![]() |
Originally Posted by ManySpurs
(Post 3540825)
Easier to just slice diagonally into the bark with a hatchet or axe, lift the bark up, and inject a healthy dose of full strength RoundUp into the tree. It works well.
|
Originally Posted by blkpowder
(Post 3540915)
Copper nails or Caustic Soda (sodium hydroxide) solution will kill a tree. This product can be found at any hardware/paint shop. Make a solution of 1 part Caustic Soda and 2 parts water and pour it around the base of the tree.:s4:
The idea of killing the trees is so plants can grow to feed the deer we want to eat, toxins are a no- no.:s6: |
Originally Posted by ManySpurs
(Post 3540839)
Yea....I hate to admit it.....but the idea came from a QDMA magazine.:eek2:
|
Originally Posted by bawanajim
(Post 3540935)
The idea of killing the trees is so plants can grow to feed the deer we want to eat, toxins are a no- no.:s6:
|
With the PGC's current DMP ,I doubt any of us can cut enough trees to make a significant improvement in the population in a given area. For example, about 4 years ago two neighbors timbered over 100 acres. There is unlimited browse and dense cover but apparently the deer avoid it due to hunting pressure and it has done nothing to increase the deer herd in our area.
At this point it seems the only thing that might change the DMP,is an order from a judge in response to the USP suit, but that is highly unlikely. |
By creating better habitat you give the fawns a better chance of survival from predators, you give deer a better food base and you benefit your self financially. Just like weeding a garden most all wood lots could use a good thinning of undesirable trees to the benefit of mast producing ones.There is no down side to proper forest management.:barmy:
|
I agree, but the question remains as to whether it will produce a noticeable beneficial change when the PGC is still issuing more doe tags than when we had 1.6M PS deer.
I know of a club that manages 2 SM for deer ,not for timber ,and they have been unable to offset the negative effects of the PGC's HR plan. |
bawana jim, I really liked the weeding the garden analogy.
blue, I used to share the sentiment that the pgc needs to reduce antlerless allocations in some of our wmus (they may still need to do so), but to play devils advocate, I would say if hunters are complaining about to few deer, then the hunters can choose not to use these tags. I know the antis aren't buying tags and shooting deer with them. |
That is not a viable option,since there are still a significant number of hunters who believe they are doing God's work by killing every legal deer they see and then there are those that just don't care and will fill every tag they have for the meat or to give it away.
The PGC has the authority and the responsibility for managing the herd and the only way hunters can control the herd is if they own or lease enough land and severely limit hunting pressure. |
[quote]
Originally Posted by bluebird2
(Post 3541616)
That is not a viable option,since there are still a significant number of hunters who believe they are doing God's work by killing every legal deer they see
The PGC has the authority and the responsibility for managing the herd and the only way hunters can control the herd is if they own or lease enough land and severely limit hunting pressure. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:52 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.