Turn us Loggers loose we'll make some browse and knock those high canopy ground cover blockin trees to their knees...

ORIGINAL: deerfly

I didn't say I don't know, I said I don't need to know.

But you also said you didn't care, which means you would have no reason to do the research to know if the herd was stable or increasing, yet you try your best to convince others that poor habitat is the reason why the herd isn't increasing ,even though the facts prove you are dead wrong. Furthermore, this is not a discussion about individual hunting practices and even if every hunter in the state did what you suggest,it wouldn't increase the sustainable harvest at all. In fact ,it would insure that the herd would never increase.

When I walk into the woods, I do not care if the pgc says the entire deer herd of wmu 4d is increasing, decreasing, or stable. It could be considered one status at mile X and another mile down the road completely different. Do you choose to hunt or not hunt an entire wmu because the deer herd is considered a certain status ? I don't and that's what I meant by I don't care. Course, you probably knew that, but are grasping straws. Gotta grab something I suppose.

I am able to steer the thread in the direction of hunting practices if I desire. You have every opportunity to not engage in discussion.


I do have reason to do the research. And that is to see what problems exist, understand why they exist and how I, in my own power, can improve on them. And I have. Sounds like you're still struggling. Maybe get off the PC and figure it out ? If the pgc allows the deer to get hammered, so be it, I give 'em my thoughts and I'm out of there. I don't spend endless hours typing about how horrid everything is. I do however spend the time trying to improve it. If the forest is tall timber and one can see a hundred yards, I ain't huntin' it.


I have found overtime that the guys that complain and continue non-stop, really aren't into hunting much anyway. When they go hunting, they spend more time in the vehicle than in the woods. They go to camp to get drunk, play cards, and sleep in (not that there's anything wrong with that). They use the excuse of the pgc to attempt to convince other hunters why they are not actually hunting. Really, that's the truth. If one really enjoys hunting -- I'm not talking deer numbers, telling deer stories, or antler size --I'm talking about the instinctual pursuit of prey as a predator.. then there are no excuses. They'll adapt no matter what. And that's okay for those who don't want to adapt but at the very least, be honest.

When I walk into the woods, I do not care if the pgc says the entire deer herd of wmu 4d is increasing, decreasing, or stable. It could be considered one status at mile X and another mile down the road completely different. Do you choose to hunt or not hunt an entire wmu because the deer herd is considered a certain status ? I don't and that's what I meant by I don't care. Course, you probably knew that, but are grasping straws. Gotta grab something I suppose.

When I walk into the woods I care whether the herd is increasing, decreasing or stable because I have spent a lot of time and energy trying to improve the habitat on my property and adjoining properties, only to have the PGC reduce the herd to ridiculous low levels and making deer hunting a lot less enjoyable. Not only do we see a lot less deer,we no longer enjoy harvesting doe because we see so few.

However , I do not judge the DMP based on my personal success, I base it on whether or not it has achieved it's intended goals statewide and to date it is a miserable failure and you can't provide a single fact that proves I am wrong.

Silver, For someone who doesn't spend his time on the computer you sure have a lot of posts compared to the rest of us. Perhaps it's you who should spend more time in the woods to see what is going on instead of telling us how good things are. Also remember, it's the 90 percent that don't spend all their time at the sport that are supporting the system that keeps the agency in business. Probably should pay some attention to them that fund the programs and pay the salarys instead of the Audubon and enviromentalists that want things like they were before man.

I have found overtime that the guys that complain and continue non-stop, really aren't into hunting much anyway. When they go hunting, they spend more time in the vehicle than in the woods. They go to camp to get drunk, play cards, and sleep in (not that there's anything wrong with that). They use the excuse of the pgc to attempt to convince other hunters why they are not actually hunting. Really, that's the truth. If one really enjoys hunting -- I'm not talking deer numbers, telling deer stories, or antler size --I'm talking about the instinctual pursuit of prey as a predator.. then there are no excuses. They'll adapt no matter what. And that's okay for those who don't want to adapt but at the very least, be honest.

[/quote

Does that include members of hunting clubs like my BIL belongs to where the members pay $600/yr. in dues and they manage 2 SM of forest for wildlife habitat. Should they all adapt by just accepting harvests that are one third what they were before? Should they pay their dues ,shut up and move to an area with more deer? Should older hunters just shut up and quit hunting because the area they hunted for years no longer produce an enjoyable experience? Do you really give a rip about your fellow hunters who may not have it as good as you do?

ORIGINAL: deerfly

When I walk into the woods, I do not care if the pgc says the entire deer herd of wmu 4d is increasing, decreasing, or stable. It could be considered one status at mile X and another mile down the road completely different. Do you choose to hunt or not hunt an entire wmu because the deer herd is considered a certain status ? I don't and that's what I meant by I don't care. Course, you probably knew that, but are grasping straws. Gotta grab something I suppose.

When I walk into the woods I care whether the herd is increasing, decreasing or stable because I have spent a lot of time and energy trying to improve the habitat on my property and adjoining properties, only to have the PGC reduce the herd to ridiculous low levels and making deer hunting a lot less enjoyable. Not only do we see a lot less deer,we no longer enjoy harvesting doe because we see so few.

However , I do not judge the DMP based on my personal success, I base it on whether or not it has achieved it's intended goals statewide and to date it is a miserable failure and you can't provide a single fact that proves I am wrong.

 
So, do you think if the pgc says your entire WMU is stable, that means your immediate area is ?   I don't.
 
When is the last time you shot a doe ?
 
Your opinion is the program is a miserable failure.   I'd have to say HR certainly achieved its goal.
 
 

ORIGINAL: S-10

Silver, For someone who doesn't spend his time on the computer you sure have a lot of posts compared to the rest of us. Perhaps it's you who should spend more time in the woods to see what is going on instead of telling us how good things are. Also remember, it's the 90 percent that don't spend all their time at the sport that are supporting the system that keeps the agency in business. Probably should pay some attention to them that fund the programs and pay the salarys instead of the Audubon and enviromentalists that want things like they were before man.

 
I would spend more time in the woods if I wasn't content with where I deer hunt.  I have in the past when I wasn't content.  I certainly don't complain about it on a message board.  I did not say how good things were but I did say I try to make the best of it.   There's two sides of the coin.  It's up to me which side I want to be on. 

"Wait a second. Isn't it you that says cut the tags ? Are you suggesting that a decrease in tags will not increase deer numbers ? Or did you type that wrong ? "

Only if tags/opportunity are cut enough. Have they been? Guess we wont know yet, but up until recently they havent been or the herd wouldve grown. Gonna take more extreme cuts in an extreme unit like 2G than many units would with higher deer densities and or some access issues.

"I don't believe our biologists are morons."

Nor do i. But i believe they are embarked on an agenda that doesnt suit us very well and its mainly based on VALUES and not absolute necessity over much of the state anyway.

HR was supposed to result in increased breeding rates, increased recruitment and a decreased breeding window and none of that happened. HR was also supposed to result in increased regeneration, yet it decreased in 13 of 21 WMU's . Therefore , HR was a miserable failure!!!


I think that's it in a nutshell-----some hunters have quit because of it, some still hunt but complain about it, some have adapted the best they could, and some have private ground to hunt where they haven't been seriously affected by it. The bottom line however is that with the exception of reducing the herd there is very little the PGC said would happen as a result that actually has.

"Looks like its time for wayne to start spouting off. Oh goodie. "

Me spouting off? Not hardly. Just one post made to defend myself and my position. I didnt say anything out of line or anything that shouldnt have been an expected response to your post. Id expect the same from you if you were slighted. Whos the guy that went off on personal attacks against all the complainers here? (which im assuming includes me).

"I am very glad you are more successful than me. Congrats. When's the last time you shot a doe ?"

Here in Pa, Its been awhile. By choice. And the way things are, it will be awhile into the near future at least. I hunt buck only in Pa, and pretty much exclusively archery, no deer rifle hunting at all. Also hunt coyotes, turkey and sometimes fox...groundhog...

"Are you sure it's me that is being ignored ?"

Well lets see... How many "complainers" as you call them have heeded your advice and quit complaining? As for the complainers... Lets see, we've had fee increase prevented.. forced at least SOME changes...and more WILL be on the way if we all stick to our guns & legislators etc. do as well...We caused the audit to take place.... gained support from legislators....even had mention made in the audit of the unending complaints and discontent coming out of Pa hunter ranks.. NONE of those things happen if all is hunky dory appearing and noone says anything. Sorry, dont see your point.

HOWEVER, the number of doe bred in the first cycle versus the second has.  You know the earlier they are bred, the earlier they are born

Let's see if you can provide a link to the data that supports that claim. If the number of doe bred on the first cycle has increased , then there should have been a significant shift in the breeding window and that didn't happen. All the data needed to support or refute your claim is provided in the PGC AWR which are readily available on the PGC website and it is obvious you never read them.

There never was a problem with late breeding or the productivity rate of our does. Alt just made that up to sucker hunters into killing more doe.

ORIGINAL: wayne c

"Looks like its time for wayne to start spouting off. Oh goodie. "

Me spouting off? Not hardly. Just one post made to defend myself and my position. I didnt say anything out of line or anything that shouldnt have been an expected response to your post. Id expect the same from you if you were slighted. Whos the guy that went off on personal attacks against all the complainers here? (which im assuming includes me).

"I am very glad you are more successful than me. Congrats. When's the last time you shot a doe ?"

Here in Pa, Its been awhile. By choice. And the way things are, it will be awhile into the near future at least. I hunt buck only in Pa, and pretty much exclusively archery, no deer rifle hunting at all. Also hunt coyotes, turkey and sometimes fox...groundhog...

"Are you sure it's me that is being ignored ?"

Well lets see... How many "complainers" as you call them have heeded your advice and quit complaining? As for the complainers... Lets see, we've had fee increase prevented.. forced at least SOME changes...and more WILL be on the way if we all stick to our guns & legislators etc. do as well...We caused the audit to take place.... gained support from legislators....even had mention made in the audit of the unending complaints and discontent coming out of Pa hunter ranks.. NONE of those things happen if all is hunky dory appearing and noone says anything. Sorry, dont see your point.

 
Your spouting off is when you start typing real fast and editing your posts a bunch.  It's a hoot to watch !  I did not attack you.  I offered suggestions that you use as saying are attacks.  If your panties get in a bunch over that, that's your issue.   You are not required to read what I write.  There is an ignor feature available.    A few admins around if you want to complain about me "attacking" you. 
 
As I already stated, complainers just complain.  Then they complain again.  I won't change them.  But I enjoy pointing out that they could spend their time addressing the issues they complain about.  I guess I'll have to stop complaining about complaining since I'm hurtin' yer fillings.

Editing posts shows me to be somehow "upset"? Then how do you explain all these posts and about 75% of my posts which also end up edites on other topics? Guess talking general fishing just pizzes me off and sends me into an emotional frenzy similar to your fits when proven wrong over and over again eh? lmao. What a character.

Links showing silver full of ....again.

I have no reason to complain to anyone about your postings. I said my piece, and told you what i think already. As usual trying to turn something into something its not.

ORIGINAL: wayne c

Editing posts shows me to be somehow "upset"? Then how do you explain all these posts and about 75% of my posts which also end up edites on other topics? Guess talking general fishing just pizzes me off and sends me into an emotional frenzy similar to your fits when proven wrong over and over again eh? lmao. What a character.

Links showing silver full of ....again.

I have no reason to complain to anyone about your postings. I said my piece, and told you what i think already. As usual trying to turn something into something its not.

 
I didn't say upset.  I said panties in a bunch.   Your fingees go alot fast than yer brain.   You submit posts then edit them while I'm responding.  Makes it difficult to follow.   Comical but challenging.
 

ORIGINAL: SilverKype

ORIGINAL: deerfly

HOWEVER, the number of doe bred in the first cycle versus the second has.  You know the earlier they are bred, the earlier they are born

Let's see if you can provide a link to the data that supports that claim. If the number of doe bred on the first cycle has increased , then there should have been a significant shift in the breeding window and that didn't happen. All the data needed to support or refute your claim is provided in the PGC AWR which are readily available on the PGC website and it is obvious you never read them.

There never was a problem with late breeding or the productivity rate of our does. Alt just made that up to sucker hunters into killing more doe.

Doe come into heat from the amount of light that enters their eyes, hence mid-November every year.  28 days later, it happens again.   More doe bred in the first cycle, has nothing to do with a breeding window shift.  It remains mid-November.
]

Here is what you said in a previous post.

The breeding mean for our parallel has always been November 15 + or - a few days. So no, the breeding window didn't change.

Once again you contradicted yourself within a few posts. Do you have any idea why the breeding window extends into Feb. and do you know what that indicates?