Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Regional Forums > Northeast
HOW...do we get the changes we need in PA? >

HOW...do we get the changes we need in PA?

Northeast ME, NH, VT, NY, CT, RI, MA, PA, DE, WV, MD, NJ Remember, the Regional forums are for hunting topics only.

HOW...do we get the changes we need in PA?

Old 12-24-2009, 08:45 AM
  #101  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

[QUOTE]Both the PGC and DCNR know exactly what they're doing when it comes to sustainable foresty practices.While some private timber companies do a good job,most of what I see being cut on private property is being done out of greed by highgrading[/QUOTE

The forests on SGLs are managed for wildlife while those on SFL are managed for profit , but the herd on both is managed for the benefit of DCNR and the timber industry. And, DMAP tags would have little if any effect on regeneration if the herd in 2G was being managed at 15-20 DPSM. Even with only 8 DPSM in 2gG regeneration is still rated as poor.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 09:22 AM
  #102  
Typical Buck
 
glew22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE PA
Posts: 657
Default

Originally Posted by bluebird2
you admitted you haven't been reading the Annual Wildlife Reports and that you have a limited knowledge of how our herd was managed prior to 2000.
I know exactly how deer were managed prior to 2000, its called traditional deer hunting. Very few, if any, does are harvested, and any legal buck, regardless of age or size, is shot. It's what persisted since the close of market hunting. Our herd was being "managed" by shooting 80% of our yearling bucks annually; and it was culturally frowned upon, even illegal at times, to shoot a doe....not very biologically sound.

Last edited by glew22; 12-24-2009 at 09:33 AM.
glew22 is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 09:46 AM
  #103  
Typical Buck
 
glew22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE PA
Posts: 657
Default

Originally Posted by Pahick
If youre not familiar with the terms saw and pole, which you readily admit, I highly doubt your claims.
So like I've said, I don't know what the terms mean, but I'm willing to listen and learn....

This summer I saw a 20m X 20m high fenced deer exclosure in a forest opening. It was a jungle, with a lot of 5 yr old white oak regeneration. The corresponing unfenced plot in the same opening had nothing but invasive species growing, and even these species were browsed. About 100 yards away, there was another high fenced and corresponding unfenced plot (this time both were under a closed forest canopy). I believe they had been high fenced for 5-7 yrs. In the unfenced plot there were no stems at least 2 yrs old. Inside the fenced plot, however, there was significant oak regeneration 3'-5'. This experiment proved that even under a closed forest canopy, we can witness forest regeneration, in fact some species have evolved to be shade tolerant to exploit this niche.
glew22 is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 09:49 AM
  #104  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Default

There was a timber company around here called Chagrin land corp.These guys did an excellent job cutting in a sustainable fashion.They ended up selling most of their property to an inestment corp.This investment corp leased most of the property to several small groups for about 5 years or so while they went in and raped and highgraded all the mast producing trees.It's regenerating but bow it's all beech,striped maple and black birch.Over the next ten years,these areas will turn into vitual wastelands,
DougE is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 10:20 AM
  #105  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Default

Originally Posted by Pahick
I agree, but lets not kid ourselves. If you think our state lands have been managed more for wildlife/forestry over politics/finance over the years we'll have to disagree.

I agree that the state forests are not being managed for deer.That isn't their mission.I will say that without a doubt,the SGL's around here are managed for wildlife,not timber.I've been involved with the habitat improvements and the PGC does a phenominal job.
DougE is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 11:03 AM
  #106  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Carbon County Pa.
Posts: 601
Default

Originally Posted by DougE
I've been involved with the habitat improvements and the PGC does a phenominal job.
I would have to agree, When I ride on the gamelands and ride by a food plot my horses eyes want to pop out of his head when he looks at those acres of green grass way back in the woods. And when the snows to deep they have the browse line cut to nibble on on each side of the trail.
pats102862 is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 11:15 AM
  #107  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

I know exactly how deer were managed prior to 2000, its called traditional deer hunting. Very few, if any, does are harvested, and any legal buck, regardless of age or size, is shot. It's what persisted since the close of market hunting. Our herd was being "managed" by shooting 80% of our yearling bucks annually; and it was culturally frowned upon, even illegal at times, to shoot a doe....not very biologically sound.
__________________
I see you insist on digging the hole even deeper by repeating PGC talking points. But the facts show that every year from 1987 to 1998 we harvested more antlerless than antlered deer. Furthermore, shooting 80% of our 1.5 buck had no negative effect on genetics or the health of the herd. Breeding rates and productivity actually decreased when HR and ARs were implement and just returned to normal last year.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 11:20 AM
  #108  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

I believe they had been high fenced for 5-7 yrs. In the unfenced plot there were no stems at least 2 yrs old. Inside the fenced plot, however, there was significant oak regeneration 3'-5'. This experiment proved that even under a closed forest canopy, we can witness forest regeneration, in fact some species have evolved to be shade tolerant to exploit this niche.
If those oak saplings were 3'-5' high they were a lot older that 5-7 years, which means they got their start before the area was fenced. The rate of growth under a closed canopy that even with very low DDs the vast majority of seedlings will be browsed before they out grow the reach of the deer.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 11:35 AM
  #109  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Default

"I know exactly how deer were managed prior to 2000, its called traditional deer hunting. Very few, if any, does are harvested, and any legal buck, regardless of age or size, is shot."
Id suggest you find a new source of information.

1992----------buckharvest: 163,159--------antlerless: 198,065
1993------------------------154,732--------------------243,236
1994------------------------157,030--------------------237,542
1995------------------------182,235--------------------248,348
1996------------------------153,432--------------------197,585
1997------------------------176,504--------------------220,284

Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-24-2009 at 11:38 AM.
Cornelius08 is offline  
Old 12-24-2009, 12:00 PM
  #110  
Typical Buck
 
ManySpurs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2G Gaines Pa
Posts: 524
Default

Our herd was being "managed" by shooting 80% of our yearling bucks annually
Somebody straighten me out please.....did we shoot 80% of the yearling bucks each year? Or.....was the buck harvest made up of 80% yearling bucks?
ManySpurs is offline  

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.