You did not say anything about buck hunting you wanted to know why sales of licenses has fallen and I answered that == you as usual just don't like the facts or especially my answers !!!!

Folks NEVER bought Pa license to come here to harvest trophy bucks .. YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING....
they came here to kill deer... any deer

and non-resident antlerless sales back they up... plus remember non-residents have always got what's left after Pa hunters got theirs.. .. never first round -- or the numbers may have even been higher in the past.. at least for around here....being 2 hours away..


most came here because we had more deer than they did.. and it was close... now these other states have better deer hunting and so the need to travel here is not as great... plus tags are limited or non-available to them...

But,due to HR the PGC only issued 15,210 tags in 2010

BT.. get real... was NOT HR.... the allocations were reducesd to satisfy all the whiners in 2G....
had nothing to do with the deer population or the DMP.... in fact PGC staff opposed the reduced allocation but the BOC wanted to make a few folks happy that were complaining and passes it themselves..

How about WV, you going to answer that while we are comparing neighbors.

Having a hard time getting accurate numbers for both WV and NW for the identical time frames. have to be careful as states have different ways to calculate different licenses.

The camps were there and the non-resident hunters were there BEFORE all the tags in 2001-02-03. They were there BEFORE they even had a chance to shoot a second deer so the situation is no different now than it was when the camps were full of non-resident hunters EXCEPT there are half the bucks and does that there used to be and the bucks are not big enough to excite them. The non-residents are telling us what they think of our deer hunting and we are spinning excuses.I'am done, keep spinning if you want

ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout

But,due to HR the PGC only issued 15,210 tags in 2010

BT.. get real... was NOT HR.... the allocations were reducesd to satisfy all the whiners in 2G....
had nothing to do with the deer population or the DMP.... in fact PGC staff opposed the reduced allocation but the BOC wanted to make a few folks happy that were complaining and passes it themselves..

If that were true then the PGC would have said that the reduced allocations would allow the her do increase. Instead the PGC claimed the reduced allocations would keep the herd stable. Therefore, the PGC is saying you don't have a clue about how our herd is being managed.

Once again you demonstrate that you do understand the simple math involved in these issues. Increasing the buck harvest by 12% and decreasing the antlerless harvest by 15-20% is not a wash when you consider the B/D ratio is around 1:2. In 2009 the buck harvest exceeded the antlerless harvest in 2G ,which means the herd is increasing ,yet the PGC claimed it was stable. The PGC simply has a real hard time dealing with the truth.

ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout

I'm spinning.. how silly is that...
tags to non-residents went up after the one and done...
it ain't all about deer numbers..
here's some facts - first hand..

3 Ohio camps here... the common thread is that NONE of them has added any hunters since 1987... no kids interested .. they are not interested and do not even hunt in Ohio... Grand dads -- (nope - not even their sons took up hunting)just sad as can be but could do nothing to change their opinions on hunting. they do not even come in the summer... nor do any of the wives ????


#1 camp = used to have two guys every year... now NONE = one died the other only comes in the summer a couple times because of a heart condition and the "little lady" will not allow him to come by himself and she doesn't really like camping....


Camp #2-- used to have 5 guys... now three ==one died 9 years ago and one also has health problems and no longer hunts anywhere... one guy hunts about 100 yards from his camp because of bad legs and does not move from there..

Camp #3... use to have 8 guys..now 3 =(2 hunters) = three now stay at a camp closer to Ohio... 2 bought there own camp north of here and one is ill for the past 3 years and gave up hunting but still comes to "deer camp"..

so what was once 15 guys from Ohio hunting here now is "6 die hard hunters" all over 50 ....... over a 50% reduction and none of it has to do with the number of deer...


I've got to go play with some info I got from the PGC this afternoon. Meeting night Wednesday and tomorrow is a work day..

LATER ===

 
That seems pretty typical Doc.  The one camp near where we hunt had abot the same deal -- those that originally built it got older and had to quit hunting because of it.
 
But here is the difference.  There was always somebody behind them -- son, nephew, neighbor -- that took over the camp for the oldsters.  Over the years I can think of four times that the camp has switched "chiefs."  But it won't again.  There are no more sons or nephews or neighbors that are willing to take over the costs and work and responsibilities of a deer camp, hours away from where they live, for the deer hunting that is present in that area today.  Those that currently own it are in there early 50's and when they are done, so is the camp.
 
Back in the day there were as many as 18 hunters that moved in and out of there.  Now there are only five that are willing to make the trip.  The rest have not started hunting elsewhere, they simply quit hunting.  Going to deer camp was fun for them and an integral part of deer hunting, but not the only part.  They were there to kill a deer as well as all the sideshow stuff associated with camp.  When killing a deer became a remote thing, they hung up the rifles and found places to play cards and drink and joke around at home -- without buying guns and clothes and boots and license and travel.
 
Of those that remain, three are archery hunters and spend the last two weeks of archery season there, plus the first day of rifle.  They told me that with the split season (it started there last year) that they more than liley will no long hunt with a rfile there at all.

I'm saying for 2F === AT BEST for those wanting to increase the herd.. the harvest will be just 8-9% lower than 2009 and PROBABLY well be higher in spite of the reduction in tags, because of the poor harvest in 2009 and thus having more available this y

How can the harvest be 8-9% lower than 2009 and at the same time"probably be higher" .

2F had a 10,000 tag reduction in antlerless tags this year .. what effect do you feel that will have on the 2010 a

The allocation in 2F was reduced by 5,852 tags in 2010 and if it takes 3 tags to harvest a doe the harvest will be reduced by 1,950.

So I predict == they (BOC)reduced tags for 2F by 10,000 , the PGC lost sales dollars, county treasurers lost money, they peezed off more deer hunters, and made NO ONE happy with their decision... so basically a waste of time and energy... and proof they should listen to the experts and not complaining hunters... hurry March harvest figures...

Should the PGC still be issuing 52K tags in 2 G so everyone can get a tag,even though the herd has been by around 40%? Statewide ,the PGC is still issuing more tags than we have over wintering deer and around 300K more tags than they issued the last time our herd was this low, Would you prefer they increase the allocation to 1M tags to keep everyone happy and make more money?

As for 270..

I did not single out hunters in 2G as whiners..

In my opinion anyone who has for years constantly complained and whined about "no deer in my area" and not tried to find new areas is who I call whiners/complainers ... they blame the PGC for them not being able to find deer, but I bet none ask the local WCO where he is seeing deer when he makes his forecast for his area... ask friends that do harvest for advice, talk to land owners and farmers, how about folks that work in the woods... make FRIENDS with folks on message boards that are successful in your area.... I know several that kill deer in 2G every year and post about it on message boards, in fact multiple deer in 2G .. even deerfly knows that...

I have also mentioned being in areas of 2G that I know have NO DEER or very few.. there's no food for them.. RSB has done the same.. A hunter should not expect to find deer everywhere...

YOU HAVE TO HUNT FOR THEM !!!!!!


I know of areas in Clear Creek where I have NEVER EVER seen a deer and others have said the same thing... now if I hunt there and come on here day after day complaining about not seeing any deer there and blaming the PGC for it.. sorry... I look like an a..

and I'd be complaining and whining !!!!!

I even visted two usually good spots this year at Clear CReek and saw nothing on two trips.... but I did not go back and spend more time there,, NOPE... for whatever reason the deer had moved somewhere else, why sit there and see nothing ???


As DARs would say == after two trips there I should not "expect" to see deer there the third time...


You are reporting what you see and hear from folks in your areas and I'm supposed to believe that ??? but when I post what folks I know and see and tell me about 2G .. I'm posting "hear say"



NOW that's FUNNY !!!!

well my friend I am posting the exact same thing you are == what you see and hear from others

If you look at a map you will see I live about 7 miles from parts of 2G and travel there often... It's not like it is in the Philly area after all..

I will say most of what I know about 2G is the western parts... not Potter and Clinton for instance, so I rely on what I read from hunters hunting in those areas post on the internet and many are still successful..

I still remember hunters from those two counties saying the deer were dissappearing before AR/HR took effect though.... and if memory serves me right harvest figures were dropping there before AR/HR.. I'd have to double check...

so to address the negative types that are always posting they see no deer, there are no deer, it's all the pgc fault, I can't shot a deer (OH WAIT) at the same time they are complaining they ARE kiiling their deer.... ???

what would like me to call what they are doing ?????

One last thought before I head off to work..


The PGC messed up deer hunting in Potter and Clinton so bad that after the decline I just posted about... antler restrictions,... and herd reduction ... here's what happend in 2003to the total harvest ==

Potter = 10,000
Clinton = 4,800

Banner year in an area that folks were saying had no deer even back then.....


have a good day guys.. work then sportmens meeting -- won't be back til Late tonight..

.

ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout

I went and checked ...

Potter County had a harvest of 9,900 in 1995 and went down hill from there... and as I said that was 5+ years before HR/AR...

Clinton County had a harvest of 4,600 in 1995 and also went dowen hill from there.. IN fact they could not even beat that figure in the BANNER year of 2000... and again 5+ years before HR/AR...

So those two counties would not be on my list of top places to hunt deer in PA anymore.... sorry....

It is truly disingenuous to try to use total harvest numbers to compare the quality of hunting in 1995 to 2000 or 2003. The quality of hunting in Clinton and potter went down hill as a result of HR that resulted from the record antlerless harvests from 1990 to 1995. If you knew what you were talking about you would know that the herd in 2G had been reduced to it's DD goal of 15 DPSM in 2000 and that the latest round of HR reduced it to 8 or 9 DPSM. That is precisely why the hunters in those areas are complaining about the current DMP and the quality of hunting in their area. A harvest rate of 1.26 buck PSM in 2g is pathetic,when the experts say the habitat can sustain over 40 DPSM at the MSY carrying capacity.

Thank you for providing the data that shows HR in Potter began in 1988 with the implementation of bonus tags. The data also shows the PGC was successful at keeping the herd stable or reducing it even more from 1993 to 2000. But keeping the herd stable was not good enough for DCNR, the Audubon and Alt so they decided to reduce the herd from 15 DPSM to 8 DPSM and forest health in 2gG is still rated as poor.

No, I am not desperate at all. But ,unlike you and Putnam I actually took the time to learn about the history of deer management in PA and I have the PGN articles that show that the herd was reduced from 40 DPSM in the 70's to 21 DPFSM in the early 80's. The PGC then allowed the herd to increase in some counties while decreasing it in others. Then they approved bonus tags and higher antlerless allocations in the early 90's to reduce the herd. Even you admitted hunting went downhill in the 90s in Potter and Clinton.

In 2003 the PGC abandoned the old deer density goals and the result was that the herd in 2G was reduced from the goal of 15 DPSM to 8 DPSM and the result was a buck harvest rate of just 1.26 Buck PSM. You say hunters should be smart enough not to hunt in areas with few deer, but what would happen to the herd if the majority of the hunters took your advice? The answer is that in just a few years the herd would increase to levels above the previous DD goals and any improvement in the habitat would be lost. Is that what you want?

I see BT is still up to his old tricks.. I hope everyone else has caught on to this too ===



The harvest figures are what they are for those two counties in 2G and they do not support the no deer agenda folks.. so one of them thinks=== let's switch topics -- we'll go with the old deer per sqaure miles stuff.. that is at best an esitmate.. no one knows how mant deer are in one square mile... and I'll play some tricks to make it look like the data supports my agenda...


Notice how BT MIXES info but does not point out he is doing that.. just tries to make it look like he is right ...

example just posted..

reduced from 40 DPSM in the 70's to 21 DPFSM in the early 80's

Notice he convenitly is comparing apples to oranges but not telling us ..

he just compared deer per sqaure mile (apples) to deer per forested square mile (oranges)

who cares about dpsm.. look at the harvest figures !!!!! Since AR/HR the harvest in those 2 counties is as good as it ever was in was in the 1990s... so who cares how many per square mile... the hunters are killing plenty of deer there..

One last time ==

potter average=
1980s =12,500
90-95 =10,500
95-00 =8,800
01-03 =10,700


clinton average ==
1980s =6,500
90-95 =4,000
95-00 =3,600
01-03 =4,600