More Pa game commission fraud -- Antlerless allocations suggested

By Bob Frye

Published: Sunday, March 23, 2014, 12:01 a.m.
Updated 8 hours ago



This year's harvest has the potential to be the largest ever.

The intent is to drive the herd down, a bit if not too dramatically, at least in specific locations, to ease human conflict-type concerns. To do that, the Pennsylvania Game Commission may issue more licenses than at any point in the last 80 years.

Thinking deer?

Nope. We're talking elk this time.

Chris Rosenberry, head of the commission's deer and elk section, has recommended the agency issue a modern-day record 108 elk licenses for this fall's hunting season. That would include 27 bull tags, up from 26 last year, and 81 cow tags, up from 60 last year.

One-third of the additional cow tags would be directed to what's known as elk management zone 5, around the community of Weedville. The increase is meant to “address human safety concerns,” Rosenberry said.

The boost in cow tags particularly is a reflection of how much more difficult they are to harvest than bulls.

Historically, hunters with bull elk licenses have been successful more than 90 percent of the time. Hunters with a license to shoot a cow succeed at closer to 80 percent, Rosenberry said.

That might not be for the reason you think.

Some have long suspected that was because cow hunters went afield less often or avidly than those with a chance to bring home some giant antlers. Research revealed that's not true.

“It wasn't a lack of effort on their part. It was just circumstance,” Rosenberry said.

No one should worry that issuing 108 elk tags — if that's what commissioners approve when they next meet April 7-8 in Harrisburg — will harm the herd, said Cal DuBrock, director of the bureau of wildlife management. It still numbers more than 800 animals, he said.

As for white-tailed deer , commissioners will set the doe license allocation at their April meeting, too. It's unlikely they'll follow the recommendations of their deer team exactly. They never do.

In fact, at their working group meeting in Harrisburg this past week, commissioners indicated they'll go through the state, wildlife management unit by wildlife management unit, with each getting a chance to tweak the allocations — as in the past.

What they'll start with is a recommendation that the commission decrease the population in units 3C, 4A and 4B, allow it to increase in unit 3A and keep it stable everywhere else.

The recommended doe tag numbers for units with 12-day concurrent seasons (with last year's allocation in parentheses for comparison) are: 1A, 52,000 (49,000); 1B, 32,000 (31,000); 2B, 61,000 (62,000); 3A, 19,000 (23,000); 3D, 37,000 (32,000); 4A, 36,000 (28,000); 4C, 32,000 (27,000); 5A, 26,000 (19,000); 5B, 50,000 (50,000); 5C, 105,000 (103,000); and 5D, 18,000 (18,000).


The biologists' recommendations for units with split buck and doe seasons are: 2A, 54,000 (49,000); 2C, 50,000 (43,000); 2D, 69,000 (61,000); 2E, 23,000 (22,000); 2F, 30,000 (29,000); 2G, 24,000 (28,000); 2H, 6,000 (6,000); 3B, 50,000 (39,000); 3C, 40,000 (35,000); 4B, 31,000 (24,000); 4D, 37,000 (35,000); and 4E, 28,000 (26,000

Read more: triblive.com/sports/outdoors/5789325-74/elk-cow-doe#ixzz2wmqaNZxG
Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook

wayne c
Looks like recommendations for 17 of 23 units to have an allocations increase.
 
Overall 72,000 tag increase from last year.
 
What a joke.  

2A went up, 2B went down. Figures. Will see what the BOC actually does at the meeting. 

2B never sells out.  I'm not sure why they even bother "calculating" recommended allocations.  For all intents and purposes, there have been unlimited tags available for 2B for many years.
 
I don't know much about 2A, but I find it interested that they state that the herd in 2A is "stable" in the 2013-2014 Antlerless Allocation and Supporting Information document that the PGC put out.  The reason I find it interesting is because both buck and doe harvests have decreased substantially from 2005 (first data point in the report). 

Esox--I didn't look at the report you referenced but in the past they considered a WMU stable unless the reduction exceeded 25%. When I last calculated the numbers in 2011  a WMU with a 25% reduction was stated as stable and one with a 29% decrease was stated as decreased. They also used 2005 as their base rather than the start of HR.

S-10 - You may be right about that.  I just went straight to the end of the report to compare last years recommendations to the proposed allocations for next year.  Here is a link to the report for 2013-2014 if anyone is interested in reading it.
 
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_1237578_0_0_18/Antlerless%20Allocations%20and%20Supporting%0Information.pdf

wayne c
What did you mean by "figures"? 

They proposed lowering them where there are too many deer and raising them in a unit where the population is largely stable or decreasing. 

Does anyone else feel like you are involved in an antlerless allocation shell game and there is no ball under any of them?

 I think the game commission should copy the gambling casinos and make it illegal to keep track of their old figures like not being allowed to count cards in blackjack.
 Take it as they are dealt, relax have a drink, isn't this much more fun? See the Fisher, hear the Coyote. I know you haven't seen a deer in two weeks isn't it great next year you can hunt deer even longer in the year. Your luck has to change!
  I am sorry, I just couldn't help myself. I honestly believe in most all the Game Com. policies regarding the deer management taking place.
  Don't forget 68% of all figures are made up on the spot. I even made up the 62%.  oops

You go Tree..WF..

S-10, My opinion of what should be happening in Pa and what is happening are two vastly different things. From timber cutting our youngsters britches below their bottoms.
          I have voiced my opinion on outdoor matters for 40 years (I am in mid 60's) and your last little diddy there will rule, and the lawyers and politicians will rejoice. As long as we are all divided they prosper. 
          If the habitat in the big woods of Pa right now was comparable to what it was in the early 1900's we couldn't keep up with the whitetails.
          In the next month you will notice the first green growth. Look for shrubs in the avg 8'  category. The first to green will be the invasive's. You will see them everywhere, and just remember where they inhabit natives used to occupy. I have never seen evidence of deer browsing on the invasive's you will be identifying with the early green growth.
         Do you know the majority of our grasses are invasive's. It makes me wonder if that has any bearing on where have all the bunnies gone? We had lots of rabbits and naturalized ring necks when I was younger.  Sure it is changes in farming and loss of habitat. Could it also be lost species of flora. I know lack of long stem grasses that gave cover has changed small games ability to hide, perhaps we have lost winter feed also. I know losing our ribes ( blackberry canes) to invasive,s is going to greatly lesson the rabbits ability to winter. Well does it matter, as I have a neighbors tom cat running loose around my place that is a killing machine. Yard rabbits are about gone here.

Treesparrow, The interesting thing about the invasives is most were brought here by the so called experts in wildlife and the environment. Several are good feed for the deer and birds but most are only good for the makers of Roundup and Cleanup. As for the rabbits and other small game, my money is on the introduction of the fisher and protection of the hawks and owls for their decline. Btw, I've got you by half dozen years so we both have seen the change in landscape and wild game.
 
Doc, according to the PGC we reduced the deer herd by 25% and increased the number of older deer by 2-1/2 times so the number of bucks in the record books should be more than double each year than they were in 2000. Remember in 2000 20% of the bucks were older where if you believe them now approx 50% are now.
 
You will always find some dead deer along the creek bottoms regardless of the overall numbers as that is where many winter and more deer do die in the winter of various causes just as humans do.
 
No matter, I'll continue to be as successful as always, I just have to put in longer hours before the right one comes along. I was working on an archery stand site today and just finished building a permanent gun stand in a new place. Good thing I am retired.

according to the PGC we reduced the deer herd by 25% and increased the number of older deer by 2-1/2 times so the

 
so now you want to use PGC figures and defend their method of calculating the deer herd... and at other times post a person can not rely on their figures because they are not accurate ???
 
Even at 25% that still means there are less deer out their and one should not compare 2014 to a "cherry picked" banner year...
 
I do not recall anyone saying the buck harvest would double just because we had larger and older deer. I recall holding up a set of antlers and saying hunters would see more bucks like that (larger antlers) due to being allowed to live longer.. many must not have figured that older would also mean SMARTER.. thus hard to kill and find...
 
As for the horse example... excellent... two horses can SURVIVE on a bale of hay a day and that coffee can of GOOD feed... not 3 or 4 just TWO !!! a bale of hay a day.. just picture that spread out in the woods as browse for deer.... here's an interesting fact from my webpage on a deer habitat seminar I attended...
 

 The next item up for presentation was done by Dave Jackson, Forest Resources Extension Educator, Penn State Cooperative Extension.. Centre County.

Dave's presentation was every bit as informative and interesting. He went into alot more detail on the food sources needed for healthy deer, their preferences in foods,
and even foods they do not prefer..

One striking point he made...

In good habitat the average deer will eat between 4-7 pounds of browse A DAY...

He gave us the following example to think about...

Just using 5# a day and a deer herd of 20 deer...for a 60 day period...

20 deer times 5# times 60 days
EQUALS =

6,000 pounds of browse...

that's 3 tons !!!..or about 1-2 ACRES of browse ---think of a food plot...  

 
just how long would the habitat stay what it is there now with just 20 deer...?????

 
 
As for horses.... that same 1-2 acres would allow an owner to not have to feed hay for the SUMMER ..... for how many horses you ask ... once again JUST TWO !!!!
 
By October there is no grass left with our 2 horses on 2 acres of pasture.... and we even allow them access to 2 small pastures during that same summer...
 
First picture May ... second one mid-August.. picture 3 is some deer enjoying that same upper part of 2 acre pasture mid-summer .. do you think they are there in  August  to Dec ???? 

No matter, I'll continue to be as successful as always, I just have to put in longer hours before the right one comes along. I was working on an archery stand site today and just finished building a permanent gun stand in a new place. Good thing I am retired.

 
Good post.   And I think its comical how some try to point to all those not satisfied as some clueless clown that couldn't find a deer in a locked barn. lmao.    As if everyones expectations should be the same.   Those of us who for years have been selective in what buck we harvest, passed on some each year, still managed to get what we were looking for every or most years because of our skill level and having a "decent" place to hunt are now supposed to be happy because we can still find a doe or a legal dink buck to shoot, so all is well, regardless of our skill or experience level.
 
Personally I consider myself to be well above average health/physical ability, skill and experience level, as well as time put in.  Also being from one of the "better" portions of the state, although that's only comparing to areas that have been FURTHER degraded than most of this one.   And compared to years past due to reductions I still see FAR fewer deer overall, ALOT more no deer seen days, and that creates much lower satisfaction no matter how you slice it.  I guess I should still be happy because if I hunt hard and long enough, I can elect to shoot the first 12 inch 8 point or doe I see because I don't go all year without the opportunities to do so. I see many many MANY fewer of them overall, which makes for a lot more boring sits waiting on the ones I DO want to shoot. 
 
Are there guys who go for years without harvesting a deer now?  Sure.  But there always was.  Now there are more of them also, and they have no reason to be any happier about the situation either.
 
I have had a big hit to my satisfaction level by hr, but when coupled with what it is doing to the sport overall, the big picture, not to mention kids and older guys and those with average to lesser skills and time available...  It is not a good situation no matter how you look at it.
 
And the reasons for it in most of the state are a total joke, passed off generically as "science" to the unknowing.  Unwarranted reductions are THE number 1 issue of concern for sportsmen today, and needs to be addressed.    The enviro-kooks need cleaned out of the agency.   It really is that simple.    That doesn't mean there will then be a deer behind every tree, or that every inch of the state will even have "good" deer numbers.   

Could you post the stats (not opinions) to back that up ???   The way I see it the success percentage rate is about the same as before and that is with fewer HUNTERS and FEWER deer....

 
Uh, no doc.  More harvest is being had in urban areas with unlimited tags basically, than previously and equates to more people in some of those areas taking multiple deer than in the days when hunters had one or two tags no matter where they were from.  That means far fewer hunters successful compared to previously even with a similar success percentage, if one chooses to believe it is so.   I think most can understand this without a long song and dance routine. 
 
Although you do bring up a good point about all the hunters that have quit that were caused by the herd reductions farce.   Another thing that is not good for our sport. 

 

I believe the PGC has done many things to help with those problems..

 
They've done nothing even close to counter the real issues to the extent of the actual PROBLEMS they have created for them.
 
And without permitting herd growth but adding "opportunity" pretty much all the things you mentioned do nothing more than lower or keep the herd lower than would be otherwise, since they made no provisions to increase herd size.
 
Less deer = less deer seen and less deer sustainably harvested.  Including our youth and seniors.  
 
And in regard to my opinions, I see no reason why I shouldn't give them, along with the facts as I do so often in support of my views. 
 
I figure most of that I stated was pretty much common sense for most.   Sorry it doesn't align with the usual pgc/environmentalist half truths and propaganda.
 
 
 
 

Kinda like they said pa was SECOND in the nation in deer harvest...
 
Rosenberry & Dubrock actually told the board of commissioners that at their last work group meeting....and reiterated it at the deer hearing to the house game & fisheries committee...
 
Comparing our harvest with a percentage added in for reporting noncompliance, and comparing them to all the rest of the states...where all but 3 others do NOT use any added in figure for harvest estimating.  So Rosenberry is happy to compare our estimated harvest that has our number of harvests reported PLUS twice as many more deer added in to the total that were not reported... and actually "calculated in"....and compared to others that only give the number of harvest reports turned in with no noncompliance percentage added in.... and uses that to support the asinine agenda and showing how fantastic we spoiled Pennsylvanians have it, when its quite possible we don't even rank in the top ten.
 
Taking all the states reported harvests and applying a similar harvest nonreporting rate around our own, or even somewhat better to those numbers, and there are several states higher than our harvest estimate.
 
Typical pgc
 
....More facts awaiting your educated professional rebuttal doc.