explorer_Jack

Is to make smaller WMUs. No other options than to do that. Hunters would be happier with a better deer management.
Smaller WMUs is the only way to do so. Be specific on where deer can be hunted to extinction. WMUs are way to freaking big. Give me a state that is in to deer mangament that has huge WMUs as PA does?

bowtruck

smaller wmu dont help if same amount of tags given out and if there is no money for more wco

explorer_Jack

That will also prove that itis only about the money.They will never do that because loss of money. It will target the deer destruction better. Now it is all about the money and not the management of the deer herd. Why else increase the deer tags and go from county to WMUs? More money.

BTBowhunter

I agree. I would like to see smaller WMU's. I question its fesibility but agree 100% that smaller wmu's couldmake for more precise management I do not favor going back to the old county system though. Keep the divisions that utilize rivers and roads to seperate the areas.

How is it to be done though? Most of us agree that smaller WMU's managed right would help with the hotspot/coldspot issues but at what cost? The PGC is having challenges with determining deer numbers now. How much will smaller WMU's add to that job? How much more manpower would be needed to get it up and running and to do the micromanaging.

Not saying it cant be done, only that it;s not as easy as it would first appear.

Cornelius08

According to pgc, the numbers arent important. They address herd health, human conflictand habitat, and if those goals are met, according to them, it doesnt matter what the deer density is if they stick with those guidelines.

Maverick 1

What is wrong with using the county system? Why didn't that work in the past? If it worked in the past, why can't it work again?

BTBowhunter

The main problem with the county system is that county lines are not clearly marked in the woods. I've seen it work both ways both for and against hunter and law enforcement officers. Road and rivers are clear boundaries

explorer_Jack

Big deal. It would be way better than the huge WMUs now.
Seriously, Most people in PA know what county they are in.Even in the woods. Give a half mile margin of error for hunters. Counties was way better than the WMUs you have now. Do you think they put up the big WMUs because of hunters confusion of what county they was in? Not a chance.I don't think that was really a problem.The PGC or WCOs don't have to beD I C Ksabout it,Leave some marging of error there for hunters and there will be no problem. The problemwas theywasn't able to sale as many doe allocation tags. Why? Because they would of wiped out the deer in each county and they would of had to stop their massive deer slaughter or they would of been caught intentionally killing off all the deer in each county. With WMUs, They can try to justify huge doe allocation license by useing a single small area in the huge WMUs for all the deer tags given out. This square mile has deer damage so lets sale 50k in doe license to take care of this one square mile of deer damage area.

BTBowhunter

Sorry EJ but none of that makes any sense.

First, the loudest opponents toHR have been fighting doe tags since the first bonus tag came of the press in the 80's. Going back to a county system will not stop the disputes over doe tag numbers.

Second, county lines do nothing toward solving the problems with the present WMU's. The valid reason for smaller WMU's is to better manage smaller geographic areas according to the habitat and herd.Man madeinvisible boundaries through the woods that are arbitrary to herd and habitat makezero sense.

It's obvious that we have widely varying habitat and herd within the WMU's but man made lines created decades, even centuries ago are not the way to fix that. For starters, the vast public land holdings are most definitely candidates for seperate WMU's

I agree with the principle of smaller WMU's but I also concede that smaller WMU's make the job of deer management far more complex than it already is.At least the move to smaller WMU's should be delayed until it is more clear that the herd has been stabilized and the present WMu management has stabilized to the maximum extent possible.

Maverick 1

I agree that boundaries were a problem but none-the-less, the county system worked. Perhaps when it came to law inforecemt, there was too much uncertainity. Perhaps explorer Jack is correctin thatwe could alleviate some of that by using a good dose of common sense.

The thought that I had, was why not use the county system but redefine the borders of the county to match nearby landmarks as you suggest?