ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout





OKAY I WILL ====



Just why did he pick those three year combos... to prove his opinion that's all.... then he turns and in an attempt to "save face" he lumps the 2000s in with the 1990s... REALLY ?????

1999-2000-2001 avg success rate = 22.5%
2007-2008-2009 avg success rate = 12.2

how about these three year periods EXACTLY a decade apart figures...


1990, 1991, 1902 compared to 2000,2001,2002... that's the same first three years of a new decade in deer hunting in PA....

bet he will not show those succes ratios.. because they would DIS-PROVE his opinion...

people can work figures to prove whatever they wish if they work at it

1990-17% 2000-22%
1991-15% 2001-24%
1992-16% 2002- 21%-- the first year of ARs.

You are more than welcomed. I am always willing to help out a fellow hunter who bases his position on the facts, rather than on personal opinions and observations like DT and RSB. Virtually all of the facts show the current DMP has failed to produce the predicted results and nothing the PGC can do to change those facts.

The PGC implemented estimated deer harvests in 1986 and the buck harvest success rate was 15% The success rate in 2009 would depend on the number of deer hunters in 2009 and the PGC hasn't released that data.

Pretty clear, that to present the data as he did was nothing but damage control & intent to deceive on Rosenberrys part.

As is always the case these days.

One problem I have with what they are doing is since 2001 they have chased approx 200,000 deer hunters out of the sport in addition to the regular hunters we have lost like every other state.We are the only state where that is happening. Now they calculate their percentage without them to try to boost the % success. If they chase away all but 10,000 hard core hunters and 20% of them are successful with a statewide kill of 2,000 bucks has the PGC done their job. That's what they are trying to claim now. On a side note, when they originally came out with their chart they used 1985-86-87 1995-96-97 2005-06-07. Besides the fact they bypassed the four years prior to AR/HR, in 1985 we were still going by actual report cards.

ORIGINAL: S-10

 Now they calculate their percentage without them to try to boost the % success. .

 
Why would they include hunters that are not hunting deer to determine success rates?  That result would not be a success rate then?

ORIGINAL: deerfly
Therefore, the only reason the buck harvest success rate was the same in 1986 as in 2009 is because we lost over 200K deer hunters from 2000 to 2009.

 
Correct.  15 out of every 100 buck hunters is successful.  Same now as in 1986.  If the hunting was this bad in 1986 I wonder why the 200,000 didn't leave then?

ORIGINAL: S-10


You and your three childern deer hunted together and each year two of you were successful. Then the PGC reduced the herd and 2 of your children quit hunting because they got tired of seeing nothing. You and the last child hunted harder and one of you managed to kill a deer each year. Would you as a father be happy. Your success rate is the same.

 
The fact remains that the success rate has not changed. 50% is pretty darn good.   If my children were becoming discouraged because of a lack of deer sightings I would try to improve the situation and look for other options. 
 
It has taken me a long time to find the areas that I currently hunt.  That changes all the time, BTW.  Lost access last year to a prime piece and one of my favorite farms is getting much more pressure than previous.  March will be spent looking for other areas.

If my children were becoming discouraged because of a lack of deer sightings I would try to improve the situation and look for other options.

Your avoiding the question---Moving isn't an option for most as there is only a limited number of deer and your increased kill is someone elses decreased kill. Carry it one step further. You have lost the companionship of two of your children and as it got harder and harder the third child gave it up but you continued to hunt hard and still managed to kill a buck every other year. How do you feel now, you have lost your kids to hunt with, you are hunting harder than ever, and you still only manage a buck every other year. Your % success is still the same at the cost of losing 3 family members from the sport.

ORIGINAL: S-10

Your avoiding the question---

I answered your question directly.  For those that were still hunting the success rate is 50% for your hypothetical.  The same as it was before. 

If they were losing interest because deer sightings were fewer, I would try to change that.  If moving was not a option I would make the most of it I guess and enjoy their company during the holidays. 

No, I didn't miss the context of your post. the same principle applies to S-10s example as to the statewide harvests.

Till tomorrow fellas.  Didn't sleep well last night and a bit under the weather.  Gotta get some rest so I am ready to flintlock on Friday and Saturday.  Gonna try to find one of those elusive deer. 

looks like desperation is setting in....

Let's not play silly word games and just accept the fact that the only reason the buck harvest success rate was 16 % in 2009 is because the number of deer hunters decreased from 923,732 in 2000 to 720,059 in 2008.. If we had the same number of deer hunters in 2009 as in 2000 the 2009 buck harvest rate would have been 11.7, instead of 16%.

If 923,732 had a success rate of 22% what makes you so sure the 2009 harvest would not have increased with another 200,000+ guys chasing deer around in the woods ??????


If we had the same number in 2009 as 2000 maybe the success rate would have climbed to 24%....

he wants to add another 200,000 hunters but does not want to give any of them credit for harvesting a deer...

If we had 923,732 deer hunters in 2009 you think the harvest would have stayed the same as it was with less hunters ?????

IF is a wonderful word.... works both ways...

How's this for success percentage on bucks:

Before AR/HR -- 28 of 28
After AR/HR -- 1 of 10

That's my personal rate.

That's pretty **** good if you ask me although lately it seems that your "bus stop" has turned into a "back stop".
Time to relocate.

Ironhed

ORIGINAL: Ironhed

How's this for success percentage on bucks:

Before AR/HR -- 28 of 28
After AR/HR -- 1 of 10

That's my personal rate.

That's pretty **** good if you ask me although lately it seems that your "bus stop" has turned into a "back stop".
Time to relocate.

Ironhed

Nice try.  I expected no less.

As Paul Harvey said, "And now, the rest of the story..."

Because of the lack of success at my primary (not only hunting location), I have scouted out and secured three other hunting areas -- all extremely private, all with good to great deer populations -- that are within a reasonable commuting distance -- 1.5 hours -- sorry to me deeer hunting is a sport to be enjoyed along with other sports -- not a second job.

Guess what -- the story remains the same -- zippo on the legal bucks.  I hunted three different locations in 2007 (three days in one, one day each in the other two) , two different locations in 2008 (three days in one, and two in the other) , and again three different locations in 2009 (two days in each).

In fact, one of the locations is a pheasant preserve, surrounded by other posted and private farms, each 300 to 600 acres with little woodlots, food plots, etc. and the owner of the property told me that he hadn't seen an antlered deer, let alone a legal antlered deer during the day light, except during the rut (which as a gun hunter I am excluded from hunting) since September.  And he is out and about on the property every day, at most times of the day (he lives at one end of 400 acres and his brother, who also has not seen a legal buck during the daylight since early fall, lives at the other end).  Since I was primarily there to kill a doe (it is earn a buck there -- 2 to one, unless the buck is ungodly large, then all bets are off) because he wants to reduce the population, I didn't really care.  But one would think that there would have been enough bucks in the local populatin that some one would see one in nearly three months, even if it weren't legal.

Another is a private truck farmer farm which he is also on every day, at all times of the day and he has seen two bucks since the harvest -- one not legal, the other a 4 point half rack which he shot because it eats justs as many crops as the others -- although he prefers to kill does because it reduces the population by a factor greater than one.

Try to understand this, while deer hunting may be great for you, in your location, under your schedule, for the VAST MAJORITY of PA deer hunters, it sucks.

Picture Bill Gates or Warren Buffet during a recession (that would be you) and the guy that just got laid off (that would be the average PA deer hunter) -- both are affected negatively, but not equally.  Under your thought process, the laid off guy can do something as simple as relocate and, walla, they become Bill or Warren.  Not so in economics (or we wouldn't have almost 10% unemployment) and not so in deer hunting.