Dr Alt Meetings.......
01-09-2002, 07:42 AM
#52
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lehigh County PA USA
Posts: 12,157
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
I am going to repost my last two posts because it seems like we haven't gone anywhere since then....
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I will take a stab at this one. Archers need more time in the woods so that they can be more effective in reducing deer numbers.
It takes more time to get a deer within range of a bow when compared with a rifle/muzzleloader, etc.....
Now, as for muzzleloader hunters....I would have no problem with a longer overlap with the regular archery season. Let the Muzzleloaders have the last two or three weeks of the regular archery season as an overlap........you won't hear an argument from me....
...just as long as bowhunters have more time, undisturbed, in the field. Fewer people and less overall disturbance are what is necessary for archery to be used as an effective deer management tool.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> That would be fine with me. I have no problem hunting strictly for does over a longer season. It isn't about a buck for me.
Nor does the idea of denser foliage really apply when it comes to archery. The denser the better. A twenty yard shot is the norm in bowhunting season. And since there are less hunters during bow season.....
The idea of putting it in November/December wouldn't fly though for two reasons that I can think of immediately. One, that is when the rifle seasons are. And two, if you place archery after rifle then less deer will be harvested during that archery season because the deer will already be spooked and there will be much less of them.
September 1st is a viable option that should be instituted.... And again, I have nothing against more time in the field for other hunter groups....give the muzzleloader guys, crossbow guys and rifle guys extended seasons as well.
Ofcourse, we need to keep all of them within reason since the herd can only support so much hunting per deer management unit.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
And I especially like BTBowhunter's comments.....
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>that it would be fair to let the guys with the most restrictive yet non disruptive weapons go first leading up to the most effective/disruptive weapons. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
...as well as Rlong's comments....
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> I am in full agreement for a Set 1st ARCHERY SEASON. Not in any way shape or form for an "any weapon" early season. Sorry. I see no reason why the archery season shouldn't be Sept 1st-Feb 1st. No biological reason either.......
....And the doe first rule could be applied in those "smaller and necessary" areas only.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I will take a stab at this one. Archers need more time in the woods so that they can be more effective in reducing deer numbers.
It takes more time to get a deer within range of a bow when compared with a rifle/muzzleloader, etc.....
Now, as for muzzleloader hunters....I would have no problem with a longer overlap with the regular archery season. Let the Muzzleloaders have the last two or three weeks of the regular archery season as an overlap........you won't hear an argument from me....
...just as long as bowhunters have more time, undisturbed, in the field. Fewer people and less overall disturbance are what is necessary for archery to be used as an effective deer management tool.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> That would be fine with me. I have no problem hunting strictly for does over a longer season. It isn't about a buck for me.
Nor does the idea of denser foliage really apply when it comes to archery. The denser the better. A twenty yard shot is the norm in bowhunting season. And since there are less hunters during bow season.....
The idea of putting it in November/December wouldn't fly though for two reasons that I can think of immediately. One, that is when the rifle seasons are. And two, if you place archery after rifle then less deer will be harvested during that archery season because the deer will already be spooked and there will be much less of them.
September 1st is a viable option that should be instituted.... And again, I have nothing against more time in the field for other hunter groups....give the muzzleloader guys, crossbow guys and rifle guys extended seasons as well.
Ofcourse, we need to keep all of them within reason since the herd can only support so much hunting per deer management unit.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
And I especially like BTBowhunter's comments.....
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>that it would be fair to let the guys with the most restrictive yet non disruptive weapons go first leading up to the most effective/disruptive weapons. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
...as well as Rlong's comments....
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> I am in full agreement for a Set 1st ARCHERY SEASON. Not in any way shape or form for an "any weapon" early season. Sorry. I see no reason why the archery season shouldn't be Sept 1st-Feb 1st. No biological reason either.......
....And the doe first rule could be applied in those "smaller and necessary" areas only.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
01-09-2002, 08:05 AM
#53
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
Seems to me that Frank addressed a longer ML season in his quote. As for the rifle guys... we now have a hole in the seasons during the week that used to be for doe season. No solution is perfect for all. We all need to be open minded as Pa's new deer management system evolves.
01-09-2002, 11:20 AM
#55
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Galeton PA USA
Posts: 28
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
You know what.....I hunt with a bow....and a rifle, and a ML, and a shotgun......and I STILL think Sept 1st - Feb 1st is a supportable season. I don't think the herd can truly sustain more than the current alloted time with rifles in the woods. At least be honest enough to admit that there is a difference.
01-09-2002, 11:30 AM
#56
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lehigh County PA USA
Posts: 12,157
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
I must have missed something........obviously.
Now, Terry, you have to admit that proposing an "all weapon" season starting on September 1st is rather irrational for several reasons.
1) Say a bowhunter shoots a nice doe and she runs down the hill 60 yards to where a rifle hunter is sitting. The rifle hunter shoots the doe and puts it down. Obviously, it is the rifle hunters deer, but how fair is that to the bowhunter, or the crossbow hunter?
2) If you allow a extremely long, extended season for rifle hunters then the deer herd is definitely going to be devastated.
It isn't bias....just common sense.
Now, Terry, you have to admit that proposing an "all weapon" season starting on September 1st is rather irrational for several reasons.
1) Say a bowhunter shoots a nice doe and she runs down the hill 60 yards to where a rifle hunter is sitting. The rifle hunter shoots the doe and puts it down. Obviously, it is the rifle hunters deer, but how fair is that to the bowhunter, or the crossbow hunter?
2) If you allow a extremely long, extended season for rifle hunters then the deer herd is definitely going to be devastated.
It isn't bias....just common sense.
01-09-2002, 02:00 PM
#57
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lehigh County PA USA
Posts: 12,157
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
Terry,
I apologize...I did read it but it didn't "stick" in my memory as well as the rest of your post. You are right...if they put a set limit on the number of doe to be taken then it would eliminate excessive doe kills.
But, if that scenario were the case then how would hunters know when the allotments were filled? What I mean is that say the allotment is for 2000 does for a specific area...and that allotment is filled at 8 am on such and such a day. How do the hunters that are still out hunting find out that the all the necessary does have been taken out of the area? Just curious.
Did you answer the one part of my last post regarding the situation involving the archer and the rifle hunter?
And just for the record...I do rifle hunt as well as bowhunt so either way I would still have more time in the woods.
...and I feel that the September 1st start for archery should be statewide, not just in the "Southeast" and "Southwest" parts of the state.
I apologize...I did read it but it didn't "stick" in my memory as well as the rest of your post. You are right...if they put a set limit on the number of doe to be taken then it would eliminate excessive doe kills.
But, if that scenario were the case then how would hunters know when the allotments were filled? What I mean is that say the allotment is for 2000 does for a specific area...and that allotment is filled at 8 am on such and such a day. How do the hunters that are still out hunting find out that the all the necessary does have been taken out of the area? Just curious.
Did you answer the one part of my last post regarding the situation involving the archer and the rifle hunter?
And just for the record...I do rifle hunt as well as bowhunt so either way I would still have more time in the woods.
...and I feel that the September 1st start for archery should be statewide, not just in the "Southeast" and "Southwest" parts of the state.
01-09-2002, 02:02 PM
#58
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
How about this:
Sept 1 archery for doe only till Oct 1 or till a doe is turned in to a check station
Oct 7-14 a one week crossbow and ML season for doe only
Oct 14-21 rifle doe
Archery continues till Feb 1
buck season continues in it's normal time slot with antler restrictions where needed.
Late ML as it has always been.
Everyone who has a desire to hunt only one weapon still has more opportunity to hunt than they used to. Yes the archers gain the most days because they have far less impact on the herd per day hunted. All season should be open to adjustment if any one season accounts for a disproportionate kill (too high or too low) Make the 1 buck tag a male deer tag to protect the buttons and check every deer at check stations until it's proven to be not necessary.
Just my personal brain Phart, but it obviously isn't perfect. It might be a good start, however.
Sept 1 archery for doe only till Oct 1 or till a doe is turned in to a check station
Oct 7-14 a one week crossbow and ML season for doe only
Oct 14-21 rifle doe
Archery continues till Feb 1
buck season continues in it's normal time slot with antler restrictions where needed.
Late ML as it has always been.
Everyone who has a desire to hunt only one weapon still has more opportunity to hunt than they used to. Yes the archers gain the most days because they have far less impact on the herd per day hunted. All season should be open to adjustment if any one season accounts for a disproportionate kill (too high or too low) Make the 1 buck tag a male deer tag to protect the buttons and check every deer at check stations until it's proven to be not necessary.
Just my personal brain Phart, but it obviously isn't perfect. It might be a good start, however.
01-09-2002, 06:00 PM
#59
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Allentown Pa USA
Posts: 76
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
Frank; i have lived while in the service and hunted Alaska. so I'll use that state as an example of how quotas are filled. On the Kenai penninsula ( where I lived) each year a set number of Brown bear tags were set aside for excess bears. EVERY killed bear regardless of how it died..car,self protection,etc. was deducted from that number. If there were tags available at the seasons onset hunting was allowed. Each day the hunter or guide was responsible to listen to the radio watch local news etc. to see if the permits were filled. You had 24 hrs to report your kill. I filed mine by 2 way radio, within 2 hrs of harvesting my bear. it is that simple. In Pa a near identical plan could be established with implementing check stations. many public parks hold deer hunts nationwide. check in in the AM check out in the PM if you have a deer to report.
As far as the wounded deer you spoke of in an earlier post...I say what's the difference if 1 hunter carried a bow and wounded a deer and a gun hunter finished it off. Or if a gun hunter hits a deer and another gun hunter finishes it off? In both cases those guys are hunting too close to eachother anyway. I've killed someehere around 50 deer with my bow. I never had a leathal shot in a deer that it went more than 1500-200yds. most were dead in les than 50 yds. Besides the numbers in your senario would be small at best. Even I will except some margins in this deer management buisness.
As far as the wounded deer you spoke of in an earlier post...I say what's the difference if 1 hunter carried a bow and wounded a deer and a gun hunter finished it off. Or if a gun hunter hits a deer and another gun hunter finishes it off? In both cases those guys are hunting too close to eachother anyway. I've killed someehere around 50 deer with my bow. I never had a leathal shot in a deer that it went more than 1500-200yds. most were dead in les than 50 yds. Besides the numbers in your senario would be small at best. Even I will except some margins in this deer management buisness.
01-09-2002, 07:28 PM
#60
Host of Hosts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Erie, Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,780
RE: Dr Alt Meetings.......
Almost sorry I started this thread! As usual some people ( and you know who you are) must discredit everyones ideas, and get away from the original topic.
Edited by - fight4yourguns on 01/09/2002 20:30:35
Edited by - fight4yourguns on 01/09/2002 20:30:35