|
RE: PA BB Harvests
What I heard Alt say is "More big bucks" not more and bigger bucks. You may in fact hae heard Alt say there would be more big buck, but that does not mean he never said there would be more and bigger buck than we have ever seen before and I have it in hard copy from an interview in PA Outdoor Times. He also said AR would double the number of 8 PT. buck and I have that in print and that is a lie and he knew it was a lie . As for refraining from shooting BB's not helping to enhance the buck kill, thats just plain ridiculous. It cant become a big buck if it dies as a knothead. PERIOD! Sure some will die from other causes. Sure, some will still be shot as AL deer. No, not all will make it. BUT SOME WILL!!! |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Apparently , you are incapable of handling more than one concept at a time in a discussion. I did not say that saving BB wouldn't increase the buck harvest the following year. I said that saving BB while reducing the herd means more more adult doe will be harvested ,which in turn results in fewer BB being produced ,which will result in fewer BB and lower antlered harvests in the future. Now unless you can provide some facts or a logical rebuttal to refute that claim, I would conclude that you have no idea of how decreased BB harvests effect future buck harvests. The rest of us do understand though, that given enough various numbers and statstics to selectively utilize, plenty of time, a calculator and a conniving mind anyone can twist and turn the numbers and by applying his own THEORIES can make any point he wants to. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
The rest of us do understand though, that given enough various numbers and statstics to selectively utilize, plenty of time, a calculator and a conniving mind anyone can twist and turn the numbers and by applying his own THEORIES can make any point he wants to. If that is true why aren't you capable of formulating a credible rebuttal? The PGC stats clearly show that saving more BB led to the harvest of more adult doe and a reduced anterless harvest. This in turn will lead to fewer BB being born and fewer BB that will survive to become 1.5's that can be saved by AR. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
The PGC stats clearly show that saving more BB led to the harvest of more adult doe and a reduced anterless harvest. Did I read that correctly? Did you say that under AR we have had a declining AL harvest? And that we harvested more doe? The more doe part is what we need. The declining AL harvest number I question though. You seem to have all the figures at hand so give me the AL harvest numbers for the last 5 years please. And show me the declining AL harvest. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Did you say that under AR we have had a declining AL harvest? And that we harvested more doe? The more doe part is what we need. For every BB saved hunters have to shoot at least 2 adult doe, in order to reduce the herd , which means 4 fewer fawns/doe the following year and two fewer male fawns/BB saved. The harvests stats since 1987 are available on page 71 of the hunting digest. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
DD
You get an A+ for reciting stats. You get an F- for using the scientific method. Although the 2003 AL harvest was down from 2002, The AL harvest for 2002 was an absolute all time high record. If you take a ten year average of the AL harvest, you get an AL average of 278,678. The 2003 AL harvest was still above average at 322,620. I think it is negligent to state that there is something wrong with this normal fluctuation first off, and then attribute some kind of negative effect in relation to the BB harvest secondly. BTB was right in the statement that you use the stats to make your point of the day, while neglecting any real scientific study of the statistics as a whole. I could make any point I would want to if I only used one or two years stats as a model. Look at the 1991 Buck harvest of 149,598. We didn't have AR then and, according to your method, 50,000 hunters went WITHOUT their prized forkie that year.. Oh my God, I bet they were pi$$ed! |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Although the 2003 AL harvest was down from 2002, The AL harvest for 2002 was an absolute all time high record. If you take a ten year average of the AL harvest, you get an AL average of 278,678. The 2003 AL harvest was still above average at 322,620. I think it is negligent to state that there is something wrong with this normal fluctuation first off, and then attribute some kind of negative effect in relation to the BB harvest secondly. BTB was right in the statement that you use the stats to make your point of the day, while neglecting any real scientific study of the statistics as a whole. I could make any point I would want to if I only used one or two years stats as a model. Look at the 1991 Buck harvest of 149,598. We didn't have AR then and, according to your method, 50,000 hunters went WITHOUT their prized forkie that year.. Oh my God, I bet they were pi$$ed! |
RE: PA BB Harvests
The 10 yr. avg. anterless harvest is irrelevant since the herd increased by 30% during that period . Therefore, in order to reduce the herd ,larger anterless harvests are required and Alt said the harvest of 352K anterless in 2002 allowed the herd to increase by 1.6%. The anterless harvest in 2003 was the first time hunters reduced the percentage of fawns in the anterless harvest fro 46% to 39%. That is why there is only one year of stats that show the negative impact of trying to save BB. You proved us right in that massive AL harvests are necessary to control the herd and not something to bellyache about when it suits you and then support when it suits you But the point you made is not valid since the highest buck harvest prior to 1991 was 170K in 1990. So 20.5K hunters didn't harvest a buck, not the 50K you claim. You say that 40,000 hunters went without their prized forkie and got a doe as a consolation prize. History shows that those numbers of successfull buck hunters cannot be consistantly maintained and were an abberation of the norm in the first place. Thanks. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
You proved us right in that massive AL harvests are necessary to control the herd and not something to bellyache about when it suits you and then support when it suits you History shows that those numbers of successfull buck hunters cannot be consistantly maintained and were an abberation of the norm in the first place. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
I completely concur with Rob/PA Bowyer and cardeer's statements. I ain't sayin no more.
|
RE: PA BB Harvests
Not to throw water on the fire or anything, but I wanna know how they actually come up with these " exacting harvest numbers"? Oh, yeah, that's right, from the " yearly report cards".....well, let me just say this----if YOU wanted to do something and could stand to make a boatload of money and kickbacks in the process, and also at the same time had at your fingertips the means to "get 'er done",[8D] let me guess, you wouldn't "tweak" things to fill your pocket?? Sure you wouldn't.
OK, I rest my case. Like I stated before, all of the mumbo jumbo smokescreens, this, that and the other, means SQUAT to me. What means something is the TRUE and FACTUAL yearly sightings and harvestings of quality deer in the area where we have camp, BY HUNTERS THEMSELVES. That's all that matters to me, and all that should matter to any of you sportsmen! Sure, you can play "biologist" and try to increase the antler size by analyzing and theorizing, but at the same time you simply must keep herd populace at levels high enough to sustain yearly harvests, winter kill, road kill, and predation numbers, otherwise you are up a creek..... And I'm here to tell you, I know of at least one county in North Central PA already well up that creek. After this coming rifle season, one or two in particular will be a virtual wasteland. Make no mistake, others will follow soon also if the "powers that be" allow it to continue. Good luck to all PA hunters this season, but keep a close eye on what is REALLY happening----things tend to sneak up very fast sometimes. Pinwheel 12 |
RE: PA BB Harvests
I also go by my personal experience in the field, and I am telling you that the buck hunting in the places I frequent has never been better in all my years of hunting. I have had either sightings, missed opportunities or seen hunters in my family take bucks the likes of which were unheard of. True, the sheer numbers of deer are down somewhat but as far as bucks go, there is a more active rut and frequency of more mature animals. Last weekend I had a close encounter with a very nice 2.5 year old 10 point. At first I was even considering passing on him! As it turned out I missed him. The reason I was going to pass on him is because he is nothing compared to a few that we have seen in the immediate area. I am formost a buck hunter though, and getting a deer every year just to fill my tag means next to nothing to me. The opportunity to hunt mature bucks is what drives me, even if I dont succeed. Just having the chance at one keeps me coming back because sooner or later things will come together and I will have the thrill of success. Success that I truly earned.
As far as the north central, we rifle hunt that region and in the last season our party harvested a VERY nice 10 point, a mountable 8 and a scrappy 9 point that had most of his rack broken up from fighting. My Dad, by the way, took the 10 point, his biggest ever, and it hangs on the wall now. A true trophy, mountain buck notwithstanding. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Well , I think it is great that you are benefiting from the effects of AR. However, your success does not offset the lack of success for the 61K other hunters that didn't harvest a buck in 2003 due to AR. If you are hunting in 2 B you are hunting where the herd is still increasing and therefore you aren't experiencing the true effects of alt's plan.
Individual successes or failures are interesting ,but only anecdotal.The true measure of the success or failure of Ar will be determined by the statewide harvest data. So far that data shows that AR has failed to produce the results Alt preicticted it would. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
livbucks, I think that is great that your party is benefitting from the AR----unfortunately for many others tho, it just isn't happening. Our camp logbook, along with input from many other hunters who frequent the area we hunt, tells a whole nuther story.
I sincerely hope you can continue to find one or two of the few remaining "monsters" in the NC area this year. Good luck! DD-- I truly believe that the "statewide harvest report", whether "tweaked" or not, is a large part of this issue---in some areas there simply isn't the hunter numbers or public land availabilities as there are in other areas, thus the numbers in those areas hasn't seen the significant Herd Reduction as other areas have. Once those areas "catch up", you guys will be crying along with the rest of us. JMHO. Good shooting, Pinwheel 12 |
RE: PA BB Harvests
I just thought I would pass this on. This is a copy of an email I sent to a hunting friend about my hunt last Saturday. I missed the monster that is referred to, last year, by the way.
I went out Fri afternoon, got in the stand about 3:30. Wind was all wrong again, I don't know what's going on, weird weather I guess. I didn't see anything. woke up about 4:00 am on Sat. Got to my dad's house about 5:15, met up with my younger Brother and the three of us headed out. It was a little blustery but not too bad. I was in my stand well before light, all situated and quiet. Still dark, I hear a loud aggressive grunt. My hopes soar. I sit there for a few hours and nothing developed. About 8:00 I hear some noise to my left and downhill so My attention is turned that direction. I watch that way for awhile and then just happen to look right. Out of nowhere, and catching me offguard is a buck standing right in my shooting lane to the right, AT 12 YARDS!. I did not see him come in. he must have come out of the thick stuff in front of me. He has a huge body and is a very pretty dark almost chocolate colored brown. I knew right away he wasn't the monster I have seen but he is a TEN POINT!. A beautiful 2.5 year old with wide spread (My guess 17 inch). Longest point about 7 inches. Very good rack for his age, although kinda spindly and thin. At first thought I decide to let him walk. He turns to face me and looks directly in my eyes and walks CLOSER! He is now at 10 yards and staring into my eyes. He does this for about ten minutes without looking away. I remain totally still and slowly squint my eyes because they are starting to burn. To my surprise he decides I'm no threat and turns around and walks away. He gets about 18 yards out and turns broadside and begins to feed. At this point I can't resist (who am I to pass on a ten point)and slowly stand and aim. He looked bigger walking away. I settle the pin on his ribs and let fly. He hears my release and reacted instantly, drawing his legs up for launch. He ducked so low I don't know how he didn't fall on the ground. I have heard of deer doing this but never had it happen to me. My arrow whizzed right over his back and stuck in the ground. He was gone. I guess he was still tense from the stare down and went off like a hair trigger, ducking my arrow. I sit in the stand for a half hour replaying the scene. I still can't believe it. I can't stand it anymore so I get down to retrieve the arrow. Part of me almost believes that I possibly did hit him and had a passthru. I get the arrow and it is clean, except for the wet dirt on the business end. I get back in the stand and think about it for a while. I come to the conclusion that I am relieved that I missed. I got to have the experience with that buck and still keep my tag for the ear of the monster. He would have looked nice on the wall but not what I know is out there and waiting come the rut. Pretty good day wouldn't you say? |
RE: PA BB Harvests
While I think it is great that you are benefiting from AR, it would be even better if all PA hunters were sharing the same experience, but they're not. In 2003 only 9.4 K additionl hunters harvested a 2.5+ buck due to AR. At the same time 61K other hunters didn't harvest a buck due to AR. So the ratio of hunters that benefited from AR versus those that didn't is arond 1 : 6.5.
|
RE: PA BB Harvests
Yes, that may be true statistically, but how many of those that didn't get a buck only hunted one day? How many that did get a buck hunted more than one day? How many saw a doe first and shot it, and then never went back out for the rest of the year?I think the opportunity is there for those that are devoted to putting in the work. I very rarely have taken a buck on the first day of any season. Time spent is what makes me lucky, at least in my past experience. you can lump the numbers together but unless you dig deeper and see how many hours are spent to tag a buck, comparisons of buck harvests when there were separate seasons are worthless. Combined seasons change the whole dynamic. Pretty obvious why they combined them.
|
RE: PA BB Harvests
So the ratio of hunters that benefited from AR versus those that didn't is arond 1 : 6.5. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
While it is true that hunters that put in more time will have higher success rates ,we always had hunters that only hunted one day and those that hunted many days and hunted harder. But the same hunters that harvested 203K buck in 2000 and 2001 , were in general the same group of hunters that only harvested 142K buck in 2003. And, it wasn't because they didn't hunt hard enough since the harvest rate for 2.5 + buck was 86 % in 2003, whcih was higher than the 80% harvest rate for 1.5 buck before AR. The harvest was lower because there were fewer legal buck available to be harvested.
Prior to AR the buck harvest success rate was 1 in 5 , with AR it decreasd to 1 in 7 hunters . |
RE: PA BB Harvests
How many saw a doe first day of the combined season, shot it and never came back to hunt for a buck? I have heard of many that considered that doe their deer for the season and didn't hunt after that. Not everyone wants to take a bunch of deer every year and are happy with their one kill.
Nothing wrong with that, but it is a factor, and one that you won't address. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
How many saw a doe first day of the combined season, shot it and never came back to hunt for a buck? |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Your point is pointless. The percentage of 2.5 bucks per the total harvest has nothing to do with my question. The percentage of a certain age class of bucks harvested has nothing to do with the fact that untold numbers of guys saw a doe, shot it and did not come back. Not to mention the untold numbers that saw an AR legal buck, but couldn't ascertain the legality of it in time to make a shot and then maybe saw a doe and shot it.
More than AR, combined seasons are your groups nemesis. That is something that should be changed in areas with low density, namely yours. I think you are misplacing your frustration on AR when combined seasons, (which I will pen CS), is the enemy. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Your point is pointless. The percentage of 2.5 bucks per the total harvest has nothing to do with my question. The percentage of a certain age class of bucks harvested has nothing to do with the fact that untold numbers of guys saw a doe, shot it and did not come back. Not to mention the untold numbers that saw an AR legal buck, but couldn't ascertain the legality of it in time to make a shot and then maybe saw a doe and shot it. More than AR, combined seasons are your groups nemesis. That is something that should be changed in areas with low density, namely yours. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
I have no idea why you would make that statement I personally DISLIKE CS! Therefore, it appears that I am NOT a TRUE ALTIE! I just love AR it seems. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Because the percentage of an age class and the numerical total of the buck harvest are totally different issues when CS influence is scrutinized. If a hunter sees a doe first and shoots it, he has removed himself from the equation That is an unsubstantiated assumption on your part. If you check how many anterless tags were sold on the first round , you will realize that many hunters bought more than one anterless tag. You are simply assuming that many hunters quit after harvesting a doe, but you have no facts to support that claim. I could make the argument that the additional bonus tags kept more hunters in the woods longer ,which in turn resulted in the higher harvest rate for 2.5 buck. In 2000, when anterless season was opened on the last Sat. of buck , the PGC said it increased the buck harvest by 10k. So .it is logical to believe that more anterless hunters in the woods would increase the buck harvest and more anterless tags mean more hunters in the woods for a longer period of time. BTW, may I compliment you for keeping our discussion civil. You are one of only a few that has been able to engage in an extended debate without engaging in personal attacks. I appreciate that and wish more of the supporters of Ar could do what you have done. Also, if i were seeing the improvement you are apparently seeing, I might have a different perspective on the issue of AR, just as you do. But, then again I may still rely on the state wide stats to form my opinion. Furthermore, I hope you get a second chance at the buck you missed or better yet get a shot at the monster buck. Good luck. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Furthermore, I hope you get a second chance at the buck you missed or better yet get a shot at the monster buck. Good luck. I still don't like CS, by the way. The GC is afraid to institute Sunday hunting out of fear of too much pressure and they go and do that! I think it gives the masses too many opportunities all at once and really takes advantage of the pressured deer movement. It is obvious what the objective of CS is when they are doing it with bears in bear dense areas. Send an army in the woods with a tag for everything and clean them out. Just the way I see that. Good luck to you too this year. Maybe check out a new area, you just might find an overlooked honeyhole. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
But the same hunters that harvested 203K buck in 2000 and 2001 , were in general the same group of hunters that only harvested 142K buck in 2003. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
You are comparing the peak harvest before CS and AR to the first year of results from CS, AR and HR. You cannot conclude anything comparing apples and ernges (oranges). I would personally trade a 1:5 chance of success at a forkhorn or spike for a 1:7 chance at an 8 or 10 point any day week or year. If the herd is too big and produces that astronomical figure, we cannot reasonably expect it to continue status quo. We had our fun those few years and now we must get back to the business of herd management. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
What you apparently can't accept is that the decreases in the buck harvest were solely the result of AR, I still like my chances and have no problem with it. I see the stats for what they are and not a forebearance of doom as you do. That says alot coming from me, foremost a buck hunter. To get something worthwhile a price has to be paid, in this case an easy kill on an immature buck is given up for improved opportunity to pursue mature animals, even though no guarantee is given that you will succeed. It is still called hunting and hunting mature animals is a different game by different rules as compared to having many uneducated and immature animals as easy targets. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
To get something worthwhile a price has to be paid, in this case an easy kill on an immature buck is given up for improved opportunity to pursue mature animals, even though no guarantee is given that you will succeed. If we reduce the OW herd by 50% ,we will reduce buck harvest by 50% the total buck harest will be under 75K. If 45% of the harvest are 2.5+ buck, there would be 34K ,2.5+ buck harveste dcompared to the 56 K we harvested in 2002. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
That statement shows you still really don't get it. If Alt's plan is successful you won't have a better chance to pursue a mature animal. There will be fewer 2.5+ buck in the future, even with AR, than we had in 2002 ,before any buck were saved by AR. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
OH I do get it. IT is the choice between HR with AR or HR alone. HR alone would mean next to NO bucks to be had anywhere of any kind. Here is a quote from an article about Wisc. that summarizes my position. Also, unhunted “natural” sex ratios were also female biased and best guesses put them at about 1.3-1.4 does/buck. I have yet to see a biology-based reason why a sex ratio of 2:1 is damaging or undesirable. A factor often overlooked by those that think they want an unnatural 1:1 sex ratio is that total harvest of both bucks and does would be reduced. One does not merely stockpile bucks. If you seek a 1:1 sex ratio and shoot “adequate” numbers of does to maintain a population at an established density goal, you reduce the proportion of the herd that is productive does. Thus, fewer fawns will be born into the population and total harvest of both bucks and does could be reduced by as much as 30%. Age Structure of Bucks Where mortality (death rate) of bucks is 60% and spread equally across all age classes, the age structure will be 60, 24,10, 6 (yearlings, 2.5, 3.5, and 4+). This is fairly typical in much of Wisconsin. Some APR advocates believe that protecting yearlings will result in 60% more bucks and an age structure like 60, 60, 24,16. However as mentioned above, the reduction of females necessary to accommodate more bucks will reduce the number of male fawns added each year. Fewer does in the population mean fewer buck fawns. Therefore, saving yearlings is not simple addition. Another factor missing in this assumption is that harvest mortality is only a portion of total mortality. In northern units it is common for more than 1⁄4 of deaths to be from causes other than legal harvest (roadkills, winter, poaching, etc.). Thus, there is “leakage” from each age class even in the absence of legal shooting. And, mortality rates seem to increase in the older age classes. Even if bucks got smarter with age (as many hunters believe), prime age bucks are more vulnerable to other mortality – even guns as their antlers are attractions. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Sorry, but there you go comparing apples to oranges. Deer in Wisconsin live a far different life than those in PA. Wisconsin has far less hunters and yet far less deer. The OW loss in Wisconsin is much more a factor than in PA. Besides enduring harsher winters, the deer are prey of cougar, wolves and coyotes. As of right now, OW loss in PA has been negligable in recent history. Things can and do change though. They have already stocked cougar in the state and wolves will be next, and deer hunters in PA will be unnecessary first and extinct second.
|
RE: PA BB Harvests
ORIGINAL: livbucks Sorry, but there you go comparing apples to oranges. Deer in Wisconsin live a far different life than those in PA. Wisconsin has far less hunters and yet far less deer. The OW loss in Wisconsin is much more a factor than in PA. Besides enduring harsher winters, the deer are prey of cougar, wolves and coyotes. As of right now, OW loss in PA has been negligable in recent history. Things can and do change though. They have already stocked cougar in the state and wolves will be next, and deer hunters in PA will be unnecessary first and extinct second. In addition, in 2001 B. Wallinford claimed that adult male mortality increased to 28% ,which was higher than the Wisc. mortality rate. The simple fact is that AR does not add any additional legal buck to the PS herd,compared to a non-AR herd. The truth is that AR increases the number of 2.5 buck, buck decreases the number of legal buck available to be harvested. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
The deer herd has not been reduced?????? PGC is full of SH!T. They LIE. In 28 years of hunting, I never saw it this BAD.
Doesn't ALT's position exist for the sportsman, then why doesn't the hunters have any input on how many "deer per square mile" we should have. The SH!T will hit the fan after this years deer season ends. The hunters are ready to explode! Last year we saw very few deer, and this year looks worst than last year. |
RE: PA BB Harvests
Seriously, I'm not being facetious. No sportsmen in signifigant numbers have gone to the PGC. Last year at the January meeting there were more nonhunters and DCNR employees there to ask for MORE reductions than there were hunters.
Several big sportsmans groups asked the PGC to ignore hunters opinion and fears. United bowhunters of Pa's (UBP) Ed Wentzler spoke at the microphone and asked the commissioners to "ignore the baseless fears of sportsmen". The federation of sportsmans clubs did NOT stand up for sportsman, and instead told the PGC they support further reductions. Stay the course they said. If you are truly upset something is askew, then you need to plan a trip to Harrisburg, or to write to your commissioners. Because right now you are out-voiced in Harrisburg by members of several sportsmans clubs, Audubon, Sierra Club, DCNR, Pa farm Bureau and quite a few timber company representatives. You really should attend at least one to see what hunters are up against, and to watch the PGC reps like Jerry Feaser and Joe Neville smooze with the timber company guys and DCNR/Audubon....then snub everyday hunters and ignore thier questions. This coming season is going to be amazing. Amazing in that hunters are going to be surprised how little shooting they hear the first couple days. Last year was a letdown, but this year will be worse than last. Not for the whole state, but for a larger area than last year. The PGC is giving you what they promised, less deer. If you don't agree with less deer, then you better plan a road trip with some friends to H-burg. BTW, no the PGC is not obligated in any way to listen to sportsman. They are appointed by our governor and ther is no law or statute that says they have to allow decent deer numbers. and for the record, the PGC 'says' the deer herd has not been reduced one bit since Dr. Alt took over. In fact they say the herd has grown by 20% in the last four years. Now I do not believe that at all, but all we have to go one are the PGC's numbers. No other group can produce anything to challenge the PGC's official word, unless that is sportsman take a more actice role in asking for more accurate reporting. My suggestion is that you also contact your state representatives AND attend PGC meetings. Because they will continue to put out misleading stats and under report problems -------- as long as sportsmen allow them to get away with it. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:58 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.