Pa sportsmen groups speaks out about audit
03-10-2010, 12:14 PM
#31
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Flawed??? Over on Pa outdoors i read where he said Pa's regeneration assessment was, and i quote "A JOKE" because he didnt believe that regeneration didnt improve since reduction, even though the audit says it regressed.
So if the plan is based on absolutely nothing...The herd health data was completely insufficient, the regen study according to doug was a joke...and many of us have been saying that for some time....Plus the audit found the data insufficient anyway.... why has this failed plan been in place for so long?
So if the plan is based on absolutely nothing...The herd health data was completely insufficient, the regen study according to doug was a joke...and many of us have been saying that for some time....Plus the audit found the data insufficient anyway.... why has this failed plan been in place for so long?
03-10-2010, 12:27 PM
#32
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Had it not been for the USP demanding the audit do you think Roe would EVER have come forth with the truth about the windfall from gas wells????..he'd been lying about that since the start of the drilling. what about the timbering harvests that the PGC has been UNDER harvesting (<1%) and telling us there is no revenue to be made from it...ALL THE WHILE PLEADING FOR A RATE HIKE TO BE EAR MARKED FOR "ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES"
03-10-2010, 12:28 PM
#33
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
By the way,very few exclosures have zero deer at all times.
03-10-2010, 12:30 PM
#34
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
[quote=Potterco;3592101]
I thought you could kill a doe any day of the week without even having to hunt for them?
Here's just a few examples of why the USP is considered a lunatic fringe group by responsible sportsmen.
They've been predicting imminent and immediate doom for the deer herd not just since Alt and AR/HR but since the first bonus doe tag was sold back in the 80's.......
QUOTE]
By the looks of the deer herd anywhere but suburbia I, and the majority of sportsmen/women/youth, in the state would say they were spot on about that!!!!!!!!
They've been predicting imminent and immediate doom for the deer herd not just since Alt and AR/HR but since the first bonus doe tag was sold back in the 80's.......
QUOTE]
By the looks of the deer herd anywhere but suburbia I, and the majority of sportsmen/women/youth, in the state would say they were spot on about that!!!!!!!!
03-10-2010, 12:34 PM
#36
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"That audit had zero to do with gas wells.The PGC finances are already heavily audited so there's no way for them to hide any revenue from gas wells."
http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/nort...ot-needed.html
.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 03-10-2010 at 12:36 PM.
03-10-2010, 12:40 PM
#38
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"Who ever said it was a natural enviroment?The point is,you take away "one" element and the regeneration is fine."
Wanna take away an element? deal with the poor soil, or the invasive species, poor timber practices etc... Things that should be addressed before even considering excessive and extreme measures that are ongoing.
Better element yet to take away...Take the enviro extremists out of our game commission, Im guessing the on paper regeneration rates would then magically increase by 25%. lol.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 03-10-2010 at 12:42 PM.
03-10-2010, 12:50 PM
#39
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
But its not acceptable to "take away" that "one" element. Its not natural. Nor is it desirable.
Wanna take away an element? deal with the poor soil, or the invasive species, poor timber practices etc... Things that should be addressed before even considering excessive and extreme measures that are ongoing.
Better element yet to take away...Take the enviro extremists out of our game commission, Im guessing the on paper regeneration rates would then magically increase by 25%. lol.
Wanna take away an element? deal with the poor soil, or the invasive species, poor timber practices etc... Things that should be addressed before even considering excessive and extreme measures that are ongoing.
Better element yet to take away...Take the enviro extremists out of our game commission, Im guessing the on paper regeneration rates would then magically increase by 25%. lol.
03-10-2010, 01:09 PM
#40
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Ive explained my view on that many times to you doug, and i believe they are very valid.
All of those things greatly magnify the effect of deer.
If there is less browse available because of those issues...Then you have less regen from the get go. The remaining will be more heavily utilized...
Also If there is slower growth rate of the remaining growth... It will take longer to outgrow the reach of a deer, it will be far slower to recover from browsing...etc..
And these things are all known to be existing conditions.. There are enclosures that have no difference inside & out, and there is much evidence showing slow growth rates of even mature trees even according to pgcs exec director Roe.
And you yourself have even agreed that timbering practices are a factor such as cut size etc...
Invasive species effects are well documented... As are the poor soils..
If all these conditions are permitted to exist.. I think it absolutely absurd to blame the deer if they are within reasonable densities known to be "normal" and what should be acceptable.
If deer numbers are at what most would consider "normal" levels and proven to be so, and all the other factors are known not to be conducive to regeneration...then where do the problems lie?
All of those things greatly magnify the effect of deer.
If there is less browse available because of those issues...Then you have less regen from the get go. The remaining will be more heavily utilized...
Also If there is slower growth rate of the remaining growth... It will take longer to outgrow the reach of a deer, it will be far slower to recover from browsing...etc..
And these things are all known to be existing conditions.. There are enclosures that have no difference inside & out, and there is much evidence showing slow growth rates of even mature trees even according to pgcs exec director Roe.
And you yourself have even agreed that timbering practices are a factor such as cut size etc...
Invasive species effects are well documented... As are the poor soils..
If all these conditions are permitted to exist.. I think it absolutely absurd to blame the deer if they are within reasonable densities known to be "normal" and what should be acceptable.
If deer numbers are at what most would consider "normal" levels and proven to be so, and all the other factors are known not to be conducive to regeneration...then where do the problems lie?
Last edited by Cornelius08; 03-10-2010 at 01:18 PM.