At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
04-12-2009, 08:38 PM
#131
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
ORIGINAL: R.S.B.
I certainly didn’t spin any numbers. All I did was point out the facts that some people either don’t understand or don’t what people to know.
If Pennsylvania had half as many hunters as what they do have , like Ohio has, the deer numbers would still be the same. That means it would just be easier for the fewer hunters to harvest the same number of deer as what were once harvested by twice as many hunters, since there would be more deer available per hunter. Therefore the hunter success rate, in Pennsylvania, would likely be just as high or even higher then it is in Ohio.
The point you were trying to make is not valid.
That is just basic math mixed with some good old common sense, you know.
R.S. Bodenhorn
ORIGINAL: J Pike
RSB your the one that always tries to spin the #'s!!
But in this case you just proved my point!
Ohio has just over half as many hunters per square mile yet they harvest
just 1.34 less deer per square mile despite PA.'s general Firearms season is 14 days in length and HIGH POWERED RIFLES are legal and OH.'s Genral gun season is only 9 days in length and only shotguns and ML.'s are permitted to use. PA. also has the early season state wide firearm seasons and OH. has none.
If you truely wanted to be fair you would have included this info!! Pike
ORIGINAL: R.S.B.
So you want to compare Pennsylvania to Ohio? That is fine, but let's do it fairly instead of the biased way you like to compare them.
Number of hunters per square mile:
Ohio……………….10.99
Penna………………20.62
Deer harvests per square mile:
Ohio………………6.15
Penna……………..7.49
ORIGINAL: J Pike
RSB. on very negative note 924,000 PA. deer hunters only harvested 335,850 deer during the 2008-09 season.
Meanwhile over in OH. 450,000 deer hunters harvested 252,017 deer during the 2008-09 season.
But I have a really good idea for the PGC., since the PGC. supporters on this site claim that the large majority of the hunters in PA. support the PGC. and the lic. fee increase why doesnt the PGC. just ask the hunters who do not bow hunt to purchase a bow stamp this year? The hunters who do not bear hunt to purchase a bear permit? And the hunters who do not turkey hunt to purchase a turkey tag and so on? No need for the legislature to get involved and no need for a Lic. fee increase. Pike
RSB. on very negative note 924,000 PA. deer hunters only harvested 335,850 deer during the 2008-09 season.
Meanwhile over in OH. 450,000 deer hunters harvested 252,017 deer during the 2008-09 season.
But I have a really good idea for the PGC., since the PGC. supporters on this site claim that the large majority of the hunters in PA. support the PGC. and the lic. fee increase why doesnt the PGC. just ask the hunters who do not bow hunt to purchase a bow stamp this year? The hunters who do not bear hunt to purchase a bear permit? And the hunters who do not turkey hunt to purchase a turkey tag and so on? No need for the legislature to get involved and no need for a Lic. fee increase. Pike
So you want to compare Pennsylvania to Ohio? That is fine, but let's do it fairly instead of the biased way you like to compare them.
Number of hunters per square mile:
Ohio……………….10.99
Penna………………20.62
Deer harvests per square mile:
Ohio………………6.15
Penna……………..7.49
But in this case you just proved my point!
Ohio has just over half as many hunters per square mile yet they harvest
just 1.34 less deer per square mile despite PA.'s general Firearms season is 14 days in length and HIGH POWERED RIFLES are legal and OH.'s Genral gun season is only 9 days in length and only shotguns and ML.'s are permitted to use. PA. also has the early season state wide firearm seasons and OH. has none.
If you truely wanted to be fair you would have included this info!! Pike
I certainly didn’t spin any numbers. All I did was point out the facts that some people either don’t understand or don’t what people to know.
If Pennsylvania had half as many hunters as what they do have , like Ohio has, the deer numbers would still be the same. That means it would just be easier for the fewer hunters to harvest the same number of deer as what were once harvested by twice as many hunters, since there would be more deer available per hunter. Therefore the hunter success rate, in Pennsylvania, would likely be just as high or even higher then it is in Ohio.
The point you were trying to make is not valid.
That is just basic math mixed with some good old common sense, you know.
R.S. Bodenhorn
The reason that OH. hunters have a higher success rate than PA. hunters despite the fact that PA. hunters are able to use high powered rifles in a gun season that is 5 days longer is because OH. has more DPSM on avg. than PA. does, it is as simple as that!! Pike
04-12-2009, 08:47 PM
#132
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
ORIGINAL: R.S.B.
Is that the reason the Pennsylvania hunters, through all of the deer seasons combined, can only harvest fewer then 20% of the tagged and marked antler less deer in the mortality studies? They can’t find them because the deer went under ground while the hunters were looking for them? What are they using when they make this underground exodus, ground hog holes?
R.S. Bodenhorn
ORIGINAL: J Pike
LMAO!!! You will try to spin anything wont you? As you and everyone else here knows deer are most vulnarable when they are on their feet and once they realize its gun season the deer go under ground and dont move during daylight unless PREASURE from hunters bump them and causes the deer to move!! And the more hunters you have per square mile hunting during gun season ( the season that the majority of PA.'s and OH.'s deer are harvested) the better the chance that any deer in the area are going to get pushed into moving during daylight and killed by hunters. I still cant believe you tried to say that. Pike
ORIGINAL: R.S.B.
Therefore, I would suspect that if Pennsylvania only had half as many hunters the hunter success rate here would most likely exceed the success rate in Ohio.
ORIGINAL: J Pike
RSB. on very negative note 924,000 PA. deer hunters only harvested 335,850 deer during the 2008-09 season.
Meanwhile over in OH. 450,000 deer hunters harvested 252,017 deer during the 2008-09 season.
But I have a really good idea for the PGC., since the PGC. supporters on this site claim that the large majority of the hunters in PA. support the PGC. and the lic. fee increase why doesnt the PGC. just ask the hunters who do not bow hunt to purchase a bow stamp this year? The hunters who do not bear hunt to purchase a bear permit? And the hunters who do not turkey hunt to purchase a turkey tag and so on? No need for the legislature to get involved and no need for a Lic. fee increase. Pike
RSB. on very negative note 924,000 PA. deer hunters only harvested 335,850 deer during the 2008-09 season.
Meanwhile over in OH. 450,000 deer hunters harvested 252,017 deer during the 2008-09 season.
But I have a really good idea for the PGC., since the PGC. supporters on this site claim that the large majority of the hunters in PA. support the PGC. and the lic. fee increase why doesnt the PGC. just ask the hunters who do not bow hunt to purchase a bow stamp this year? The hunters who do not bear hunt to purchase a bear permit? And the hunters who do not turkey hunt to purchase a turkey tag and so on? No need for the legislature to get involved and no need for a Lic. fee increase. Pike
Is that the reason the Pennsylvania hunters, through all of the deer seasons combined, can only harvest fewer then 20% of the tagged and marked antler less deer in the mortality studies? They can’t find them because the deer went under ground while the hunters were looking for them? What are they using when they make this underground exodus, ground hog holes?
R.S. Bodenhorn
I remember the bogus study in Sproul, If you could be so kind to remind me how many deer were in the study, how many of those deer were harvested by hunters and how many of the the radio collars used turned out to not work properly I will show everyone how you try to spin the #'s by using %'s. Cant wait for your answers. Pike
04-12-2009, 08:57 PM
#133
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
ORIGINAL: R.S.B.
R.S. Bodenhorn
ORIGINAL: J Pike
RSB. First off you are lieing about OH. hunters having to pay over 3 times as much to hunt deer and turkey.
Not according to the Ohio site that explains and sells them.
Resident License Fees
6 months residency required)
Resident hunting licenses are $19 for adults, $10 for youth (under 18) and seniors (65-70). Licenses for those over 70 are issued at no charge. In addition to the general license, hunters will need a special permit for the type of hunting (deer, waterfowl, wild turkey, etc.). See Additional permits
Additional permits are required for each type of hunting. 2008 fall turkey permits are $24 for adults and $12 for youth and seniors.
2008 Deer permits are also $24 for adults and $12 for youth and seniors.
Here is the link:
http://cleveland.about.com/od/sports...inglicense.htm
Second, ofcourse OH. hunters are going to have to pay more to hunt because they have less than half as many hunters.
But you are right that the ODNR receives money from the genral fund, How is that a bad thing?
I didn’t say it was bad. I think it would be a good thing for the future of the resources and hunting.
It is the hunters of this state, and especially this web site that say it would be bad.
The PGC. claims that they are an """ Independant Agency""" but other than funds their is nothing independant about them!! PLEASE EXPLAIN what is so "" independant"" about the PGC. other than how it is funded? And the hunters in OH. have a say on how things are done by the ODNR. and here in PA. our hunters have zero say!!
Here in PA. the Farm Bureau, DCNR, Audobon Soc. and timber industry control the PGC. ( thats why we do not and never will have sunday hunting and are trying to manage our herd at under 10 dpsm)
In contrast in OH. the hunters wanted sunday hunting and boom they got it!! They wanted their gun season to be extended and boom they got it!!
they wanted a youth either sex gun season smack dab in the middle of the rut and boom they got it!!
Hunters have a voice in this state too, even if they don’t get everything they demand.
In this state we do our best to manage with first consideration to the resource instead of just giving hunters everything they want to make it easier to exploit the resources.
Oh thats right the PGC. just made crossbows legal even though 9 out of 10 PA. hunters didnt want them!! Pike
I don’t know that 9 out of 10 hunters didn’t want them and either do you.
In fact I know that flat out isn’t even close to be a true statement since about 20 % or more of all licensed archers in this state already had a permit to use a crossbow and many others in the special regulations areas were already using them because they didn’t need a permit.
Plus archery hunters are only a small part of the total hunters and more hunter simply didn’t care one way or the other about crossbows.
Besides they are legal in Ohio and since you always tell us how much better it is in Ohio why not make them legal here, just like in Ohio.
ORIGINAL: R.S.B.
But, since we should be talking about license fees how about we go ahead and do that.
In Ohio their Conservation Department is not self funded, like here in Pennsylvania. They got their money, to operate, directly from their state general fund tax dollars every year. Every resident in their state pays for wildlife management and conservation, unlike here in Pennsylvania where all of the wildlife management is paid for by hunter dollars. Ohio also still gets thier share of P-R funds from the Federal Government, based on license sales, the same as Pennsylvania and every other state, too.
Yet, an Ohio resident pays over three times as much to hunt deer and turkey as what a Pennsylvania resident pays.
So, I agree lets get our hunting license prices on par with Ohio and still have all of the state’s tax payers supporting wildlife management and conservation with their general taxes. I suspect if we do that we will only have half as many hunters as what we have now, and compare with Ohio’s hunter numbers. I suspect those hunters will still be able to harvest more deer then they do in Ohio though so our hunter success rate would then also be much higher then it is in Ohio.
How about that I agree with Pike we need to be more like Ohio.
So, you should march right down to you Legislator’s office tomorrow morning and demand that the Pennsylvania hunting license prices triple. Also demand that even after they do that the Game Commission still should to be funded from the state’s general taxes so everyone, instead of just hunters, pays thier share for wildlife management, just like things are done in Ohio.
Do you still want to compare and tell us how good they have it in Ohio?
R.S. Bodenhorn
ORIGINAL: J Pike
RSB. on very negative note 924,000 PA. deer hunters only harvested 335,850 deer during the 2008-09 season.
Meanwhile over in OH. 450,000 deer hunters harvested 252,017 deer during the 2008-09 season.
But I have a really good idea for the PGC., since the PGC. supporters on this site claim that the large majority of the hunters in PA. support the PGC. and the lic. fee increase why doesnt the PGC. just ask the hunters who do not bow hunt to purchase a bow stamp this year? The hunters who do not bear hunt to purchase a bear permit? And the hunters who do not turkey hunt to purchase a turkey tag and so on? No need for the legislature to get involved and no need for a Lic. fee increase. Pike
RSB. on very negative note 924,000 PA. deer hunters only harvested 335,850 deer during the 2008-09 season.
Meanwhile over in OH. 450,000 deer hunters harvested 252,017 deer during the 2008-09 season.
But I have a really good idea for the PGC., since the PGC. supporters on this site claim that the large majority of the hunters in PA. support the PGC. and the lic. fee increase why doesnt the PGC. just ask the hunters who do not bow hunt to purchase a bow stamp this year? The hunters who do not bear hunt to purchase a bear permit? And the hunters who do not turkey hunt to purchase a turkey tag and so on? No need for the legislature to get involved and no need for a Lic. fee increase. Pike
In Ohio their Conservation Department is not self funded, like here in Pennsylvania. They got their money, to operate, directly from their state general fund tax dollars every year. Every resident in their state pays for wildlife management and conservation, unlike here in Pennsylvania where all of the wildlife management is paid for by hunter dollars. Ohio also still gets thier share of P-R funds from the Federal Government, based on license sales, the same as Pennsylvania and every other state, too.
Yet, an Ohio resident pays over three times as much to hunt deer and turkey as what a Pennsylvania resident pays.
So, I agree lets get our hunting license prices on par with Ohio and still have all of the state’s tax payers supporting wildlife management and conservation with their general taxes. I suspect if we do that we will only have half as many hunters as what we have now, and compare with Ohio’s hunter numbers. I suspect those hunters will still be able to harvest more deer then they do in Ohio though so our hunter success rate would then also be much higher then it is in Ohio.
How about that I agree with Pike we need to be more like Ohio.
So, you should march right down to you Legislator’s office tomorrow morning and demand that the Pennsylvania hunting license prices triple. Also demand that even after they do that the Game Commission still should to be funded from the state’s general taxes so everyone, instead of just hunters, pays thier share for wildlife management, just like things are done in Ohio.
Do you still want to compare and tell us how good they have it in Ohio?
R.S. Bodenhorn
Not according to the Ohio site that explains and sells them.
Resident License Fees
6 months residency required)Resident hunting licenses are $19 for adults, $10 for youth (under 18) and seniors (65-70). Licenses for those over 70 are issued at no charge. In addition to the general license, hunters will need a special permit for the type of hunting (deer, waterfowl, wild turkey, etc.). See Additional permits
Additional permits are required for each type of hunting. 2008 fall turkey permits are $24 for adults and $12 for youth and seniors.
2008 Deer permits are also $24 for adults and $12 for youth and seniors.
Here is the link:
http://cleveland.about.com/od/sports...inglicense.htm
Second, ofcourse OH. hunters are going to have to pay more to hunt because they have less than half as many hunters.
But you are right that the ODNR receives money from the genral fund, How is that a bad thing?
I didn’t say it was bad. I think it would be a good thing for the future of the resources and hunting.
It is the hunters of this state, and especially this web site that say it would be bad.
The PGC. claims that they are an """ Independant Agency""" but other than funds their is nothing independant about them!! PLEASE EXPLAIN what is so "" independant"" about the PGC. other than how it is funded? And the hunters in OH. have a say on how things are done by the ODNR. and here in PA. our hunters have zero say!!
Here in PA. the Farm Bureau, DCNR, Audobon Soc. and timber industry control the PGC. ( thats why we do not and never will have sunday hunting and are trying to manage our herd at under 10 dpsm)
In contrast in OH. the hunters wanted sunday hunting and boom they got it!! They wanted their gun season to be extended and boom they got it!!
they wanted a youth either sex gun season smack dab in the middle of the rut and boom they got it!!
Hunters have a voice in this state too, even if they don’t get everything they demand.
In this state we do our best to manage with first consideration to the resource instead of just giving hunters everything they want to make it easier to exploit the resources.
Oh thats right the PGC. just made crossbows legal even though 9 out of 10 PA. hunters didnt want them!! Pike
I don’t know that 9 out of 10 hunters didn’t want them and either do you.
In fact I know that flat out isn’t even close to be a true statement since about 20 % or more of all licensed archers in this state already had a permit to use a crossbow and many others in the special regulations areas were already using them because they didn’t need a permit.
Plus archery hunters are only a small part of the total hunters and more hunter simply didn’t care one way or the other about crossbows.
Besides they are legal in Ohio and since you always tell us how much better it is in Ohio why not make them legal here, just like in Ohio.
And according to 2 members of the BOC. 9 out of every 10 PA. hunters that contacted the BOC. by phone, mail and e-mail were against crossbows being made legal.
And dont get me wrong I supported crossbows being made legal here in PA. 100%. But until I started hunting in OH. and saw that they are not the evil killing machines that alot of PA. hunters claim them to be.
But once I saw that 9 out of 10 PA. hunters were against the crossbow I changed my opinion on the subject. Like I said PA. hunters should have some sort of voice even if that voice disagree's with me. Pike
04-13-2009, 03:28 AM
#134
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 175
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
As for the EHD mortalities aver a year ago I am sure they were high. Many of those mortality were confirmed and documented by the Game Commission. But, those occurred before the 2007 hunting season so the biggest affect was simply on the 2007 hunter harvests and success rates. Since the mortalities occurred before the season it certainly would mean fewer deer being available to the hunters. But, it doesn’t not mean fewer deer the next year after fawn recruitment unless there were other factors limiting fawn recruitment, such as declining habitat, as well.
So my question still is,does the PGC have any idea how many deer were killed by EHD ? There is no way humanly possible that they have any clue do to the size of 2a and the manpower available to them to do a thorough enough study to come up with a feasable number,especially since EHD was concentrated in some areas and hardly a factor at all in others.As far as it not affecting the next year,that's impossible due to the fact that fewer deer to breed simply means less faws the next year.If the number of breedable doe was reduced by even 5% ,common sense dictates the number of fawns the following year will be at least 5% less.
So my question still is,does the PGC have any idea how many deer were killed by EHD ? There is no way humanly possible that they have any clue do to the size of 2a and the manpower available to them to do a thorough enough study to come up with a feasable number,especially since EHD was concentrated in some areas and hardly a factor at all in others.As far as it not affecting the next year,that's impossible due to the fact that fewer deer to breed simply means less faws the next year.If the number of breedable doe was reduced by even 5% ,common sense dictates the number of fawns the following year will be at least 5% less.
04-13-2009, 04:03 AM
#135
Typical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
Why don't you ask GTFBOHH (Gal That FishesBut Obviously Hates Hunting). She supposedly worked closely on studying the effects of the virus, it's causes and, and mortality. Interestingly she initially claimed over 3,000 dead possibly more, than rescinded her earlier statements and claimed a much lower mortality when pressured by her affiliates at the PGC. I believe that Cornelius has a very good grasp on that subject, concerning the statements she made earlier on mortality estimates, and other events that transpired at that time. I'm sure he can shed more light on the subject.
04-13-2009, 04:11 AM
#136
Typical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
As for the EHD mortalities aver a year ago I am sure they were high. Many of those mortality were confirmed and documented by the Game Commission. But, those occurred before the 2007 hunting season so the biggest affect was simply on the 2007 hunter harvests and success rates. Since the mortalities occurred before the season it certainly would mean fewer deer being available to the hunters. But, it doesn’t not mean fewer deer the next year after fawn recruitment unless there were other factors limiting fawn recruitment, such as declining habitat, as well.
Wrong. If the EHD mortality in addition to the harvest combined to exceed recuitment, than the herd was reduced. If the EHD mortality was significant as believed, and if anyone believes that the antlerless allocations are based on any form or resemblance to scientific principles and relevant to any established management goal, then the plan was adversely affected by the outbreak, and it should have been calculated in to future allocations to adjust accordingly.The statement that it could have only affected the herd for one hunitng seaoson and prior to recruitment, implies that the 2008 fawn recruitment would have surpassed any reduction in the herd incurred through the outbreak and the hunter harvest, which recruitment statistics show us is an impossibility. Nice try. Anyone with atleast half a brain won't fall forthat nonsense.
04-13-2009, 06:59 AM
#137
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 175
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
Thank you sir,I'm glad I wasn't the only one to see the BS he's trying to baffle us with.What amazes me the most is the PGC knew full well that EHD was doing a lot more damage than first anticipated,yet they insistedon selling every lastantlerless license allotted until they sold out in December !
04-13-2009, 07:19 AM
#138
Typical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
Still hoping for Cornelius to log in and contribute here to the EHD topic. The PGC, despite anything they say, surely welcomed the outbreak with open arms. Their history of allocations in 2A, 2B tell the true story here that they continue to shoot for further HR. The EHD played in their favor, as they are of course encountering hunter resistance statewide to continue the slaughter. Bet they are only hoping it happens again. Maybe on a broader scale than before, eh? If you think about it, it's the perfect virus. Supposedly not transferable to humans, transmitted by midges, kills quickly and effectively. Couldn't design it better if they had tried. Animal control speciaists researching birth control options for deer pale in their successes reducing or maintaining populations to what EHD can potentially do in a short period of time.
04-13-2009, 07:50 AM
#139
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
"So my question still is,does the PGC have any idea how many deer were killed by EHD ?"
Well, according to Galthatfishes, the total conservative estimate ended up beingin the neighborhood of3000 to 4000 if I remeber correctly. Funny thing is, the last publicly announcedestimates were in the 1000 range,and everyone here knew it was a joke. That estimate was made early on, and many caseswerestill being found all along, yet the estimate released to press never changed and they ran with it, none the wiser. Even though pgc later had an estimation over3 times as high.
To my knowledge the newest estimate never made print anywhere, an in my opinion the true death toll was not released for fear of having more guys in the area less willing to shoot does. Pgc deciet and damage control at itsfinest. As is ALWAYS the case these days.
The estimate, Gal said, came straight from Pgcs Dr. Cottrell. I had linked to her statementto show it in discussion several times to show it on other boards, doubt its still there nowafter this long though.
Well, according to Galthatfishes, the total conservative estimate ended up beingin the neighborhood of3000 to 4000 if I remeber correctly. Funny thing is, the last publicly announcedestimates were in the 1000 range,and everyone here knew it was a joke. That estimate was made early on, and many caseswerestill being found all along, yet the estimate released to press never changed and they ran with it, none the wiser. Even though pgc later had an estimation over3 times as high.
To my knowledge the newest estimate never made print anywhere, an in my opinion the true death toll was not released for fear of having more guys in the area less willing to shoot does. Pgc deciet and damage control at itsfinest. As is ALWAYS the case these days.
The estimate, Gal said, came straight from Pgcs Dr. Cottrell. I had linked to her statementto show it in discussion several times to show it on other boards, doubt its still there nowafter this long though.
04-13-2009, 08:01 AM
#140
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 175
RE: At this period of time, do you favor a hunting license increase?
The EHD played in their favor, as they are of course encountering hunter resistance statewide to continue the slaughter. Bet they are only hoping it happens again. Maybe on a broader scale than before, eh? If you think about it, it's the perfect virus. Supposedly not transferable to humans, transmitted by midges, kills quickly and effectively. Couldn't design it better if they had tried. Animal control speciaists researching birth control options for deer pale in their successes reducing or maintaining populations to what EHD can potentially do in a short period of time.
Can you say "PGC" conspiracy ?????
Can you say "PGC" conspiracy ?????
