Interview with Pa wmu 2A archery shop owner
09-21-2009, 08:10 AM
#51
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"Can I ask a question? Why is it the PGC fault?"
Because they are paid MANY millions of dollars each and every year to manage the resource.
"We all have choices. Just because the have the doe tags available doesn't mean we have to shoot them off."
You know that. I know that. Try organizing 900,000 hunters, many of which have no interest in anything other than going out and huntin' or filling the freezer, and dont delve into the "management" aspects. Id say they are most likely the majority.
"As for the Antler Restr. its working alot more older bucks."
In you area maybe. It certainly isnt working here. Dont have more and bigger buck when our herd was cut in half....and it shows. I do support ar, but not the extent of the excessive ridiculous hr.
"I am a bow hunter mostly where the deer move because of the rut."
Same for me, i bowhunt. I dont rifle hunt at all.
"But in rifle hunters have to move them and its not really happening anymore. IMO - Why people aren't moving the deer because of less and less of public hunting land is available to hunt. People are buying or leasing land and are sitting and not driving."
Or you can simply look at the pgc data and see that the herd was significantly cut, and that was the goal. This easily explains why there are so many fewer deer, and no excuses or other explanation is needed. There is MORE public hunting land NOW in Pa than there was 20 years ago not less. MORE gamelands have been bought, farm/game co-op lands etc. People arent driving deer any less or walking any less than previously. Somewhat more are buying land and leasing thanks to pgc making that the only option to have good hunting assured. Though they are still a minority in this state. Only different between now and the year 2000 is several hundred thousand less deer.
Because they are paid MANY millions of dollars each and every year to manage the resource.
"We all have choices. Just because the have the doe tags available doesn't mean we have to shoot them off."
You know that. I know that. Try organizing 900,000 hunters, many of which have no interest in anything other than going out and huntin' or filling the freezer, and dont delve into the "management" aspects. Id say they are most likely the majority.
"As for the Antler Restr. its working alot more older bucks."
In you area maybe. It certainly isnt working here. Dont have more and bigger buck when our herd was cut in half....and it shows. I do support ar, but not the extent of the excessive ridiculous hr.
"I am a bow hunter mostly where the deer move because of the rut."
Same for me, i bowhunt. I dont rifle hunt at all.
"But in rifle hunters have to move them and its not really happening anymore. IMO - Why people aren't moving the deer because of less and less of public hunting land is available to hunt. People are buying or leasing land and are sitting and not driving."
Or you can simply look at the pgc data and see that the herd was significantly cut, and that was the goal. This easily explains why there are so many fewer deer, and no excuses or other explanation is needed. There is MORE public hunting land NOW in Pa than there was 20 years ago not less. MORE gamelands have been bought, farm/game co-op lands etc. People arent driving deer any less or walking any less than previously. Somewhat more are buying land and leasing thanks to pgc making that the only option to have good hunting assured. Though they are still a minority in this state. Only different between now and the year 2000 is several hundred thousand less deer.
09-21-2009, 08:21 AM
#52
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 103
"Can I ask a question? Why is it the PGC fault?"
Because they are paid MANY millions of dollars each and every year to manage the resource.
"We all have choices. Just because the have the doe tags available doesn't mean we have to shoot them off."
You know that. I know that. Try organizing 900,000 hunters, many of which have no interest in anything other than going out and huntin' or filling the freezer, and dont delve into the "management" aspects. Id say they are most likely the majority.
"As for the Antler Restr. its working alot more older bucks."
In you area maybe. It certainly isnt working here. Dont have more and bigger buck when our herd was cut in half....and it shows. I do support ar, but not the extent of the excessive ridiculous hr.
"I am a bow hunter mostly where the deer move because of the rut."
Same for me, i bowhunt. I dont rifle hunt at all.
"But in rifle hunters have to move them and its not really happening anymore. IMO - Why people aren't moving the deer because of less and less of public hunting land is available to hunt. People are buying or leasing land and are sitting and not driving."
Or you can simply look at the pgc data and see that the herd was significantly cut, and that was the goal. This easily explains why there are so many fewer deer, and no excuses or other explanation is needed. There is MORE public hunting land NOW in Pa than there was 20 years ago not less. MORE gamelands have been bought, farm/game co-op lands etc. People arent driving deer any less or walking any less than previously. Somewhat more are buying land and leasing thanks to pgc making that the only option to have good hunting assured. Though they are still a minority in this state. Only different between now and the year 2000 is several hundred thousand less deer.
Because they are paid MANY millions of dollars each and every year to manage the resource.
"We all have choices. Just because the have the doe tags available doesn't mean we have to shoot them off."
You know that. I know that. Try organizing 900,000 hunters, many of which have no interest in anything other than going out and huntin' or filling the freezer, and dont delve into the "management" aspects. Id say they are most likely the majority.
"As for the Antler Restr. its working alot more older bucks."
In you area maybe. It certainly isnt working here. Dont have more and bigger buck when our herd was cut in half....and it shows. I do support ar, but not the extent of the excessive ridiculous hr.
"I am a bow hunter mostly where the deer move because of the rut."
Same for me, i bowhunt. I dont rifle hunt at all.
"But in rifle hunters have to move them and its not really happening anymore. IMO - Why people aren't moving the deer because of less and less of public hunting land is available to hunt. People are buying or leasing land and are sitting and not driving."
Or you can simply look at the pgc data and see that the herd was significantly cut, and that was the goal. This easily explains why there are so many fewer deer, and no excuses or other explanation is needed. There is MORE public hunting land NOW in Pa than there was 20 years ago not less. MORE gamelands have been bought, farm/game co-op lands etc. People arent driving deer any less or walking any less than previously. Somewhat more are buying land and leasing thanks to pgc making that the only option to have good hunting assured. Though they are still a minority in this state. Only different between now and the year 2000 is several hundred thousand less deer.
How do you make it right in those counties that are feeling those effects?
09-21-2009, 08:34 AM
#53
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
"Can I ask a question? Why is it the PGC fault?"
Because they are paid MANY millions of dollars each and every year to manage the resource.
"We all have choices. Just because the have the doe tags available doesn't mean we have to shoot them off."
You know that. I know that. Try organizing 900,000 hunters, many of which have no interest in anything other than going out and huntin' or filling the freezer, and dont delve into the "management" aspects. Id say they are most likely the majority.
"As for the Antler Restr. its working alot more older bucks."
In you area maybe. It certainly isnt working here. Dont have more and bigger buck when our herd was cut in half....and it shows. I do support ar, but not the extent of the excessive ridiculous hr.
"I am a bow hunter mostly where the deer move because of the rut."
Same for me, i bowhunt. I dont rifle hunt at all.
"But in rifle hunters have to move them and its not really happening anymore. IMO - Why people aren't moving the deer because of less and less of public hunting land is available to hunt. People are buying or leasing land and are sitting and not driving."
Or you can simply look at the pgc data and see that the herd was significantly cut, and that was the goal. This easily explains why there are so many fewer deer, and no excuses or other explanation is needed. There is MORE public hunting land NOW in Pa than there was 20 years ago not less. MORE gamelands have been bought, farm/game co-op lands etc. People arent driving deer any less or walking any less than previously. Somewhat more are buying land and leasing thanks to pgc making that the only option to have good hunting assured. Though they are still a minority in this state. Only different between now and the year 2000 is several hundred thousand less deer.
Because they are paid MANY millions of dollars each and every year to manage the resource.
"We all have choices. Just because the have the doe tags available doesn't mean we have to shoot them off."
You know that. I know that. Try organizing 900,000 hunters, many of which have no interest in anything other than going out and huntin' or filling the freezer, and dont delve into the "management" aspects. Id say they are most likely the majority.
"As for the Antler Restr. its working alot more older bucks."
In you area maybe. It certainly isnt working here. Dont have more and bigger buck when our herd was cut in half....and it shows. I do support ar, but not the extent of the excessive ridiculous hr.
"I am a bow hunter mostly where the deer move because of the rut."
Same for me, i bowhunt. I dont rifle hunt at all.
"But in rifle hunters have to move them and its not really happening anymore. IMO - Why people aren't moving the deer because of less and less of public hunting land is available to hunt. People are buying or leasing land and are sitting and not driving."
Or you can simply look at the pgc data and see that the herd was significantly cut, and that was the goal. This easily explains why there are so many fewer deer, and no excuses or other explanation is needed. There is MORE public hunting land NOW in Pa than there was 20 years ago not less. MORE gamelands have been bought, farm/game co-op lands etc. People arent driving deer any less or walking any less than previously. Somewhat more are buying land and leasing thanks to pgc making that the only option to have good hunting assured. Though they are still a minority in this state. Only different between now and the year 2000 is several hundred thousand less deer.
in clinton county we are not seeing more bucks but ones we do see are bigger horns.we used to see 3 bucks a drive in good area,now about 1 in good area for about lets say 100 hunters.
most of hunters i see dont seem to care if 1 doe is left in a area.the worst are the out of town hunters or 1 week at camp hunters.sadly some of these hunters already got 1 or 2 doe in another county and are here to get more
.this is not all of above,some dont shoot a doe at camp.biggest liers are ones locally i know that say,SPROUL I DONT KILL A DOE I BOUGHT 3 DOE TAGS BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN SAVING A DOE.yes, there are hunters that buy a doe tag and not use it but MOST fib.they have to FILL FREEZER at all cost.
so,if i stop a gang of doe hunters like i did last year.i said, GUYS WE HAVE 3 DOE LEFT IN THIS AREA COULD YOU PASS ON DOE.1 young kid said, I GO TO HARRISBURG COLLEGE AND I SAW HERDS OF DOE IN HERE SPROUL.HIS EYEGLASSES WERE AS THICK AS MINE,LOOKED LIKE BOTTOM OF COKE BOTTLE, MINE TOO.his grandfather said, SPROUL HE IS A HECK OF HUNTER.
with this type of FIBBING no way we will ever be able to manage sfl.they did not want to hear the FACTS from me.they said, OUT OF WAY SPROUL,YO HO, YO HO,YO HO
09-21-2009, 11:27 AM
#54
Spike
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Watrous Pa 2G
Posts: 23
[How do you make it right in those counties that are feeling those effects?
09-21-2009, 11:30 AM
#55
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"How do you make it right in those counties that are feeling those effects?"
That problem has a very simple solution. Cut the doe allocation.
More doe birthing more bucks to be saved by antler restrictions in the first place would = more and bigger buck than currently is the case with ar and far less than necessary/ half (or less in some areas) the deer numbers.
That problem has a very simple solution. Cut the doe allocation.
More doe birthing more bucks to be saved by antler restrictions in the first place would = more and bigger buck than currently is the case with ar and far less than necessary/ half (or less in some areas) the deer numbers.
09-21-2009, 11:45 AM
#56
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"By tweaking the program as promised in the hardest hit WMUs."
It needs tweaked everywhere. The carry capacity of the habitat isnt the same in the southwest as it is in the northwest and the southeast isnt the same as north central....etc. Some cases not even close. Though pretty much ALL of them are FAR below cc. for no good reason. Only units that any possible argument for fewer deer even exists at all is in sras where human conflict is the claimed issue.
" He11, in the hardest hit WMU in the state, which is 2G, we don't even have a CAC commitee yet!"
Consider yourself lucky. Those I have followed have been a complete travesty and joke. Some very well known Pgc insiders have taken part on cacs and attempt is made to greatly limit hunter involvement yet many antideer factions are encouraged and sought out to attend. The very design of the cac itself is made to = no increase. No matter how many attend, if only TWO disagree = no increase to deer density. PERIOD. If 5 or 50 want MORE deer doesnt make a damn bit of diff. if two econuts want less or one farmer + one forester.. whatever.. and 20 others representing hunters, landowners, business owners etc. want more... At best, you are getting "stabilization". And stabilization = more reduction according to pgc data of "stabilized" units thusfar. SHould be MAJORITY RULE PERIOD.
Cac's are a complete joke, consider yourself lucky it hasnt happened in your neck of the woods, as its an insult to our intelligence and provides deceptive b.s. grounds for herd increase prevention. And if there is any justice (which currently there isnt) this sham will be either 100% done away with or reconfigured.
It needs tweaked everywhere. The carry capacity of the habitat isnt the same in the southwest as it is in the northwest and the southeast isnt the same as north central....etc. Some cases not even close. Though pretty much ALL of them are FAR below cc. for no good reason. Only units that any possible argument for fewer deer even exists at all is in sras where human conflict is the claimed issue.
" He11, in the hardest hit WMU in the state, which is 2G, we don't even have a CAC commitee yet!"
Consider yourself lucky. Those I have followed have been a complete travesty and joke. Some very well known Pgc insiders have taken part on cacs and attempt is made to greatly limit hunter involvement yet many antideer factions are encouraged and sought out to attend. The very design of the cac itself is made to = no increase. No matter how many attend, if only TWO disagree = no increase to deer density. PERIOD. If 5 or 50 want MORE deer doesnt make a damn bit of diff. if two econuts want less or one farmer + one forester.. whatever.. and 20 others representing hunters, landowners, business owners etc. want more... At best, you are getting "stabilization". And stabilization = more reduction according to pgc data of "stabilized" units thusfar. SHould be MAJORITY RULE PERIOD.
Cac's are a complete joke, consider yourself lucky it hasnt happened in your neck of the woods, as its an insult to our intelligence and provides deceptive b.s. grounds for herd increase prevention. And if there is any justice (which currently there isnt) this sham will be either 100% done away with or reconfigured.
09-21-2009, 03:50 PM
#57
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
"By tweaking the program as promised in the hardest hit WMUs."
It needs tweaked everywhere. The carry capacity of the habitat isnt the same in the southwest as it is in the northwest and the southeast isnt the same as north central....etc. Some cases not even close. Though pretty much ALL of them are FAR below cc. for no good reason. Only units that any possible argument for fewer deer even exists at all is in sras where human conflict is the claimed issue.
" He11, in the hardest hit WMU in the state, which is 2G, we don't even have a CAC commitee yet!"
Consider yourself lucky. Those I have followed have been a complete travesty and joke. Some very well known Pgc insiders have taken part on cacs and attempt is made to greatly limit hunter involvement yet many antideer factions are encouraged and sought out to attend. The very design of the cac itself is made to = no increase. No matter how many attend, if only TWO disagree = no increase to deer density. PERIOD. If 5 or 50 want MORE deer doesnt make a damn bit of diff. if two econuts want less or one farmer + one forester.. whatever.. and 20 others representing hunters, landowners, business owners etc. want more... At best, you are getting "stabilization". And stabilization = more reduction according to pgc data of "stabilized" units thusfar. SHould be MAJORITY RULE PERIOD.
Cac's are a complete joke, consider yourself lucky it hasnt happened in your neck of the woods, as its an insult to our intelligence and provides deceptive b.s. grounds for herd increase prevention. And if there is any justice (which currently there isnt) this sham will be either 100% done away with or reconfigured.
It needs tweaked everywhere. The carry capacity of the habitat isnt the same in the southwest as it is in the northwest and the southeast isnt the same as north central....etc. Some cases not even close. Though pretty much ALL of them are FAR below cc. for no good reason. Only units that any possible argument for fewer deer even exists at all is in sras where human conflict is the claimed issue.
" He11, in the hardest hit WMU in the state, which is 2G, we don't even have a CAC commitee yet!"
Consider yourself lucky. Those I have followed have been a complete travesty and joke. Some very well known Pgc insiders have taken part on cacs and attempt is made to greatly limit hunter involvement yet many antideer factions are encouraged and sought out to attend. The very design of the cac itself is made to = no increase. No matter how many attend, if only TWO disagree = no increase to deer density. PERIOD. If 5 or 50 want MORE deer doesnt make a damn bit of diff. if two econuts want less or one farmer + one forester.. whatever.. and 20 others representing hunters, landowners, business owners etc. want more... At best, you are getting "stabilization". And stabilization = more reduction according to pgc data of "stabilized" units thusfar. SHould be MAJORITY RULE PERIOD.
Cac's are a complete joke, consider yourself lucky it hasnt happened in your neck of the woods, as its an insult to our intelligence and provides deceptive b.s. grounds for herd increase prevention. And if there is any justice (which currently there isnt) this sham will be either 100% done away with or reconfigured.
i attended 1 of those meetings.president of sportsmans club said to group,I FILL MY FREEZER EVERY YEAR AND HAVE NO TROUBLE DOING IT IN WMU2G CLINTON COUNTY.
then 1 hr later a hunter said to him, I BOUGHT MY GUN AND SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TO DEER HUNT, I WOULD AT LEAST LIKE TO SEE SOME DEER AND GET A DEER.
here comes big one from the president of club.YOU DONT HAVE TO KILL A DEER TO ENJOY WOODS..................
as paul harvey used to say, GOOD DAY!
09-22-2009, 09:45 AM
#58
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Well, our c.a.c had you guys beat you there sproulman. We had GALTHATFISHES from hunting pa/pgc volunteer/cheerleader on our cac!!!!!!!!!!!! If you are a deer hunter, it doesnt get much scarier than that!
Do i even need to tell you what her vote was? Luckily there were some people who know what is going on and care, so the vote overall ended up in a forced compromise of "stabilization" and not her wished for decrease to save the trillium and hobblebush was thwarted.
Do i even need to tell you what her vote was? Luckily there were some people who know what is going on and care, so the vote overall ended up in a forced compromise of "stabilization" and not her wished for decrease to save the trillium and hobblebush was thwarted.
