Cornelius08

Pats, you speak of previous maleffects. Imho there are far more now. Ive seen and heard about so much crap because of "hunters" being so darn desparate to kill a deer that they sink to any lengths. Ive seen hunters fistfight over treestand location, Ive heard more arguing than ever, Ive seen in the newspaper where hunting dogs were poisoned because some idiots put out poison in bait, hoping to kill coyotes up on gamelands 111 because of so few deer. Ive seen deer left to rot because they didnt have the 4th point. Ive seen & heard alot of things.

I dont think citing the actions of idiots who dont follow the rules is a good reason to go with or against any management plan. There will always be plenty of those.

DougE

I hunt differently today than I did in 1990.There were definately more deer back then,no doubt about it.Still,I rate the quality just as good today.I've killed a buck every year since 1990.The bucks I've killed the last 8 years were all nice 2.5-3.5 year old deer,nothing huge but decent.

germain

Doug where in the heck does Seneca have land against mosh forest?

bluebird2

I didn't say those three deer ruined the habitat, but in many areas the PGC and DCNR are managing the herd based on oak regeneration. BTW, the 3 deer that ruined the oak regeneration,so it had nothing to do with the condition of the surrounding habitat. Those three deer ruined the oak regeneration simply because it was a small exclosure and the deer preferred the oak over other browse species.

You blame the deer for the condition of todays forests when you should be blaming past forestry practices which created an even aged forest that resulted in over 50 % pole timber, which even you agree won't support many deer Furthermore you can't blame the invasive species on the deer since the deer didn't introduce them.

DougE

Drive on mountain run road(where the boyscout camp is).Just past Cessna's taxidermy is a big pipeline.Walk up the pipeline just down from his place a few hundred yards and you'll hit the bottom of Seneca's property.It's a huge chunk that runs from there all the way to the Brockway Resevoir.You can also drive up rt 153 between Penfield and Brockport.About halfway up Boone mountain,take Firetower rd to the left.Once you go a few miles,Seneca's property is on both sides of the road.It's good habitat with alot of deer.I generally kill a couple in there most years.It's bordered on the lower side by Moshannon state forest.I'll show it to you.There's several huge clearcuts on that property with loads of browse.There's lot's of deer but it's tough to get them to leave the clearcuts.

If you walk strit above the rifle range at the boyscout camp,you'll also hit it.

DougE

Nope,I've always fully ackowledged past forestry practices as a problem as well.Unfortunately,bad habitat is bad habitat.When you add too many deer to already poor habitat it takes less to have an impact.That's where we are now.However,the deer also certainly played a major role in the condition of the habitat today.It's a proven fact.

The deer certainly prefered the oak over the maple in that exclosure.That was my main point.It was simply to show how deer are picky eaters and hit the most prefered species first,altering the composition of the forest.That's what happened all accross the northern tier.Oak isn't the only tree to be concerned about but it does provide alot of food for a varity of wildlife including deer.I'd like to see it regenerate.

bluebird2

The condition of the habitat in the vast majority of the state is just fine and dandy. The condition of the habitat in pole timber will always be bad for deer no matter how many deer we have. The condition of the habitat in half of the land managed by DCNR will always be bad since no timbering will be permitted.

Todays habitat can support over 1.6 M deer ,so if you want to blame the deer for creating that kind of habitat , that is fine with me. Of course the deer played a role in the condition of the state forests , just as the chestnut blight, gypsy moths, leaf rollers , beech blight.acid rain,erosion ,forest fire suppression, invasive species, forestry practices and many other factors.

Cornelius08

.......Yep.

DougE

Nope,you're flat out wrong and there's reams of evidence to support that.The deer certainly played a huge role in the condition of forests.It's not even debatable.No way could we over winter 1.6 million deer without extreme damage to the habitat.

bluebird2

If you had the slightest clue what you are talking about , you would know that the 1.6M figure was PS deer , not OWD. In the 1930's the habitat in just 30 counties supported 1.3 M deer and those were the counties with the lowest carrying capacities in the state. The MSY CC of the capacity of all the habitat in the state is probably well over 2M PS deer.