"I know a few guys in Illinois that would love to have Cornie come over there and advocate for them. "

No thanks lanse. You are a much better man for the job. I dont go around the country poking my nose into what other states should or shouldnt do with their deer herd simply for the sake of argument.

We reduced our herd by 40% and still have a problem with roadkills.So in your opinion , how much more should the herd be reduced?

"Wanna tell us where that number came from?

Same place as your "vast majority" that opposes the current DMP"

Cmon now btb. Dont you know by now to give me the benefit of a doubt because my word is GOLDEN? As you know, I was referring to the "farmers" lanse mentioned. According to usda there are an estimated 58,000 farms in Pa. There were 12,448,279 People in Pa in 2008 according to the census bureau, and that kind sir, as i said is less than ONE PERCENT.

As for the The "vast majority" not supporting the deer plan, isnt even debatable so i dont exactly feel compelled to "prove" anything in that regard. Its ridiculously common - common knowledge.


"At least when the bird posts a stat, he has some basis from which he twists things. You just pull the numbers outta your backside!"
Hardly. Im not going to call you a liar. But that IS a lie.:s13:http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0883513.html

2nd link of proof for btb. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42000.html



"The point of mentioning crop damage, timber damage and even car accidents is that while hunters pay to manage them, the deer herd costs everyone a little something so only an arrogant idiot would ignore that we (deer hunters) are the useful minority and the continued existence of our sport depends on continued favorable support from the nonhunting majority."

Agree with all. But there is absolutely NO reason to believe if we dont bend over on command and accept everything and anything we are dealt and the extremes, that society will no longer support hunting!! Society didnt demand this nonsense not by a long-shot. They supported hunting when the herd was basically double in size and there is no reason why they wouldnt if the herd size were somewhere in between now and then!! Those whining about less deer will always do so even with less yet, and we shouldnt allow them to dictate management...Period. For some its pure greed and $. For others they are simply nuts. Environmentalist extremists.:hit:

I said "We are also one of the most populated states with the most roads. Where should we rank?"
Btb says: "Uh not exactly. "

Yes. Exactly.

"As a matter of fact Pa and Ohio are almost dead nuts equal on human population per square mile

Thats not what was stated. I stated we had one of the highest populations and more roads than most states. And your reply has anything to do with anything exactly HOW? And you dare talk about OTHERS pulling things out of ones backside! No one said a thing about density statewide per square mile lol. You tried to change the issue. Fact of the matter is WE have according to the 2008 surveys of Pa and Ohio, we have nearly a MILLION more people running around than ohio! Thats a bigger difference than some states have population total! Nuff said.

LOL, I see you've been taking lessons from the bird.

Funny how you try to say your 1% is the farmers only but that wasnt what was said. The continued existence of hunting as we know it depends on our value to the nonhunting public. No, of course we dont "bend over" but too many hunters have forgotten that it's the timber companies who have been the single largest block of private landowners who have always welcomed ud with open arms on their ground. Now guys like you, the bird and the USP types continue to bash and demonize our hosts because they expect a decent return on their investment. They didnt buy all that property, maintain it and pay the taxes on it all these years just to produce a deer herd for us to hunt. They are in the timber BUSINESS. The minute that becomes unprofitable, they'll bail and who knows what'll happen to our sport then.


Oh, and your "vast majority" has been disproven by every credible poll done to date. No the tainted ones done here don't count. Sooooorrrrrry:confused0024:


PS: according to Odot Ohio has 188000 + miles of road

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions...ents/RI82b.htm

Penndot doesnt have a similar page but wikipedia says PA has 118000 miles of road

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions...ents/RI82b.htm

Not really important information except in the context of showing that you are willing to type without knowing the real facts

[QUOTE]Now guys like you, the bird and the USP types continue to bash and demonize our hosts because they expect a decent return on their investment. [/QUOTE

That is another flat out lie. No one is demonizing or bashing the timber industry or other property owners. What we are questioning is if the PGC is lying to us when they claim they base the doe tag allocations on herd health and forest health. As yet no one can explain why the PGC wants to keep the herd stable in 11 WMUs when forest health varies significantly and there is no apparent correlation between deer densities and forest health.

[quote=bluebird2;3450190]
LOL C'mon. Did you keep a staright face when you typed
Almost every page of this forum contains some reference to the timber industry and DCNR calling the shots or blackmailing the PGC

OK, that little joke of yours aside, you're long on criticism of the PGC deer goals. I was always taught not to criticize without a constructive alternative to offer. You've been asked to produce that many times here. How would you determine the goals and specifically what would they be? You claim to have all the facts the PGC uses so what's your plan?

Got an answer for us yet???

"Funny how you try to say your 1% is the farmers only but that wasnt what was said."

If you go back and look you'll see it was in reply to lanses "farmer brown" scenario. I think it was made pretty clear. You had your sources provided very quickly after you questioned the stat.

"The continued existence of hunting as we know it depends on our value to the nonhunting public. "

Yes. Majority of which do not demand current deer levels PERIOD. So why use that as an excuse? Especially when its definately not beneficial to the sport itself, which some do find important!

"No, of course we dont "bend over" but too many hunters have forgotten that it's the timber companies who have been the single largest block of private landowners who have always welcomed ud with open arms on their ground. Now guys like you, the bird and the USP types continue to bash and demonize our hosts because they expect a decent return on their investment."

I dont mean to bash timber companies. they are simply looking out for themselves. For that I dont blame them. I blame pgc 100%. Not the timber companies. Timber companies arent responsible for managing the deer herd.

"Oh, and your "vast majority" has been disproven by every credible poll done to date. No the tainted ones done here don't count. Sooooorrrrrry "

Every poll here has had UNFAVORABLE results to say the least, even the one you got caught voting multiple times on. As have polls on about 5 other sites that i posted several times in the past from Pa outdoors, Grizzly gary message board, Pa outdoor times, Pa outdoor news, Pa sportsmen portal etc. etc. All showing 80+ % disapproval of pgc reduction policy and other pgc "deer" issues. Though that hardly tells the tale of course since we have guys like good ol rsb and other pgc employees, at least one usfws employee, and god knows who the hell else (LOL) all within those various polls with limited number of votes.... and the results STILL were against.

Realistically in the real world I wouldnt be surprise if 90-95% of those asked would be 100% against the excessive slaughter. Ive seen enough to know it. Dont really need much more confirmation. Facts are facts.

[QUOTE=bluebird2;3450190][QUOTE]Now guys like you, the bird and the USP types continue to bash and demonize our hosts because they expect a decent return on their investment. [/QUOTE

That is another flat out lie. No one is demonizing or bashing the timber industry or other property owners. What we are questioning is if the PGC is lying to us when they claim they base the doe tag allocations on herd health and forest health. As yet no one can explain why the PGC wants to keep the herd stable in 11 WMUs when forest health varies significantly and there is no apparent correlation between deer densities and forest health.

Here is a quote from the PGC website regarding forest health and regeneration. How does the rankings compare to the data I posted?

[quote=bluebird2;3450213][quote=bluebird2;3450190]So, we make Bluebird the PA deer CZAR tomorrow.........
Whats your plan??????