Apparently you don't know the difference between complaining about the low buck harvests or having a discussion about the effects of Alt's plan and AR. When I say AR reduced the buck harvest by 61K, I am simply stating a fact and I am not complaining. Alt could make all antlered bucks illegal and it wouldn't have a significant impact on me since I only have a few good years left to hunt. But, I would still discuss the issue and point out the negative impact of such a decision.

You don't know our position because you won't listen!! I specifically stated we shot those BB in order to reduce the herd in our area. Remember the deer are eating my strawberries ,corn and carrots , their eating the farmers crops and we have quite a few road kills. You ,on the otherhand place saving BB ahead of HR ,because you are selfish and want more bucks to hunt. Protecting BB means not shooting fawns which means more deer ,more over browsing ,crop damage and roadkills. It also means Alt's plan will fail. Is that what you want?

Gary alt said that failure to reduce the herd to "what the habitat can support" would be the greatest sin the hunting world can commit. We have to do our part to reduce the herd where needed. Can't slack off now or we would not be good stewards of our ecosystem.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, it will mean that we will also suffer worse buck hunting as a result of our herd reduction. But it is needed.

We just don't make up excuses for the lower harvests as many alties try to do. Wind, acorns, moon eclipse, cornfields are not the issue. Our herd reduction is. It is, according to professional deer managers needed and overdue and we accept the fact that with additional doe harvests we will take mature antlerless bucks and bb. A 3 point AR will not make PA harvest Saskatchewan bucks, our buck harvests will be lower than pre-ar and the deer harvest will merely shift from 1.5 to 2.5 which are only marginally larger. It will be a long process of many years.

Because we are taking bb, mature antlerless bucks each season and because about 20% fall to other means of mortality after the season like disease and cars we acknowledge that there will not be any "shock and awe" associated with AR/HR. Just mediocre hunting of lesser quality than we had before overall.


BTW, deaddeer I just saw this posted on a Michigan hunters messagebaord this morning. How appropriate.

"Sam is correct.

Every year in Michigan there are "Does" shot with antlers and mature "Bucks" that are shot without antlers. (I Shot a 4.5 yr old antlerless buck a few years ago during the muzzleloader season)"

Thanks for the excellent insight DD.

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were a senior hunter. How many more years do you think you have to enjoy hunting?

Are you saying that Alt is correct when the deer are eating your stuff, but he is wrong when the foresters need relief? Remember that one of your complaints not long ago was that Alt was wrong in HR and was only doing it because he was on the take to lumber interests.

Ok, Do you think HR without AR would be better for buck hunting?

If I am lucky ,I may have five good years but that depends how fast the cataracts develop and if the surgery is successful. There is also other major surgery that will be inevitable at some point, and it only takes one blood clot to change everything ,so i take one season at a time and hope for the best.


No, I agree with rational herd reduction whether it is in farmland or forestland. but, I do not think the herd in 5C should be reduced to 6 DPSM ,nor do I think the herd in 2G should be reduced to 10 DPSM ,or less., when research by the PGC says 2 G can support 15 DPSM. If the PGC isn't going to manage the herd based on their own goals, why should hunters believe that additional herd reduction is necessary in 2 G.

There is no question that for the average hunter, buck hunting with HR would be better without AR, since AR reduces the number of legal buck available to be harvested. That is why I said from day one that it was a mistake to implement AR while attempting to reduce the herd by 50%. the fact that the buck harvest declined by 23 k in 2003 , proves that AR doesn't increase the number of legal buck even in a herd that is increasing. Imagine what the effects will be in a decreasing herd!

Sorry to learn of your health probs. You did not say it but if I was to guess, sounds like you have sugar. I've had family with that and it is no good to deal with. I hunt private property in bow season then NC region in rifle, then back home to finish up with shotgun and finally flintlock here at home too. I don't hunt state forests nor game lands, even before AR and HR I would rather not go there. We hunt different worlds I guess.

Did you ever check out PA Bucks forum? I was looking there today and seems alot of guys that share your take post there. I hope we can find something suitable for all concerned with deer management in PA. All the tradition that goes with it is what I was raised on and it seems like even before the AR debate things were changing and the old traditions were letting go, no matter what the cause, what a shame.

My health problems are not related to diabetes , they are just the normal result of the aging process which a high percentage of our hunters are also experiencing. Actually ,I'm one of the lucky ones when compared to those who are pushing up daises or just looking out the window wishing they could do what the once enjoyed more than anything else. But, my concern is not for my age group, it is for the new hunters and for the PGC's ability to manage the herd in the future with a significant reduction in the number of hunters.

No, I haven't checked out the PA Bucks MB, but it doesn't surprise me that they may not be happy with the current situation. The one mistake all deer mangers seem to make is that they declare a crisis ,but claim hunting will be better if we reduce the herd. then when hunters reduce the herd, they find out that hunting doesn't improve they demand more deer. thus we repeat the cycle over and over again and never balance the herd with the habitat for extended periods.

DD,
It just hit me what your point is and what your theory is. You think that Alt wanted to drastically reduce the herd. He thought up this grand scheme to use the buck hunters to do it. He would send them out in the woods all gung ho to get a big buck. He would give them concurrent seasons. When they got out there they would either shoot a doe right away or hunt all season, and when they got no buck, they would go out and whack a bunch of does out of frustration. The theory being that he would make bucks scarce and the buck hunters' interest would be transferred to the does and BB, thus increasing the load on does even more the next year. The whole thing spirals out of control until there are no deer left in PA.

Am I on to something?

There is only one problem in this applying to "buck hunters"...

WE don't shoot does and WE won't shoot BB, so it isn't US, the buck hunters , that decimated the herd.

It is the "DEER" hunters, that decimated the herd

Actually what you described is Alt's theory ,not mine . But, you didn't quite get the terminology right. For example, you forgot that before the concurrent season we were all buck hunters for the two weeks of rifle season ,since only antlered bucks were legal. However, Alt didn't get hunters to shoot more doe by making bucks scare, he just made many of them illegal to harvest.

Once again you have you terminology wrong. Instead of buck hunters you should have said rack hunters or trophy hunters. But , you did make a valid point. The rack hunters and archers are not the ones that decimated the herd , they are the ones that created the problem Alt is trying to solve and has failed miserably because he doesn't understand the mentality of hunters .


Archers and trophy hunters have created the overpopulation problem we have today because they refused to do their part in managing the herd. Instead they critisize those who harvest BB in order to reduce the herd because it makes it harder for them to harvest their trophy. Now that is a very selfish and self centered position that can no longer be tolerated.

Our group are stewards of the herd where we hunt, not selfish as you characterize us, and I will tell you why;

Where we hunt at home is private property. Many guys hunt it though as it is not posted and as with the PA tradition, guys that live around here feel permitted to hunt. A good many that don't live here hunt also. The only limiting factor is safety zones and a few areas that most guys feel uneasy about venturing into. During the gun seasons it is like a war zone, with many, many, mostly antlerless deer being taken. We have a good many groups that buy scores of tags and fill them all. A case in point is a neighbor of mine that has already as of today, taken 5 antlerless already this year, and will take a good many more. We call these guys gluttons and they are, for they sit in the same area and harvest away till time runs out. You say that we don't do our part, but if AL tags were allocated more intelligently, we would be glad to participate. This concept translates to the game lands problem where the same guys go with their book of tags and kill anything that moves. If they hunted many different areas, their effect would be spread out and useful, but they empty the woods in the same place year after year. These are the same guys that scream at the GC when their overhunted areas are devoid in following years.
The spots that we hunt are relative sactuaries for deer escaping the mobs. The older more mature animals go there when the pressure starts and these deer are the ones that are left to propagate the next years crop. If the bag limit was less, and we didn't see those guys skinning a doe or BB in the garage every other day, we might feel justified in taking a few of the escapees. We gauge what we feel right in taking out of the herd by what we see as far as pressure from the annual "deerhunters".
We have often pondered taking a few doe, as every good QDM guy will preach, but every year it gets worse as more guys come in each year, and all have a book of tags to fill. The numbers ARE declining, and I fully expect these same guys to start complaining very soon, but it is not WE the "rack" hunters that are removing these scores of deer, it is they the "deerhunters" that are. We always gauge our efforts against what is best for the herd, and for many years we have not felt good about the idea of harvesting these deer that seek refuge, because there is less and less each year. Do you think these groups care about leaving some for seed? I would tell you NO! I know for certain that they would shoot every last one if they could get to them. For me to take these deer would not do a thing to alleviate the overpopulation in an area that I don't hunt that is far away. I have nothing against hunting for the meat, and a family could well use several deer a year for food, but what I see some doing is just extreme. I know a guy in particular that is just obsessed with hunting and killing and can't utilize a fraction of what he takes every year. He ends up throwing tons away or just feeding it to his dogs by the tons. Do you think this "deerhunter" cares a bit about the herd? When an area is devoid, he will move on to another and not give a second thought to the loss of opportunity he has cost someone else. And so go the up and down densities that you pointed out. What ever happened to "take only what you can use"? Is that a lost Indian concept? I would bet more guys like me would enjoy taking a doe once in a while if we felt good about doing so.
So who is to blame? "deerhunters" or the GC?
I would say both, The deerhunters because of their excessive wanton overharvest in the same overhunted areas year after year, and the GC for allowing it to go on, with the rediculous hope that killing ALL the deer in limited areas will balance out the overpopulated places that hunters are not permitted to go, or are just too lazy to go, because they are too far from the road.
Maybe my point has gotten lost in the words, so I will simplify it and wrap up this post.
Do you know what animal these guys target most? .... BB!
Why? Because they are the easiest and quickest to harvest because of their nature. The "deerhunters" that will take any deer will always take the easiest deer. They pat themselves on the back for not wanting racks. They criticize us "rack" hunters for not doing our part. What they don't understand is that we are willing to work harder and wait longer to get what we are after. They, on the otherhand, shoot our future opportunities all the while justifying it as controlling the herd. What they don't get is that they are not controlling the herd as the does that would grow the herd are left to do just that. So it is we that get blamed for leaving them when they are not what we are after and the justified are applauded for denying us "ours", while leaving "theirs". If the deerhunters really cared about controlling the herd, they would work harder and wait longer to take an animal that would really count in that regard. And maybe they would have to take less overall and make a better opportunity for everyone concerned.
And so exists my disdain for "deerhunters" that shoot BB at will, justify it as HR and then criticize "rack hunters" for not harvesting the animal they deem appropriate and politically correct, that they themselves won't work for or wait for. And then blame me for their "going home without a buck".

livbucks,

At last someone speaks some true facts gathered from the field! I'm not from PA. I have hunted and scouted farms up there over the decades. IMHO and with all do respect to true game managers up there (hunters). PA has a mind set with respect to harvesting deer. You guys kill more deer on highways than most states have as total population! Alot of slob hunting up there, if it's brown it's down. As you said, BB are easy targets - stupid critters who wander around,dispersed from mom and Boom!. I don't blame any of this on Fish and Wildlife managers. I blame it on the slobs who do exactly what you just stated.

Back to the topic at hand. It does not take a rocket scientist to distiguish BB from a Doe. Do we/I make mistakes in shooting BB on ocassion - YES. That is no freekin excuse to not practice QDM in mangaing our Deer herd and at same time improve the health and quality of our Bucks. I think thats a no brainer.

Livbucks - I clearly see your point.