton, i feel from feeder checks and my trailcamera counts .
if habitat or study says that we can hold more than 12 dpsm,then the PGC should be bringing the deer to that level.
02-17-2009 | 05:55 PM
#405
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
is there a study done on habitat in wmu2g that says that it can hold over 12 dpsm.
02-17-2009 | 06:15 PM
#406
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,195
Likes: 0
From: PA.
RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
A 20 yr. study showed 2g could support 15 OWD PSM. The 12 DPSM I reported was the pre -season population ,not the OWDD. the PGC has dismissed the 20 years of research plus over 50 years of harvest data that shows shows 2g can support more than 15 OWD PSM.
is there a study done on habitat in wmu2g that says that it can hold over 12 dpsm.
