ORIGINAL: deerfly

The point I am making is that the data the PGC is using to manage our herd does not accurately reflect changes in the habitat, because their survey sites do not include clearcuts which would respond the fastest to reductions in the herd and where competing vegetation would have it's must severe affects.

 
Now that is more forthcoming and representative of some of the issues currently going on. Your continual quotes of "HR has not increased regeneration" is simply not true as a blanket statement and it appears you are well aware of that.  It is true that the data from the PGC supports that statement and that is a big problem for the PGC, IMO. 
 
 

Foresters telling the PGC that some areas can support more deer.  Believe it or not, that is what is precisely happening on occasion.  Interesting isn't it.  But I suspect you already know that to be the case.

Can you provide any links to reports by foresters telling the PGC the some areas can support more deer. All the reports that I have seen say that any increase in the herd will wipe out any gains that may have been made to date. DCNR is still using DMAP to reduce the herd even more and they still say they have to use fencing in many areas in order to get regeneration ,even in WMU 2G where the herd has been reduced the most.

Now that is more forthcoming and representative of some of the issues currently going on. Your continual quotes of "HR has not increased regeneration" is simply not true as a blanket statement and it appears you are well aware of that. It is true that the data from the PGC supports that statement and that is a big problem for the PGC, IMO.

Has regeneration increased or decreased in the majority of the WMUs? What percentage of our forests have benefited from increased regeneration due to HR? Not only does the PGC data support my position but the DCNR data also supports my position and their sampling is much more intense and shows worse results than the PGC surveys.

"Now that is more forthcoming and representative of some of the issues currently going on. Your continual quotes of "HR has not increased regeneration" is simply not true as a blanket statement and it appears you are well aware of that."

Overall, pgc data & the deer audit supported the claim that hr did not increase regeneration. Dcnr also, does NOT believe we should have more deer.

"Can you provide any links to reports by foresters telling the PGC the some areas can support more deer. All the reports that I have seen say that any increase in the herd will wipe out any gains that may have been made to date."

Yep. Thats what ive read as well. And thats all youre gonna read in the future. Because pizz poor deer number are thee "plan". I also see that pgc biologists didnt ask for decreases in allocations. I think the facts speak for themselves.

I still fail to understand your animosity towards the PGC's current program. If you truly believe they are failing; why do you so vehemently believe their data?

I never said I believed their data and I even stated in a recent post that their method for determining regeneration was flawed because they exclude clearcut areas from the plots that are surveyed. I simply reference PGC and DCNR data because that is the data that is being used to manage our herd and it is the only quantitative data we have to work with. If you have a better source of hard data please let us know. Furthermore, despite the PGC's best efforts to manipulate the data, the data they chose to use still shows their plan has failed to produce the predicted results.

BTW, I have consistently questioned the PGC's methodology for managing the herd even when it was based on the carrying capacity of clearcuts, pole timber and saw timber because it did not account for the carrying capacity of non-forested habitat and the beneficial effects of fringe habitat. However, the new plan is even worse since it makes no attempt to determine the carrying capacity of the habitat and relies solely on the ability of forested areas to regenerate and replace the existing canopy.

Thanks Wayne C. It is always nice to know that ones efforts are appreciated ,at least by a few. What constantly amazes me is how those that support the plan dismiss the hard evidence that shows the plan has failed to produce the predicted results,while at the same time they willing accepted the propaganda Alt used to sell the plan with no hard data. I guess there are some among us that just chose to believe what they want to believe regardless of any hard evidence that may contradict their beliefs.

Did any other state reduce their herd by over 45% with no increase in regeneration? Did any other state implement ARs and suffer a 45 % reduction in their buck harvest? Did any other state base the management of their herd on the regeneration of commercially valuable timber?

No, but I did a search and Bryon doesn't have one hit, So why should anyone care what Bryon has to say about our DMP? If he had anything important to say why don't you post it instead of beating around the bush and saying nothing worthwhile.

Bryon shissler? lmao!! Do you even have a clue who that guy is?? You may as well as Heidi prescott about her well thought out intellectual thoughts on hunting as to ask that guy about "deer management". Extreme to say the least.

To make matters worse, he was actually ON the deer management team, which could be seen on his online resume' that is/was listed on that consulting company he works for. ( He was on the dream team as dcnr interloper into pgc deer management affairs) back when the slaughter em all days was starting, helped put it into place and structure the danged thing, one of the guys that didint get the lime light. LMao. Yeah. Real critic. Only thing he critisized after he left was that the deer werent getting killed quite as fast as he'd like. lol

Also one of the participants in the audubon deer sham scam study if i recall correctly?

lol. Yeah hes really concerned with we hunters interests. We should really heed his words. lol.

Yep. Just like some of petas staff biologists & hsus's. Guess we should take their words as gospel too.

For anyone knowing anything about the guy, it'd be kinda hard to classify him as "a frequent critic" despite the ridiculous press claims. While there may have been a thing or two he didnt like going on, the same could be said for anyone. But when he had be intricately involved previously in such a large role... and is singing the praises now. lmao. I doubt there are many who cant see the extreme damage control attempt and the ridiculous show that was put on for our benefit.

"Did I say that I worship the guy or his opinion? Nope, I didn't."

I never said you did. But your saying you know who the guy is, yet still chose to point to him to back a position, and clearly are trying to defend him as a credible source even after knowing what we know, + the little media show that was put on, which you know every bit as well as i do, that it was a complete joke and farce....so obviously orchestrated because there is so little support for the program. Yet you still support this guy as a credible "expert" on the subject, is a bit confusing to say the least.....

"Just get tired of the anti pgc rhetoric from sportsmen that is driven by the deer wars. A balance is nice and would probably be better served in the long run."

I agree 100%.

ORIGINAL: deerfly

Was the testimony by Bryon Fellas or Bryon Schissler?

If you want a balance in these discussions,why aren't you willing to accept the data that shows the DMP has failed?

 
Shissler as I pointed out a few threads up.  You should try to get a copy of his presentation.  Good info that can be discussed further on many fronts.
 
I am not one for long drawn out discussions on the DMP as you have probably figured out.  For the most part I feel that our DMP is on track.  Pennsylvania continues to have one of the highest deer harvests in the nation, excellent opportunities are available for those that want them, our age classes have improved, B/D ratios are improving(fractionally) and licenses are cheap.  Our crew has seen increases in average age, weight and antler mass since AR/HR.  Deer are fewer and our overall success rates dropped a touch but we are also more selective than previous.  We used to have some browse lines present but they are improving as well. 
 
Those are my criteria for why I am pleased with most of the current program.  The specifics on the data and the validity of it, the statisiticians and biologists can figure out.  Sure, I would like to see some changes but overall I am happy. 
 
I am fortunate to have excellent opportunities close by.  Many years ago, I spent more time looking for good hunting and driving to it than hunting.  That was way before HR/AR.  Things change.  Populations densities shift.  Adapt and conquer as the situtaion will be different in another 15 years. 
 
Good luck and happy hunting. 
 
 

ORIGINAL: wayne c

Funny how the same couple of guys go around the boards whining about people who complain about the deer plan trying to shut down any and all conversation on this topic. Also funny how they continually "pop up" right after series of extra scathing to the deer plan posts.

Essox, my advice would be...Blow it out your tailpipe! lol

Deerfly, pretty clear your a very educated fella on all this stuff, and your input is valued by many of us on this board. Keep up the good work!

I also find it quite funny that the same few people who can't kill a deer continually whine about the PGC on the boards. Even if the PGC is to blame, they still do nothing about it. I guess you must like running in circles, since I see no other outcome coming from you.

Wayne, my advice would be to keep taking in the tailpipe as you seem very content with it.

ORIGINAL: deerfly

I read his testimony and found it to be very biased and for the most part irrelevant as a method for evaluating our DMP. Furthermore it seems he agrees with me that the plan is seriously flawed. Here is a quote from an article about his testimony.

Shissler did not back away from his previous statements that deer management in Pennsylvania is a "flawed" system.
He pointed to the state's lack of funding from a broader base than hunters to support wildlife management and lack of broader representation from interests other than hunters on the Board of Commissioners, as well as inadequate measures of the ecosystem effectiveness of the state's evolving deer management program, as central to the flaw.

It seems you support the plan because you still have good hunting and haven't been significantly impacted by herd reduction like so many of your fellow hunters and , at the same time you reject the facts that show the plan has failed.

He did have some concerns and he offered praise as well.  Pa's DMP had alot going for it compared to the other states he looked at.  There is good and bad and I choose to look at both of them.

As I said before, I am satifisfied for the most part with the current plan.  The current program has improved upon what I find important in a herd and its habitat.  As I also said before, I was in a similar situation 20 years ago that hunters are finding themselves in today.  Few deer locally.  I enjoy hunting and drove 1.5 hours to archery hunt 2 hours than drove back home.  Spent 3 hours driving and two hours hunting after work.  Anyway, I have seen positive results as I pointed out before even though deer numbers are down.  That I am happy about.

"As I also said before, I was in a similar situation 20 years ago that hunters are finding themselves in today. Few deer locally."

What area is that dpms? Im not aware of any southwestern Pa counties that were deer poor in 1990. FAR from it in fact. Back then, my stomping grounds included mainly Greene, Fayette, but also included Somerset & occaisionally wash county. All the properties i hunted in those areas held good deer numbers, most, far more than they do today.

ORIGINAL: wayne c

What area is that dpms? Im not aware of any southwestern Pa counties that were deer poor in 1990. FAR from it in fact. Back then, my stomping grounds included mainly Greene, Fayette, but also included Somerset & occaisionally wash county. All the properties i hunted in those areas held good deer numbers, most, far more than they do today.

 
The parts I had access to were in Allegheny and Washington Counties.  I remember seeing a deer track in the snow in Allegheny County in the mid eighties.  It was the talk of the neighbors for awhile.  Saw few deer then.  In Washington, the farm I hunted was small game primarily.  Saw a few deer but I did all of my deer hunting in northern Butler and southern Venango back then.   
 
Now I stay close.  I hear the numbers are down quite a bit in the areas I used to hunt.