Deer herd in 2G-A sign of things to come?
12-15-2004, 03:58 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lock Haven PA USA
Posts: 4
Deer herd in 2G-A sign of things to come?
I read the many posts both in favor of HR and those against. One poster wrote that he didn't really care what happens in the other WMU's because they were working in 3A. As someone who has hunted in 2G, specifically western Clinton County since 1980, my observations of deer numbers are pretty disturbing and may be indicators of what other areas can expect. Since about 1990, the sightings of deer in the Big Woods areas has dramatically decreased. This year was no doubt the worst. Nearly everyone with whom I spoke talked of no sightings of deer.
A bear camp to which my wife's uncle and my cousin belong harvested 8 bears and could not get shots at 2 others. During those same 2 and a half days of hard hunting, they saw a grand total of 5 deer. These guys do not road hunt, but push the heaviest cover and steepest side hills. No one could ever imagine a time when they would see more bears than deer. It has happened here. Another individual who works as a forester in the Sproul State forest hunted every day of the season. There were five days in which he saw no deer. Again, this gentleman hunts hard and knows where to hunt deer.
Perhaps, this is a prime example of the long effects of a large deer herd eating itself out of house and home. But perhaps it shows the effects of a deer management plan that strives to reduce numbers to the point that deer are a very rare commodity. Lots of people favor larger bucks and don't mind seeing fewer deer, but come to an area where you might not see any deer and your feelings may change. We have huge tracts of state ground that can, and have been affected by increased allocations. Other places may never reach the game commission's desired number of deer per square mile due to private and posted property that provide a sanctuary for some deer.
I hate to say it, but I long for the numbers of deer present in the county during the mid '90's. The same numbers of deer that I complained about as being way too low. I love hunting, but I'm worried that youngsters will pass on the sport as there's not much fun in hunting all day and not seeing a deer. We can offer them the opportunity to shoot smaller bucks and give them chances at does with an early October season, but if they see nothing, the opportunities are meaningless. During this season, I managed to see two legal bucks that I passed on because it was obvious they were yearlings and a total of seven does. I, like many others, hoped to put my tag on a larger deer. I want to believe that Dr. Alt's plan will benefit the deer and hunting, but I'm starting to have my doubts.
Another poster indicated that 2G's numbers are in line with the game commission's desired herd size, or at least they're not way above. Well, if that's the case, then we should have seen a reduction in antlerless allocations to a number that maintains the herd size for this unit in 2004. 52,000 tags for that unit seems to be a considerable number.
If we have the 10-12 deer per square mile that is desired, I invite those in favor of the HR to spend a few days in Clinton County's forested areas and decide whether you want your hunting area to have the same number of deer. I don't need to kill a deer to have had a successful season, but I do need to see some deer.
I don't have the answer to the deer situation. Many don't think there is a problem, but I doubt too many of them hunt in my neck of the woods. Some will no doubt suggest that I just have to hunt harder or smarter. Others will suggest I have to travel to find huntable numbers of deer. This, however, becomes more difficult as my family of three increases to four.
I guess I'm worried about the future of hunting and what it will mean to Pennsylvanians. I'm worried about the deer too. It's fun to see them throughout the year. Taking a ride in the evenings south of Renovo used to be a favorite past time of my family's. It was nothing to count over 150 deer, of which 30 or so would be bucks. Many of them would be eight pointers or larger. Now, it's an exercise in futility. I'm sure the area could no longer support those numbers, but can't we reach a happy medium?
A bear camp to which my wife's uncle and my cousin belong harvested 8 bears and could not get shots at 2 others. During those same 2 and a half days of hard hunting, they saw a grand total of 5 deer. These guys do not road hunt, but push the heaviest cover and steepest side hills. No one could ever imagine a time when they would see more bears than deer. It has happened here. Another individual who works as a forester in the Sproul State forest hunted every day of the season. There were five days in which he saw no deer. Again, this gentleman hunts hard and knows where to hunt deer.
Perhaps, this is a prime example of the long effects of a large deer herd eating itself out of house and home. But perhaps it shows the effects of a deer management plan that strives to reduce numbers to the point that deer are a very rare commodity. Lots of people favor larger bucks and don't mind seeing fewer deer, but come to an area where you might not see any deer and your feelings may change. We have huge tracts of state ground that can, and have been affected by increased allocations. Other places may never reach the game commission's desired number of deer per square mile due to private and posted property that provide a sanctuary for some deer.
I hate to say it, but I long for the numbers of deer present in the county during the mid '90's. The same numbers of deer that I complained about as being way too low. I love hunting, but I'm worried that youngsters will pass on the sport as there's not much fun in hunting all day and not seeing a deer. We can offer them the opportunity to shoot smaller bucks and give them chances at does with an early October season, but if they see nothing, the opportunities are meaningless. During this season, I managed to see two legal bucks that I passed on because it was obvious they were yearlings and a total of seven does. I, like many others, hoped to put my tag on a larger deer. I want to believe that Dr. Alt's plan will benefit the deer and hunting, but I'm starting to have my doubts.
Another poster indicated that 2G's numbers are in line with the game commission's desired herd size, or at least they're not way above. Well, if that's the case, then we should have seen a reduction in antlerless allocations to a number that maintains the herd size for this unit in 2004. 52,000 tags for that unit seems to be a considerable number.
If we have the 10-12 deer per square mile that is desired, I invite those in favor of the HR to spend a few days in Clinton County's forested areas and decide whether you want your hunting area to have the same number of deer. I don't need to kill a deer to have had a successful season, but I do need to see some deer.
I don't have the answer to the deer situation. Many don't think there is a problem, but I doubt too many of them hunt in my neck of the woods. Some will no doubt suggest that I just have to hunt harder or smarter. Others will suggest I have to travel to find huntable numbers of deer. This, however, becomes more difficult as my family of three increases to four.
I guess I'm worried about the future of hunting and what it will mean to Pennsylvanians. I'm worried about the deer too. It's fun to see them throughout the year. Taking a ride in the evenings south of Renovo used to be a favorite past time of my family's. It was nothing to count over 150 deer, of which 30 or so would be bucks. Many of them would be eight pointers or larger. Now, it's an exercise in futility. I'm sure the area could no longer support those numbers, but can't we reach a happy medium?
12-15-2004, 04:26 PM
#2
Fork Horn
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 377
RE: Deer herd in 2G-A sign of things to come?
welcome to the club! I know 3A is a mess due to HR numbers are way down and posted signs are hanging on nearly every private pc of land as a direct result of it.
IMHO Alt has done more to stop hunting than any anti hunting org. Why? cause landowners are fed up with low deer numbers and posting to save the few they have for themselves, state land is shot out.
like I said I only know about 3A and some of 3B but I hear alot about other WMUs that are in a bad way too.
IMHO Alt has done more to stop hunting than any anti hunting org. Why? cause landowners are fed up with low deer numbers and posting to save the few they have for themselves, state land is shot out.
like I said I only know about 3A and some of 3B but I hear alot about other WMUs that are in a bad way too.
12-15-2004, 05:25 PM
#3
Join Date: May 2004
Location:
Posts: 255
RE: Deer herd in 2G-A sign of things to come?
"I'm sure the area could no longer support those numbers, but can't we reach a happy medium?
NO.
that would be a "social carrying capacity" and PA used to honor the wishes of hunters.
But "Dr. Alt had this to say about sportsmen, "We've been held hostage politically by hunters for the past 70 years. Everyone who has gone after the deer herd has been fired or transferred or quit, and I might be another in a long line, who knows?"
http://www.acslpa.org/pgc/quality_deer_management.htm
He felt when he took the position that hunters had held the state HOSTAGE, and he has worked with conservationsists, biodiversity geeks, business's and nonhunters to take that power hunters once had away.
It will NEVER be regained in PA. Hunters having a say in the ways of management are over.
And that is because Vernon Ross, Dr. Alt, Cal Dubrock opened the door and invited in non hunters to outspeak the voices of hunters. Remember they even took cash donations amountingto over 1.3 million $$$ to finance Dr. Alt deer studies. (done through the extremists in Audubon).
Herd reduction has only just begun. It will get worse in your area as the large numbers of hunters go after lower numbers of deer.
Don't get mad at me, I'm just pointing out that hunters no longer matter in pa. You have been sold out by the leaders in Harrisburg. Not your fault, not my fault. But many of your fellow sportsman helped it along. Major sportsmans groups backed Dr. Alt and his plan for 12dpsm in pa, and you can write to them and thank them for selling you out.
NO.
that would be a "social carrying capacity" and PA used to honor the wishes of hunters.
But "Dr. Alt had this to say about sportsmen, "We've been held hostage politically by hunters for the past 70 years. Everyone who has gone after the deer herd has been fired or transferred or quit, and I might be another in a long line, who knows?"
http://www.acslpa.org/pgc/quality_deer_management.htm
He felt when he took the position that hunters had held the state HOSTAGE, and he has worked with conservationsists, biodiversity geeks, business's and nonhunters to take that power hunters once had away.
It will NEVER be regained in PA. Hunters having a say in the ways of management are over.
And that is because Vernon Ross, Dr. Alt, Cal Dubrock opened the door and invited in non hunters to outspeak the voices of hunters. Remember they even took cash donations amountingto over 1.3 million $$$ to finance Dr. Alt deer studies. (done through the extremists in Audubon).
Herd reduction has only just begun. It will get worse in your area as the large numbers of hunters go after lower numbers of deer.
Don't get mad at me, I'm just pointing out that hunters no longer matter in pa. You have been sold out by the leaders in Harrisburg. Not your fault, not my fault. But many of your fellow sportsman helped it along. Major sportsmans groups backed Dr. Alt and his plan for 12dpsm in pa, and you can write to them and thank them for selling you out.
