stop complainin...start hunting
02-02-2010, 12:07 PM
#101
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southwest Ohio
Posts: 10,277
Fellas has just described a large demographic of public land deer hunters (or pretty much deer hunters in general) who, quite naturally, are going to voice dis-satisfaction with any managment stategy that decreases the liklihood of filling ones tag. But, such dis-satisfaction does not necessarily mean that the management plan is, overall, bad.
02-02-2010, 12:20 PM
#102
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
When most predictions were proven false with the deer plan.
When hunter satisfaction is so low it demands nationwide attention.
When it get so bad it prevents funding for management.
When it gets so bad it caused legislative intervention & demanding of audits.
When it gets so bad deer management team leaders had to wear bullet proof vests...
When it gets so bad sportsmen are suing the commission.
Those are all subtle hints that alls not well with the management.
But as long as all that equates to unnatural unnecessary levels of biodiversity, some environmentalist types would probably call that proper "modern" management.
When hunter satisfaction is so low it demands nationwide attention.
When it get so bad it prevents funding for management.
When it gets so bad it caused legislative intervention & demanding of audits.
When it gets so bad deer management team leaders had to wear bullet proof vests...
When it gets so bad sportsmen are suing the commission.
Those are all subtle hints that alls not well with the management.
But as long as all that equates to unnatural unnecessary levels of biodiversity, some environmentalist types would probably call that proper "modern" management.
02-02-2010, 12:22 PM
#103
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"Thanks for straightening me out Cornie. Note to self, comparisions across states are only legitimate if they serve to make a point for Cornie, but not if they are used by someone disputing Cornie's claims.
So we need to now accept that all these PA hunters are driving to other states to hunt on public land that is crawling with deer compared to PA public land. They aren't doing hunts with outfitters or private landowners where it would be expected that there should be more deer seen than on much of the public ground in PA. Gotcha"
So we need to now accept that all these PA hunters are driving to other states to hunt on public land that is crawling with deer compared to PA public land. They aren't doing hunts with outfitters or private landowners where it would be expected that there should be more deer seen than on much of the public ground in PA. Gotcha"
You are a funny guy though. lol. Pretty hard to get under anyones skin, as you attempt to do, when your avatars and intentional distortion posts are so humorous and impossible to take seriously. lol.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 02-02-2010 at 12:28 PM.
02-02-2010, 12:25 PM
#104
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Sure a significantly higher kill will reduce the herd even more.That won't happen because the PGC knows that it takes more does tags to kill more deer in 2G.If people more people actually started putting in a little more effort and the success rate increased,they'd have to lower the allocations.That's never happened and it never will.Far too many hunters like yourself expect and demand an easy hunt.I don't.
The PGC did in fact reduce doe allocations in 2G and several other WMUs because more hunters hunted hard enough to harvest enough deer to reduce the herd in 2G from 15 DPSM to 8 DPSM.
02-02-2010, 12:27 PM
#105
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southwest Ohio
Posts: 10,277
I don't seem to be playing by myself Cornie, since just about everything i post here draws a lengthy reponse from you. In fact, on various occasions you post a response to me, then follow that up with yet another post. Hell, you did that the other day despite calling me a troll and saying you were going to ignore me. Sounds like you are the lonely lad....
Well, if death threats are being made to the point that officials have to wear bullet proof vests then is a pretty telling perspective on the attitudes and intelligence of the folks that don't like the management plan.....
Guess the only way to solve the problem is to manage the state-wide deer population at levels that allow 900K hunters to have fantastic success rates. Of course, that would result in folks practically having deer living in their garages, but hunter satisfaction would be high and there won't be death threats, so I guess it would be a perfect management plan
Based on the attitudes of many deer hunters that come across to many as selfish and narrow, a very low satisfaction level probably isnt really all that bad...
Well, if death threats are being made to the point that officials have to wear bullet proof vests then is a pretty telling perspective on the attitudes and intelligence of the folks that don't like the management plan.....
Guess the only way to solve the problem is to manage the state-wide deer population at levels that allow 900K hunters to have fantastic success rates. Of course, that would result in folks practically having deer living in their garages, but hunter satisfaction would be high and there won't be death threats, so I guess it would be a perfect management plan
Based on the attitudes of many deer hunters that come across to many as selfish and narrow, a very low satisfaction level probably isnt really all that bad...
Last edited by Lanse couche couche; 02-02-2010 at 12:32 PM.
02-02-2010, 12:29 PM
#106
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Donno bout all that lanse. I can only go by what history has shown us. Hunter satisfaction was never as low as it is currently.
Just about anything would be an improvement. Having more than unnecessary rock bottom deer densities doesnt equate to having deer living in garages. Though in some areas of ohio, that might be closer to the case?
Just about anything would be an improvement. Having more than unnecessary rock bottom deer densities doesnt equate to having deer living in garages. Though in some areas of ohio, that might be closer to the case?
02-02-2010, 12:36 PM
#107
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"I don't seem to be playing by myself Cornie,"
Why should i ignore you? Youre not gonna get the response you want. So no harm in debunking your "stuff". May as well get a few laughs from your comedy routine.lol.
I post passionately (current line of posting aside) on the topic because these issues effect my state and my lifestyle. You dont live or hunt here, yet you are the one who said they like to post on this stuff merely for the controversy. So whos the lonely lad? lmao.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 02-02-2010 at 01:00 PM.
02-02-2010, 12:41 PM
#109
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Doug says: "Sure a significantly higher kill will reduce the herd even more."
..........
He he, yeah, i caught that NY. But then not much i read here these days surprises me.
Maybe he knows some of these guys from Pa use alot of out of state guides & outfitters for their deer hunting?
Last edited by Cornelius08; 02-02-2010 at 12:49 PM.
02-02-2010, 01:00 PM
#110
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,149