Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Regional Forums > Northeast
What PA needs .................... >

What PA needs ....................

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

What PA needs ....................

Old 12-29-2009, 06:09 AM
  #61  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

FYI, QDMA does NOT always support antlerless harvest.
I agree, they support high antlerless harvests on SFL and SGL while keeping the deer density on the lands they control at much higher densities than the PGC will allow.

[QUOTE]I think you're dead on right here with the exception of one oversight. Cooperatives.[/QUOTE

Cooperatives were included in my reference to controlling enough land to limit the antlerless harvest. It doesn't matter if it is a single property or a group of adjoining properties, the principle is the same.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 06:29 AM
  #62  
Typical Buck
 
glew22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE PA
Posts: 657
Default

I agree, they support high antlerless harvests on SFL and SGL while keeping the deer density on the lands they control at much higher densities than the PGC will allow.
C'mon thats a blatant stereotype. I've been to several properties managed under qdm and they had low deer densities. Did it occur to you that the properties under qdm have often implemented habitat improvement projects like food plots, and on average, could support more deer than a unbroken tract of forest in the sgl?

Cooperatives were included in my reference to controlling enough land to limit the antlerless harvest. It doesn't matter if it is a single property or a group of adjoining properties, the principle is the same.
I agree that the principle is the same, I just want to emphasize that you dont need to own or lease a large tract of property to see benefits. You may only own 10 acres; as long as you can educate your neighbors and convince them to get on borad then you can succeed (I realize this is not always an option). The 1.2 acres I live on now is enrolled in a cooperative, and has been very effective at meeting the cooperatives goals.
glew22 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 06:43 AM
  #63  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

C'mon thats a blatant stereotype.
No QDM deer lease will be managed at 8-10 DPSM like 2G, yet QDMA named Alt deer manager of the year.

Did it occur to you that the properties under qdm have often implemented habitat improvement projects like food plots, and on average, could support more deer than a unbroken tract of forest in the sgl?
That is always the excuse they use for managing their herds at much higher DDs than the PGC will allow. All the mixed farmlands and woodlots in the southern part of the state are as good if not better than most QDMA properties.

You may only own 10 acres; as long as you can educate your neighbors and convince them to get on borad then you can succeed (I realize this is not always an option).
We own 27 acres and have over 12 adjoining property owners and the only way we can improve the DD on our property is to turn it into a preserve where no one hunts.

Last edited by bluebird2; 12-29-2009 at 06:47 AM.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 06:51 AM
  #64  
Typical Buck
 
glew22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE PA
Posts: 657
Default

No QDM deer lease will be managed at 8-10 DPSM like 2G, yet QDMA named Alt deer manager of the year.
So do you think Gary Alt did anything good for PA?

That is always the excuse they use for managing their herds at much higher DDs than the PGC will allow. All the mixed farmlands and woodlots in the southern part of the state are as good if not better than most QDMA properties.
That's not an excuse, thats the bottom line: if you have a nutritional food plot, you can support more deer than if you didn't. Does that excuse managing deer above the carrying capacity, absolutely not. But don't take the pgc reccomendations, without regard to the site specific habitat conditions. As you mentioned the pgc puts out suggestions for an entire wmu, even though there is extreme variation within those wmus in regard to carrying capacity. Im not familiar with the souther farmlands/woodlands so I won't comment.
glew22 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 06:53 AM
  #65  
Typical Buck
 
glew22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE PA
Posts: 657
Default

We own 27 acres and have over 12 adjoining property owners and the only way we can improve the DD on our property is to turn it into a preserve where no one hunts.
Have you tried to educate the adjoining property owners to get them on board with a better dmp?
glew22 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 07:01 AM
  #66  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

So do you think Gary Alt did anything good for PA?
Quitting the PGC and leaving the state was the best thing he did for PA in the last 10 years

That's not an excuse, thats the bottom line: if you have a nutritional food plot, you can support more deer than if you didn't. Does that excuse managing deer above the carrying capacity, absolutely not
The bottom line is the vast majority of the state have nutritional food plots that the PGC totally ignores when assessing the carrying capacity of the habitat, since the only criteria they use is forest regeneration.

Im not familiar with the souther farmlands/woodlands so I won't comment
Do you hunt with your eyes closed . I thought you were from SE PA and hunted 5C.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 07:10 AM
  #67  
Giant Nontypical
 
BTBowhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Default

Glew 22

Let me save you some time and effort. There are no positive ideas that will satisfy the bird on his single minded mission to simply discredit all things PGC and QDMA.

He'll also dismiss anything any sportsmen either individually or as a group would do to improve their deer hunting. The comon theme in virtually every post is "that won't work because PGC blah blah blah.

look back through the hundreds of posts here. Nothing will ever good be enough. No suggestion will work. All you'll get in return for a reasoned thought out idea is a deluge of PGC stats assembled and re-assembled in a single minded way that distorts their true meaning or relevance. Whats really funny is how we're given PGC information when it suits him but when PGC information doesnt suit him, it's simply wrong.

How about a few examples.....

Someone suggests thinning trees to open the canopy where it can be done........the bird says it wont work

Many hunters point out that it's us pulling the trigger and encourages some individual personal responsibility by passing does where they are obviously low in numbers...... the bird says it wont work

Cooperatives are suggested.......again, the bird says no!

Smaller management units? ......there's almost universal agreement on that here but the bird says no again!

AR's? widely accepted and generally agreed my most that it's had a positive overall effect.........No again says the bird!

Reminds me of an old saying about trying to teach a pig to sing, It simply frustrates you and annoys the pig
BTBowhunter is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 07:37 AM
  #68  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Default

"So do you think Gary Alt did anything good for PA?"

Some good perhaps. Nothing even in the same realm as that which hes been credited for. A lot more harm than good, and certainly didnt deserve the award.


.

Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-29-2009 at 07:49 AM.
Cornelius08 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 07:41 AM
  #69  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Default

Btb, I think you are misconstruing the positions of bb. I dont think he disagrees at all with those things. He just doesnt think any of those things is THEE answer for fixing our statewide deer management program, especially when not combined with the things that are only common sense, such as lower allocations etc. and i think most would agree.

I really dont mean to speak for the man, but after seeing him post for around 9 years on several boards, Ive become more than a little familiar with his postions.

" Whats really funny is how we're given PGC information when it suits him but when PGC information doesnt suit him, it's simply wrong."
I dont think its "funny". I think it only to be expected. If he (or any of us) believed every single thing pgc said we wouldnt be against the deer program currently. We'd simply take their word that all is as said and trust the "professionals" were doing what is in our best interests. Thats not the case. As for actually using their data, what makes the diff. whether or not he believes it, as long as those hes arguing against supposedly do? If it doesnt support the program (wether the data is true or not), at the very least it show NOTHING supports the extreme program.

Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-29-2009 at 07:50 AM.
Cornelius08 is offline  
Old 12-29-2009, 08:23 AM
  #70  
Giant Nontypical
 
BTBowhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Default

Btb, I think you are misconstruing the positions of bb. I dont think he disagrees at all with those things. He just doesnt think any of those things is THEE answer for fixing our statewide deer management program, especially when not combined with the things that are only common sense, such as lower allocations etc. and i think most would agree.

I really dont mean to speak for the man, but after seeing him post for around 9 years on several boards, Ive become more than a little familiar with his postions.
The problem is that he dismisses many ideas that may not be THE answer but collectively are part of THE answer.

THE answer is not to be found in one simple step and we all know it.

He has said that managing by smaller WMU's won't help. He's said it many times. When hunters suggest hunters taking some initiative and banding together and limiting their doe kill in a given area, he claims it wont work. I think we all agree that there is a bit too much of a one size fits all mentality in Harrisburg yet he goes into long winded diatribes when someone has an idea that are essentially based on his "that wont work statewide mentality"

Those are just a few examples.

Lots of positive ideas come out in this forum. This is a diverse group and we often disagree on what will be beneficial and what wont. I'll bet though you'll have a hard time finding many positive ideas for our deer management that BB got behind and supported .


Feel free to prove me wrong and point out where BB had anything positive to say in those last 9 years. I've been acquainted with BB's posts for 10 years too and I'm hard pressed to remember much positive input form him or any of his banned alaises here or elsewhere.

Last edited by BTBowhunter; 12-29-2009 at 08:26 AM.
BTBowhunter 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.