ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout

As for RSB remark that you quoted...

As you know I have attend many of his SGL tours and listened to his deer presentation following the tour and even had him at our local club to give the same presentation...

I have not heard him make that statement...

Although I do recall him saying to maintain that type ratio more adult does need to be harvested than adult bucks...

but.. IMHO... he is free to say what he feels is true... and we can listen and form our own opinions based on his remarks and others... we nedd to listen to both sides of discussions so we can form our own opinions based on our beliefs not from pressure from others on either side...

But he is not free to misrepresent the data in order to mislead others. The issue of the B/D ratio has been debated on numerous occasions and it has been documented that our B/D ratio has been around 1:2 since the early 80's. It is irresponsible for anyone to post misleading information which only confuses the issue while benefiting no one. Opinions should be based on established facts rather than on the personal opinions of a WCO that obviously doesn't understand the issue.

Also wrong on the number of Fawn does available for breeding...
Ranges from 45% to 6% depending on area of the state...
 

every person who posts on here takes info and adds their own "spin" (as S-10 calls it)

But RSB is not just putting a spin on the data I posted. He is intentionally misrepresenting what the data clearly shows in order to support his contention that there was a problem with the B/D ratio before ARs I , on the other hand, simply took the PGC data and performed simple division to come up with the B/D ratio. Why RSB would go out of his way to question that is beyond me.

No research needed.... I could care less about the books.. all they show me is who likes to brag about the size of their kill.

I was simply making my point that not ever single deer (buck) that could get in the book gets in ...

so that in my opinion it does not show how successful AR has been in Pa...


since I do not want to do the research maybe you can just supply this answer...

What's the average age of the record book bucks ????


Since Pa is still harvesting 80% of all legal bucks each and every year I imagine there is not YET alot of deer reaching 4-5 years old and my guess is that the average age for all the buck in the book is 3-4 years old if not older ....not 1.5s and 2.5s like most of Pa's harvested bucks still are each year...

Bucks do not get their best racks til 4-5 years old, and according to figures I have seen we still do not have that many of that age running around...

keep in mind the #4 archery season buck was just killed LAST YEAR.. since AR .. using a crossbow and he was in the older than 2.5 category..!!!

so maybe we will see more trophy book bucks killed now by a crossbow during the early season or at least the opportunity is there now.. while there is less pressure on those mature bucks than in rifle season..

No research needed.... I could care less about the books.. all they show me is who likes to brag about the size of their kill.

 
Kinda like putting up hero shots with the fish we catch.....  Braggards anyway......

Yes..

we all like to "show-off" our trophies...

but I certainly would not use "trophy pictures" or "record books" to represent the everyday conditions being it hunting or fishing..


I've seen your walleye pics for example and I bet that not everyone catches fish like that, and I bet you do not catch walleyes of that size all the time.....

so I do not see you claiming that is the norm for that body of water...or stating since maybe that lake does not have many record book walleyes in it .. that it is not a good lake to fish...
or the PFBC is ruining fishing there because there are not tons of record book walleye caught there.......

I just don';t agree that record books are a good basis for over-all opinions..

You are probably right if I did not get an antlerless tag or a DAMP this year I would be complaining...


And for what it's worth.. the heart doctor tells me I can eat all the venison I want..

BUT stay away from too much beef ... once or twice a month at best for beef .. no pork... no bacon.. no sausage.. no cheese, et, etc ... it's call a "low cholesterol heart diet"

so those two deer harvested sure help on the meat front...

Do you think your Dad was just unlucky or was he applying to counties that usually sold out ?? Jefferson usually had tags left until the end and out-of-staters could even get them... BTW = I think that is why there are so many camps from Ohio around here ..

"scouting for does".... interesting I have on countless times read "find the does and the bucks will follow".... so I find the does but the bucks (legal ones) just don't appear during that average 4 hour hunt.... and after harvesting my two deer my excitement about harvesting another deer is not that great...

as for putting off shooting the first adult doe .. I tried that theory back when I did alot of archery hunting... pass on the small bucks and wait for the bigger ones.. that cost me many years of no buck harvests in archery season.. so I dropped that idea and now take the first legal ADULT deer I have a tag for...





"fillinmg tags" = I have licenses for 4 deer... I know I could get three antlerless then concentrated on a fourth deer (a buck) but we only need two deer for food.. so I will not fill a tag just to fill it.... and if this year a legal buck shows up I'll take him and a doe for my 2 deer...

I read on message boards all the time about guys hunting and hunting and seeing only a couple deer for the season period.. at least I get to see deer even if they are antlerless and small bucks at my spots

And I'll bet a youngster would be just as excited about seeing antlerless deer even if he did not see a legal buck, and come to think of it, they can shoot the "scrubs".. you just have to find the deer.. If I had a youth to take hunting he or she could have possibly harvested a couple of those 9 bucks since 2002 that I have seen... and probably be happy as hell...

ORIGINAL: deerfly

n the statewide data you just presented, people have to understand that the first thing you have to do is totally remove those male fawns from that breeding season’s equation since male fawns are not breeding mature their first fall. When you calculate the adult buck to adult doe (absolutely breeding mature deer) you end up with a breeding adult buck/adult doe ratio of 1 : 7.44. That really was a horrible ratio in view of the fact that it has recently been revealed that most adult bucks only manage to bred 1-3 does per year even where the deer are confined to small areas and the adult buck/doe ratio is less than 1 : 2.

You are absolutely flat out wrong since the data I posted represented the over wintering population estimate after hunting season. Therefore,all of the fawns in that population would be adult deer by the next breeding season,so the adult breeding B/D ratio was better than 1:2.3 as I stated. The fact that you want to include the fawns in the adult breeding B/D ratio indicates that you either don't understand the meaning of the term or that you are intentionally trying to mislead others that there was a problem with the B/D ratio before ARs were implemented.

 
You are correct that I was wrong. I didn’t read the entire Wallingford comment that represented the data as being post season. I read the first sentence where it said pre-season and used that to calculate. That was my mistake, but that still doesn’t negate the fact that it still leaves a shortage of breeding mature bucks to accomplish the breeding during the correct time period the following year.
 
You also want to remove those juvenile does from the breeding equation but that is not the way nature does it because nature doesn’t discount them since the bucks spend time tracking and breeding them as they come into estrus. Many of them are also cycling at the same time and adult does are and we were ending up with adult does not getting bred because of not having enough bucks to cover both the adult and juvenile does cycling in some areas.
 
It certainly is true that the buck/doe is self-correcting to about a 1:2 ratio as long as you have good fawn recruitment each year. But, it is also well documented that many areas don’t have good fawn recruitment many years, especially the years following hard winters and the area of the state with poor habitat. The wildlife survey teams in Elk County documented preseason adult buck/adult doe ratios that ranged between 1:3.34 and 1:4.67 during the years between 1997 and 2003, the first year following antler restrictions and the added bucks from the previous year. Since antler restrictions they have documented the adult buck/adult doe ratio between 1:2.58 and 1:3.08. I suspect there were and still are similar to Elk County buck/doe ratios across much of the northern tier.
 
Nor am I convinced that even a 1:2 buck ratio should be considered as good enough or even suitable. Nature produces fawns at a nearly one to one sex ratio, slightly slanted higher toward the males. Natural mortality, without the influence of hunting, also removes deer at about a one to one sex ratio slightly higher toward male mortality. Therefore, nature seems to intend for the sex ratio to be about one to one for both adult and juvenile deer in a naturally balanced deer herd. Though most people, including Biologists, have very likely been mistaken when they promoted a 1:2 buck/doe ratio as being suitable in the past. As more and more evidence is coming in from DNA results it is becoming more evident that most bucks only bred about one doe per year even where the buck/doe ratio and age structures are well balanced.
 
I seriously doubt that trying to intentionally maintain a deer population that is out of balance with what nature intended would prove to be what is best for the future of the deer or the deer hunter once all of the real facts about deer management were realized.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: S-10

RSB-- I think your explanation of the deer hunting on the ANF is a bit misleading also. According to the KQDC studies done on both the ANF and private areas surrounding the ANF there were 24 DPSM on the ANF in 2002. I would consider that good hunting. The same study shows 8 dpsm in 2008 as a result of doe hunting. I would consider that poor hunting. While I would agree that the lack of timbering had a negative impact on deer numbers it wasn't nearly as significant as the impact of the PGC's actions on the doe population.

 
First of all the KQDC is but a very, very small area of the ANF. Second since it has been managed totally different than the rest of the ANF there is no valid nor logical comparison to what is occurring on the rest of the ANF.
 
The KQDC has always been its own DMAP unit aside from the ANF. The KQDC is the only part of the ANF that has been under DMAP for the past several years so it would only be logical that the area would have fewer over winter deer.
 
But, the fact of the matter is that even with the higher deer harvest per square mile on the KQDC the fall pre-season deer populations there don’t seem to be any lower than they are in other parts of the ANF where there have been both fewer hunters and deer harvest the past several years. That is because most areas of the ANF don’t have more deer because the habitat simply can’t support more deer.
 
The habitat in some areas of the ANF is starting to show some signs of improvement and deer numbers are starting to increase right along with the habitat though. That increase in deer is only a positive though if hunters harvest enough of the deer to keep them from damaging the improved habitat to the point it can’t continue to support those slightly higher deer densities.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn   

ORIGINAL: S-10

If you want to pick and choose, only 2 of the top 10 non tpyical archery bucks have been killed since AR. Not every single deer has EVER been entered but the book represents a good cross section of the trophy bucks and as Carl Roe stated the buck harvest is what determines the status of the herd. There are good bucks being entered every year and good bucks have been entered every year since they started keeping records. Some years more than others. No doubt the crossgun will account for some record bucks. One can only hope the put them in the rifle catagory where they belong. Actually you should see many archery bucks showing up as, especially with the reduced deer herd archery is your best chance to harvest any legal buck.I see Ohio's archers and crossgunners now account for 35% of the total kill.

 
Since the subject of record book bucks has come up I will share some information provided to me by an individual you put all of the gun harvest record book bucks and their antler measurement into an excel spread sheet by year. From that he was able to determine the number of bucks for each yearly time period and also their average antler measurements.
 
I found it pretty interesting.
 
Time period……………….# of entries………………Average antler measurement
Prior to 1910………………..5……………………………….153.975
1911-1920………………….10………………………………152.663
1921-1930………………….82………………………………151.295
1931-1940…………………118……………………………...151.585
1941-1950…………………213……………………………...154.007
1951-1960…………………151……………………………...150.398
1961-1970…………………177……………………………...148.598
1971-1980…………………121……………………………...149.230
1981-1990…………………239……………………………...149.900
1991-2000…………………228………………………………151.558
2001-2007………………….97……………………………….153.554
 
By year since 2001
 
Time period……………….# of entries………………Average antler measurement
2001………………………….8……………………………..160.047
2002…………………………16…………………………….153.711
2003…………………………13…………………………….151.019
2004…………………………11…………………………….160.682
2005…………………………11…………………………….148.977
2006…………………………27…………………………….152.782
2007…………………………11…………………………….150.943
 
It must also be recognized that it generally takes about five to ten years to get the majority of the record book bucks into be measured so it is pretty safe to say there will continue to be entries made for bucks shot in the past several years for several more years.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn  

"as for putting off shooting the first adult doe .. I tried that theory back when I did alot of archery hunting... pass on the small bucks and wait for the bigger ones.. that cost me many years of no buck harvests in archery season.. so I dropped that idea and now take the first legal ADULT deer I have a tag for..."
 
And that is how AR/HR was designed to work hand in hand.  When a hunter would not find a legal buck to shoot, they would take the first legal deer thay could, which would be a doe.  AR was the means to the HR ends.

Danes,
 
Having been through 6, count them, 6, company mergers/sales, rest assured that those in the top 2 to 4 layers of a bureaucratic organization NEVER get hurt when it happens.  Having been in on the planning and implementation of two of them, I have first hand knowledge of the procedures, strategies, and dealsthat get it done.
 
Some change jobs, but do not lose salary.  Some get bought out to leave.  Some get to hang onto their job until they find something of equal or greater value (does Doug Austin of the PFBC ring a bell).  Some retire (does Alt come to mind) because they have the time in.  Some get a deal to retire, like when your school district give 5 years of service credit for every 4 served.  How many years does Roe have in?  How many years does Rosenberry have in?  How many years do any of the top 2 to 4 layers have in?  How many more do they need to reach 20, 25, 30, or the max retirement cap, whatever that might be?
 
Attrition through retirement, voluntary, enhanced service years, or forced (with enough years) would easily handle this merger duplication of personnel issue in the upper reaches of the organization.  It doesn't even need to be solely on the PGC side either.  Those that can go early into retirement from the other side of the coin, DCNR, more than likely would volunteer -- especially if they were able to cut a deal on extra credit for years served.
 
As for the soldiers in the rank and file, no one cares about them.  Hence the reason Doc is being told no one wants the merger.  This is who he communicates with.  They are the ones that may, and that is a very big little word, may be affected.  Again, after attrition through retirement, it will mean a minimal number of people that will need to be dealt with.  The biologists have no worries, plants and and animals are different enough to need both.  Enforcement officers might be on the block to some degree.  It is namely the support staff, like Press Secretary, and administrative assistants that will get the axe.  They always to do, in any merger.  But, except for those that actually get cut, their being collateral damage is of little or no consequence to those making the decisions.

This is who he communicates with.

====NOT FAIR =====

When I post an E-mail reply to a question I rarely give-out who tells me what at the PGC..
so you have no way of knowing who I communicate with...

If you ever see Carl Roe for example.. ask if he knows "Dr. Trout"...


my address book has MANY contacts in Harrisburg or others in the PGC

not meant to be self-promoting.. just that I use many contacts and NONE want a merger, nor do the senators or representatives of the committee ... or my local two... politicians have a lot to lose if they make the wrong decision... or back the wrong plan...

Off to work for me !!

Dar, Doesn't it amaze you that aftr 3 decades of highly publicized buyouts, mergers, hostile takeovers and bankrupucys there are still people who don't believe they can happen or that everyone gets a say in what happens.
It stands to reason that no one was going to admit to being in favor of the PGC DCNR merger for fear of their job if it didn't happen as well as to enable them to test the feelings of others.Many folks had to be in favor of it or it wouldn't have gotten as far as it did. Some folks must have lived in a cave the last 30 years as there have been literly hundreds of them including many dozens in Pennsylvania alone. The first thing you learn in management is if you want to keep your job you you don't bad mouth your superiors and you keep your mouth shut about certain aspects of company business. Doc, you can count on your contacts telling you exactly what they want you to know and pass on and nothing more. It's just the nature of the beast. They didn't get where they are by being blabbermouths.

ORIGINAL: S-10

Dar, Doesn't it amaze you that aftr 3 decades of highly publicized buyouts, mergers, hostile takeovers and bankrupucys there are still people who don't believe they can happen or that everyone gets a say in what happens.
It stands to reason that no one was going to admit to being in favor of the PGC DCNR merger for fear of their job if it didn't happen as well as to enable them to test the feelings of others.Many folks had to be in favor of it or it wouldn't have gotten as far as it did. Some folks must have lived in a cave the last 30 years as there have been literly hundreds of them including many dozens in Pennsylvania alone. The first thing you learn in management is if you want to keep your job you you don't bad mouth your superiors and you keep your mouth shut about certain aspects of company business. Doc, you can count on your contacts telling you exactly what they want you to know and pass on and nothing more. It's just the nature of the beast. They didn't get where they are by being blabbermouths.

 
Yes, it amazes me.
 
It got the point that my reports would start to ask me about a rumor and would answer themselves with -- "If you could tell me you would.  If you can't you won't.  So why am I bothering to ask?"