You don't need a crystal ball to see the writing on the wall.

Saying you have no interest in the numbers is either apathy or a cop out. Either way, it means sportsman not holding the commission accountable..... (is it any wonder we don't have all sportsman going in one direction in Pa?) and secondly it means hunters do not have the tools to make educated decisions on deer management if the numbers from our state employees are not believeable.

I actually do believe the numbers are the best estimate of the pgc staff. I usually only disagree with posters who want to believe them when they show something in one direction - then disbelieve them when the numbers go in the opposite!

It surely is a boondoggle to say that you belive the PGC when they say we must cut the herd in half and then say 'oh but I do not believe the yearly harvest stats that show a declining buck harvest for the last 3 years or the total herd numbers' Its hypocrisy if you do....

Pa asked for better buck hunting and got doe tags as a consolation prize. Hunting in the smaller herd will lead to a coninuance of lower buck harvests than before we had ar/hr (with the emphasis on hr)

...no crystal ball needed.

less deer equals l-e-s-s d-e-e-r. Get it?

less deer equals b-e-t-t-e-r q-u-a-l-i-t-y h-a-b-i-t-a-t. Get it?

Less deer equals b-e-t-t-e-r b-a-l-a-n-c-e with other species. Get it?

Less does equals b-e-t-t-e-r b-u-c-k/d-o-e ratio. Get it?

Less doe equals more n-a-t-u-r-a-l b-r-e-e-d-i-n-g c-o-m-p-e-t-i-t-i-o-n. Get it?

Fer cryin out loud, we are only going into our third year of AR!

Yes the buck kill dropped the first year because we couldnt shoot a lot of em. The second year weather was very much a factor in the lower kill. Maybe not the ONLY factor, but a significant one to be sure.

From the start, Alt said this was going to be trial and error till they got it right.


I swear some of you guys are just like those in this country that said they understood that the war on terror was going to take awhile but began to whine when it wasnt over in 6 weeks!

We harvested 86% of the buck that were carried over from 2002 and we had the second largest anterless harvest ever recorded. Therefore , weather conditions were not the cause of the lower buck harvest in 2003 , but the harvest of 77K BB in 2002 and the harvest of 52.6 K 2.5 + buck in 2002 was the reason for the lower than expected buck harvest in 2003.

When AR was implemented in Ark. the buck harvest decreased by 40% and Dr. Demarias said implementing Ar in Miss. decreased te buck harvest by 50% and neither state was ithe process of reducing their OW herd by 50% , as alt wants to do in PA.

Chickory:
Killing 27 deer in one night is not crop damage control by any sort of the friggin imagination. Thats nothing more than one GREEDY S.O.B taking advantage of his circumstances!!!! I grew up on a farm in the same area that i wrote about earlier in this thread & i can tell you one thing for damn certain,,,my love for hunting & having deer to enjoy year around (not just during the hunting season) never would have let me do such a SORRY ASS thing as kill 27 deer in one night & write it off as doing the right thing for my livelyhood!!! what became of these 27 deer killed by this so called farmer???? I would think that such a man prolly shot em in the guts to run off & die for the so called "sport" of it. no way could i justify such an act as this,,nor would any sportsm,an or farmer that i know! If im not mistaken,,,isnt there something in the laws that says you can only kill as many deer for crop damage that youcan personally you for your own consumption?? This is the kind of antix that im talking about,,,how can I be held responsible for going out to my treestand & thinking to myself "Mike,,,theres a buck!!! Ok let me make sure that theres 3 pt's on 1 side,,yeap,,he's legal,,now wait until he stops so you get a good broadside shot,,, If killing 27 deer for "crop damage" in one night is justifiable by one farmer,,,than i may as well quit buying non-resident liscense every year & just shoot every deer that i see for two weeks that im home!

Now,,,where did all this 27 deer shot in one night figure into Alt's numbers???
Did this farmer call the game commission & tell themn that he just demolished the deer herd in his area & did they come to his "farm" & congratulate him on half of alts behalf?

Dude:
your last statement of "NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT" makes me wanna sit down to the loading bench & load one special round for my own head!

Oh & by the way:
I have no problem with a farmer killing deer for crop damage! But 27 in one night????

Hey,,maybe im the one thats wrong here & im just not getting the whole picture

The way you talk the harvest will just keep falling. Eventually it has to level off or rise. That may be this year. It may be next. It may not happen for five more years, but neither you nor I know it....hence the crystal ball.

I never said I have no interest in the PGC numbers. I said they aren't worth arguing over because they are all we have to go from. I said that I don't believe them. I don't believe the herd is increasing by the amounts the PGC suggests when just a couple of years ago they were telling us the herd was dropping. Almost everyone is seeing less deer in this state. Especially on public land. I think that's a good thing, but either the old model was WAY OFF or the new one is. How did we have a herd of 1.3m and declining just a couple of years ago and suddenly with a new model we have 1.6m and rising?

The harvest stats I put more faith in than the overall herd estimate. I don't contest that the buck harvest is declining, but it won't decline forever. If the rest of the state is anything like my area there are more legal bucks around than I ever used to see any bucks, period. If that holds true then the harvest this year will increase. If it doesn't then it can decrease or remain similar. Again, we've had the last, what, four years of all-time-high harvest and yet the herd is growing tremendously and there aren't any bucks around. Make up your mind.....

PA asked for QDM and we're getting it. A deer behind every tree and killing spikes and Y's is not better buck hunting, it's more killing of young deer. Once again, the buck harvests will drop, but not forever....therefore, not a continuance.

I don't have a problem with less deer, you seem to though. HR is needed in this state. We have had too many deer for way too long in most parts of the state. I don't see the need for deer behind every tree or the need to kill the first tiny buck that wanders aimlessly by. If you can explain to me why the previous management plan was better than the current I will take the time to read and discuss and debate it with you, but until you have something to talk about I'm liking the new plan a whole lot more.

sorry bt bowhunter but it was Dr. Alt who said each tweak he performed would do great things....not me. He said earlier seasons would do wonders. They did not.

He said, not me, that hunting would get better right away (even before AR) he took steps to put more emphsasis on doe harvests early. Soooooo..... talk to your buddy.

We have been under 'modern scientific' deer management going on six seasons now and it has not made hunting any better. In fact in many areas it has mad it worse. You can sit and wait another 10 years, but I don't have to in order to see what a smaller deer herd has brought.

by the way habitat does not limit deer in many parts of our state, our B ratio was just fine before AR/HR, and having deer inharmony with all other mammals is fluff.

Sorry but you are just making excuses as proponents usually do to excuse your having fallen for the rhetoric.

how does it feel to get punk*d? Dr. Alt sure did fool some of you......


oh, but you were right about one thing..."Alt said this was going to be trial and error "
Yes, it has been trial and ERROR.

rem700 ? Whats up with your surprise over 27 deer killed for crop damage?

In PA. sportsman have agreed with the game commission and the legislature that private landowners MUST have the tools to control the deer on thier own property. That is carved in stone in Harrisburg. No debate.......

It happens often in pa. Dirk Remensnyder, a PGC employee was charged for shooting 125 deer at night with a light in Sunbury Pa, for a landowner who didn't feel like shooting them himself. (at one time thought to be illegal) but Dirk is working for the Game commission once again due to the help of Commissioner Thomas Boop who got him acquited of the charges and re-instated. Landowners come first, even if laws are sidestepped, in most cases.

If you think that the farmer shot them out of greed, I would say no. He did not keep a ssingle one (he could keep one legally), he shot them, gutted them, and placed them on his farm lane for the PGC to pick up after he called them. All perfectly in accordance with law and regs. Of course it was August and hot and two days later when the PGC arrived with trucks to load them they were spoiled and they went into a landfill. All per the state rules. No problem.


It ain't me who says so, its our state leaders. We are under seige from a brown menace called deer pollution, and all tools are being brought to bear. IF YOU GOT a problem with that, then you need to be talking to your state representative (who made)and your 8 commissioners (who enforce) the regulation!

Tonight, your local farmer can do the same thing (amish or not) and it all perfectly within his rights. Don't blame me, I don't make the rules.

You musta talked to a different Gary Alt than I did. Or are you getting your "Alt proclamations" second hand?


From the hunters I've talked to, it did get better right away. The only complainers seem to be the guys that just don't want to change hunting sytle or locations. In other words they refuse to adapt.

In a way you are somewhat correct. Habitat hasn't yet limited deer much of anywhere yet but a lot of habitat has been permanently changed, damaged or outright destroyed by too many deer. As for the B/D ratio having been just fine I can only say

No, the likes of Silinsky, Unified and old DD have Punk*d you!

And as for you DD, old buddy....


Exactly what part of didn't you understand???
I guess that since you can't put adverse weather into your little calculator that means it doesn't count. Eh?

Yes , I understand that adverse weather is not a factor when the harvest of only one class of deer decreased significantly. The harvest of 1.5 buck decreased from 113K in 2002 to 80K in 2003. That is a decrease of 29% ,while the total buck harvest only decreased by 11 %, and the harvest rate for 2.5+ buck increased. That means that adverse weather was not the limiting factor controling the harvest , but the decreased number of 1.5 buck was the controlling factor.