Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Regional Forums > Northeast
Pa game commission hunting license fee increase not needed >

Pa game commission hunting license fee increase not needed

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

Pa game commission hunting license fee increase not needed

Old 03-03-2010, 05:26 PM
  #51  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Default

"Well you don't have to move out west. Virginia still has lots of deer. West VA. too."

Why on earth would i do that, when with responsible management, the hunting can and should be better than both of those states RIGHT HERE?? Think I'll stick to plan A, but thanks for the suggestions. Besides, I have several times and probably will just for kicks in the future at some time again hunt WV. Its only a short drive. Though I much prefer Ohio, having spent a few years out that way as well...but its not quite as convenient for me. Hard to get out there and scout etc. as Id like on top of all my Pa preparations and everything else considered...

If where everyone lived was determined by where theyd like to hunt, Pa would be a deserted Ghost town, and states like iowa ill. etc. would be packed in like sardines.
Cornelius08 is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 05:28 PM
  #52  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

Pa is a lot better than some here claim.
But it is much worse than it was in 2000 when we harvested 203K buck compared to 109K buck in 2007 or 122K buck in 2008. Those harvests represent a reduction of the herd of over 40% compared to the reduction of 25% reported in the audit.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 05:31 PM
  #53  
Giant Nontypical
 
BTBowhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Default

Originally Posted by bluebird2
But it is much worse than it was in 2000 when we harvested 203K buck compared to 109K buck in 2007 or 122K buck in 2008. Those harvests represent a reduction of the herd of over 40% compared to the reduction of 25% reported in the audit.
Just more proof that we had too many deer back then
BTBowhunter is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 05:37 PM
  #54  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

regeneration in 2G decreased from 45% to 38% as the herd was reduced, breeding rates and productivity decreased as the herd was reduced and the breeding window remained unchanged. therefore there was no scientific evidence to support your claim that we had too many deer in 2000!!!
bluebird2 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - 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.