[quote]ORIGINAL: chickory

Arkansas takes a LARGE number of BB every season even though they tag them. But what it did do in arkansas was to lower thier antlerless harvests to the point that wildlife managers were not meeting thier goals of harvesting enough does.

Same would happen here in pa, people would be too timid in shooting does and the PGC would not hit thier goal of antlerless harvest.

*********** exactly raise the doe numbers , my point exactly*************

Isn't the first rule in shooting "Identify your target"....Personally I can't tell you the last time I ever shot a button buck for a doe. I've spent enough time in the woods to tell the difference between a doe and a fawn to not make that mistake....and when in doubt, I didn't shoot, bow or gun. Not condemning anyone who shot a button, but I think it's preventable....like someone said, he mistakenly shot a bb...mistakely, it happens but it can be prevented by not pulling the trigger. And if one is mistakenly taken or intentionally for that matter, this is the first time I'll agree with with wingbar and say it should be tagged as a male deer. If one has multiple doe tags, the next shot should be positive to not make the same mistake, no difference than AR and shooting a 4 pt in a 3 pt on a side county, Identify the target and when in doubt, don't shoot....the deer buck or doe might live another year and that can't hurt either sex.

Do you really support harvesting an additional 100,000 adult doe in order to save BB. Do you realize that if the anterless harvests remained around the 323K we harvested in 2003, we would be harvesting roughly 300,000 adult doe ? How many BB do you think the over wintering female fawns an bb will produce the following spring?

If we save BB and harvest mature doe instead,as we did in 2003, in 2005 we will have fewer 2.5+ buck than before AR was implemented.

Well it would certainly balance the herd as far as buck/doe now wouldn't it and making hunters more respondsible for their bullet is obviously a good thing and in turn I feel they would actually pass more doe to make sure of a correct harvest...no more shooting across fields at running deer, no more if it's brown, it's down mentalities which in turn makes the woods safer.

And 2.5 + bucks wouldn't lessen, they would increase especially initially because their will be that many more 1.5 years olds in the woods the following year not to mention the existing 1.5 and 2.5+ bucks that would survive because a hunter burned his tag on a bb...then in a year. Competition will be tighter for buck breeding rights, deer will be able to be hunted as they should be.....

None of this is rocket science, what do you think the major monster buck areas of this country have been doing for years.....

Why is it so important to have a deer behind every tree.....I purposely go without a deer certain years looking for that "special" one that makes my hunt memorable be it buck or doe, large or small.....I've bought doe tags the last 2 years and didn't fill them...not because I couldn't but because I chose to, I've passed bucks and does numerous times and didn't fill either my tags...this year I took a 3.5 year old buck in archery and passed many does without filling my doe tag...I even have a muzzle tag but decided not to go out....next year I might take two doe and no buck or one buck and two doe or none...it doesn't make me a bad hunter and it doesn't lessen the hunt for me. I don't have to harvest an animal to be a great hunter.

That's what's wrong with this state....too many "deer behind every tree", "if it's brown it's down" and "I have to get my buck" mentalilties.

We didn't have a problem with the B/D ratio and the closer the B/D ratio gets to 1:1 the lower the sustainable buck harvest will be.

Do you really belive the PGC will allow the OW herd to increase by protecting BB and not require that additional adult be harvested to at lest keep the OW herd stable? Sounds like you are one of those guys that needs to have a buck behind every bush.

Of course the number of 2.5 + buck would increase initially , but that increase would only last one year and then the number would decrease to lower levels than before AR. In case you didn't realize it BB have to be born before hunters can pass on them . Removing 300K adult doe from the herd means over 250,000 fewer BB will be born. Apparently you have little understanding of herd dynamics and think we can just save BB without having any other negative effects.

You are entitled to your opinion and my opinion it is the "buck behind every tree mentality" that is preventing the PGC from managing the herd effectively. Alt was hired to reduce the herd ,not produce bigger racks. But,after 4 years the PGC says their has been no herd reduction because hunters like you are passing on BB and not harvesting doe . I guess you never did support Alt's pan except for AR.

I am all for everyone following the same rules. I am torn between the tagging of a BB. In principle I like it, but the ave PA hunter wouldn't follow the rules anyways. It is so amazing the mindset in this state that a person HAS to shoot a deer when they see it. Letting one walk becuase they aren't 100% sure, is a completely foriegn concept to most guys. Yes I have killed a BB or 2 in the past when I was younger, but never have I killed one when consciously making an effort to avoid it. If you are unsure you don't pull the trigger.

I like the AR's that PA has in place and the additional ones suggested here are an even better idea. Anyone who looks at the improvement in the size of the bigger bucks being tagged in PA over the last few years can see that it's working. I am one who has been wanting to see the same kind of restrictions implemented here in MD. Those of us that pass on the small, immature bucks -- wanting them to grow -- wouldn't have to worry that the hunters on the neighboring properties would likely shoot them anyway. I also like the idea of using buck tags for any male deer taken -- to include BB's. What to do with subsequent BB's taken after the buck tag is already used is a tricky question, but solutions will be possible -- fines are one possibility. Taking the extra deer through adult does isn't any problem whatsoever -- who wouldn't prefer a big doe over a small BB anyway?

See that is why all these arguments are beating a dead horse. Yes, in fact we did have a problem with B/D ratios, a significant problem....we've already seen 20 does in the alphalpha field and only a single 4 pt...now that's not to say there were not bucks in the woods, but you can bet there were more doe as well....now we can argue this is area specific...exatcly let's not beat a dead horse.

No, BB will never be treated as a antlered tag...that's obvious and don't put words in my post, I don't need a buck behind every tree but would love a well balanced herd to hunt where bucks don't kill themselves running does because there are not enough bucks to breed rather than balancing the herd and allowing the bucks to compete for breeding. Not to mention all the does that are not bred until the second and third cycles which in turn affords late births causing and smaller/inferior deer. Seen this too many years.

.

But of course the 3.5 year old population would increase and hunters can let 1.5 year olds walk and harvest a more mature animal. That in turn allows 1.5 year olds to mature themselves...this is not rocket science, all your well balanced trophy states and hunting areas like Willow Point have been this for ever and they have all the makings of the best herd in the country....healthy animals, mature animals and a well balanced herd....


You as well are entitled to your opinion and again, don't put words in my post because you havent been around long enough to read back when I exhausted myself supporting Alt on this site...now it's pointless and it's beating a dead horse over and over and over again with all the anti Alts on this forum. And now, I think we need to keep AR and reduce the doe allotments in a smaller WMU but that's not going to happen. Again, dead horse...beating...[&:]

How can you say that AR is workig when the reason Alt gave for implementing AR was to improve the breeding ecology and to reduce the number of late born fawns by shortening the breeding period. Have you seen any data to show there has been any improvement?

Rob: in your post you said you'd love to hunt where bucks aren't killing themselves trying to breed all the does because there isn't enough bucks:

Could it be there aren't enough Does?

Alsoyou mentioned you ran yourself out supporting Alt;

I hate to tell you but you allied yourself to a falling star from the get go. he had SOME sound ideas I'll grant him that . I like the AR but we really aren't saving that many more bucks under it that we need to make room for them by cutting doe numbers so drastically an hunters saw right thru that. he made his mistake in trying to sell HR by using AR rather than telling hunters we needed smaller WMUs to be able to manage each WMU for the amount of deer the habitat would support. Then proving his theroy by plotting the habitat in those smaller WMUsthe way the timber companies do.