That is what you said in a previous post. Note , you said the data on forest health can not be used in any way shape or form , which means in your opinion the data can't be used to manage the herd and determine antlerless allocations, but that is exactly what the PGC claims they are doing. Furthermore, the PGC has stated that the measure of forest health is not a measure of habitat health,so once again you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

The PGC uses herd health as a measure of habitat health and that is why all but WMU is at or above its goal for herd health.

I understand where some think by buying up doe tags and not using them it is saving the doe population.I have to look at the broad picture and the way the pgc thinks.the more doe tags you buy and not use only shows the pgc that it took that many more hunters to get the harvest numbers they needed and thus it will look at the numbers and decide to give out even more doe tags next time to achieve that goal.I myself believe we should go back to 3 days of doe hunting like before for awhile but, buying doe tags up is not the solution to the problem only a contributer to it.

Ever think that maybe the same guys who buy the doe tags to "save a doe" are also issuing a false harvest report for that very reason?

One deer per hunter per year. If you shoot a buck your done. If you want a doe permit it should be available when you buy your license or anytime after.That would save money. One per person. If you decide to shoot a doe thats it no buck. One deer per person a year. If they NEED ,NOT want more doe shot, Because the POP is over 60 deer PSQ.MILE then they could give away another doe permit for a specific area only. But never exceed more then 2 doe per person a year in problem areas.Many states do it that way and it is working.Instead of 3 out of ten get a deer ,it is more like 8 out of ten will be eating venison.

If we get on that "other states" bandwagon, then what about all the states that offer nearly unlimited doe tags and nearly unlimited opportunities to take multiple does and even bucks?

Yeah I know, many states also have far fewer hunters than we do and "plenty" of deer to go around. Which is the operative phrase here too, for those who live and hunt where there are still "plenty" of deer around.

Hunted for nearly 30 years here under "one and done" regs. I like that we can now take at least two deer, when possible and if we want to.

I understand your feelings,believe me I hunted 50 years in Pa before moving and totally leaving and putting pa, hunting behind me 2 years ago. But I just dont see a future for anyone in pa especially the youth. One thing though , being able to buy your doe permit when you buy your license does simplify the procedure and will save cost. Plus I find the physical check in of the deer a good idea. All I have to do is take the deer to any place that sells a license and they mark it down in a book. No fuss really.Local gas stations, walmarts, general stores are able to do it Even people like myself who hunt only my property and dont require a hunting license must check a deer in. I think we get a better count.

Everyone here in PA receives a postage-paid big game report card that takes about 15 seconds to fill out, if successful. If everyone that killed a deer, did that, no need for check stations and the PGC would have a more complete data base. As it is now, there are enough different types of data collected within their system to make it work, so it suits me.

It apparently also suited those professional wildlife biologists that peer-reviewed our system for the Journal of Wildlife Management a few years ago and found it to be acceptable?

I consider having to go out of my way to lug a deer to a check station, an unecessary inconvenience, even if they had one in the town nearest my camp. That's a 14+ mile roundtrip. The local big buck contest location doesn't even stay open after 7PM now and that would likely be the place chosen, should PA ever go to checks. Might work for those going home after they've been successful and passing multiple stations? I stay for the entire season now.

How many other states with check station systems, have given them up, or are thinking about giving them up? If everyone doesn't stop and have their deer checked, how accurate are their systems?

"Everyone here in PA receives a postage-paid big game report card that takes about 15 seconds to fill out, if successful. If everyone that killed a deer, did that, no need for check stations and the PGC would have a more complete data base. As it is now, there are enough different types of data collected within their system to make it work, so it suits me."

The harvest reporting isnt the problem. Of course it would be nice if everyone turned in a harvest, but assuming the current system is at least fairly accurate, that leaves the goals of the program as the problem. Biodiversity extreme goals. I dont have a problem with the pgc claims of how many deer we have. They are flat out telling us we have relatively few when they post the data on the anual reports that shows us when the highest wmu density in the state is less than 25 owdpsm and continuing to decline which is one of the lowest goals per best area of a state...and other areas of our state have less than 10 dpsm which are as low as pretty much anywhere whitetails exist. Keep the reporting system if need be....but do the right thing and cut the allocation.

I can take a ride around the mountain and see more than 25 dpsm. I gotta wonder about there numbers.

You have no idea if you are seeing 25 DPSM. You see groups of deer in open areas along the road and assume the other areas that you don't see have the same number of deer. it is simply impossible to determine DD by driving around the roads.