I think we can all agree on this one. We gotta stop shooting doe in places where the heard is damaged. That's the only solution. Buy the tags, and throw them out.
-Jake

I said the same thing 7 months ago and that the woods was beyond caring capacity but was called childish. Heathly woods, healthy herd.

Depends on the area. One farm I hunt has a good amount of deer. Last year there were 4 buck and 9 doe running around.I took a doe off that farm last year, And probably will again this year. But there's other places I hunt where I wouldn't even think of taking a doe right now. There's still some deer in the areas, and I hunt them because I know there's some decent bucks running around. But there's nowhere near what there used to be.
-Jake

'Healthy woods, healthy herd". If only it worked out that way. There was no bumper crop of acorns there last year and they were rotting on the ground. The "Quality" of the deer, or what ever you rack hunters call it, has really gone down hill since the herd reduction started. Let me give you my theory. A couple years ago, it was not uncommon to kill doe up there that weighed 120 to 150 pounds. The last couple years a big doe is about 80 pounds. You let old, demented looking spike and 3 pointers walk and then you are breeding the runts and "Scrap". It takes two to tango. Gary Alt policy was "Kill the big doe". In other words, get rid of the good genes the big doe were carrying. I remember when the Game Commission stance was "Shoot the little ones, they will starve over winter anyway." What next? You want a healthy forest? I still take bags of acorns and beech nuts from my back yard and spread them around where there are none when I am hiking or hunting. Some are bound to roll into rocks and be safe from the squirrels.

c-rad I've been saying that for years. Common sense aint so common huh?

The problem with the PGC is that they don't listen to the people that are out in the wood from Sept - Jan.
There are deer out there. But their numbers are way way down. I believe they are almost at the point of not being able to recover. My passion is archery and I use to let dozens of doe walk by me every year. Now, I am lucky to see a dozen all season. And I have several stand locations after serious preseason scouting an trail cams, etc. I manage to shoot a decent buck every year. And in the past 5 years, I have shot some really nice ones. But I worked my tail off for them.

Gary Alt said the deer herd was out of balance. Too many doe. I live in a unlimited tag area (Thousands of doe tags left every year) and it is apparent that now there are more buck than doe in the area. As far as how big an oak tree should get, 3 foot across is nothing. We cut trees in Philadelphia, where they could not be logged or burned, that were so wide I could not get the log truck grapel around them to lift them. I hunt West Virginia and every once and a while you find one on a rocky shelf where the loggers could not get it or a fire either. Those trees you see are not dieing of old age. There is something killing them. I heard that horse **** "A tree gets ripe" from the DNR. That is an excuse to cut them. Go back through the history books and look at the early logging pictures.

I'm sorry, where did you get your forestry degree or your biology degree?

I have a science degree and I did not get it off the internet like you did. You losers are all the same. Talk down to people when they won't admit they are wrong. In the 1800's when wooden ships were king, the eastern shore of the U.S. was the go to place for timber. An oak tree was not even cut unless it was 6 feet across. I have hunted the eastern shore of Maryland and there are trees there that 3 guys could not reach around. There are oak trees along the roads here in Lehigh and Bucks county that are easily 4 foot and better. I must have been in make-believe land because some Forester told me it is not possible.

Woooooo a science degree! That doesn't tell me anything. I DO have a science degree in forestry and an associate degree in biology so I DO know what I am talking about. the numbers I pulled were off the PGC site. And they are nothing more than lies and ridiculous estimates. If they would get their heads out of their a$$es they would realize that they have screwed up the deer herd so bad that it may not ever recover. Plus the predation level has increased. If you go out in the snow you will see coyote tracks everywhere. And yes they are capable of killing a full grown deer if they hunt in 2 or more. And their toll on fawns I would guess is realitively high also.
And as for being a hunter, there may have been only a couple years that I haven't harvested a deer in over 45 years. And almost all of them have been buck. I hunted in the years where you could go out and see 25 - 50 deer a day on public land. But now, if you see 3 or more deer you had a great day.
Just don't sit in front of your computer and tell me I don't know what I am talking about. There are countless of real hunters out there that know the PGC and the DCNR are nothing but a group of illogical individuals with terrible statistical methodology that create the fraudulant number they have the gall to post on their site.

You don't know what you are talking about. Somehow it went from old growth trees to deer again. You actually make sense until you discuss forestry.

Gunplummer I believe you may have seen huge oak trees 6' + in diameter being cut in residential areas. But understand how long it takes a tree to get that big. Hundreds of years. And most of PA's state forest land was cut back some time in the 1800s and early 1900s. In fact, Williamsport was a major logging town at one time. So you will not find these huge trees anymore. And as for them dying of old age. You do realize there are over 400 types of oak trees I hope. Those growing in the wilds of PA are mostly white, red and black oak. Some areas have the typical scrub oak that doesn't grow more than 20' tall. The whites have the longest livespan and can live 500 - 600 years if undisturbed. Normal livespan however is about 100 yrs. The red and black oak have an aerage life span of about 75 years. So if the forest were cut in the 1800s and early 1900s then yes they are dying of old age. (some also from disease and predation such as the gypsy moth). So why not cut them leaving some for seed, allowing the undergrowth to start and provide a healthy habitat for game. Those mature timber stand are worthless for holding game. Deer are mostly browsers which is what they eat most of the year. The acorns and other nut that drop in the fall are eaten mostly for the fat content to get them thru the winter.

Yea Tundra you can't fix how people hunt. People I hunt with think I am nuts because I drive 1500 miles to hunt there and won't shoot does or a young big racked buck. But I will drop a scrub rack in a second. They don't understand the concept of if you leave certain deer go the next year will be better. You can't change that because they been thinking like that for so many yrs.