Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Everyone wants to see the PGC audit completed right?

Guess who is causing the delay??? yep the good old USP!!
You gotta wonder why the USP wouldn't want to see the audit completed............

http://www.paoutdoornews.com/articles/2009/01/29/top_news/news01.txt
Copied and pasted from PA outdoor news

Deer audit delay to
freeze license hike









[/align][/align]
By Jeff Mulhollem
Editor
Wednesday, January 28, 2009 12:13 PM CST

[/align]Harrisburg - An independent audit of the Pennsylvania Game Commission's deer-management program has been postponed, according to a key lawmaker, and that will result in a delay of the passage of a hunting-license fee increase.

The audit, which was to have started in March, will not proceed because the company that had agreed to do it, Wildlife Management Institute of Virginia, backed away from the project because it feared being drawn into a lawsuit filed against the Game Commission by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania.

Rep. Ed Staback, D-Lackawanna and Wayne counties, chairman of the House Game and Fisheries Committee, met with Unified leaders late last year and asked the organization to drop the suit to expedite the audit. But they refused to abandoned their challenge to the agency's deer-herd-reduction strategy.

"Their continuing with the lawsuit certainly is going to delay the audit, and the audit being delayed is definitely going to delay the license increase," he said. "I will not start the hunting-license fee-increase process until an audit is under way, but I may not be adverse to negotiating about an increase before then.




[/align]"We can work out the details while the audit is being done.

"But having said all of that, I don't see a hunting license fee increase taking effect until 2010 at the earliest," Staback added. "I just can't see everything that needs to be done occurring before July. And my committee members and I will need to see the results of the audit before voting for any license-fee increase."

Revenue from the license-fee increase - which might boost the cost of an adult resident license from $20 to $32, according to Staback - is seen as vital to the Game Commission. The agency has cut many programs, such as pheasant rearing and stocking,

Still Steve Mohr, a former game commissioner and president of the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, remains defiant.

"We told him (Staback) we couldn't drop the lawsuit because we didn't have the support from our members," he said. "Our membership is vehemently opposed to dropping it because we see no reason that the audit couldn't proceed with our lawsuit."

Regarding delay of a hunting- license fee increase, Mohr scoffed. "I don't think that there are many legislators foolish enough to vote for a hunting-license fee increase now with the state budget in the condition it is," he said. "I don't think a license fee increase is necessary anyway. The commission is sitting on so much natural-gas revenue under the game lands that they ought to be paying us for getting hunting licenses."

Mohr is "irritated" by Game Commission officials' declaration to Staback that they would not "cooperate" with an audit unless the lawsuit was withdrawn. "They shouldn't have that option," he said. "I can't believe Staback is letting them get away with it."

Mohr pointed out that the Unified Sportsmen pledged not to bring Wildlife Institute into its lawsuit, but Staback indicated that was not good enough. "If the lawsuit is being delayed, it is not the fault of the Unified Sportsmen, it is the fault of the lawmakers," he said.

"There is no financial crisis here. The PGC is a wealthy agency, it's just they don't want to reveal their wealth at this time. They aren't fooling anyone - the legislators are very skeptical."

Staback was noncommittal about the seriousness of the Game Commission's financial plight, but he did say he was disappointed that the Unified Sportsmen will not withdraw their lawsuit to let the audit proceed.

"The answers about deer management that the Unifieds are looking for are the same ones the Legislature is seeking," he said. "So now we will wait and see how long it will take the courts to react to their suit.

"But it's not a question of if, but when a deer audit will take place," Staback added. "The only way this issue is ever going to be resolved to hunters' satisfaction is by an independent audit of the commission's management program. This has been dragging on for years."


[/align]

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

1. Why should usp drop a lawsuit they started and spent much effort an money on?
2. This is old news. A prior article told the tale. Pgc ALSO said "they would be reluctant to cooperate with an audit while the lawsuit was ongoing.

WIn win for pgc.Holding that position they get out of the lawsuit if pgcdrops it, and theyget out of the audit at least for some time, if they dont.

Some pgc supporters/insiders over at hpa had stated that pgc didnt wantto have thingsdivulged in an audit that usp could use against them in an audit. IF they had nothing to hide, what in the world could usp use against them if it didnt exist? (LOL)

As for the company backing out, I cannot blame them. Would be VERY awkward to have to work closely with a completely unwilling to cooperate agency at pgc. I dont believewmi had much choice.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

The only good thing to come of the situation is LICENSE FEE INCREASE FROZEN. That right now is beneficial to EVERYONE other than the ecoextremists.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Its the auditor that is reluctant to do the audit. Not the PGC. Even Staback, who is no friend to the PGC, said so. It is USP who claims to want the audit but also will not back off so it can be done. Remember, it has been the USP or their founding members who havecried that our deer herd would be wiped out ever since the late 80's when first bonus tag came off the presses.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

You gotta catch up on things there BTB. Thats ol news. I said something to that effect to you on another thread and you did,nt reply. Get another company that isnt afraid of a lawsuit too do the audit. Tell me what could WMI find that the USP could use in a lawsuit just 1 thing.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Btb, its all a matter of perspective. If pgc doesnt want to do both at one time because of the lawsuit, as theyve admitted,and you or anyone else chooses to blame usp for it, your entitled to do so. I think its unfounded myself.

Are some mad that usp won't step down to continue with the audit? Maybe, but its generally strong pgc supporters who hate usp anyway.

I personally couldnt care less about usp, but do think that I would like to see what if anything could come of the lawsuit. I dont think they will win what they are asking for, but that doesnt mean that things beneficial cannot be had from the whole deal.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

You're kidding right? In this day where anyone can sue anyone for anything? Maybe the dubious merits of the USP suit has convinced the auditors that the USP wackos will sue anyone including an auditing frim that may not produce the results that USP wants to see? I would think that if the auditors beleived they would only find things that wouldn't go against the USP's irrational claims, they wouldn't be concerned about a suit. It's obvious that the auditorshave figured out that they'd be walking into a snake pit with no way out.

BTW it took quite a long while for this auditing firm to be selected. And where exactly are we gonna find another firm that won't have the same fears?

Maybe you need to catch up on the state of the legal world.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

I agree that it could be argued either way. remember though, that it was Staback that first said it. Thiswould one of very few things that I agree with him on. Again, Staback is no real friend to the hunters or the PGC IMHO. He is the consumate "which way is the wind blowing" politician

Perhaps something good would come from the lawsuit. I've heardsome USP membersimply that the USP actually generated the audit singlehandedly. Clearly the audit will shed light where some beleive things were dark. Clearly the audit can not hurt and can only help those who want the real truth to come out. The USP suits demands are completely unrealisticand I think most rational hunters who have read it agree with that. So why is the USP standing in the way?

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

BOB,why not e-mail them and ask them that question,then report back to us;)

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

The lawsuit and the crossbow vote are both justclassic examples of the bad that comes from a wildlife management entity that refuses to put any value on hunter input. I don't blame the USP for any of this. The blame lays squarely on the PGCs and WMIs shoulders.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

BTW it took quite a long while for this auditing firm to be selected.

Your kidding arent you. They did the Swan study for the GC. they had the inside edge for this study to be done. And as you stated apparently they were not the only company too put bids in for this contract. I honestly think theres more to the whole audit. You got Staback approaching USP to back down,then GC. saying they were hesitant to cooperate theres something that smells here and I dont think it,s USP. Your prognosis for WMI being sued after the study dont flush either. The judge would throw it out of court a audit was done and here are the results everybody plain an simple.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

It took the legislature a long time to award the audit contract for one reason: No one other than WMI applied for it, that was qualified to do it.IF indeed, anyone elseever applied to do it?

WMI does not want to do the audit while USP's lawsuit is still active, for one reason: They do not want to get drawn into the lawsuit itself, in the event USP trys to useWMI's findings as evidence one way or the other. Your contention that a judge would dismiss any attempt by USP to use audit findings, isfar from the mark.

Go with what Staback says, because it's probably the closest thing to reality.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

I think you have the cause and effect mixed up once again. The USP suit was filed before WMI was awarded the contract. The USP did not tell WMI not to conduct the audit, WMI choose to not perform the audit and the PGC said they were reluctant to cooperate with the audit. So it is WMI and the PGC that is causing the delay,not the USP.

Furthermore, the only group that is getting screwed by the delay is the PGC.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Why would someone drop a lawsuit? Hey BTB drop your multi million$ you have in a lawsuit so we can audit your defendent? Guess what, BTB is the cause why the audit isn't getting done with the defendent. He refuses to drop his lawsuit.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

well said,USP members have pride too, i know, i was original member long ago.

it breaks my heart to to see our hunting and game get to this point.

what has PGC/DCNR done too us,they got hunters HATING them .for good reason too.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

BlueBird is right. The USP suit was filed before WMI was awarded the contract. WMI is the one that chose not to conduct the audit for whatever reason. There is nothing preventing them from proceeding and if the truth be told I am sure the PGC is very content to have the audit delayed or even cancelled. Yes, the sportsman are the ones who are losing out, again, but the blame can hardly be put on the USP who have nothing to do with the audit.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

You can blame the usp it sounds like pgc is trying to bully there way out by making the usp look bad
or look worse then they do now

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Dennyf said: "It took the legislature a long time to award the audit contract for one reason: No one other than WMI applied for it, that was qualified to do it.IF indeed, anyone elseever applied to do it?"

According to Kdavis on Hpa, there were 2 or 3 other applicants for theaudit. Dont know the details, nor do I care.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

"Again, Staback is no real friend to the hunters or the PGC IMHO. He is the consumate "which way is the wind blowing" politician "

He is a friend to us currently and not pgc. Thats because currently pgc is FAR from "our" friend. 2nd. He is not what you have a problem with. Its more accurately him doing his job description. He was appointed as part of the committee that was set up as a check and balance system. He also represents the people. In fact its the very title of his job. That is exactly what he is doing in both cases. Representing the will of the people and acting as the current check and balance system of the pgc. EXACTLY both as intended in the first place.

"Perhaps something good would come from the lawsuit. I've heardsome USP membersimply that the USP actually generated the audit singlehandedly. Clearly the audit will shed light where some beleive things were dark.Clearly the audit can not hurt and can only help those who want the real truth to come out. The USP suits demands are completely unrealisticand I think most rational hunters who have read it agree with that. So why is the USP standing in the way?"

Their money. Their lawsuit. Their right. Their call. There is VERY strong evidence of their claims of insufficient breeding data to support the extremes of the program. Anyone can see that easily by glancing for one moment at the annual reports. Its rediculous. I just don't think they will be granted exactly what they are seeking based on that.

My only concern with the audit is will it take on the real issues? Or will it avoid the very problems we have in the first place? Pgc whined as soon as the audit was proposed that they supported is as long as it didnt dwell on the numbers. Thats b.s. That should be a PART of the deal. Also, the main thing imho should be simply this... Is there or is there not changes that can be made that would be scientifically sound as currently or moreso, yet appease more sportsman than this joke currently. It needs to offer solutions and other options that need to be considered. There IS a problem or this wouldnt be going on inthe first place. Only question is is it social alone in nature, or both social and scientific.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

What doesn't make any sense to me is why the PGC switched from deer density goals that were established based on 20 years of research and 20 years of field data, to a system based on the number of embryos/doe when they knew that the sample sizes were too small to yield statistically valid data on a yearly basis.Now ,the PGC makes yearly decisions on antlerless allocations based on 3 year averages rather than year to year data. Therefore, they can't adjust allocations due to reduced recruitment due to a severe harvest or higher than expected antlerless harvest. That is unless they are really managing the herd based on the actual deer density rather than on breeding rates and forest regeneration.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

i dont think USP is screwing themselves.

the members are backing what they are doing,so no way they are screwing themselves.

me,I HAPPEN TO BE INVOLVED WITH LAWSUITSover years.

i always thought on people i represented that you could work it out without filing a suit, but thats not real world.

look at commercial on tv with that ole INSURANCE AGENT fart involving DEMPSEY/LENAHAN.

he keeps saying,NO,NO, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ON CLAIMS ,until clerk says, DEMSEY/LENAHAN IS ON PHONE.

he then goes,OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO:D.

that is real world and PGC/DCNR are playing same game most likely.

all i can say to PGC is OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO:)

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

We know you don’t understand it. You never have and most likely never will, but I will explain it for those that might be interested in the answer.

The reason the deer density numbers are no longer the largest force in deer management was because they were estimated numbers that had way to much variability in their degree of accuracy. They had such a low reliability because they were estimated numbers that came from the end result of using many other estimated numbers to reach that bottom line estimate.

By using scientific results provided by real deer and real food supplies you are using reality instead of estimates, guesses and theories.

Yes, everyone wishes the samples sizes were large enough to use each individual years of data for making management decisions but that isn’t reality either, so they use three year averages to at least be able to work with the actual trends that the deer and their food prove are reality.

But, neither your comment or my answer, in response, have anything to do with the topic so why are you going in that direction yet again?

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

By using scientific results provided by real deer and real food supplies you are using reality instead of estimates, guesses and theories.


How many real deer do you have?

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

No body knows. Do you know?

There are some rather reliable estimates, but it really doesn’t matter if anyone knows how many there are. The deer and their food tell the professionals, monitoring what the deer and food supply tell them, as far is if that area can feed that number of deer, more deer or if there will have to be fewer deer.

The number of deer that can live on the food supply is determined by nature not the Game Commission. All the professions do is their best to keep that balance, at what nature allows, by using hunters instead of nature to remove the deer nature will not allow to survive in a healthy condition through the winter and into the long term future.

Would it be better to have them die each winter to feed the buzzards when they return each spring? Do you like the looks of the sun bleached bones from winter killed deer in the spring?

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Winterkillhasnt been a problem in Pa. Any state will recieve some in extreme years in the northern parts of the US, and its rediculous to expect otherwise. Pa has not had widespread deaths as a problem and shouldnt even be mentioned with the current herd size when double that had no maleffect for the mostpart in that regard.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

That is only a testament to having the harvests as closely balanced to the habitat as the professionals have been able to keep it in resent years and in some parts of the state, like yours, ever since the deer populations first started to increase.

Come up here sometime and can show you old pictures of lots and lots of dead deer and bleached bones following the winters back in the days from before annual doe season. Back then the old time Game Wardens up here piled up dead deer by the dozens to the hundreds in nearly every stream bottom. All because hunters didn’t think they should kill does so they could have more deer the next year. It works exactly the opposite though when you don’t harvest enough deer.

Deer populations and habitat are not the two separate issues you seem to think they are. Deer eat habitat and if the habitat does exist the deer don’t eat. If deer don’t eat they die.

Haven’t you ever learned or even heard about the affects of nature on populations?

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

well said good points rsb

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

"That is only a testament to having the harvests as closely balanced to the habitat as the professionals have been able to keep it in resent years and in some parts of the state, like yours, ever since the deer populations first started to increase. "

Winterkill hasnt been a problem in Pa EVER. In extreme years, northern states like Pa, minnesota, NewYork, etc. are gonna experience SOME losses. Ours has never been an issue. That includes the years of very highest herd estimates.

"Come up here sometime and can show you old pictures of lots and lots of dead deer and bleached bones following the winters back in the days from before annual doe season."

We had wellover amillion deer. How many of those have to die tonatural mortality before it is no longer acceptable and normal natuaral mortality?? THere are always weak deer, diseased deer and injured deer that die lingering deaths. There are also normal losses especially during an overly harsh year despite herd health. You are also in the harshest environment and habitat in the state and it STILL isnt usually a problem, so what does that say about the other 90+ percent of the state?

"Back then the old time Game Wardens up here piled up dead deer by the dozens to the hundreds in nearly every stream bottom. All because hunters didn’t think they should kill does so they could have more deer the next year. It works exactly the opposite though when you don’t harvest enough deer. "

I think the "old time" wardens were probably great fellas, but those old timers also like to spin yarns and drink too much. No disrespect meant, thats just the way it is often. Such episodes as you speak have never been realized across the majority of this state, and thats a fact. Can it occur in a very isolated incident? Perhaps. And perhaps an area of such poor habitat and such a rediculous deer density (that would allow that many dead in one area) WAS indeed in need of reduction. Some areas needed it of course. Others didnt. Others needed some and got more than needed by far... Blanket reduction statewide was in no way warranted by an isolated incident during a terrible winter in one area many DECADES ago.

"Deer populations and habitat are not the two separate issues you seem to think they are. Deer eat habitat and if the habitat does exist the deer don’t eat. If deer don’t eat they die."

Having read enough of my posts, you know that I know deer and habitat are entertwined. To suggest I think otherwise is a meaningless petty jab at me and attempt to discredit based on absolutely nothing.

"Haven’t you ever learned or even heard about the affects of nature on populations?"

Of course, dont be silly. Ive never said deer numbers can be limitless.AndIve neversaid range quality isnt a factor. The basics of saying too many deer isnt good, especially through winter on marginal habitat only goes so far however. It says exactly NOTHING about how many are actually too many. And that is where our acceptance of the basic principals part ways.What IS to many??I don't see ANY evidence at all that pgc has pointed to that suggest we HAVE to have the exact numbers of deer in each wmu that we currently have. NONE. Throw in the fact that some are supposedly being stabilized yet the allocation simply in no way will allow it and we are WELL past supporting an arguement with: overpopulation of deer = winterkill.

Major tweaking needs to be done. Wmus size shrinking and numbers increasingwould be a HUGE start.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Knowing how many deer there are certainly matters when allocating doe tags and those allocations are not based on herd health and forest health as the PGC claims. Allocations are still based on the same population estimates as they used before but they are using herd health and forest health as a smoke screen so don't have to release the population estimates. WMU 2F and 2G are rated the same for herd health and forest health yet they are being managed at significantly different densities. If they were being managed on herd and forest health they would both be managed at the same density. When the herd in 2G increased in 2006, the PGC increased the antlerless allocation in 2g, but there wasn't a similar increase in 2F tags as I recall based on my memory.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

[
[/quote]




it really doesn’t matter if anyone knows how many there are. ?

R.S. Bodenhorn
[/quote]



Hmmmmmmm?????

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

I understand the plan good enough so that my predictions regarding buck harvests, breeding rates and total harvests were dead on,while yours were dead wrong.

Guess what sport, the PGC is still using the same estimated numbers that they used in the past to establish antlerless allocations. Every year they estimate the change the deer populations and in order to calculate that change they have to know the estimated populations for the two years involved.
The topic is the delay in the audit and the audit would address the very issues we are discussing.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

I know there is atleast 10 times less deer than there was 8 years ago.

I know you have no idea what youare talking about when you say.

"There are some rather reliable estimates, but it really doesn’t matter if anyone knows how many there are. The deer and their food tell the professionals, monitoring what the deer and food supply tell them, as far is if that area can feed that number of deer, more deer or if there will have to be fewer deer. "


I also know that you been around animals to long and becomming an anti from your view of animals and about nature being cruel and you can't handle it any more. So you think it is better for us to interfere with nature to save the cruelity from nature.

I would like to see these bone piles you talk about as one walks thru the woods. From your description, No one can walk thru the woods in spring without seeing bones of dead deer that starved to death scattered all across our state.

Mother nature has been doing a good job of taking care of herself. If you can't handle to see what she does,Which I think you over exagerated quite abit beyond belief. Then I advise you to just quit your job and join up with the antis and get it over with.

Atleast the predators would be feeding on the dead and not the live ones that might be pregnant as you would like to see I am sure.

How about this question?

Explain why 2F is being managed at 22 DPSM and 2G is managed at 12 PS DPSM when the forest health is poorer in 2F than in 2G based on regeneration? What PGC criteria justifies that descrepency?

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

rsb,if i read right clinton county is to be around 12 dpsm.

we placed our feeders in about a 2 mile area,so our feeders are about 1 feeder per 2 fpsm or 1 feeder in 2 miles or so.

i was out today and by look of tracks it is 4 deer per feeder.

so about 4 deer in 2 miles at feeder.

i checked about 6 feeders.

i saw 3 deer at 1 feeder.

so, thats about what i saw in my area around 3 to 4 deer in archery to gun season.

we are no way close to 12 dpsm.

i checked our best area for deer.



from bottom to top which is 4.6 miles, i countedabout 8 deer tracks.

this is only water and best feed in area along this road and is low land area where the deer go to yard up etc...

so, i figure its same, about 2 deerdpsm.

i would WELCOME a FLIR now to prove what i am seeing but why waste money.

tracks tell a lot.

most of others , we filled feeders on sat said the most they see at feeder is 3 deer.

boy, they are tearing feeders apart this winter.

i spent 50 dollars myself buying alfalfa on sat to place at feeders.

i used to get that for 3 dollars a bale, now its over 5 dollars a bale.:eek:

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

No one ever said they didn’t still use population estimates in the deer allocation modeling. They always have and mostly always will have population estimates for each unit. Otherwise there would be no need to even collect harvest data and I assure you there is no likelihood of not collecting and using that data in the future just as has occurred in the past.

But, estimated deer densities is not the gage used in determining the herd or forest health parameters that determine if the population should be held stable, reduced or if it is even possible for it to increase.

So as I already pointed out you don’t understand, never have and most likely never will.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Really! Don’t you think that is a rather unlikely claim in view of the facts of buck harvest history?

Buck harvest trends are typically a pretty good indicter of the total deer population. Eight years ago the hunters harvested 194,371 bucks, which still included 80% of the 1 ½ year old bucks. Last year hunters harvests 109,200 bucks while not harvesting about 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks in the population.

For your claim of ten times as many deer eight years ago to have any logical validity the hunters back in 1999 should have been harvesting well over a million bucks.

Quote:

---

I know you have no idea what you are talking about when you say.

"There are some rather reliable estimates, but it really doesn’t matter if anyone knows how many there are. The deer and their food tell the professionals, monitoring what the deer and food supply tell them, as far is if that area can feed that number of deer, more deer or if there will have to be fewer deer. "

---

Really again!

Why Don’t you go ahead and enlighten us with how it really is then.

Quote:

---

I also know that you been around animals to long and becomming an anti from your view of animals and about nature being cruel and you can't handle it any more. So you think it is better for us to interfere with nature to save the cruelity from nature.

---

That one is a real Hoot!

I assure you that even with the very limited time I have to hunt each year I not only a very active and avid hunter but I still harvest more game every year then the vast majority of the hunters in this state and I suspect that includes you as well.

I do far more to defeat the anti-hunter movement with my promotion of the need for increasing deer harvests then you and you USP do with screaming that we should harvest fewer.

I guess you didn’t think that comment through at all before posting it did you?

Quote:

---

I would like to see these bone piles you talk about as one walks thru the woods. From your description, No one can walk thru the woods in spring without seeing bones of dead deer that starved to death scattered all across our state.

---

When I get time I will go through some of the old slides and pictures. Then if I can get a good enough picture of the projected slide I will see if I can post some of them on here. So far though I have never been able to get pictures up on this site without someone else doing it after I provide the link.

But, I never said there were dead deer all over the woods now. The fact that there aren’t a lot of winter kill though is just more proof that the professional deer managers are doing a pretty good job of keeping the harvests at a level that keeps the deer pretty well balanced with their food supplies. The desire to prevent excessive winter kill is the reason we have controlled deer seasons and deer harvests though in case you didn’t realize that.

Quote:

---

Mother nature has been doing a good job of taking care of herself. If you can't handle to see what she does,Which I think you over exagerated quite abit beyond belief. Then I advise you to just quit your job and join up with the antis and get it over with.

---

That sounds pretty much like a line from the anti-hunter handbook if you want to know the truth of the matter. It is the antis that claim nature will take care of its self. They are partly right, but only if we allow all of nature to take full course including what affects the human race. That would mean no more need for sending the fire departments out on lightning strikes, whether it be a fire on the forest floor or one that strikes and ignites one of the houses in your neighborhood that threatens to take out a whole town. If would also mean no more major medical treatments, everyone would have to go back to healing themselves with home remedies. Do you think you are up for that?

You see man’s very existence and past altering of nature has also changed the way we have to now try to manage in a manner that simulates some of the things that nature once did that man changed.

The other thing people that advocate allowing nature to take her course don’t seem to understand that since some parts of nature are not missing many populations would indeed stabilize but where they would stabilize is at the low end not the high end or even the middle because man has already removed to many natural controls for too many species and introduced way too many alien species that don’t belong here at all.

All of those past mistakes of introducing none native species and organisms being combined with allowing other native species to become out of a nature balance just created more challenges for professional resource managers to continue trying to correct those mistakes.

Quote:

---

Atleast the predators would be feeding on the dead and not the live ones that might be pregnant as you would like to see I am sure.

---

See there is just one more example of how many people that don’t understand how nature really works have no idea and shouldn’t be trying to tell professional managers how to do their jobs.

Yes, the predators would feed on the dead animals. Of course that then allows for a higher then normal food supply for predators during that time period. That then allows their populations to grow during a time when the prey species has just been reduced. Then for the next several years that increased predator population preys more heavily of the prey species, including the new born that should be building the prey populations back up. Thus, since the predator populations had increase to higher levels it has longer reduction affect on the prey species until the predator populations once again decline due the limited availability of food supply.

Then since the predator base once again declined the prey species can increase again. If you don’t then control that prey population to the limits of its food supply, (in the case of deer their habitat since they eat their habitat), that natural boom and bust population cycling just continues. When that happens neither population is sustainable at the highest population levels both could be by managed at by better controlled harvests of the prey species.


That above example of how populations naturally cycle is pretty much exactly what has caused the low deer numbers we have in many parts of this state right now. And, make no mistake about the fact it is the result of over protecting the populations and under protecting their food supplies.

Those are some of the things that both the anti’s and many of the hunters simply don’t understand that is presently allowing the anti’s to use the hunter attitudes and objectives to become their own base for using those hunter comments as their allies.

Quote:

---

How about this question?

Explain why 2F is being managed at 22 DPSM and 2G is managed at 12 PS DPSM when the forest health is poorer in 2F than in 2G based on regeneration? What PGC criteria justifies that descrepency?

---

That is an easy one.

All across the state there are habitat variables that allow the various areas to support a different number of deer based on the differences in those habitats.

For one thing 2F has fewer steep rocky outcroppings where something can grow. Units like 2G could support more deer if things they could eat would grow on totally rock covered soil or if we could teach deer to survive by eating rocks.

Though both areas have about the maximum number of deer their individual habitats can support unit 2F inherently has better habitat types that will always support more deer then can be supported in the habitat types found in unit 2G.

There is nothing complicated about that difference, at least for those that are professionally training to manage the resources across the state.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

You're normally pretty good at making excuses for this failed plan , but that excuse was hilarious. You and the PGC has been telling us that they are managing the herd based on forest health. In 2007 only 34% of the plots in 2F regenerated successfully while 42% regenerated successfully in 2G . Therefore the forest habitat is obviously better in 2G than in 2F. So, your easy answer turned out to be the wrong answer,as usual.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Your resonses and the fact that you completely dodged the direct question proves that you know nothing about either 2F or 2G except numbers on a piece of paper. Do really expect an 8% difference in sampling areas in a given year to be regarded as statistically significant?

Again, I know 2F pretty well and not as much about 2G. Actually, the sampling plots in 2F that I know of are in the areas of 2F that are located in the most marginal habitat. The sampling plots aremost often on public ground. From what I've seen the public ground on 2F is often inferior to the private ground in habiatat quality. There are a few notable exceptions to that and Buzzard swamp is an example ofone of those. 2F has a decent amount of private ground mixed in among the ANF boundaries and some of the best managed private ground is owned by the timber companies. I'd bet that if we had smaller WMU's, parts of 2F, especiallythe eastern areas, would be managed more like 2G.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

Without a doubt the 8% difference is significant when you consider that 2F is being managed at almost twice the DD as in 2G. It is also significant because a 34% regeneration rate is 36% the rate that is considered to be good.

What you fail to realize is that our herds are no longer being managed based on the carrying capacity of the habitat. It is being managed based on the ability of the forests to replace the existing canopy. Therefore the only thing that is relevant in determining DD is herd health and the per cent regeneration.

RE: Once again the USP screws everyone including themselves
 

rsb you are right there would be a pretty nasty cycle with preds/pray kinda like the cycle bluebird goes in