BTBowhunter

Sorry Corn but youre
W-R-O-N-G A-G-A-I-N !!!
The estimated kill was started in 1986. before that, the trend in reported kills was rising. ( hint, do a rolling average and guess what you get?) The reported kill over the past 50 was also lower than the most recent reported kill several other times. The bottom line is that your 50 year claim has no basis in fact. What hole did you pull your little fact out of anyway?


bazillion opportunities? In PA? But you keep telling us how hard it is for a PA hunter to see deer?!?!?! Gee, it seems to me that a bazillion opportunities ought to be enough for a mere million hunters LMAO!!


Sorry if all the facts in that document overwhelmed you. I used 1986 because it was the first year where the system was the same as the one used now. I used total kill. You chose to counter with only part of the facts. The real fact is that your claim that harvest are at a 50 year low has been proven to be totally false. Had you said 20 years it would have been true. But hey, a 30 year miss aint that bad

LMAO

BTBowhunter

Actually they are antlerless deer tags. We all know that, (or ought to) and yes, you can harvest an antlerless buck with that tag. Many of us call them doe tags but we all know what that means. I daresay you've done the same thing a time or two.

For that matter a antlered tag can be a doe tag if the doe is one of those rare does with antlers.

So now that we cleared that up, did you have a point when you posted what we all knew?

Cornelius08

Sorry but not hardly.

Oh yes, we are all non law abiding criminals now but were pure of heart in the 70's and 80s! lmao

The Pgc "data hole". You have to go back to 1960 in the link i provided to find a lower buck harvest. (althought there is no data for 1961 listed)...So whether you wanna call it 50....48, 49, or whatever your heart desires, I think i'll stick to the nice round 50 if its all well and good with you? Certainly a far cry from the 20 youve been spouting! lmao.

Now unless thats just another of your lies, please show a link pointing to a post i made saying that. Thats what i thought--in advance..

Absolutely and thats my point. TOO MUCH. And thats why even with all these opportunities and tags the harvest has declined...the herd has declined.

And the data for "the old way" is also given. Though you used that year because it in no way shows the full extent of how pathetic the harvests are. Around 50 year low buck harvest and 2nd worst overall harvest as i said, in around 30-40....At least thats what the data shows.

I think your memory has slipped.I am the one who brought up the 50 year harvest deal NOT you! So what makes you think you can tell me what im talking about? Guess its too easy to jump in without asking detail just saying "wrong" and ending up sticking your foot in your mouth yet again. lmao.

But then Id have been greatly understating it and not telling the full truth of the matter... The truth of roughly 50 year low buck harvests and 2nd lowest overall in the neighborhood of 30-40 years. I brought it up, but i guess i need your permission on how to word it? lmao. Yeah right.

Yeah, youre just saying that because thats almost exactly how far you were off and are tryng to downplay it.

Cornelius08

Problem is they werent antlerless tags, they werent doe tags... They were either sex tags. You cant kill a buck with a doe tag even if you call it an "antlerless" tag instead! lmao. You spoke of "doe" (or antlerless) tags being not separate from the general license. Dont care if it were because of miswording yet again by you, or if you didnt know what was going on.... You were wrong. And theres no need to argue any of this further just because you hate being wrong on.

Goodnight.

BTBowhunter

Well once again when you cant respond to the facts, you resort to the personal attacks and try to distract turn around the subject.

Any male deer is a buck. an antlered deer is one with at least a three inch spike. A legal antlered deer ( for adults ) is one with either 3 or 4 points to a side depending on the WMU. A button buck or a shed buck is legally an antlerless deer but it is still a buck.

Unless it existed well before 1970, the PGC never issued anything called an either sex tag.
There was a tag on the general license that was only good for an antlered deer unless accompanied by an antlerless license. In 1984, the anlerless license was accompanied by it's own antlerless tag and the general license had an antlered deer tag. The only exception to that was when the general tag was used for a deer harvested in the flintlock muzzleloader season, it could be used on either an antlered or antlerless deer.

LOL, I hate being wrong? Well here's your opportunity to prove me wrong...... I'll bet you cant find one link where the PGC refers to any tag as an either sex tag. I'm also betting you'll either ignore this or claim you've proven it already or simply tell us it's not debatable. Anything but actually come up with proof.

We'll be waiting..........

Cornelius08

That was your statement and that was the topic and that is what you were wrong about... Youre trying to cloud the issue with all the other extra unnecessary twisting and writhing and just plain silly challenges trying to take the attention from yourself, like telling me to find a pgc statement referrring to tags that were legal for either sex as "either sex tags" specifically as if that was their given name and as if that matters in any way shape or form whether you referred to them as buck tags, back tags, either sex tags or meat paper.. ! lmao.

Didnt have a thing to do with the either sex tag the tag in question and that you were wrong about was ANTLERLESS ONLY tags or "doe" tags you spoke of.. (and the "either sex" was description of tag not name of the tag! ... Though you knew this).

Separate DOE tags not back tags that could be used for buck only or used with a doe license for doe or buck! SEPARATE DOE/ANTLERLESS tags. You are trying to get out of being wrong again, but its too late. The deal is done.

You also were in no way personally attacked by me, but its pretty clear you are saying such out of desparation and tired of being proven wrong.

BTBowhunter

I'd say nice try, but it's actually kind of pathetic. That last post makes absolutely zero sense. To anyone who reads all the drivel from the point where you made the false 50 year claim, the truth should be obvious in spite of the smoke and mirrors.

wvhuntin4me

I remember the bonus tags coming out in the late 80,s . Shortly after the deer herds started shrinking....

bluebird2

Funny how you claim I was wrong and then provide the information to prove I was right. For the past 50 years a rifle hunter needed a separate antlerless license in order to harvest an antlerless deer.


The bottom line is you can't compare statewide hunter success rates when hunters are permitted to harvest multiple doe, unless you can determine the number of hunters that killed multiple doe. You can only compare the total number of hunters and the total number of deer harvested, but that does not produce the hunter success rate.

Here is what happened in 1984.

moosemike

I started hunting in 1986. The first bonus tags were issued in either '89 or '90. My memory can't pick between the two.