The Park service was sued in November by animal rights groups for attempting to reduce the deer herd. An article in the Chester county "Daily Local News" talked about it. Some things that I found interesting. Since 1983 the population has grown from 31-35 dpsm to an estimated 241 dpsm. The estimate the current population to be 1,277. Their management plan included killing 1,000 of those deer over the next four years, to attain a target herd of 165-185 deer (I know the math dosen't add up, but I'm gettin the figures directly from the article). Their plan is to then "maintain the deer population through some form of birth control when the technology becomes available." I say good luck with that, PSU has been unsuccessul at developing contraceptives for the last 15 years.

"Park officals say over browsing by deer has led to the decline of the forest...and has resulted in unaceptable changes in the species composition, structure, abundance, and distribution of native plant communities and associated wildlife" The animal rights groups countered saying "the deer management plan is logically and legally misguided...the deer should be protected because the white-tailed deer are a cultural and historic resource to Valley Forge that were present at the time of the Continental Army's encampment in 1777...protecting some of Valley Forge's resources at the expense of another is contrary to Congress' charge to preserve all the park's resources." UMM YEAH...AREN'T THEY SUGGESTING PROTECTING DEER AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYTHING ELSE!?!?!? Seems to me that you could use their argument to argue against their point. This kind of bs is the reason hunters need to stay united.

Merry Christmas everyone!!!

One thing I forgot....Yes deer were present during the encampment in 1777...NOT AT 241 DPSM THOUGH!

Of course the anti-hunters have no clue or concern about the damage that amount of deer can cause each other through starvation and too much inbreeding. Is there an unusually high rate of piebalds and albinos in that area yet?

I seriously doubt there were as many deer around the VF encampment in the spring of 1778 as there were in the fall of 1777. I bet those boys shot and killed anything that could possibly be eaten. A VF hunt would be right in line with historical accuracy.

Hmm, not sure. I'll look into it though.

There was no reference to an increased percentage of piebalds or albinos in the reports I have read on VF. But, the studies from VF and Gettysburg Battle Field prove that the MSY CC of the habitat in 5C and 5B is at least 200 DPSM and the PGC claimed 5C can only support 6 DPSM and 5B can support 5 DPSM.

So now it's 200 DPSM

You guys that get frustrated when your concerns about too few deer fall on deaf ears need to look and think very hard when you allow stuff like this to go unchallenged.

I just read in another thread where someone praised beenthere for "wearing his opponents down" (with a deluge of manufatctured facts out of context)and "beenthere" is the man!

Of course he's had to change his name a handful of times just to stay on here but with stuff like that pearl of wisdom above, it's small wonder why you guys with legitimate beefs that suport BB , beenthere deaddeer, ddear etc etc etc don't get taken all that seriously much of the time.

I really do try and take you serious but you make it sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hard.

You know his response will be to post evidence that proves he is wrong, the bird speaks and facts are made.

Three acres per deer should of made that little winter foray a pleasure by most standards of the day.

What the PGC is thinking, who knows.

Whether you realize it or not , you also let my claim go unchallenged since you have provided nothing to refute my claim that the MSY CC in VF is at least 200 DPSM.