bawanajim

Responsible management is exactly what were getting yet you seen to despise it. Responsible management means looking at the whole picture. Responsible means understanding that our desires are not more important than any others desires.There more to being responsible than demanding more deer.
I too would like to have more deer, and I do my best to have more deer, through land and hunter management.And you can too.
I see no benefit in belittling or making degrading comments about how other hunters see responsible deer management .Take control of your hunting get involved and educate others on the benefits of discipline in doe harvest and over harvest.

J Pike

MPH PA., For me the kill has always been very very important.
I spend all year in the woods, Feb thru April enjoying shed hunting every bit as much as hunting, From May thru Sept, I enjoy using my trail cams as much as hunting, from mid July thru Sept I enjoy sitting in my stands hunting deer with my bino's and video camera just as much as deer hunting, but from about the 3rd week in Sept thru the end of Jan. its all about the kill. I can enjoy everything else about hunting, nature ect. the other 9 months of the year. But the one thing I do not under stand is that I read on this site and others all the time about the kill isnt that important, but I rarely see any one else sitting in stands, glassing deer, shed hunting, and just taking walks thu the deer woods the other 9 months of the year. If they truely did enjoy all the other aspects of deer hunting as much or even more than the kill then you would think the same guys I see everywhere in the deer woods during the deer seasons, I would also run into in the woods the other 9 months of the year. Pike

bluebird2

No, we are not getting responsible deer manage. Implementing ARs in SRA areas makes absolutely no sense and is totally irresponsible. Implementing ARs in order to protect one class of deer is irresponsible since there was no biological reason to implement ARs. Claiming that they are managing the herd based on herd health and forest health,when there is no correlation to the deer density goals is totally irresponsible.

Cornelius08

"Responsible management means looking at the whole picture"

Exactly. And thats not happening. Any states management plan would have to consider any management decisions effects on hunting itself. It is being given ZERO consideration and its not because of wishing to right the ship where other management basics are concerned, its to give complete hack nutjobs ridiculous amounts of biodiversity hobble bush, trillium etc. And thats simply not acceptable. It goes far beyond solid management goal basics. All for something most do not need or care one lick about. But it is costing us more than most want to spend. Pgc is in financial trouble, hunters numbers dwindling and hunter satisfaction in the toilet. NOT a good trade-off. Any "responsible" management scheme would incorporate reasonable compromises between stakeholders. Thats not happening when the deer densities are as low as any states goals in the nation. That is what you call going to "extremes".

bawanajim

You would whine about being hung with a new rope.
AR is are state wide for enforcement reasoning and you know it.
HR is responsible because we were killing to many 1.5 year old bucks another fact that you refuse to acknowledge.
Your half truths carry no water any more we've all heard them before.[]

As you know there is no proof that 2.5 year old bucks are any bigger than before AR's. Right?

bluebird2

If that were true, SRAs would have been included the first year ARs were implemented , but they weren't.
HR has little to do with killing too many 1.5 bucks and there is no evidence that killing 80& of the 1.5 buck had any negative impact on herd health.


I have the facts to support my position while all you have is your opinions.
BTW, please produce the data that shows our 2.5+ buck are higger now than before ARs. Dr. Rosenberry says that data doesn't exist.

bawanajim

[quote]ORIGINAL: bluebird2

So when the adjustments that you scream for are made they are irrelevant?
Anyone with triple digit IQ knows that basing the reproduction of a species on one year class is just inviting disaster.

Even the most naive of respondents can come to the obvious conclusion that with more and better food, an older class ofbreeding deer and a tad of common sense would realize the most basic of conclusions.
Your bitterness and tunnel vision prevents even the most obvious of conclusions from being clear to even you.

bluebird2

I see you are back to posting total nonsense in order to avoid addressing the issues.

Please learn how to use the quote function!!

bawanajim

Even a the elementary level you have admitted to defeat.

fellas2

MGH PA , your original post says a lot about what the essence of hunting is all about and why so many people have enjoyed it for so long.It is a shame that you are not old enough to experience what "deer camp" was like in the big woods years ago like I am because it was something you looked forward to it from the day after the season closed the previous year.That being said,I have seen all of the change that has occured since then and the majority has not been good.For you younger guys,it is possible for you enjoy and be overwhelmed by the sucess of today not knowing what you have missed by 2 or 3 decades.I like to use the analogy of some one who has only eaten hot dogs ,even though they're great they don't really know what they're missing until they eat a piece of good prime rib.If you don't have a good camparison,it's hard to judge what you have.Guys that come on this forum and paint some rosey picture of the PGC,it's policies,and the state of hunting today are only playing the part of the ostrich and will never admit to the decline of was once a proud tradition for many generations in this state.Those who come on here and brag about not "needing" to kill a deer to enjoy hunting are often the same guys who promote AR in the hopes of hanging a bigger set of horns on the wall.If walking in the woods was that enjoyable,they wouldn't buy a license,wouldn't carry a gun,and would stay out of the woods during the season and do their walking other times of the year.After all,it's called hunting for a reason and even though a good day afield doesn't always mean coming home with game,it sure makes the experience a whole lot more enjoyable.It's hard to get excited today about the state of affairs when you look at the license increases,bag limit changes,lack of public land available,overwheliming amount of posted property,lack of game,rules and regulations that change from year to year,and the general attitude of some of our PGS's finest.Couple that with the state of the economy,lack of courtesy and consideration of a few,greed of others and a general feeling apathy and negativity it's not hard want to lash out when things aren't going well.I still love hunting,it's still my favorite pastime,but like many others I miss the days when you could sit on your back porch and hear bobwhite quail calling to each other.I miss the days when a trip afield with a good dog would produce dozens of "wild " pheasants,hours of listening to the howl of a beagle hot on the trail of a rabbit and never running into another hunter or a disgruntled landowner or posted property signs.There are less licensed hunters today than back then so please don't tell me it's not possible again.Somewhere along the line many hunters,landowners,and PGC have lost their focus on the real issues and have let the voices of groups like Peta,Audobon Society,and other tree hugging consevationist groups dictate policy and proceedures.Maybe,just maybe it's time to take hard look at how things were and try to return to times back then when life was cheaper, simpler,and more enjoyable.