MikeE51848

As reported in todays Lehighton "Times News", "two private communities in the Poconos have applied to cull the deer herd, which residents blame for destroying vegetation in the area."
"About 280 deer would be killed to bring the density to a more manageable 30 per square mile in the two developments, supporters said."

Please Dr Alt, tell them 12 per square mile is the goal, and nothing more!

DougE

Mike,yep,they'd still be almost three times the goal.I wonder if ornamentals can regenerate at those levels.I'm sure Alt will consult the audubon to find out.

Tomster

Mike,

I'm just curious, what are the names of these private communities?? I live near some communities like Big Bass Lake, Pocono Springs, and Eagle Lake. The deer live and prosper in there, but hunters can not take them. The last time Big Bass sponsered a hunt to get rid of some of them, a home owner saw what was happening and called the ASPCA and they put a stop to the hunt.

Now you can almost pet the deer in there since many people feed them and they are not afraid or us.

T

juniorpc

This would already have been addressed if Dr. Alt had been allowed to do so. Can't change things too rapidly though folks would blow a gasket. Again.. some folks want things done faster, some slower. All want to complain about how it's being done. Seems like you folks realize these deer aviod the hunters. Soooo you won't be too upset when when it's addressed and baiting in certain areas is instituted will you now. Also if we hunters had our act together it would be much more likely we would be allowed in, at least bowhunters (possiblly muzzleloaders, and maybe even buckshot) but we keep shooting ourselves, shooting each other, leaving our litter in the woods, on folks property, driving over fields, trespassing, shooting too close to buildings, and generally allowing the negative perception some folks have about hunters to perpetuate itself. Yep all that is Alts fault, all of it. Oh, he just has to figure out a way to correct the problems it causes. Or maybe he doesn't when White Buffalo or some other sharpshooter business comes in and does what we could have done. Not because of ALT, because our actions, our ignoring others littering etc, has made hunting the least favored option for these Communities to consider. If you folks were following the deer management issue you'd already know this was a concern. Enjoy, Juniorpc.

deaddeer

Alt did absolutely nothing to elevate the status of hunters when he denigrated us at the Audubon Confereence , by telling his omega hunter joke. He routinely portrays hunters as lazy and inept along with being to stupid to appreciate how great hunting will be with 50% fewer deer.

Then,after telling everyone that hunters have been reducing the PS herd since 2001 , he switches to a new computer model that wipes out those decreases and increases the herd to 1.6 M PS deer. That told all the critics of hunting that hunters w ere not an effective tool for controling the herd. talk about shooting onself in the foot. He turned succcess into failure with the click of a mouse.

MikeE51848

The communities listed were Lake Naomi andTimber Trails.

Junior, what you don't seem to get is that, except for small pockets, public land hunting is poor, and getting worse. Something needs to be done, besides issuing more doe tags, or have a buffoon making jokes about the hunters he represents (besides lying about deer densities). You mean to tell me he's still proclaiming 1.6 million deer after hunting season??? Even you can't believe that.

PABowhntr

So if I am reading your quote of the article right Mike then they want to try to get the ratio down to 30 deer psm as opposed to being there now and getting it down to 12 deer psm?

I could definitely believe that is the case with some of those private communities. It seems that most folks don't want the deer eating their shrubbery but they don't want to see them killed either.

juniorpc

Mike, what I see on public land I hunt on is..... poor, overbrowsed, poorly regenerating habitat. What I do see thriving is the less desirable species, at the expense of the regeneration we need. You folks don't want to acknowledge some facts: Bucks and does are undersized, antler growth is poor, fawn mortality is increased because habitat is poor (good habitat means good concealment cover in addition to the nutrion it provides) Where I've seen deer congregate on public land is where habitat is better, thicker, more cover, more food. You folks ignore the poor habitat, sight an example here or their where habitat is better (although some thicker habitat is full of undesirable growth so other than cover doesn't provide the nutritional kick needed) and say we don't have a habitat problem. We do. You folks don't want to admit habitat is difficult to regenerate and will take years to do so. Suddenlty it becomes a myth foresters propogate so that they can have better forests so they can make more money. You folks don't want to admit deer are the problem. They are. Acid rain does not create browse lines. Acid rain does not kill seedlings (deer eat them long before acid rain can even effect them). You folks don't want to admit we need to harvest more deer until things are back in balance and even if we overharvest we will be able to quickly bring deer numbers back up. The facts are habitat, while easy to destroy is harder to restore and deer numbers, while they can be reduced can quickly be restored. The solution, while not palatable, is necessary. The problem, while ignored, is real. I can't really put too much stock in any arguements folks are making when they fail to acknowledge the simple truths that exist, even if you don't agree with the methods being used to solve them. Juniorpc.

MikeE51848

Right, they're overun with deer, a common occurance here in the private communities of the Poconos. Some communities are quite extensive in area, are always posted (or have laws against it), and usually not huntable due to safety zone considerations. For instance, I could shoot deer from my deck, but it ain't legal, not even with a bow. There's a small herd of about 5 - 6 deer terrorizing my neighborhood, and man, they love my wife's flowers and shrubs!
PS. And I don't know if the PGC will allow them to do that. I mean, if the WMU goal is 12 dsm, why would they allow them to maintain any other ratio?

deaddeer

When are you going to accept the fact that the herd will not be allowed to increase above the OWDD goals even if the habitat improves. Pole timber will still have a carrying capacity of 5 DPFSM and saw timber will still be 20 DPFSM and the goal for 3 D will remain at 13 DPSM. At 13 DPSM the max. buck harvest PSM will be 3 buck/yr. and with AR it will be closer to 2 Buck /yr.

Pole timber will always be lousey deer habitat no matter how many doe we harvest and 29% of our forests are pole timber and pole timber remains in that stage for 40-60years. Reducing the herd to 5 DPFSM will will do nothing to improve the habitat in those stands since the factor limiting growth is the lack of sunlight, not the deer.