Who Has the Answer?
09-22-2009 | 01:59 PM
#41
Banned
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,978
Likes: 0
From:
"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
"
Says the man who "tainted" them. Didnt make much diff. to the results though! lmao. Those on Pa outdoors, grizzly garys, Pa outdoor news, Pa outdoor times, and others than id posted in last several months all failed to agree with ANYTHING youve said! lol 80+% saying most didnt support hr doesnt exactly back your purposely fact stretching. Nor does the majority in the real world. Pretty much common sense. Get some mighty strange looks telling people you supported the deer program pretty much anywhere I have been in the state.
"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"
I never said ohio had more or less. I said Pa has ONE OF THE HIGHEST numbers of people and roads. Ive clearly shown Pa to have nearly a million more people. Which should be end of story, but when you have someone who cant stand being proven wrong for the 10 thousandth time, I guess you have "nitpicking". If you link is accurate and Ohio has slightly more "roads" than Pa, that doesnt mean Pa isnt up near the top in total roads.
I also said nothing at all about roads in ohio and wether or not they were "up there"??? Only reply i gave was to your nonsense about Ohio per square mile peoplewise hogwash. My reply tore it to shreds.
"Not really important information"
Gee that an understatement.
"except in the context of showing that you are willing to type without knowing the real facts "
Lmao, yeah, good joke. You are wrong about the assessment of the accuracy and intent of my statement (purposely no doubt) and also I think the previous b.s. challenge by you on the 1% comment pretty much spoke for who know what and who doesnt. lmao.
"Says the man who "tainted" them. Didnt make much diff. to the results though! lmao. Those on Pa outdoors, grizzly garys, Pa outdoor news, Pa outdoor times, and others than id posted in last several months all failed to agree with ANYTHING youve said! lol 80+% saying most didnt support hr doesnt exactly back your purposely fact stretching. Nor does the majority in the real world. Pretty much common sense. Get some mighty strange looks telling people you supported the deer program pretty much anywhere I have been in the state.
"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"
I never said ohio had more or less. I said Pa has ONE OF THE HIGHEST numbers of people and roads. Ive clearly shown Pa to have nearly a million more people. Which should be end of story, but when you have someone who cant stand being proven wrong for the 10 thousandth time, I guess you have "nitpicking". If you link is accurate and Ohio has slightly more "roads" than Pa, that doesnt mean Pa isnt up near the top in total roads.
I also said nothing at all about roads in ohio and wether or not they were "up there"??? Only reply i gave was to your nonsense about Ohio per square mile peoplewise hogwash. My reply tore it to shreds.
"Not really important information"
Gee that an understatement.
"except in the context of showing that you are willing to type without knowing the real facts "
Lmao, yeah, good joke. You are wrong about the assessment of the accuracy and intent of my statement (purposely no doubt) and also I think the previous b.s. challenge by you on the 1% comment pretty much spoke for who know what and who doesnt. lmao.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 09-22-2009 at 02:07 PM.
09-22-2009 | 02:05 PM
#42
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
Stop lying to the hunters of PA. Allow unlimited DMAP tags to landowners that want to reduce the herd on their property. Manage the rest of the state based on the true carrying capacity of the habitat, except in areas with high human populations.
09-22-2009 | 02:05 PM
#43
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
"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.
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.
And I guess since Ohio has almost exactly the same human population density but half again more road miles, PA must still have considerably more deer to hit with cars.
09-22-2009 | 02:08 PM
#44
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
And your definition of the true carrying capacity is?
What areas would you define as high human population and how would you manage them?
09-22-2009 | 02:18 PM
#45
Banned
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,978
Likes: 0
From:
"Plenty of polls from some of the same sites and others show just the opposite."
Not one i know of supports hr.
" Guess they couldnt all be cornied"
Yeah. Im an administrator with access to those polls results on all those boards. A bit "out there" even for you....The only guy to get caught cheating on huntingnet polls! Glad to see they now show who voted how, that way it will limit your use of aliases (your "known" ones anyway). I trust we wont be seeing the "camp id" (lmao) in voting action again anytime soon?
"And I guess since Ohio has almost exactly the same human population density"
They have nearly a million less people. VERY significant and hardly "the same" lmao.
"but half again more road miles"
Oh wow its "half again" lmao. lmao. Just think if you were familar with how to do percentages you couldve used one there. lol.
"PA must still have considerably more deer to hit with cars."
With nearly a million more people id say more cars to hit the deer. Ohio is also ranked highly in deer auto collissions as well and only to be expected.
Not one i know of supports hr.
" Guess they couldnt all be cornied
"Yeah. Im an administrator with access to those polls results on all those boards. A bit "out there" even for you....The only guy to get caught cheating on huntingnet polls! Glad to see they now show who voted how, that way it will limit your use of aliases (your "known" ones anyway). I trust we wont be seeing the "camp id" (lmao) in voting action again anytime soon?
"And I guess since Ohio has almost exactly the same human population density"
They have nearly a million less people. VERY significant and hardly "the same" lmao.
"but half again more road miles"
Oh wow its "half again" lmao. lmao. Just think if you were familar with how to do percentages you couldve used one there. lol.
"PA must still have considerably more deer to hit with cars."
With nearly a million more people id say more cars to hit the deer.
Ohio is also ranked highly in deer auto collissions as well and only to be expected.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 09-22-2009 at 02:41 PM.
09-22-2009 | 02:20 PM
#46
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
Does that include unlimited DMAPS to DCNR? They own property.
However. how I would manage the herd is not the issue. the issue is , is the PGC telling the truth about how they are managing the herd and the quote I just provided proves they are lying.
09-22-2009 | 02:57 PM
#48
Banned
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,978
Likes: 0
From:
"Table 2. Winter deer density goals and estimated winter densities from Jan
1999 through Jan 2003 for Pennsylvania. Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) 5D
is excluded due to limited harvest data.
Post-hunt deer density estimate (Jan)b
WMU Goala 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
1A 9 20 23 23 24 26
1B 12 22 25 25 25 25
2A 13 36 39 38 37 36
2B 10 24 26 28 28 30
2C 15 23 26 27 30 31
2D 14 31 33 31 31 29
2E 14 25 26 25 25 24
2F 17 27 30 28 27 24
2G 15 14 15 14 13 12
3A 15 23 26 28 30 31
3B 13 21 24 26 28 29
3C 14 24 27 28 28 28
3D 13 16 19 21 22 23
4A 15 25 28 28 29 30
4B 11 20 23 24 27 29
4C 12 20 23 24 25 26
4D 14 20 23 22 23 24
4E 11 19 21 22 23 23
5A 8 14 16 18 19 21
5B 5 13 15 16 17 17
5C 6 17 18 19 19 19 "
Absolutely disgusting.
1999 through Jan 2003 for Pennsylvania. Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) 5D
is excluded due to limited harvest data.
Post-hunt deer density estimate (Jan)b
WMU Goala 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
1A 9 20 23 23 24 26
1B 12 22 25 25 25 25
2A 13 36 39 38 37 36
2B 10 24 26 28 28 30
2C 15 23 26 27 30 31
2D 14 31 33 31 31 29
2E 14 25 26 25 25 24
2F 17 27 30 28 27 24
2G 15 14 15 14 13 12
3A 15 23 26 28 30 31
3B 13 21 24 26 28 29
3C 14 24 27 28 28 28
3D 13 16 19 21 22 23
4A 15 25 28 28 29 30
4B 11 20 23 24 27 29
4C 12 20 23 24 25 26
4D 14 20 23 22 23 24
4E 11 19 21 22 23 23
5A 8 14 16 18 19 21
5B 5 13 15 16 17 17
5C 6 17 18 19 19 19 "
Absolutely disgusting.
09-22-2009 | 05:19 PM
#49
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
DCNR does not own the SFL, the Commonwealth of PA owns the SFL. Therefore they should be managed for the benefit of all PA citizens.
However. how I would manage the herd is not the issue. the issue is , is the PGC telling the truth about how they are managing the herd and the quote I just provided proves they are lying.
However. how I would manage the herd is not the issue. the issue is , is the PGC telling the truth about how they are managing the herd and the quote I just provided proves they are lying.
As for DCNR managing for all citizens, congrats, you got something right. the only thing wrong is your idea of what benefits all PA citizens.
I figured you'd cop out on the management thing. You have no idea how to manage the deer herd. The only thing you know how to do is whine about the people who do it for a living.
09-22-2009 | 05:24 PM
#50
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
Yeah. Im an administrator with access to those polls results on all those boards. A bit "out there" even for you....The only guy to get caught cheating on huntingnet polls! Glad to see they now show who voted how, that way it will limit your use of aliases (your "known" ones anyway). I trust we wont be seeing the "camp id" (lmao) in voting action again anytime soon?
