bluebird2

The PGC finally released the Fall edition of the Deer Chronicles. Here is the link.
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/p...7_20091123.pdf
If you want a good laugh read the section on," Are there No Deer Left in 2G" and don't miss the fast fact at the end where they say hunters account for 70% of deer mortality. That pretty much kills the theory that the habitat is controlling the herd.

DougE

You know nothing about 2G.The article was pretty much spot on.2G is a very steep and remote area.There are huge areas that see practically no pressure during the entire season.I hunted some remote areas around Sinnemahoning last year and never cut a boot print in the snow,despite the fat that there was snow cover since the beginning of Nov.I hunted three days in elk state forest and Moshannon state forest.I could have killed a buck each day and managed to fill 2 dmap tags by 10am on 2 of the three days.I saw no hunters or boot prints in Elk state forest and saw a grand total of 2 other hunters in Moshannon state forest.Thew last two weekends I scouted out new spots in Moshannon state forest that I never hunted before.I saw over a dozen deer last saturday including a 6 point that was easily over 18 inches wide.The week before,I saw a half dozen different deer in a new spot,including an almost pure white doe.I have to laugh when people whine and cry about the lack of deer in 2G.

Hunters may be accounting for 70% of the mortality in certain areas and in years with good weather.That doesn't account for the reduced fawn recruitment rate however.

BTBowhunter

Also notable on the very first page was that the original findings that 80% of 2G does survive the hunting season have been further supported by the continued research which was modified to account for the theory that hunters would be less likely to harvest collared deer.

Of course that 80% doe survival probably would be blown away if they followed Doug around

BTW Doug, whats the body count up to these days?


Also noteworthy is the piece about deer contraceptives. It's still basically an impractical tactic for now but it's probably just around the corner and unless hunters step up and harvest more does in areas like 2B, 2A most of the 5's etc it'll come on like a steam roller one day and further erode our percieved value to the non huniting masses.

Cant ignore the huge disparity between hunting pressure on public vs private land in 2G either. Our old buddy Sproul and our other hunting bretheren up that way are obviously accurate when they complain that the public ground up that way gets hit much harder....at least close to the roads.

bluebird2

How much has the fawn recruitment rate decreased since 2000?
How many more fawns would have been recruited if hunters didn't harvest 33K doe in 2G in just two years?

bluebird2

But you claimed 80% of the deer that died in 2G ,died from non-hunting mortality and you were dead wrong,as usual.

Furthermore, since you only need to harvest around 33% of the preseason deer in order to keep the herd stable , a harvest rate of 20% of the adult doe combined with the fawn harvest and the buck harvest would keep the herd stable in 2G. Therefore , hunters were harvesting al the deer available to be harvested on a sustainable basis in 2G.

germain

I know one thing,the area I hunted bear in 2G has alot more coyotes then deer.Loads of acorns,fields with green growth including clover,clearcuts and plenty of cover.In my opinion the coyotes are killing quite a few fawns up there.Although in this particular area hunting does the job.I wouldn't hunt deer there if ya paid me.

BTBowhunter

Actually 80% was generous based on the results of the doe mortality studies at the time. The study actually indicated 92% and 85% in the first two years. The new information simply reinforces the gist of what the original studies concluded.

The deer chronicle statement was about all antlerless deer not just adult doe. The comparison you made is apples vs oranges.
Most folks I hear from up in 2G are saying that the herd has rebounded a little lately. That further supports the 20% claim in the chronicles. Therefore hunters are harvesting LESS than the amount of antlerless deer required to keep 2G stable.

Cornelius08

btb, why on earth would pgc want to harvest more deer in 2A when the goal was stabilization and the herd is still being reduced? Remember its not an sra like 2b which you lumped together with 2a in your statement where human conflict is supposedly high due to urban areas etc... I guess that means you dont support the goals of stabilization or herd increase where deemed appropriate? That has been the goal, even if pgc hasnt been adhering to it, just like most other wmus where reduction ISNT supposed to be the goal, but is occurring anyway. To support statewide blanket slaughter even where pgc claimed its no longer necessary is a bit of an extremist view isnt it?

Doug says; "I have to laugh when people whine and cry about the lack of deer in 2G."

I have to laugh when a few support anything and everything said by pgc, and claim to love wmus with deer density averages around 10 when it could be and probably should be double that. Kinda speaks to "other" agendas. lol. To love killing doe as much as you to save the hobblebush and trillium would make you a prime candidate to work for whitebuffalo. You share many of the same views.

"Hunters may be accounting for 70% of the mortality in certain areas and in years with good weather."

No...I believe that would be in an AVERAGE year. Meaning with better than average weather MORE would be killed. Also since 70% were spoken of as an average, some areas would be lower as you stated, so others would be HIGHER as well to average it out.

"That doesn't account for the reduced fawn recruitment rate however."

Neither does the pgc annual reports which show deer reproductive herd health among the highest in the state.

Cornelius08

I also like this double-talk from the deceitful jackass that always puts these chronicles together: First off the question is, are public lands overharvested as compared to private. One would think the answer only obvious, but NOOOO as with everything pgc has an explanation! lmao. Even though as usual its contradictory and full of holes.

"Living on public land did not necessarily mean a doe was more likely to be harvested by a hunter."Then they say this in the next sentences! lol:

" In WMU 2G, the harvest rate on private land was 4 to 6 times greater than on public lands. In WMU 4B, harvest rates on public lands were slightly higher than on private lands. "

Correct me if im mistaken but 4 to 6 times higher is higher, and "slightly higher" on the other is STILL HIGHER no? lol.

Unreal. Who authors this crap?? I see noone steps forward and signatures their work on these "chronicles". Wonder if the reason is because they are so proud of the content? lmao.

bluebird2

But it doesn't support your ridiculous claim that 80% of the deer that die in 2G die from non-hunting mortality.

Wrong again. All of the doe that were tagged trapped over the winter after hunting season,so all of the doe would be at least 1.5 years,which would make them adult doe. BTW ,the PGC says the herd is stable, not increasing.