RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

You claimed you were going to post the data that showed the shift in sample size and location, but you failed to meet that commitment. but, I posted the PGC dat that showed that the sample size and location did not shift as you claimed. I back my position with PGC data while you back your position with RSB hotse puckey.

The deer have proven you were wrong over and over again and you aren't man enough to admit it.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

You really are a loser if that's all you have.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

No the deer are proving the direction wildlife management is and has been moving is what is correct forthe deer, their health, their habitat and the future of hunting.

I’ve explained that several times and you refuse to accept that there is a difference between individual WMU data and the statewide averages. I already told you I am not going to say or provide anything more on the data at this time.

If you want any additionaldata you will need to call Harrisburg and ask for it. I suspect there will be ample data used and available during thecourt proceedings. You can take notes there if you want more then is presently being made available on the Game Commission web site.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

But you can't explain why statewide breeding rates decreased by 5% , if breeding rates in the majority of the WMU's increased or remained the same. By posting the sample size of doe checked in various WMUs I proved that the decrease was not due to a shift in sample size or location. Furthermore, if the PGC data shows that breeding rates increased in the majority of the WMUs that data would be of no value to the USP since it would show that ARs produced the predicted results. Just like the PGC you are hiding the data because it doesn't support your agenda.

I don't need the data for each WMU to prove that breeding rates declined in the majority of the WMUs because based on the sample sizes in the 2007 AWR, that is the only way that the breeding rates could have declined by 5%.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

I post the dead horse beatings because all you have are the same old tired unsupported claims. You choose to dismiss any and every response, you dismiss the findings of numerous wildlife biologists, and you offer nothing constructive.

You dismiss the research, conclusions and recommendations of wildlife professionalslike Kroll, Samuel, Asheimer etc etc while yousupport the conclusionsof the likes of Lily Huang, an anti hunting rookie reporter for Newsweek.

You dismiss the real lifeexperiences and observationsof a WCO who has spent most of his working life in PA's traditional deer country but you expect readers here to accept the experiences and observations of a hunter who has no experience there.

You cant manage to find more than a few whitetails over an entire season within a WMU that has so many deer that other hunters canharvest multiple deer consistently yet you dismiss the observations of hunters who consistently find and harvest deer on public lands

The dead horse cartoons are simply appropriate to exemplify the redundancy and pointlessness of your endlessly repetitive posts of the same old distortions and apples vs oranges conclusions.

Yep, the dead horse pictures are appropriate as are Jims Blah Blah Blah commentary's

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

WCOis not always right.or should i say, ALLOWED TO TELL IT LIKE IT IS.

hey, they are human, they can and will walk talk.if they dont, they wont be around long.

i know, I DID NOT WALK THE TALK AND WAS REMOVED FROM A MANAGEMENT POSITIONAT MY JOB.

no different at PGC .

now, for funding the PGC ,first thing that has to be done is PGC has to show people and programs that they now have and why they are needed or required.

that is first step and should be in WRITING showing everything, costs and cost benefits.

if not,i see no support from hunters.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

If RSB can't tell the truth because of his position with the PGC then he shouldn't post false and misleading information in an attempt to mislead the hunters of PA. The PGC has a public relations expert to handle that task.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Wrong again. I agree with Kroll that culling 1.5 spikes does no good and I agree that his research accounts for why ARs result in high grading and decreased rack sizes. I also agree with the research results from TX which concluded that a 3pt. AR like ours isn't the right approach to promoting a better buck age structure.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Wrong again! You said that Kroll didnt' understand the results of his own research. That is not only arrogant it is simply clueless and delusional.

Wrong again, again! As for agreeing with the Texas research, you have flatly stated over and over that you support NO AR program.

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!!

Give the old dead horse a break!

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

his info for most part seems to be able to back-up his facts.

so, for most part, i feel he is giving us good info BUT i still have to be shownthat the habitat is what is causing less fawns in clinton county.

i think the fawn study showed it was PREDATORS, i did not read it but i should.

when you see SGL and has best habitat and very few deer, something is wrong, it canted be habitat, can it?

when RSB says he sees lots of deer on a SGL and we dont hunt WAYBACK, i dont believe that when BTB even says that very few deer on SGL.

this is where him and me tangle, he sees deer, i dont.

he feels 12 deer along road is lot so must be 100 WAYBACK.

i dont.

is he fibbing,he should know more than us as its HIS LIVING .

so, other things MUST influence all of us , we all have agenda at times.

we are very lucky him and rwj come on here and you and others too,hey, i learned a few things here too.

it would be great loss if anything or anybody stopped coming on here.

if so, their best place to go would be to the DASTERLY HUNTINGPA FORUM.

over there, you get real TRUTH on deer situation

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Maybe Kroll did understand the results from his study , but just presented the results in a way to support his QDMA agenda, while ignoring the fact that his study supported the reports of high grading in Miss.
That is a flat out lie. I never make the blanket statement that I didn't support any AR plan. I would support a plan that was biologically sound and suitable for a state with over 900K hunters.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

That is flat out wrong and I listed at least six claims he made that were flat out false and impossible to achieve . He still blames hunters for preventing the PGC from controlling the herd , even though he also said the PGC has been controlling the herd for the past 20 years

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

So now you've backed off the statement you made before when you stated that he didn't undertstand his own research??? ARe you now simply calling Kroll a liar too?

Oh really? And what plan is that? I have not seen you support any AR other than the old failed policy of a 3" spike on one side. Surely you don't want PA to return to that do you?

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

i know he says its HABITAT for reasons of no fawns.

i come back and say,WHY IS THERE VERY FEW IF ANY DEER ON SGL LAND IN PA WITH BEST HABITAT.

is good habitat also killer of fawns?:)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Maybe I should have said Kroll did not understand the significance of the results from his study. He chose to emphasize the fact that culling 1.5 spikes doesn't accomplish anything,while ignoring the fact that his study supported the high grading theory in Miss., which he falsely represented in the article. kroll didn't lie , he just presented the data in a very biased manner in order to support his agenda.

Please explain why the 3" spike rule was a failed policy. It produced a harvest of more 2.5+ buck in 2002 than we harvested in 2007.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

because they were shot sproul

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

And that is the reason for the low fawn recruitment in 2G and I can't understand why Sroul would believe anything RSB says since RSB obviously has a hard time telling the truth.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

I think RSB summed it up best when he said that you had us fooled into thinking that you were a person of above average intelligence with a personal agenda and a penchant for manipulating the facts. I now agree with RSB that we were giving you far too much credit for your IQ

I'm beginning to agree that you really believe the nonsense you post and that you really do think you know more than a few dozen PHD wildlife biologists

The fact that you want the 3 inch spike rules back combined with the fact that you admitted that you have a hard time seeing deer these days certainly supports the notion that your agenda is purely personal

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

I now agree with RSB. What a joke, I've never seen you disagree with anything he says. You are of the biggest suck ups I've ever seen, no wonder you hide behind that mountain man beard.

At one time there was AR of two to a side, it was changed back to 3" spike. You really don't know much, no wonder your a tree hugger and think anyone with a college degree is some kind of expert.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

btb does go along with RSB most of time other than the comment RSB made about hunters,there he disagreed.

guy i tangle with does not come on much,i wonder if he went to HABITAT school or applying for next years DMAP tags:)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

RSB disagreed with the PGC when they cut the tags in 2g, he had stated on the other site, antlerless should be unlimited in 2g to let the forest recover. I don't understand how anyone could agree with him, unless they are a meat hunter. I never hunted the NC and never will, but I don't see him as a friend of the hunter.

I'm sure glad he is in Elk County and not here where I live and hunt. If you guys in Elk County like him, please keep him.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

That is just pure nonsense. I have stated over and over again that i don't need to kill another deer and that I often hunt without carrying a weapon. I also stated I saw 6 buck in two days of hunting during archery so your mindless cheap shots are an out right lie.

The fact is the PGC biologists were wrong about the B/D ratio, the cause of late breeding and the need for ARs and I was right and the deer and the PGC stats prove I was right. On the other hand you and RSB have yet to be right about anything.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Just because you don’t understand how wildlife populations are controlled by their habitat doesn’t mean other people more in touch with how nature really works don’t understand it. More and more hunters are becoming more educated about how the deer/habitat balance works so more and more hunters are shifting to my line of thinking all the time.

Since you don’t seem to think unlimited antler less licenses can be a good thing for deer numbers perhaps you can explain how the areas of the state that have had unlimited license for close to two decades now have increasing deer populations even though their past five year average antler less harvest has been more then 4.5 times as high per square mile, city streets included, as it has been in unit 2G.

If they can’t over harvest, or even reduce the deer numbers, with harvests like that why do you believe they could over harvest the deer where it is much harder access with so many seriously remote areas? The fact is that you and bluebird neither one have even the slightest clue how remote the areas of 2G really are or how under hunted the deer area.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

for the life of me ,I can't understand why you continue to flaunt your total ignorance on a subject that has been explained over and over again./ The antlerless harvests in 2B simply failed to exceed recruitment and therefore the herd expanded even with increased antlerless harvests. Despite the fact that the herd continued to increase for 2 decades the herd still did not come close to exceeding the carrying capacity of the habitat so breeding rates and recruitment remained high. But in 2G harvests exceeded recruitment and the herd was reduced to much lower levels than the habitat could support and as a result recruitment dropped like a rock along with the sustainable harvest.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

ROTFLMFAO!! Have someone read the posts to you from a few weeks ago. If you think I'm a suck up to RSB you obviously cant read. If I agree, I'll say so and I'll do the same if I disagree. Go back and read again Skippy!

Uh yeah, over 50 years ago! Actually it was at least two on ONE side if we wish to join you on your half century trip back in time. And that means what? It'srelevant how?

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

No the biologists were not wrong and I know the results of the resent management are an improvement in this area over what was occurring before antler restrictions. It is you who is wrong about the need for antler restrictions, just as you are wrong about the how deer should be managed in relation to their habitat.

Before the affects of antler restrictions the five year average adult buck/adult doe ratio the volunteer survey teams were seeing 1 adult buck per 3.80 adult does and the average since has been 1 adult buck per 2.72 adult does.

The adult doe breeding rates, from the highway killed deer I have checked, for the same time five year time periods have also shown a great improvement of 84.4% adult doe being bred before antler restrictions to 98.0% being bred since. Also before antler restrictions it took over five months to get those adult does bred, but since antler restrictions that breeding window has declined to six weeks and even included the few juvenile doe that were bred.

The fawn recruitment rates in this area have also improved since antler restrictions, based on the number of fawns per adult doe the volunteer survey teams have seen. Before antler restrictions the five year average was .54 fawns per adult doe and has increased to .63 fawns per adult doe since antler restrictions.

That is an improvement in all of the things that the professional deer managers said they expected to achieve with the antler restrictions. I know darn well it is working because I get to see the affects of it doing exactly as it was intended. Now everyone else can also see that it is working in this area. If antler restrictions and the current deer management is working that well in this area I am also sure it is working in most other areas of the state too.

At least it is working for the benefit of better deer management. I agree though that it might not be working as well for those that just wanted to shoot the first piece of antler they saw so they could get their hunting over with as quickly as possible. But then, unlike some hunters, I tend to believe professional deer managers should manage for the betterment of the resource instead of just hunter appeasement.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

And I can’t understand why anyone would fail to understand that it is that good habitat that allows that higher fawn higher recruitment in those areas with unlimited antler less harvests and that it is also the poor habitat that keeps the fawn recruitment so low hunters can’t harvest but a fifth the number of deer per square mile in those poor habitat areas.

I can’t understand howany knowledgeable or logical thinking personwould fail to see that it is largely the years of attempting to carry too many deer that created that poor habitat in the areas of the state that can’t recruit more fawns even at such low deer harvests. Nor can I understand how anyone could fail to recognize that it is that continuous demand to keep trying to support way to many deer on that poor habitat that keeps preventing the habitat from recovering enough to one day have both higher harvests and better fawn recruitment.

Just because you have never figured out how nature works or that the deer and habitat are not two separate issues doesn’t mean the professional resource managers haven’t learned those things.

When left unchecked the deer numbers will control their habitat until it reaches the point that habitat also controls the deer numbers. Once the habitat is controlling the deer numbers there is only one way to fix the resulting low deer numbers and that is to harvest as many deer as possible until the habitat can recover enough to support more deer. That is the only thing that works.

As long as hunters fail or refuse to either understand or accept that fact the deer numbers will never increase much or for long in the poor habitat areas. What is even worse is that we will continue to see more and more of those poor habitat and declining deer population areas until more hunters do understand and accept that message.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

You sort of disagreed with him after the other hunters jumped all over him. Did you disagree before or after he felt his words were a little harsh?

Seems to me that PGC supports always say, that had they listened to a certain Biologist years ago, we wouldn't have the problems we have today.

Had we been allowed to harvest more than one deer a season, back in the 50's and 60's, you and a lot of other hunters, wouldn't be hunting today.

So go crawl back under your rock with RSB and do whatever it is you two do.

When you do take a break, try and picture what hunting was like back then. Twenty some hunters driving deer on the first Saturday and usually not seeing one buck, half or less seeing a doe or two, yes we hunted, didn't sit in a tree and wait for someone else to put a deer into us. Twenty some hunters again in doe season and harvesting five to seven deer was a great first day. I recall having 21 hunters posted the first day of doe season, until we were going to start driving at nine, not one hunter had seen a deer.

It's time for you to grow up and start thinking for yourself.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Do you also read palms and tarot cards?

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Go back and read and stop making a jackass of yourself.

The problem with most irrational PGC haters like you is they're stuck in the 50's and 60's just like you are. I know this. When my father and grandfather took me hunting for the first time in the 60's, when it was one deer per hunter, neither one of them taught me to poach like you've done with your grandson. My father and grandfather taught me to respect the game and the game laws.

I happen to agree with RSB much , but not all, of the time. That seems to bother you. Well get over it sport! Since you seem to like defending Bluebirds distortions, It make just as much sense toask what you two do under a rock? discuss AR's maybe? maybe not

To all of that, the answer is SO TF WHAT??

Uh, I was hunting then too. In the 60's anyway. We usually did a little better than that but thats how it was done back then. So what's your point? That groups were bigger then and people did more driving? So what! That you couldn't find many deer then either? OK, I believe that one. BTW, did your daddy and grandaddy teach you to poach and pass it on or did you just start the outlaw tradition with your son and grandson?

What independent thought have you offered this forum?


Nope, I can get enough ridiculous premonitions by reading Bluebirds posts.

Havent seen any independent thoughts from you but maybe you need to buy some tarot cards to have one of your own?

Of course, one of your Uninformed Silly People heros predicted that our deer herd would be below 50,000 animals by now. Maybe you ought to ask Jimmy boy Slimesky about the tarot cards and palms.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

The palm reading and tarot cards were addressed to RSB, once again you jump in to defend him and try to put the poster on the defensive, that really is getting old and you need to try something new.

Jim lives about five miles from where I was born and raised, never met the man. I had written to him twice, once to ask for a site to read up on hunting in PA. He told me about that PGC site, but warned me of the PGC plants. He had published an article in the local paper, a few years ago, about the herd getting thinned out. I sent him an e-mail that said, "you should tell the hunters to ease up on shooting the doe". He wrote back and said, "you know how it is the boys like to bring something home".

I don't defend Bluebird or anyone else that keeps records and questions RSB's. My father taught me to have respect for people, unlike you and RSB, I have no respect for you or RSB, because neither of youshow respect to others, therefore you deserve non in return.

I don't discuss my independent thought much lately, guess I'm still shell shocked from that PGC site, express a view and you have 20 PGC jumping all over you.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

I had once posted on that PGC site, that my father told me that years ago, they had stocked deer from another state in the Poconos and cut off the bucks horn to save them from breeding. RSB and people like you, jumped all over me and said they never stocked deer in PA. Finally, I think it was John S, said yes they did and also in the NC.

Another time on a discussion of the difference in weather in different parts of PA. I live in Lehigh County now, stated that when I croosed the Blue Mountain into Carbon County the temp decreased five degrees and when going into the Poconos it decreased another five degrees. You friend RSB, jumped all over me again, he said that was impossible and couldn't be true. Finally someone that was also from the area, confirmed what I said. That was the end of the Almight RSB, but don't ever expect him to admit he was wrong.

The way I see it with you and your two buddies, RSB is using the three of you to try and get those that disagree with PGC into an argument to get thrown off this site. I'm happy to see the game plan isn't working and you look like a fool, with your white dead talking horse.

I think your father spared the rod and ruined the child.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

But you can't comprehend is that the habitat only controls a hunted herd when the herd reaches the max. carrying capacity of the habitat. At levels below the max. carrying capacity the harvests control the herd. That is exactly what happened in 2G when the antlerless harvests were double the buck harvest and the harvests reduced the herd to 8 OWD PSM. Now you expect those 8 deer to produce the same recruitment and same sustainable harvest as 2B with 3 times as many OWD. You simply aren't making any sense.



If breeding rates increased so dramatically in your district, can you explain why the PGC is not reporting the same increase in the vast majority of the WMUs? If that had happened ,the statewide breeding rates would not have decreased by 5% and you and the PGC wouldn't have to be hiding the breeding rate data for individual WMUs. The simple fact is HR and ARs didn't produce the predicted results and the PGC is scrambling to hide the results and make up excuses.

The PGC is also hiding the data on the effects of ARs on rack sizes, both Miss., Ark. and WMU118 in Mich. released rack size data after 5 years of ARs . We have had 8 yrs. of ARs in PA and we still don't have any data. Obviously they are hiding something or the data would be used to justify a license fee increase.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

[blockquote]quote:

The adult doe breeding rates, from the highway killed deer I have checked, for the same time five year time periods have also shown a great improvement of 84.4% adult doe being bred before antler restrictions to 98.0% being bred since. Also before antler restrictions it took over five months to get those adult does bred, but since antler restrictions that breeding window has declined to six weeks and even included the few juvenile doe that were bred.
[/blockquote]RSB, is that your own compilation of data/ percentages or the summary of the official PGC data? If your district breeding rates are so high now, then you should forward that memo to the PGC so they can save face with the 5% decline overall. Your staement about the six week breeding window even for doe fawns would be hard to prove. Even in great habitat, doe fawns usually do not achieve sufficient weight to enter estrous until January.If the habitta in your are is as terrible as you claim, that would be quite a feat, indeed. try to keep track of your earlier B.S. comments from time to time to avoid looking like a fool. remember, you already stated that the habitat and predation is controlling the herd there, because the herd still exceeds the max cc according to you.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

HERE IS WHERE I DONT AGREE WITH YOU.


you hear me all time saying,RSB WHY DOES SGL IN PA HAVE VERY FEW DEER ,IF ANY when the best habitatyou would ever see is in those SGL lands.'

if good habitat produces lots of fawns and deer, then why dont you see many fawns, IF ANY on the SGL i hunt all accross the state of pa:eek:

SGL is awful place to hunt

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Respect for others? You mean like when you jumped on Bluebirds bandwagon and accused BWJ of plagarism? If you had any respect for others, you would have acknowledged your mistake and apologized. You did neither. Respecting others also means obeying the law. You've shown your disrespect to all by breaking it and teaching a 10 year old to do the same.

Yep, long on attackstowardothersbut short on independent thought.

Not hard to see that you and the other PA bashers are safe here. I don't object to your presence oryour opinions here. BB's insistent lies get old. You really ought to investigate when he starts spoutin numbers. Often times he finds ways to add 2+2 and gets 5. Doesn't it bother you in the least that he claims that a whole gang of professional wildlife biologists areall wrong?

What IS most aggravating to most folks here, is that no thread is safe from Bluebird and company'sBS hijackings. Post a pic of a nice buck.... BB will post an anti AR rant. Post a message about CWD and BB will turn it into an arguement about HR. Ask about hunting a particular area? BB will tell you HR wiped it out. Crossbows? BB's contribution there was another AR/HR brouhaha. A thread about muzzleloader season? BB jumped in with AR/HR there too.Even guys from other states have complained about his hijackings.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Sproul, I tend to agree thatsome, not all, SGL's are lacking in game in spite of good habitat. Your experiences might be different, but from what I've seen, the poor hunting on SGL's is a direct result of heavy heavy hunting pressure and that problem has existed for all of the 40 years I've been hunting. Many of the one day punkin army folks from the cities simply look for a game lands when they hunt. Even as a kid I remember the gamelands parking lots being chock full as we drove by. I havent hunted an SGL in a long time except for stocked pheasants once in awhile so my opinion may be dated but thats what I remember about my experiences hunting gamelands.

I'm sure there is some great hunting to be had on some gamelands, I just find it easier to go right on by and find other public ground that is far less crowded or better yet, private ground that's often better managed. The best hunting currently around my camp is mostly private groundbut it is open to all hunters, all seasons. There's still some great public spots but they're ANF, not SGL and the difference is hunting pressure.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Not only are S.G.L. over hunted they are hunted from the same parking lots year after year.
One of the last years we hunted at camp we hunted a game lands toward the end of the season and we saw little or no deer,the next year we got a map of the area and walked in from the back side early before the first day. My wife and I both shot bucks before noon,bucks that were sneaking out the back side.
You don't have to go way back, you have to go where others won't.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

wildlife management could be funded better with license increase IF the PGC/DCNR would increase the DPSM to what it is suppose to be, i think its 12 DPSM for clinton county, not sure on that.

right now, i feel DPSM in western clinton county is about 4 deer and i am being very generous on that .

my results were developed from extensive reasearch:).

i flew over each feeder:)