![]() |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
ARE you saying we have more deer than we had in 1997 or are you saying we have less deer? I am inclined to lean toward less deer in the more traditional deer ranges (NW, NC) but about the same in the Southwest. I qualify that by saying it's based purely on personal experiences and limited anecdotal evidence. I, like most of us, anxiously await this years harvest figures. Now, answer my question if you will. You implied that a 300k reduction in doe tags will not significantly slow the HR rate. I contend you have nothing to back that up other than your best guess. |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
Therefore, if they decreased the anterless allocation by 300K tags , there would still be more than enough tags to reduce the herd even more. Remember the increased the lenght of the anterless season by 400% with the concurrent season and allowed the use of rifles in the extended anterless season in 5C. |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
I think it plays out like this, lots of people will bitch about not seeing enough deer, but when Doe tags go "on sale", they will all get bought, like usual.
I myself will apply for a doe tag, and not hesitate for an instant about shooting 1 early in archery, then be selective about my buck. 1st I love to hunt, 2nd I love venison-yum yum :D |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
Since then . the anterless season has been increased by 400%,which increases the efficiency of the anterless tags issued. Oh and back in 1997 with a 3 day doe season, according to the numbers, in your last post Pa 32% of doe licenses resulted kill. Those anterless harvests have reduced our OW herd to below the 777K OWD we had in 1997 ,when 677 K anterless tags produced an anterless harvest of 220K At a 35% kill rate 300k less licenses should mean somewhere around 105k less doe killed. |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
At a 35% kill rate 300k less licenses should mean somewhere around 105k less doe killed. In 2001 with only 773K. , 227 K less anterless tags than in 2004 , hunters still harvested 283K anterless, which was 63K more than the 220 K anterless deer that kept the herd stable in 1997. The issuance of 450 K bonus tags makes your analysis invalid because the success rate for bonus tags is lower than for first round anterless tags. |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
The issuance of 450 K bonus tags makes your analysis invalid because the success rate for bonus tags is lower than for first round anterless tags. proof??????? |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
I am inclined to lean toward less deer in the more traditional deer ranges (NW, NC) but about the same in the Southwest. I qualify that by saying it's based purely on personal experiences and limited anecdotal evidence. I, like most of us, anxiously await this years harvest figures. |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
ORIGINAL: BTBowhunter The issuance of 450 K bonus tags makes your analysis invalid because the success rate for bonus tags is lower than for first round anterless tags. proof??????? |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
The proof is ,nobody fills a bonus tag before they fill there first tag. |
RE: Doe shooting in Pa
All figures are calculated, they have doubled the harvest figures since 1985. You are correct that the figures have doubled but you also need to remember that way back then they only published the reported kill (meaning report cards received) they have since gone to a calculated number based on the estimated reporting rate. this is one of the reasons most of on either side of AR/HR are all screaming for more meaningful reporting. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:28 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.