Fall 2002/Winter 2003

A cooperative study of fawn mortality by our college and the Pennsylvania Game Commission at two sites in central Pennsylvania has revealed that black bears are a major predator of young white-tailed deer.
Wildlife biologists knew that black bears kill an occasional fawn, according to Justin Vreeland, graduate research assistant in the Pennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, but they were surprised about how many.
“We didn’t really expect to find that Pennsylvania black bears are the efficient predators of fawns that they are,” he says. “It is widely known that the state’s large population of coyotes prey on fawns, but it now looks like bears kill as many, or possibly more.”

Good point rollcaster...
 
but as I mentioned do you not think that with better habitat the number of smaller critters will increase allowing for easier prey and thus less effect on deer by coyotes??? 
 
I never thought I would say this.. but here goes....
 
considering the coyote population is growing for many reasons... #1 their fur is not valuable any more.... there is not a strong desire or reason to harvest them.
 
I was raised to believe don't kill it if you are not gong to eat it... but believe me.. coyotes are the exception.... If I can legally harvest one that I see I am going to..  just to help control their spread.. and thus there immediate thread to deer numbers...
 
Bears.. I still say with better habitat they will not be needing to kill deer....

This just in...
In reply to henhouse who wrote ---

Dr. This quote is for you as given by a PGC biologist named Dale Sheffer and reported in an issue of Game News. "Elimination of the antlerless season would produce an explosion in whitetails that would soon get out of hand." I thought you said that the opposite was true about not shooting does?

Here is a reply from a PGC staffer in Harrisburg I just received after wrting questioning who was Dale Sheffer since I had not heard him name mentioned before.....

E-MAIL ---
 

Dale Sheffer was the Dir. Of BWM before Cal Dubrock.
You’re talking ancient history and whole lot of research ago.

rollcaster....
 
I mean this in a FUNNY way....
 
you watch too much discovery channel in Africa.....
 
coyotes do not run down deer in packs..... the number of deer killed this was is so small it's silly....
 
Fawns are what the coyotes are killing and usually there is no need for a pack to run them down....
 
In fact the fawn studies showed that after the fanwns are a couple months old they do not fall prey to predators near as much..

I'll try something here.....

On my board there are always E-mails  
from "my experts" that I am allowed to share...
the experts do not like posting their opinions and then getting "slammed" by those that disagree... but thankfully are willing to voice there opinions there...

I'm not looking for new members.
 
But if you have some free time maybe some of you would enjoy reading those opinions....

I will share this ONE and ask that those members of my board that have seen this before and visit here keep the senders I.D. quiet.. THANK YOU...

Dave,

Sorry for such a late response.   Our annual reports and research analyses are consuming all my time now.


Below is a response from the Deer Section to your question.

Given our time constraints and limited personnel, we cannot provide such a detailed explanation for all questions, but we felt we should respond to this one.

You can post this on your website as a response from the PGC Deer Section.

"First, all habitat quantity and quality, not just "forest habitat health" will affect deer health. Deer health depends on habitat because deer get their nutrition from the habitat in which they live. However, we only consider "forest habitat health" in making management recommendations.

Other habitat types can provide nutrition to deer, but are not a part of our "forest habitat health measure".
For example, in agricultural landscapes, deer can impact forest health, but forests are not the only type. 
In agricultural areas, deer can impact forests significantly, yet still be healthy because of the high nutrition plane in the ag land.  

Compared to forested lands, agricultural lands tend to have better soils with increased nutrient levels that grow plants that are more accessable to deer.

Second, the measurement of forest habitat health does not dictate what deer health will be.

Health assessments of deer and forest habitat are judged separately.

Deer health is based on its own measure and what is needed for a deer population to be sustainable. Forest health is based on its own measure and what is necessary for a forest to be sustainable.

The point at which a deer population is sustainable is not necessarily the same as the point where a forest is sustainable.

A sustainable deer population (i.e., deer health "at target") occurring at a point where the forest is not sustainable (i.e., forest health "poor") is not unexpected based on previous experience and research.

The fact that assessments of "forest habitat health" and deer health do not agree in all WMUs is expected and does not invalidate the fact that deer health is affected by nutrition they get from the habitat."

Must have really been hungry

It happens... but I am sure more adults get whacked by cars than coyotes....
 
As I said.. a balancing act... 

Around here (I can promise you) coyotes are eating ten times as many turkeys....

Well guys I got to go get ready to shot some "tree rats"
 
be back this evening to catch up...

I wanted to post this earlier in the discussion.  I have a camp in 2F and I grew up in 2B.  These two WMUs might as well be different countries in terms of habitat, deer densities, huntable ground, and just about everything else.  The deer population is high in 2B (for the most part) and the deer are healthy. Natural predation (bears and coyotes) are rare threats. The biggest worry the deer have here is getting hit by a car or being shot by sharpshooters hired by misguided boroughs and townships that willingly pay for a service hunters would provide for free.  Comparing 2B to 2F is totally apples and oranges.

ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout

Well guys I got to go get ready to shot some "tree rats"

be back this evening to catch up...

 
"I was raised to believe don't kill it if you are not gong to eat it..."
 
I take it you are eating all those tree rats you are killing..
 
 

squirrel pie is VERY good

Yes, definetely..

With just a three day season  the weather becomes to much of a factor, plus with work duties getting harder and harder in todays economical world folks can't get the days off as easily as the could in the past.

I fear going back to a 3 day season would require MORE tags being issued to get the harvest numbers needed to maintain the herd at a level that is equal to the habitat it is feeding for the winter... everyone would be getting a regular tag plus a bonus tag.. shoot 2 .. nothing gained ...

Folks who are successful now on one  of the 2 saturdays (that's the only days they get to hunt) would not buy a license for antlerless.

I do not see that many guys hunting deer period after the first two or three days of rifle season..  then I see them again on Saturday and the second Saturday....

around here the rest of the two weeks is pretty void of hunters....

I think you will find that the current program is allowing deer numbers to increase slowly... which is also allowing the habitat to get better slowly ....

I kind of figured this was a ten to twelve year deer program.... so we are about half way... let's continue to be patient and see what the second half brings.....


I know this comment will bring those insulting comments but I have grown use to
them...

One thing most guys fail to realize is that the deer herd we are hunting now is older on average than the ones we grew up hunting.....

those older bucks (even at 2.5) are wiser they know what deer season is now... they lived thru one.... at 1.5 they were running around wondering what's all the excitement... now they know --- run around and be dead...

Most hunters are still harvesting antlerless without trying to ID button bucks... or waiting for ther mature one...

at our sportsmen's club last night I heard of two BBs getting harvested in muzzie season ... and one small doe (fawn) from folks that were there.. one BB was a youngster so I guess that one is okay ?????

I still believe the PGC and other experts when they say it is NOT the length of the season it's the number of tags that control the harvest figures....

we'll get to see with the study for the 4 WMUs that had the season shortened...


My guess -- harvest may even GO UP in them ...  here's how I get there ---

with the shorter season guys will shoot the first antlerless deer they see PERIOD.... will not even think about passing with less days to hunt....

I and many I know still try to be patient and shoot the bigger does knowing we have 2 weeks to harvest.. with a 3 day season... yes I harvested BBs and fawns in those years ... I could not afford to pass in case the next day had terrible weather...  keep in mine that the does were alot more cautious with a three day season too...  I can remember seeing  does in buck season that could barely walk, tongues hangin out because they had been on the run all day...

I remember the days of seeing maybe 30 does in one day in rifle season and in the EXACT same area on 1st day of doe could not find a single doe in that area...

I do not agree with those using that brown it down bull....  but with a 3 day antlerless .. it will go back to that...

AR stopped that for bucks and MANY guys still look them over tryin to avoid a BB.... 

The current program is working and we should just hang in there for a few more years and see that it was the thing to do....

Antlerless harvest is way easier to control by regulating the number of tags than it is by changing season length.
 
That said, I'm not convinced the longer season is sparing more button bucks.  Doc, has the percentage of BBs in the overall antlerless harvest changed since the PGC went to concurrent seasons?  I feel that the decision to harvest a particular deer is often determined by the amount of time a hunter has to invest and that since a lot of guys are only first day and saturday hunters, BBs will continue to fall.  A Lot of guys dont have time to be picky.  And, for far too many (hunters and non hunters alike), the success of a hunt begins and ends with killing.  The mentality is: If you dont kill, you are not a good hunter and you are wasting your time in the woods.  While this is an entirely different can of worms (than the current topic), I believe it contributes to the "if it's brown, it's down" school of thought.

Danes Dad..

I have to say it has not changed , it varies 1 or 2 % year to year but still is in that 23-25% range...

You are absolutely correct, Chromewrangler.
 
Too many people watch TV too much and think that is normal.
 
The real experience is in the doing, not the killing.