DougE I agree with your post 100%!! I think even though we are a couple years into our herd reduction, many Alt supporters do not understand how much he is planning on reducing the herd, or they do not care because they are hunting pritate land with limited access and AR. will not affect them. Pike

to DD
No Darryl! What I said was that I have a life and a real Job and that I am alright with letting the people that are trained to do a job DO THEIR JOB. You are one of the worst Monday morning quarterbacks I've ever seen. Exactly what are YOUR credentials???? I and others have asked this before with no answer. You seem to have infinite time to crunch meaningless numbers till you find a way to make the point you wanted to make regardless of the context. You continue to discount the work of professionals in the field with your incessant bean counter, screw the numbers around till they work fpr you lies without offering any solutions to the real issues that exist here in Pa.

Jeff, Illinois is not PA. Even the least densely populated agricultural areas in Pa (humans) is far more populated than Illinois' farm country. Soil content, crop yeild and deer damage are different. Hunting pressure is vastly different. York Co appears to be about 40% of 5B's area. Have you saked the PGC why the goal is 5? I certainly don't know, but before I criticized it I would ask.

I guess you missed my public service announcement where I stated I have no credentials and don't claim to be a wildlife biologist. However, I do have the ability to read the PGC data and use simple math like addition,subtraction ,multipilcation and division to see if the PGC data makes sense.

I don't have to screw the numbers around as you claim since they speak for themselves. In 2002 AR supposededly saved 38K 1.5 buck, but the harvest of 2..5 buck in 2003 only increased by 9 K. So 61K hunters didn't harvest a buck ,in order that 9K more hunters could harvest a buck that was 1 year older. What a deal! Invest 38K bucks and get 9K in return. Sounds like a scam to me!!

BTBowhunter, Yes I have asked both Dr. Alt and Bret Walingford about 2 years ago, and their answer is what I posted above, They do not consider any land that is not FORESTED to be deer habitat, and every square mile of non forested land is excluded from the equation when determining the DD. for each WMU. no matter if the land is in York, Potter, Clearfield or Pike Co. IL. Actually even if Alt would consider farm land as deer habitat, he wouldnt give 5B a deer density of more than 13 DPSM anyway so it would still be a joke!! And I doubt you would be in favor of reducing the herd on your property even to 13 DPSM.Pike

Jeff, you have a valid point regarding Illinois and I am now currently looking for the Ill DNR's deer density goals. Even though Ill is not anywhere near the same as Pa, it is something I personally would like to find out. Anynone know of a site? the Ill DNR site aint the easiest to navigate. Just to make my point of view clear, I also have unanswered questions about the current trends in Pa deer management. I am, however, willing to be patient and let the professionals do what they've said is a trial and error job.
If they screw up, the reproductive capability of the whitetail will fix whatever gets broke very quickly.

DD, somewhere in all your statistical gobbledegook, there might occasionally be something of value. It really doesnt matter anymore cause no one is listening. It's too bad that you spew so much crap that no one can stand to read your posts anymore. You've been caught in your own "out of context" lies way too often.

You have been making those baseless accussations from day one, but you have yet to support any of your claims with documented facts. No one to date has caught me in out of context lies .but you have admitted you don't know what the OWDD goals are in PA because you are working to hard to take five minutes to check the PGC website for the data. But ,you have more than enough time to attack me ,even though you can't provide the data that would prove that I am wrong.

If you can't handle the truth ,just sign off and continue to live in your dream world where trophy hunters can have their cake and eat it too.

On the contrary, DD has presented figures straight from the PGC website while you have presented none.

The good news is that the majority of posters here have seeen through DD's "figures dont lie but liars can figure" strategies. We've pointed out his out of context or partial information rantings many times. It seems many folks here simply have given up. It's kinda like trying to explain the value of hunting to a PETA nut. I'm not sure where it came from but I've heard a quote that really fits here. It goes something like this:

"Dont waste time trying to teach a pig to sing, it just frustrates you and annoys the pig"

Dr Alt and co are professionals that do what they're doing for their living. They've said thy're entering uncharted waters. They've said there will be mistakes. Some have been made and admitted to. Some were fixed right away, some will take more time. A lot of folks here, myself included, have questions about some of the strategies being implemented. DD and a few otheres here seem bent on discrediting Gary Alt no matter what. That kind of game is destructive to our sport.


Here's an example of DD's game:

That was in reference to me not DOUBLE checking one figure when responding to a fellow poster. DD turns that around to imply that I'm completely uninformed.

I don't take my car to a plumber, I didn't ask the banker to wire my house, I don't have a mechanic do my taxes. But I guess I should accept DD's interperetation of the figures and not Gary Alts!!

Alt and his staff spent a year developing a new computer model and converting the OWDD goals from DPFSM to DPSM. If he had any intention of correcting the misguided OWDD goals for farm areas ,that would have been the time to do it. But, instead he just converted the old deer density goals from DPFSM to DPSM and and continued to ignore the value of farm land and fringe areas.

If the OWDD goals. reflected the true carrying capacity of all the habitat the deer use ,there would be absoluely no need to reduce te herd by 50%.

BTbowhunter, Sorry, I cant help you with IL. but Do know that MI. Manages there OW. herd at 29.6 DPSM. and OH. manages there OW. herd at 25 DPSM., Alt isnt managing our herd to benefit the herd, he is mangeing it to benefit the Timber Industry, The Bird watchers and the Flower Sniffers. Do yourself a favor!! Ask a biologist with QDMA, or any biologist outside the PGC. and they will tell you that max, OW. carrying capacity for habitat such as PA. is around 50 DPSM., and most biologist's recommend that you should manage your herd at 60% of Max.
I understand you want to give Alt. a chance, and want to believe in him!! I did aswell!! But like me and many others you will reach a point were you will have to face the fact that you got Punk*D!! and the sooner you get to that point the better!! Pike