LockedAR/HR Poll...

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 3 of 12
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 11:59:32 (permalink)
I think it was the old PRO PGC DOC TROUT that started the downfall of this one.
#61
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 12:05:01 (permalink)
Eyes, that PGC claim is another example of their misleading us. We are losing hunters at about the same rate as other states but are losing DEER HUNTERS at 2-1/2 times the rate of hunters in general since 2001 as shown in the deer audit and we are the only state that is doing that. In fact we are the only state that is losing more deer hunters than regular hunters since 2001.
post edited by S-10 - 2010/12/07 12:06:35
#62
Ironhed
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1892
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/11/07 19:10:08
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 12:09:59 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

I think it was the old PRO PGC DOC TROUT that started the downfall of this one.


Since today should be coined as "Finger-Pointing Tuesday", I'd like to point out that is was you who was the first to not follow directions, not Doc.  It has since been edited.  Thanks btw.

Ironhed

Blacktop Charters
#63
bulldog1
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5203
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2008/06/05 12:23:00
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 12:10:29 (permalink)
I'm not anti PGC at all, just don't agree with those two policies. Frankly, I think people seeing less deer is more closely related to fewer hunters and more posted ground, less deer moving. Perhaps I should have said that the programs are adding to the reduced hunter population, didn't mean to blame them entirely. The property I grew up hunting with the family is 1,000 contiguous acres of timber land and there used to be a large group that hunted the area every year. Guessing 40+ people in the section that we used to hunt. The property was leased and is now hunted by 6 people (on all 1,000 acres), all sitting in stands and nobody walking around. Better or worse? Definately different. People are generally lazier these days as well, when ATVs came out the walkers decreased dramatically too and had a similar effect of seeing less deer. I was always a guy that would sit from dark till dark and count on others being less patient or getting cold to move the deer.

Personally I haven't had any touble filling tags, but also see way less deer (I blame the above reasons more than AR/HR)
#64
wayne c
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3473
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 17:34:27 (permalink)
"Can't get a link to post directly but, there is an article by Chris Rosenberry on the PGC site titled "Fewer Deer and Fewer Hunters: Are they Related?"."

Rosenberry is one of the problems that ail us and hunting in Pa. And you can take that to the bank. His attempts to decieve, do damage control and "fool" the masses is a never ending effort, and is one of the reason why he will never be embraced and trusted as others like Tonkovich has been in his state. Rosenberry succeeded Alt for a reason, and it wasnt because he was the most incredibly intellectual deer manager in the nation. lol. Its because he couldnt care less about the effects to hunters of this state, is environmentally extreme minded, and will do what is necessary to see the plan through. Interestingly he is another of the characters spoken of by Eveland.

"Graphs and charts mapping the decline in license sales from 1982 to present (at least 2008) shows pretty clearly that the AR/HR program has had no net effect on the historic loss of hunters in this state."

Data taken at face value with no logic or common sense applied at all is utter useless. They dont do it with any other form of data, including the herd health measures and regen. data, so why on earth would they start now with this? There is no reason in the world to believe that our hunter numbers couldnt or wouldnt be higher if hunter satisfaction were higher. Thats common sense 101. Apparently Rosenberry missed that class.

He also conveniently left out the fact that from 2001 to 2006 our license sales decline was OVER DOUBLE the national average. The national average was about 4% in that time frame according to usfw. Ours was TEN percent according to pgcs license sales figures.

Pgc employees going so far out of their way to do damage control and making asnine statements on a regular basis that are clearly decietful and insulting to the intelligence of those of us who are intelligent enough to realize it, doesnt go very far towards garnering trust. They'd be wise to just keep their mouths shut if something doesnt support them, instead of drawing even more attention to it by so obviously and blatantly lying through their teeth. I dont believe Rosenberry has his head so far up his own... that he thinks the deer situation which has has so many other maleffects like pgc being sued, Alt walked around with bodyguards & a kevlar vest, legislators taking action by preventing fee increase, audits, all time high level of dissent etc.... But it had ZERO effect on hunting numbers?... Perhaps some high school drop out that had one too many hits of acid back in the 60's might believe such hogwash. No way does an "educated man" such as rosenberry believe that. But for some inexplicable reason, he seems to think we are dumb enough to believe that. lmao. And thats VERY insulting to the hunters of this state.
post edited by wayne c - 2010/12/07 17:45:08
#65
CRANKMASTER
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 256
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2008/08/06 15:28:00
  • Location: Mercer,Pa
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 18:12:18 (permalink)
Remember when we were only permitted to harvest one deer a year? Then in 1988 they began the bonus license program. WOW! how cool is it to be able to harvest two deer! Then any unsold licsense became available and next thing you know some people get five tags to fill. We were all so excited at the time and because our love of the sport, we filled as many tags as we had. Were we all too blind to see what was happening? We have crescendoed to the climax of decimating the deer herds. AR has helped with the over harvesting of doe, aint no doubt about it. People are now posting their property at a very high rate. They are trying to protect their resources so they have something to hunt, can you blame them? Some area's I know that are still open to hunting have signs posted as NO DOE HUNTING! So HR is definately out of the question. As far as AR? Hey if you want to be a bone collector go ahead. You apparently have alot more free time on your hands. For the people who have very few days to enjoy the opportunity to hunt, AR is forcing them to ultimately give up a passion they once enjoyed. They just dont have the time afforded to them to be out everyday and wait for a buck with X number of points on one side! That is totally unfair! Once they lose it, it only trickles down to not getting their children involved and there you have the decrescendo effect resulting in the decline of hunters and licsense sales.
post edited by CRANKMASTER - 2010/12/08 04:12:10
#66
deerfly
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1271
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 18:39:50 (permalink)
Here is a link to the article.

http://www.dogpile.com/dogpile_other/ws/results/Web/Fewer%20Deer%20and%20Fewer%20Hunters!3A/2/0/0/Relevance/zoom=off/qi=21/qk=20/bepersistence=true/_iceUrlFlag=7?_IceUrl=true

As S10 and Wayne pointed out, Dr. R's analysis was totally bogus.. Herd reduction in the NC counties actually began in the late 70's when the herd was reduced from 40 DPSM to around 20 DPSM. At the same time small game hunting declined dramatically with the loss of naturally reproducing pheasants. HR was implemented statewide with the introduction of bonus tags in 1988 or 1989 and by 1998 the PGC was issuing 890K doe tags in order to reduce the herd statewide. But Dr. R chose to ignore the effects of previous HR efforts inorder to promote his agenda.
#67
Dr. Trout
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4417
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2002/03/03 03:12:33
  • Location: Jefferson County (2F)
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 19:09:05 (permalink)
I can't belive someone is trying to blame me for the down-fall of this thread..

all I did was post the results as of that day and time.. No discussion and no comments... just the percentages...


some of you must spend all day waiting for me to post so you can bash away ....

DR. TROUT'S OUTDOORWORLD MESSAGE BOARD


#68
deerfly
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1271
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 19:13:33 (permalink)
Ironhead specifically stated he didn't want any comments but you couldn't follow those simple instructions and maybe that explains why you support the PGC's DMP.
#69
spoonchucker
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 8561
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 19:52:57 (permalink)
Wayne,

Do you believe Iowa has a sound DMP?

Get Informed, Get Involved, And Make A Difference.

Step Up, or Step Aside


The next time you say "Somebody should do something", remember that YOU are somebody.

GL
#70
eyesandgillz
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4052
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2003/06/18 11:30:03
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 20:32:28 (permalink)
Yes, what are the "haters" plan for the perfect deer management plan? 
#71
deerfly
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1271
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 21:16:02 (permalink)
The DMP that provided a total buck harvest of 165K buck and 52,900 2.5+ buck in 2002 seems to be a better plan than the one that produced a total harvest of 108K buck and a 2.5+ buck harvest of 55,200.
#72
egg_drifter
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 102
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/15 16:24:23
  • Location: SWPA
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/07 23:25:00 (permalink)
1 YES
2. NO
#73
DarDys
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4961
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
  • Location: Duncansville, PA
  • Status: online
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 08:08:58 (permalink)
"I can't belive someone is trying to blame me for the down-fall of this thread."
 
Doc,
 
You weren't the down fall of this thread, you just did the math for everyone.  I don't think there was a down fall of the thread -- it would have been about like sitting in the woods seeing no deer to just read no, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, no........  Some folks like Chinese water tourture, others need a little something more to keep them interested.
 
If there was any down fall to the thread it was the expectation that there would be data collection in the form of a survey and no one would want to discuss the meaning or implication of that data.  What good is data if nothing is done with it?
 
By the way, is Susie Bell in the freezer yet?

The poster formally known as Duncsdad

Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
#74
BIGSLICK
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1867
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2008/05/15 10:03:58
  • Location: Girard
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 09:45:51 (permalink)
1. No, If you want to hunt monster bucks, then do so at your own discretion or move to Kansas or Illinois..This is PA, we don't have optimal habitat for creating Monster bucks all over the place.

2. No, It's pretty bad when you continue to walk blocks of 50 or so acres of public property and cut 2 sets of tracks...I have no problem thinning the heard, and getting a better BD Ration, but destroying it is unacceptable...



#75
Panfisher
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 833
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/12/06 16:23:54
  • Location: Central City
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 12:20:17 (permalink)
1.  Yes
 
2.  No

The only thing better than 1 day of fishing is 2 days of fishing.
#76
DanesDad
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3087
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/03/21 15:35:43
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 13:19:18 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: DarDys

"I can't belive someone is trying to blame me for the down-fall of this thread."

Doc,

You weren't the down fall of this thread, you just did the math for everyone.  I don't think there was a down fall of the thread -- it would have been about like sitting in the woods seeing no deer to just read no, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, no........  Some folks like Chinese water tourture, others need a little something more to keep them interested.

If there was any down fall to the thread it was the expectation that there would be data collection in the form of a survey and no one would want to discuss the meaning or implication of that data.  What good is data if nothing is done with it?

By the way, is Susie Bell in the freezer yet?


I dont agree. I think Ironhed WAS colecting data and, after he heard from as many people as he thought he would, he would than have gone on and made his point in another thread based on the data collected. But WE (and I'm not singling anyone out) were unable to follow directions. So, the thread went into thew toilet as far as it's original intent.

Unless the original intent was to prove that we couldn't follow directions.
#77
bulldog1
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5203
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2008/06/05 12:23:00
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 14:25:49 (permalink)
"Unless the original intent was to prove that we couldn't follow directions."

Dang, he got us again... we are a predictable bunch....
#78
wayne c
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3473
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 14:39:56 (permalink)
"Yes, what are the "haters" plan for the perfect deer management plan? "

Monitor the habitat, but get rid of the absolutely ridiculous-- poke and hope as you try and account for all variables, wide open to interpretation, learn as they go for decades,-- "habitat based managment" fraud that basically gives the enviromentalists a blank check to cash on our deer herd. Go to scientifically sound deer density goals within wmus...smaller wmus. Densities that are and have been proven to be sound per habitat type here and/or elsewhere. Be open and honest with the hunters of the state, and get rid of vague goals very extreme unofficial agendas and unholy alliances, threats of contraception usage and other b.s., Better PR.

There you have it. Not perfect, but at least some semblance of normal... Like many other states.
post edited by wayne c - 2010/12/08 14:40:46
#79
wayne c
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3473
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 14:42:17 (permalink)
I think Ironhed WAS colecting data


He still can. Votes are still coming in.
#80
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 15:19:22 (permalink)
By the way, is Susie Bell in the freezer yet?


Him being the expert hunter and all who guides others to deer in the area and with the magic crossgun and extra season to hunt he probably has Susie Bell and all her relation in the freezer by now. Remember Doc, just one per tag.

Since I'am almost too old to worry about loss of antler mass as a result, put me down for a YES on AR
#81
deerfly
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1271
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 16:06:56 (permalink)
Since I'am almost too old to worry about loss of antler mass as a result, put me down for a YES on AR


Do you feel the same way about the loss of around 200K deer hunters?
#82
Ironhed
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1892
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/11/07 19:10:08
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 16:09:21 (permalink)
I dont agree. I think Ironhed WAS colecting data and, after he heard from as many people as he thought he would, he would than have gone on and made his point in another thread based on the data collected. But WE (and I'm not singling anyone out) were unable to follow directions. So, the thread went into thew toilet as far as it's original intent.


Thanks DD.
Like Wayne said, it is still going. 
Following directions is very difficult for some.

Carry on guys.

Ironhed

Blacktop Charters
#83
benthook62
Novice Angler
  • Total Posts : 83
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/06/30 21:38:25
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 16:13:50 (permalink)
yes
no
#84
pudders72
New Angler
  • Total Posts : 12
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2002/10/06 12:42:06
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 19:31:50 (permalink)
YES!
YES!


Did I mention YES.
#85
tull66
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1049
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/07/15 07:43:43
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/08 19:34:01 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: wayne c

"Yes, what are the "haters" plan for the perfect deer management plan? "

Monitor the habitat, but get rid of the absolutely ridiculous-- poke and hope as you try and account for all variables, wide open to interpretation, learn as they go for decades,-- "habitat based managment" fraud that basically gives the enviromentalists a blank check to cash on our deer herd. Go to scientifically sound deer density goals within wmus...smaller wmus. Densities that are and have been proven to be sound per habitat type here and/or elsewhere. Be open and honest with the hunters of the state, and get rid of vague goals very extreme unofficial agendas and unholy alliances, threats of contraception usage and other b.s., Better PR.

There you have it. Not perfect, but at least some semblance of normal... Like many other states.

 
Some things bear/need repeated.  Well said Wayne.
#86
DarDys
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4961
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
  • Location: Duncansville, PA
  • Status: online
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/09 08:16:05 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Ironhed

I dont agree. I think Ironhed WAS colecting data and, after he heard from as many people as he thought he would, he would than have gone on and made his point in another thread based on the data collected. But WE (and I'm not singling anyone out) were unable to follow directions. So, the thread went into thew toilet as far as it's original intent.


Thanks DD.
Like Wayne said, it is still going. 
Following directions is very difficult for some.

Carry on guys.

Ironhed


 
Well, then, when collecting data, one should have a beginning and end point and state so in the instructions.  since there was no end point mentioned, Doc made one after responses semmed to tail off.

The poster formally known as Duncsdad

Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
#87
Twowithone
New Angler
  • Total Posts : 16
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/12/09 08:53:26
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/09 08:57:51 (permalink)
1.No
 
2.No
#88
SilverKype
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3842
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/24 11:58:02
  • Location: State
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/09 09:21:08 (permalink)
Yes

Yes

Since directions have been breached I will too. :)

What hasn't been mentioned here or else I missed it is that the majority of the state is no longer in reduction. The tag allocations are the same or less than previous years.. that is not HR. I do not support more HR where I hunt.. I am glad to see a reduction of tags in my area for this year.


My reports and advice are for everyone to enjoy, not just the paying customers.
#89
dpms
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3561
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
  • Status: offline
RE: AR/HR Poll... 2010/12/09 09:47:44 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: SilverKype

What hasn't been mentioned here or else I missed it is that the majority of the state is no longer in reduction. The tag allocations are the same or less than previous years.. that is not HR.


 
A good point.  Though I did support HR when it was implemented, I would not support further herd reduction except in the SRA. 

My rifle is a black rifle
#90
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 3 of 12
Jump to: