No,Doug needs a study to show that. How many cords did you cut in 2F this year?

We only cut enough for summer campfires. The forest is thinning dramatically with virtually no understory in many places.
The deer do impact regeneration, don't get me wrong, but there is no regeneration in a maturing forest. We need more logging.

Not at all.

You obviously either don’t read entire reports or fail to understand what you have read. I have worked with Dr. DeCalesta on a number of projects over the years. We have worked back and forth on various educational and research projects since the eighties and I assure you we are not at odds with what the research has proven at all.

I have files and boxesfilled with the studies conducted by Dr. DeCalesta and Dr. Stout. I have been to the lab to visit and converse with them and have also gone there to present programs, on deer, for them and other Research Biologists.

Even the short clip you took fromDr. DeCalesta'sreport says pretty much the same thing about the studies that I pointed out in my post from last night.

It seems to me that you just don’t like the facts so you either ignore many of the study results or misrepresent what they say in an attempt to garner support for your misguided agenda.

The fact is the deer and their food supply have proven time after time that you are wrong. Your preferred method of deer management does not work for the long term, and that failure for the long term is exactly what got us to where we are with low deer populations in so much of the northern tier today.

R.S. Bodenhorn

That, and large scale clearcutting falling out of favor.

Apparently you have a short memory and a very selective way of viewing the evidence. you predicted breeding rates would increase as the herd was reduced but, instead they decreased. That alone proves the herd was below the MSY carrying capacity of the habitat in 2000. If the harvests hadn't exceeded recruitment over the last 8 years elk Co. would still have over 25 DPFSM instead of 8 or 10. To show you I am right the over browsed habitat in 2F was still supporting 22 PS DPSM in 2005, 3A had 32 PS DPSM,2E has 32 PS DPSM2C had 20 DPSM and 4D had 21 DPSM. Isn't it amazing that all the WMUs surrounding 2G can support almost twice or more the number of deer as 2G.

Explain that one if you can.

Here is another quote from the SCS Report.
So for over 80 years the habitat supported 25 DPSM and now you are claiming the habitat suddenly decided to control the herd ? Try again.

That is a subjective choice made by DCNR and those that control timbering. It is not a reason to decimate the herd.

It is every reason to reduce the herd, and no, that is a choice forced upon us by the eco-nuts. You are mad at the wrong crowd. They view vast clearcuts as an unsightlywasteland, not as the unleashing of life as it really is. They take aerial photos of flattened forest and launch public campaigns against the practice. As a result, colleges have educated the new age foresters to use every method but clearcutting and justify the results. Because of this situation, the forest cannot regenerate with higher DD, the GCMUST reduce the herd because they DO negatively impact regeneration in this scenario, and your type of hunter becomes outraged and inconsolable. So you see, youmight sometimesbecorrect in your views, but completely wrong in the grand scheme.
There is nothing you can do aside from beating your dead horse, because the situation is never going to change and make your type of hunter relevant as before.

The flaw in your argument is that the RDD goals were not based on the presence of a significant percentage of clear cuts. The study was done long after large clear cuts ceased to be the dominant type of timber harvest. They were based on the average forest habitat of northern hardwoods with the current timber harvesting practices.

If the PGC was right in reducing the herd in 2 G to 8 DPSM are they wrong for managing the herd in 2F at almost twice that number? Should all the NC WMUs be managed at 8 DPSM? If the percent regeneration is an accurate representation of forest health , maybe you would like to explain why 5C only has 23% regeneration, which is the poorest in the state, and it has some of the best soils in the state and unlimited food for the deer.

BTB says you are wrong and I agree. If the number of hunters hunting those NC counties continues to decline there will soon be a time when there aren't enough hunters to control the herd.

Cliff Casena does EXCELLENT work thats who does all of my mounts

Two parcels of the woods I own were timbered before I bought them. both were select cut for saw quality logs,the results are the poorest of seed trees being left standing. Its plan to see after select cutting over the years the quality of trees remaining deteriorates.By cutting the biggest and best every time the poorer genetics and faster growing soft species take over.
For me this is not a big factors as we burn a lot of fire wood as do several friends,although not preferred, soft maple burns well and there seems to be a never ending supply of it,so just like growing a garden you must keep up with the "weeding" if you want a good crop.
Much of PA's woods could use a good weeding.