Some people just aren’t logical enough in their thought processing to really understand cause and affect. You seem to be such a person and tend to see things all wrong or backwards.

Most logical thinking people, seeing a horse and cart going down the road would figure the horse was pulling the cart along. I expect you somehow see it as the cart pushing the horse down the road, don’t you?

R.S. Bodenhorn

What anyone can see is it is impossible for you to analyze dat objectively because of your extreme bias . In order to analyze the effects of the harvest data you presented one would also have to know the size of the over wintering herd that produced those harvests. The high harvests from 2000 to 2002 came from a herd that had already been reduced to less than 15 DPSM and it is irrational to expect less than 15 DPSM to produce a sustainable harvest of over 9 DPSM.

What the data clearly shows is that the high harvest of 1999-2002 reduced the OWDD from 14 DPSM to less than 10 DPSM and as a result the sustainable harvest was cut by over 50%

Well that explains it then. When you said the "last 20 years", you really meant the last 65-75 years.

Well then using that goofy analogy explain what happened between the early nineties, when 2G hunters had been harvesting more deer for several year then any time since, that the hunters could continue to sustain those relatively higher harvests but couldn’t sustain even lower harvests for a shorter time period ten years later?

The fact is that during the late nineties the harvests were increased to bring the deer numbers into balance with the habitat. But, hunters and politicians through a fit and demanded that the allocations and doe harvests be reduced. I was at a meeting where a high powered politician flat out made the statement that if the Game Commission didn’t reduce the allocations he would introduce legislation to take their regulatory powers away and they would decide how many license to issue.

As a result over the next five years, beginning in 1992, the allocations across the entire north central region of the state were cut over 18%. As I already said the deer herds got away with that only because we were having a run of mild winters and good mast years. Even then the deer populations weren’t high enough to satisfy the hunters and they still complained. So, during the next five years the allocations were cut another 5% and the deer harvests went even lower.

After ten years of lower doe harvests the deer herd should have exploded but it didn’t, in fact the buck harvests declined by over 13% during those lower doe harvest years, and before they were affected by any change in the antler restrictions. That alone is a very clear indication that the deer population was already declining as a result of harvesting fewer does.

Finally in 2000 there was once again a attempt to get the deer population back in balance with the existing habitat and that went on for three years of very modest harvest increase, though still lower then the harvests had been a little more then a decade before. It was simply too little and too late to avoid having a major deer population crash with two back to back hard winters followed by several more years of poor mast crops.

The habitat in unit 2G simply couldn’t the number of deer hunters and politicians were demanding so the deer started the process of reducing their own numbers, Then when those hard winters came along the bottom fell out and the deer herd crashed. Anyone that really understands both the deer harvest history data and the habitat the deer live in can clearly see that the deer population crashed from under harvest instead of over harvest.

That is simply how nature works and neither you, the politicians, the Game Commission or anyone else screaming and shouting can change the way nature works. We can either get smart enough to work with nature or we can continue to make those same STUPID mistakes over and over again and in even more areas until they too are ruined to where they support very few deer.

R.S. Bodenhorn

Rsb do you ever get tired of spewing forth completely unabashed nonsense? lmao. Too many deer were harvested....the harvests WERE NOT SUSTAINABLE because the herd was declining... and a MUCH lower herd gives us a MUCH lower harvest. How flippin' simple is that? A friggin moron could understand that even in a semiconscious state! [8D][8D][8D]

Most people realize that the 52K antlerless tags issued in 2G in 2003 and 2004 were designed to reduce the herd and they accomplished just that . As a result the herd in 2G was reduced from 15 OWDPSM in 2000 to 12 PS DPSM or 8-9 OWDPSM in 2006. There simply is no way 8-9 DPSM can sustain a harvest that a herd of 15 DPSM would produce. It is just that simple and if you weren't so indoctrinated even you might be able to grasp the simple concept of using antlerless harvests to reduce the herd.

A person with logic would be quick to realize that SGL will receive an overabundance of hunting pressure compared to private land so why would anyone be surprised at a lower number of deer than on land that can be controlled and regulated as the owner sees fit.

But only a fool would make that point when the discussion is about the herd reduction in all of 2G, not just on SGLs.

You hitting the bong that hard?

Take a look at the top of the page and read it to yourself real slow. says something about
"Game lands" [&:]

Do you know the difference in 2G and Kenny G ?

Do you know up from down or black from white?