RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

BT, do you ever visit HuntingPA? This poster(DD) has an uncanny resemblance to a BT overthere.....same things, same number crunching, same in every manner.....

Deaddeer, are you Beenthere?

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

I'll have to visit it. If I decide to post there I guess I'd better come up with a new name.[:o]

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

DD you are something. Keep throwing it up their some of it will stick. Juniorpc.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

junior, why don't you answer DD's question? You don't see anything wrong with the PGC's density goals?

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Jason, Thanks for pointing out huntingpa. I'm signed on there now. Apparently I was signed on 2 years ago and never went back so had to modify my name to btbowhunter56. I'll see you there as well!

BTW, take a look at the profiles. I think youll agree DD has "beenthere"

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Don't bother posting there. It is a much tougher crowd and you can't even handle what you have here. You have no facts,just opinions,and opinions won't get you very far on HPA.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Guess I done been warned!

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

:D

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Mike what do you or I or anyone else have to base our DPSM or DPfSM numbers on??? NOTHING. I'm all for leaving it in the biologists hands. Gary Alt has already stated in print that deer numbers would be lower than some sportsman would prefer in some areas. The fact that some folks will be unhappy does not change the fact that we need to do something about habitat, taht some change downward in deer numbers are necessary. Besides DD's already stated that under ALt deer numbers are rising, so why worry about thier goals they'll never reach em ;) DD, MikeE, Juniopc, etc - none of us have any idea what those numbers need to be. Folks just want to blindly argue against them because less deer scares them.
As for DD's presentation of numbers. I've already shown you he takes data and makes invalid interpretations of it. He also directly lies when refuting where data was collected from (If you don't know where don't say you do to bolster your arguement or shoot down someone elses). But again, I think he does know where the data comes from and deliberately states differntly to discredit others and shore up his position. So as for DD's numbers, once I see them popping up a skip through them. They really mean nothing. The PGC website and other sites are chock full of information for folks to read through carefully and make thier own decisions. What DD does is wrong, but a favored tactic of folks like Slinsky and others. Can't really argue with DD on his data, just like you can't tell a kid he did wrong. All you get is blanket deniels and no I didn't you did. Juniorpc.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

That simply is not true. You gave your opinion that the antler survey was not the basis for determining the percentage of 2.5+ buck in the herd. I ,on the otherhand provided the link for the antler buck study where it states how and where the data was collected and it made no mention of voluntary check points or visits to taxidermy shops.


If the antler buck survey wasn't used to determine the percentage of 2.5+ buck, produce the study they did use. You can't do it because their is no other study.


We may not know what the exact OWDD goals should be ,but we do know when the OWDD goals of 6 DPSM for 5C. or 9 DPSM for 1A are ridiculously low . We know that the habitat in the southern tier counties can support more deer than the northern tier counties ,but te northern tier counties have much higher oWDD goals. In other words ,we know the OWDD goals simply make no sense and are not based on science.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

I did just what the PGC did- did not use the data set for purposes it could not be validly used to answer. As for where the data on the antlered bucks came from I do know that Taxidermy shops were used as were deer from processers, and local voluntery check stations by groups who showed enough interest in the deer herd to get certified in aging deer and ambitious enough to do the work involved in setting up a voluntary check stations, such as Peter Pinchot.

The qoute from your link states.. "harvested deer from butcher shops and other locations". which comes right from your link.

Think now other locations... other locations.... other locations.... other locations ..... think hard....other locations...... other locations...............other locations I know where the data was collected from so I know what other locations were...... they included voluntary check stations and taxidermy shops... Not my opinion it's how the data was collected and the reason they couldn't use it to determine the percentage of bucks harvested in each age class. By the way thier are no Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq. Juniorpc.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

I said from day one they included other locations. I ask you to document your claim that the surveyed taxidermy shops and established vountary check points . You still have not done that.


If you would have read the report you would know the teams only operated 3 days during the rifle season and there were only 32 data collection teams to cover the entire state. If they worked the first two days and the first sat. most buck wouldn't have even gotten to the taxidermy shops and it would have been a waste of the teams time to check those shops, especially since they knew it would bias the results.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

You blame the PGC constantly for intentional bias, but when it serves you you claim they would never do that!

As Bill Clinton said, Guess it just depends on "what your definition of is is"

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

No, that is nor true. I do not blame the PGC for being bias. However, Ido blame Alt for misrepresenting the results of their research ,like when he claimed over 50% of the Pike Co. spikes would be 8 pts. the following year.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Yada Yada Yada[:'(] Blah Blah Blah[:'(]

Please show us that quote from Dr Alt. You've stated it as fact a number of times that he specifically promised a 50% 8 pt ratio in Pike county 2.5 year olds . I challenge you to document your claim. Don't expect us to take your word or, your personal number crunching, for it or. Back up your statements as presented !

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Here for you reading pleasure is the quote you requested.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Thanks DD is was a pleasure to read that.:D

First of all this was from a study result not just a prediction. 56% of the bucks had 8 or more points. Now last time I looked 56% was a majority. This aint Florida and there werent any hanging chads here;).

Now I know you don't trust PGC results and it would be possible to skew the results by non random sampling..... But...... wait a minute...... wasn't it you? .....Yes it WAS...YOU.... that insisted that Taxidermy shops weren't included in the sampling

It would seem to me that taxidermy shops would be the place to go if you wanted your sample to favor better antlers.

Hope you washed your feet this morning cause you just stuck both of em in your mouth

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

It was definitely not the result of the antler survey because there was absolutely no way that the staff could know what the 2.5+ buck that were 8 pts were as 1.5 buck. What the study showed is that only 40% of the 2.5+ buck were 8+ pts in Pike CO. That 40% included all buck 2.5 yrs. or older and it included 1.5 sikes and Y buck. Therefore , Alt's claim that 56% of the 1.5 spikes would be 8 pts. as 2.5 buck has no basis in fact. furthermore, if his claim were true the 2003 buck harvest in Pike would have increased not decreased.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

Careful, you are attempting to discredit yourself and you are succeeding!

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

You are entitled to your opinion, but as usual , you have not provided any facts to support your opinion. I provided the quote from the newspaper and anyone can check the results of the antler survey on the PGC website. Your idle chatter proves nothing.

RE: Did PA's deer managment need to change?
 

sniff sniff:(:( whimper whimper:(:(

Guess I done been told AGAIN!!