Pa sportsmen groups speaks out about audit
03-11-2010, 11:26 AM
#81
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Here is quote from the notes of PFSC report on the HF7G hearing.
Note that 80 year old trees would have been seedlings in 1929 and by 1928 there were so many deer that the PGC an antlerless only season. Since then, even during years of extremely high deer densities the forested acreage increased instead of decreasing and all of our current pole timber stands developed with much higher DDs then we had in 2000 when the current slaughter began.
Rep. Krieger asked when the first regeneration problems were noticed. Williamson answered it was first noticed in the 1930s and 1940s. Rep, Krieger asked if the problem is getting better or worse. According to Williamson, WMI is encouraged by the data it is receiving from DCNR. Rep. Krieger noted that "the forest didn't appear to change, but we are no longer seeing deer." Williamson clarified that the model suggests the deer population decreased in "most units" and some units saw a decrease greater than 25% and other saw a slight increase. Rep. Krieger asked that if the fact that regeneration problems occur with and without suggests deer are not the primary factor. Healy responded that when much of PA's forest regenerated in the early part of last century, "there were not that many deer." Healy noted that "60% of state forest is up at 80-100 years old" and that makes the problem more obvious. According to Healy, a large portion of the forest is ready to be harvested and that makes the number of deer critical. Rep. Krieger asked if the WMU should be made smaller. It would make sense to shrink the size of the WMU, according to Healy, but he warned the units have to be large enough to get adequate sampling for "harvesting, deer health, forest health, and citizen desires."
03-11-2010, 11:43 AM
#82
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Here is quote from the notes of PFSC report on the HF7G hearing.
Note that 80 year old trees would have been seedlings in 1929 and by 1928 there were so many deer that the PGC an antlerless only season. Since then, even during years of extremely high deer densities the forested acreage increased instead of decreasing and all of our current pole timber stands developed with much higher DDs then we had in 2000 when the current slaughter began.
Note that 80 year old trees would have been seedlings in 1929 and by 1928 there were so many deer that the PGC an antlerless only season. Since then, even during years of extremely high deer densities the forested acreage increased instead of decreasing and all of our current pole timber stands developed with much higher DDs then we had in 2000 when the current slaughter began.
03-11-2010, 11:54 AM
#83
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"It's way too early in the game to say how much of a windfall there will be.I agree it has the potential to be hugely significant but it's all speculation at this point."
Its most definately not too early to see that Carl Roe lied to the legislators and the public about VERY minimal income that was to be had. Thats definate.
"I don't see where anyone hid anything.If and when the money starts rolling it,it can't be hidden."
I agree. It was clear he was buying time. Time to plot ways to utilize the cash and get things set up where they could have access for whatever they deemed appropriate. They were trying to get that money to be used for agency funding, and not earmarked etc..i believe. Set up in a way so that they could utilize it as they please without others helping make those decisions. I believe their politician boy, Levdansky was trying to set that up or so ive read.
They also wanted to ream us for another several million a year in license fee increase before it came known they didnt need it. Id say 10 to 20 million a year additional for the next decade would come in handy regardless of whether its absolutely needed or not eh?
"You need to spend some time in the northcentral part of the state to see the devistation to the habitat.When an area get's cut,the deer would quickly eat all of the prefered regeneration and nothing but worthless junk would grow.That's a fact and that's why we can't have more deer than the habitat can support without further permanenet damage.Once again,that's proven by the exclsoures."
Even if we were to assume some of what you say may be true in some areas... The problem is they are saying this is a statewide problem...the statewide regen has decreased, etc. And thats not even worthy of discussion, its utterly ridiculous and pure bull- as far as im concerned. Now im not familiar enough to make firm statements in regards to the north one way or the other... But if they are gonna say the habitat down here and some other areas Im familiar with is anything less than fine, they are out of their friggin gourds.
Its most definately not too early to see that Carl Roe lied to the legislators and the public about VERY minimal income that was to be had. Thats definate.
"I don't see where anyone hid anything.If and when the money starts rolling it,it can't be hidden."
I agree. It was clear he was buying time. Time to plot ways to utilize the cash and get things set up where they could have access for whatever they deemed appropriate. They were trying to get that money to be used for agency funding, and not earmarked etc..i believe. Set up in a way so that they could utilize it as they please without others helping make those decisions. I believe their politician boy, Levdansky was trying to set that up or so ive read.
They also wanted to ream us for another several million a year in license fee increase before it came known they didnt need it. Id say 10 to 20 million a year additional for the next decade would come in handy regardless of whether its absolutely needed or not eh?
"You need to spend some time in the northcentral part of the state to see the devistation to the habitat.When an area get's cut,the deer would quickly eat all of the prefered regeneration and nothing but worthless junk would grow.That's a fact and that's why we can't have more deer than the habitat can support without further permanenet damage.Once again,that's proven by the exclsoures."
Even if we were to assume some of what you say may be true in some areas... The problem is they are saying this is a statewide problem...the statewide regen has decreased, etc. And thats not even worthy of discussion, its utterly ridiculous and pure bull- as far as im concerned. Now im not familiar enough to make firm statements in regards to the north one way or the other... But if they are gonna say the habitat down here and some other areas Im familiar with is anything less than fine, they are out of their friggin gourds.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 03-11-2010 at 12:03 PM.
03-11-2010, 12:20 PM
#84
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
[QUOTE]True but there was such widespread clearcutting that the deer were overwhelmed.[QUOTE]
That simply is not true. By 1929 the majority of the clearcuts from the turn of the century were already in the pole timber stage which supports the fewest number of deer of any forest class.
This quote proves I am right.
That simply is not true. By 1929 the majority of the clearcuts from the turn of the century were already in the pole timber stage which supports the fewest number of deer of any forest class.
This quote proves I am right.
Dead deer everywhere – “Several trips were made into Clearfield and
Pike and other counties in the fall of 1928 and again in the fall of 1929
and the early spring of 1930 by officers from the Harrisburg office,
accompanied by experts from the offices of the U.S. Biological Survey and
the U.S. Department of Agriculture at Washington, and also by officers
our own Bureau of Animal Industry, and various district game
protectors, fish wardens and forest rangers. Food conditions were
thoroughly studied, and a large number of dead deer were examined --
both where they lay and later in laboratories -- every one of them a fawn.
Not one of them showed the faintest sign of disease, either on field
examination or in the laboratory; it was simply a plain case of utter
emaciation and starvation, though all stomachs were reasonably full of
laurel or rhododendron.” – Game Commission Executive Secretary John
Slautterback, 1929-30 Biennial Report
Pike and other counties in the fall of 1928 and again in the fall of 1929
and the early spring of 1930 by officers from the Harrisburg office,
accompanied by experts from the offices of the U.S. Biological Survey and
the U.S. Department of Agriculture at Washington, and also by officers
our own Bureau of Animal Industry, and various district game
protectors, fish wardens and forest rangers. Food conditions were
thoroughly studied, and a large number of dead deer were examined --
both where they lay and later in laboratories -- every one of them a fawn.
Not one of them showed the faintest sign of disease, either on field
examination or in the laboratory; it was simply a plain case of utter
emaciation and starvation, though all stomachs were reasonably full of
laurel or rhododendron.” – Game Commission Executive Secretary John
Slautterback, 1929-30 Biennial Report
Last edited by bluebird2; 03-11-2010 at 12:28 PM.
03-11-2010, 01:14 PM
#85
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Actually,you are correct which proves my original point.The timber regenerated like crazy because there were practically no deer when the majority of it was cut.By the late 40's there were severe winter mortality because it was in the pole stage.
03-11-2010, 02:46 PM
#87
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
I read what the date was.That doesn't matter.The majority of the northern tier was pole timber throughout the 30's and 40's and there was magor winter mortality in that time period as well.
03-11-2010, 03:06 PM
#88
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
But you claimed there were few deer when our 80 yr.old saw timber developed and I proved you were wrong. Then , you tried to avoid admitting you were wrong by talking about winterkill in the 40's. Just more of your bob and weave nonsense in order to avoid admitting the DMP has failed.
