bingsbaits
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 5035
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 07:50:44
(permalink)
No more logic , please sir. Someones head is about to explode...  
"There is a pleasure in Angling that no one knows but the Angler himself". WB
|
deerfly 
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 08:00:45
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Esox_Hunter
ORIGINAL: deerfly
I have a better idea. Since you have unlimited access to the PGC data ,why don't you tell us the percentage of 1.5 buck that were saved by ARs in 2009. You should really enjoy providing the data that proves I was wrong,so have a ball and provide the data.
Is there a reason why you never post the links to the data you cite?
If you are in fact correct then I don't see any reason not to throw it up. Honestly, if your ideas have facts basing them you will gain a lot more support if you drop the cloak and dagger act and become transparent, as you should have nothing to hide.
You are right, I have nothing to hide , but that doesn't apply to the PGC. I don't provide links to the data because the PGC doesn't present the data in such a way that the average hunter could make the observations I make. For example,when they released the harvest data they said 1.5 buck made up 48% of the harvest a 52% were 2.5+ buck , but they didn't provide the actual numbers of each class that were harvested. Also, they didn't provide the number of 1.5 buck saved by ARs, but if you know the number of 1.5 bucks that were harvested you can estimate the number of 1.5 buck that were carried over to the following season.
|
eyesandgillz
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4042
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2003/06/18 11:30:03
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 12:51:16
(permalink)
Since you are far and above the "average hunter" in your observations and understanding, then please, give us the mathematical breakdown of the estimate of 1.5 yr old bucks carried over from the previous season.
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 13:11:09
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: deerfly
Just how did you come up with the idea that more 2 ½ and older bucks were harvested this year than were saved last year?
The fact that you had ask that question shows it is you that doesn't understand the harvest data. The PGC claims ARs save 49% of the 1.5 bucks,so all you have to do is divide the 1.5 buck harvest by .51 and you come up with the PS 1.5 buck population. then you subtract the 1.5 buck harvest from the total number of PS 1.5 buck and you get the number of 1.5 buck carried over. The result is that the number of 2.5+ buck harvested the last 2 years exceeds the number of 1.5 buck carried over in the previous two years and that is statistically impossible.
The fact that you had ask that question shows it is you that doesn't understand the harvest data. The PGC claims ARs save 49% of the 1.5 bucks,so all you have to do is divide the 1.5 buck harvest by .51 and you come up with the PS 1.5 buck population. then you subtract the 1.5 buck harvest from the total number of PS 1.5 buck and you get the number of 1.5 buck carried over. The result is that the number of 2.5+ buck harvested the last 2 years exceeds the number of 1.5 buck carried over in the previous two years and that is statistically impossible.
That was my previous answer and it hasn't changed since yesterday.
|
Esox_Hunter
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 2393
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2006/08/02 14:32:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 13:17:53
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: deerfly
You are right, I have nothing to hide , but that doesn't apply to the PGC. I don't provide links to the data because the PGC doesn't present the data in such a way that the average hunter could make the observations I make. So why not cite your sources and explain how you came up with whatever it is you are trying to prove? You are losing credibility by the second when you fail to provide sources for your data. What makes you any different than the average hunter? Why should anyone trust you to represent data for which you don't cite?
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 13:37:41
(permalink)
Since this thread is about the 2010 deer harvests estimates , I thought everyone would have taken the time to read it and therefore would know that 52% of the buck harvest was 2.5+ buck and 48% were 1.5 buck. I though it was also common knowledge that ARs protected around 50% of the PS 1.5 buck population. Maybe I am giving some of the guys too much credit when it comes to basic knowledge about our deer harvests.
The only way I am different than the average hunter is that I care enough to take the time to analyze the PGC data rather than just accepting the PGC's version of that data.Plus I have the old copies of the PGN which tells an entirely different story about the previous DMP than what we are being told today. For 15-20 years we were told how successful the plan was and then basically ,overnite it turned into a disaster.
|
S-10
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 5185
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 14:26:53
(permalink)
Plus I have the old copies of the PGN which tells an entirely different story about the previous DMP than what we are being told today. For 15-20 years we were told how successful the plan was and then basically ,overnite it turned into a disaster. If any of you younger fellows are really interested in following the political transformation of deer and hunting in this state I highly suggest going on E-Bay and bidding on old game news magazines. We were the most highly regarded state in dedicated deer hunters and deer research right up until 2000 at which time the hunters became lazy slobs and the biologists from the past 100 years were idiots. The interesting thing is all they talk about now is our great scientific deer management and how we should continue it. If you read ANY of the research papers written since AR/HR you will see half the research quoted is from PRE AR/HR. Some of the public claims made today were disproven long ago and are still disproven in todays research. It's just that most people don't bother to read them but take folks at their word.
post edited by S-10 - 2011/03/11 14:30:57
|
RSB
Expert Angler
- Total Posts : 932
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/11 21:09:39
(permalink)
As I have said in the past, your failure to correctly understand and analyze ALL of the data provided leads you to make false assumptions that then result in you making erroneous, extremely misleading and frequently even completely false statements. Then when it is pointed out and even proven that you are wrong you just claim everyone else is to stupid to understand what the data means.
I know exactly how you came up with your assumption and comments that the Game Commission was in error by showing there were more 2 ½ and older bucks than you thought there should have been. You simply took the previous year’s buck harvest when they harvested a little over 53,000 1 ½ year old bucks and made an incorrect assumption that since antler restrictions is intended to protect 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks then there should only be 53,000, less the expected 10% mortality, to be available as 2 ½ and older bucks the next hunting season.
But, it is you who is totally incorrect in your analyze of the data, instead of the Game Commission statistician. Your methods and use of such generalized data is flawed and leads you to developing and promoting totally incorrect conclusion.
Antler restrictions are designed to protect 50% OR MORE of the 1 ½ year old bucks and obviously in some years a lot more than 50% do escape hunter harvests, more on that in a moment. Then we also know that hunters are not harvesting all of the 2 ½ and older bucks in any year so many of them are also available to hunters as 2 ½ and older bucks once again in following years.
In 2009 the Biologists were monitoring hundreds of adult antlered bucks through the hunting season. Here are the percentages of those bucks that avoided being a hunter harvest in the 2009 season.
Unit…% of 1 ½ year old bucks not harvested……% of 2 ½ and older bucks not harvested
2D………………….78 %……………………………………..38 %
2G………………….92 %……………………………………..71 %
3C………………….83 %……………………………………..N/A (sample too low)
4B………………….61 %……………………………………..51 %
As any objective, unbiased and logical thinking person can see there is plenty of reasons for this year’s buck harvest to have as many 2 ½ and older bucks as there were. Of the monitored units not one of them harvested anything close to 50% of the available 1 ½ year old bucks. It is also pretty evident that hunters are not harvesting anyway near all of the older bucks either.
R.S. Bodenhorn
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/12 08:59:39
(permalink)
Unit…% of 1 ½ year old bucks not harvested……% of 2 ½ and older bucks not harvestedÂ
2D………………….78 %……………………………………..38 %
2G………………….92 %……………………………………..71 %
3C………………….83 %……………………………………..N/A (sample too low)
4B………………….61 %……………………………………..51 %
Â
As any objective, unbiased and logical thinking person can see there is plenty of reasons for this year’s buck harvest to have as many 2 ½ and older bucks as there were. Of the monitored units not one of them harvested anything close to 50% of the available 1 ½ year old bucks. It is also pretty evident that hunters are not harvesting anyway near all of the older bucks either. Now let's take an objective,unbiased and logical look at what the effect would be if those survival rates were applied to the buck harvest in 2G in 2009 when 6,300 buck were harvested Just for the sake of discussion lets' say that 3000 were 1.5 buck and 3300 were 2.5+ buck. With survival rate of 92% that means the harvest of 3,000 represents 8% of the PS 1.5 buck. So, 3000=.08X where X is the PS 1.5 buck population of 37,500 Then ,applying the same logic to the 71% survival rate for 2.5+ buck you get 3,300= .28X and a PS 2.5+ buck population 11,375. Then by adding the 1.5 buck to the 2.5+ buck you get a PS buck population of 48,879 buck or 7 buck PSM. Now, if the adult B/D ratio was 1:1.5 , multiplying the buck population by 1.5 you get 73,185 adult doe for a total over wintering herd of 121,964 or 30 DPSM ,which is more than twice the OWDD in 2003 when hunters in 2G harvested 10,110 buck. So an unbiased logical analysis shows that the harvest rates of the buck in the study do not accurately represent the true harvest rates for all bucks in 2G!!!!
|
S-10
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 5185
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/12 13:56:43
(permalink)
When you really think about it it's impossible for the numbers RSB posted to be anywhere close to what is happening statewide and probably not even in the WMU's studied. In 2001 when we had a 1,600,000 deer herd Alt thought that AR would move approx 75,000 1-1/2 year old bucks into the next age class. He was off on the high side by almost half.
Now with a deer herd just over half of what it was in 2001, The numbers RSB posted, when averaged together indicate that AR has moved over twice as many deer into the next age class as Alt incorrectly thought would happen with a herd of 1,6000,000. Something smells and it isn't fish.
|
RSB
Expert Angler
- Total Posts : 932
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/13 20:54:22
(permalink)
Your made up examples are of no relevance to reality since no one said that the four study area results represent the entire state. I am sure there are great variances across the state and even within each management unit.
But, the results in those four study areas where valid results for those area in 2009. Those area results clearly prove that hunters did not harvesting 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks in any of those areas in 2009 so it is perfectly logical to suspect there were also many other areas of the state where hunters failed to harvest 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks or for that matter even the 2 ½ and older bucks in 2009.
It is not yet know if that low 1 ½ year old buck harvest rate is normal or how it will be in future years but, the fact still remains that the evidence indicates there was nothing abnormal, underhanded or even unexpected with seeing an larger number of older bucks in this year’s harvest.
Just because those variables are too complex for some misguided and agenda driven laypeople to understand or accept the facts indicated and even proven as a result of the data certainly doesn’t make it inaccurate or invalid.
R.S. Bodenhorn
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/13 21:14:31
(permalink)
But, the results in those four study areas where valid results for those area in 2009. Those area results clearly prove that hunters did not harvesting 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks in any of those areas in 2009 so it is perfectly logical to suspect there were also many other areas of the state where hunters failed to harvest 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks or for that matter even the 2 ½ and older bucks in 2009. That is pure nonsense. The results of the study prove absolutely nothing unless the results correlate with all the other harvest results from any given WMU. Furthermore, I proved beyond a doubt that the harvest numbers from the study in 2G do not correlate with the other established data from 2G and you couldn't come up with anything that shows my calculations were flawed. There is a simple undeniable fact and that is you can't have a 2.5+ buck harvest that exceeds the 1.5 buck harvest with ARs that only protect 50% of the 1.5 buck. Non-hunting mortality removes at least 15% of the bucks saved by ARs before hunting season ,so the 2.5+ buck harvest should be at least 15% lower than the 1.5 buck harvest, unless the 1.5 buck population is decreasing.
|
RSB
Expert Angler
- Total Posts : 932
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/14 21:27:48
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: deerfly
But, the results in those four study areas where valid results for those area in 2009. Those area results clearly prove that hunters did not harvesting 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks in any of those areas in 2009 so it is perfectly logical to suspect there were also many other areas of the state where hunters failed to harvest 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks or for that matter even the 2 ½ and older bucks in 2009.
That is pure nonsense. The results of the study prove absolutely nothing unless the results correlate with all the other harvest results from any given WMU. Furthermore, I proved beyond a doubt that the harvest numbers from the study in 2G do not correlate with the other established data from 2G and you couldn't come up with anything that shows my calculations were flawed.
There is a simple undeniable fact and that is you can't have a 2.5+ buck harvest that exceeds the 1.5 buck harvest with ARs that only protect 50% of the 1.5 buck. Non-hunting mortality removes at least 15% of the bucks saved by ARs before hunting season ,so the 2.5+ buck harvest should be at least 15% lower than the 1.5 buck harvest, unless the 1.5 buck population is decreasing.
You are correct that you can’t harvest more bucks than were saved the previous year but the REAL deer out there are proving you completely wrong about how many bucks are avoiding harvest and available the following year. I am extremely confident that the real deer are providing real and relatively valid data while your paper deer don’t provide much more that a lot of speculation that lead to your incorrect assumptions and predictions. R.S. Bodenhorn
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/14 21:42:55
(permalink)
I am extremely confident that the real deer are providing real and relatively valid data while your paper deer don’t provide much more that a lot of speculation that lead to your incorrect assumptions and predictions. There are no paper deer !! There are only deer that are based on PGC data. If the PGC data is wrong regarding the number of 1.5 buck protected by ARs that is not my fault. However, the percentage of the 2.5+ buck in the harvest may be higher simply because the number of PS 1.5 buck continues to decrease.
|
Ironhed
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1892
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2001/11/07 19:10:08
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/14 23:35:21
(permalink)
"There are no paper deer !! Ahem...  Ironhed
|
DarDys
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4938
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
- Location: Duncansville, PA
- Status: online
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/15 08:12:20
(permalink)
The poster formally known as Duncsdad Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
|
wayne c
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 3473
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/15 11:56:47
(permalink)
lol Looks like that one in the middle has been "high-graded".
post edited by wayne c - 2011/03/15 11:57:28
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/15 17:42:43
(permalink)
I am extremely confident that the real deer are providing real and relatively valid data while your paper deer don’t provide much more that a lot of speculation that lead to your incorrect assumptions and predictions.
 If you think my assumptions and predictions are wrong, then you are saying that the PGC's assumptions and predictions are wrong, since I made the same assumptions the PGC uses to manage our herd. So, instead of just claiming I am wrong based on your personal opinion, why don't you point out the specific flaws in my reasoning and assumptions. The math I used is only at the sixth grade level, so it should be easy for you to point out the glaring flaws in my calculations. If you can't do that, it would show that you really don't understand what the effects would be if ARs were protecting as many 1.5 buck as you claim they do in 2g.
|
RSB
Expert Angler
- Total Posts : 932
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/15 21:02:46
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: deerfly
I am extremely confident that the real deer are providing real and relatively valid data while your paper deer don’t provide much more that a lot of speculation that lead to your incorrect assumptions and predictions.
If you think my assumptions and predictions are wrong, then you are saying that the PGC's assumptions and predictions are wrong, since I made the same assumptions the PGC uses to manage our herd. So, instead of just claiming I am wrong based on your personal opinion, why don't you point out the specific flaws in my reasoning and assumptions. The math I used is only at the sixth grade level, so it should be easy for you to point out the glaring flaws in my calculations. If you can't do that, it would show that you really don't understand what the effects would be if ARs were protecting as many 1.5 buck as you claim they do in 2g.
Hey, you are the one that said the Game Commission data had to be wrong since hunters harvested more 2 ½ and older bucks than you thought would have been possible. So, what you are now asking me to prove has already been done. I already provided the Game Commission data that proves your assumptions and predictions wrong and all you did was claim it too must be incorrect since it proves you are full of bologna. By using that Game Commission data I pointed out that you were wrong in your speculation of how many 1 ½ year old bucks had been saved from harvest the previous year. It is obvious that you are wrong because the hunters did harvest more 2 ½ and older bucks than you believed possible. I already pointed out why you are wrong when I pointed out that you made an incorrect assumption that only 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks had avoided harvest the previous year when it was obvious that more than 50% that survived the previous season. R.S. Bodenhorn
|
S-10
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 5185
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/16 08:38:34
(permalink)
But, the results in those four study areas where valid results for those area in 2009. Those area results clearly prove that hunters did not harvesting 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks in any of those areas in 2009 so it is perfectly logical to suspect there were also many other areas of the state where hunters failed to harvest 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks or for that matter even the 2 ½ and older bucks in 2009. Since you think the study data is revelant for 2G and have access to data most of us don't please do the following----------- 1. Post the total deer in 2G either before or after hunting season in 2001 and show the PGC caluclation used to get the number. 2. Post the total deer in 2G in 2009 and 2010 during the same time frame as above using the harvest % calculation and show the whole PGC calculation used to get the number. 3. If #2 is greater than #1 explain why. Thanks
post edited by S-10 - 2011/03/16 08:41:06
|
stradic1
New Angler
- Total Posts : 31
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2011/03/08 01:54:09
- Location: York Pa
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/16 16:28:04
(permalink)
Reading all this b.s. is making me see red, the PGC reminds me of a door to door salesman (believe what I say even if the truth is the deer are gone). O.k. maybe I don't go far enough in the woods to see them, or maybe I just don't know how to hunt (Only been doing it for 28 years and have killed a couple). Lets face it, they are getting exactly what they want, drive the hunters out so big business can come in (logging, gas and oil drilling among others). The only way we will ever see the herd come back is for every hunter to buy their license and get as many doe tags as they can get and not use them. I made the mistake of not buying a license last year (thinking I was saving a few deer) but will this year and as much as I love hunting, I will not shoot any deer in this state. I would love to see the numbers the PGC would come up with if every hunter did it, bet it would be a record harvest. Screw this game commission and all their b.s.
Momma Always Said Fishing Is Like Going To Thailand - You Never Know What You're Gonna Catch
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/16 16:43:45
(permalink)
Hey, you are the one that said the Game Commission data had to be wrong since hunters harvested more 2 ½ and older bucks than you thought would have been possible. So, what you are now asking me to prove has already been done.
Â
I already provided the Game Commission data that proves your assumptions and predictions wrong and all you did was claim it too must be incorrect since it proves you are full of bologna. Actually . you didn't prove anything. You simply cited the results from a study based on a very small sample size with an obvious bias. Unless you can show that the results from the study correlate with the harvest numbers , herd size and B/D ratio the results of the study are basically meaningless when it comes to making management decisions. If you really want to show everyone that you know more than me,why don't you calculate the number of preseaon 1.5 and 2.5+ buck based on the 2009 harvest in 2G? Choose any 1./2.5 harvest ratio you want and then choose whatever b/D ratio you want to come up with the size of the OW herd.
|
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/16 17:07:56
(permalink)
I will continue to buy doe license and not use them as many other I know. I have heard of many reporting kills with their unused doe license.Good or bad who knows. You surly can't believe what the PGC puts up. Perhaps more should follow. The Pa gas and timber co, better known as the PGC has to change. Every time I hunt other states I'm reminded from non-residents what a joke they are. You can't talk to any group now days that are satisfied with them. Major issue is lack of game. Second is how they spend money then cry broke. Third is attitudes with hunters. ORIGINAL: stradic1
Reading all this b.s. is making me see red, the PGC reminds me of a door to door salesman (believe what I say even if the truth is the deer are gone). O.k. maybe I don't go far enough in the woods to see them, or maybe I just don't know how to hunt (Only been doing it for 28 years and have killed a couple). Lets face it, they are getting exactly what they want, drive the hunters out so big business can come in (logging, gas and oil drilling among others). The only way we will ever see the herd come back is for every hunter to buy their license and get as many doe tags as they can get and not use them. I made the mistake of not buying a license last year (thinking I was saving a few deer) but will this year and as much as I love hunting, I will not shoot any deer in this state. I would love to see the numbers the PGC would come up with if every hunter did it, bet it would be a record harvest. Screw this game commission and all their b.s.
|
Ironhed
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1892
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2001/11/07 19:10:08
- Status: offline
|
RSB
Expert Angler
- Total Posts : 932
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/16 21:56:35
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10
But, the results in those four study areas where valid results for those area in 2009. Those area results clearly prove that hunters did not harvesting 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks in any of those areas in 2009 so it is perfectly logical to suspect there were also many other areas of the state where hunters failed to harvest 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks or for that matter even the 2 ½ and older bucks in 2009.
Since you think the study data is revelant for 2G and have access to data most of us don't please do the following----------- 1. Post the total deer in 2G either before or after hunting season in 2001 and show the PGC caluclation used to get the number.
2. Post the total deer in 2G in 2009 and 2010 during the same time frame as above using the harvest % calculation and show the whole PGC calculation used to get the number.
3. If #2 is greater than #1 explain why.
Thanks
I don’t have that data and have no interest in trying to obtain it. If you want it call Harrisburg and request. That is what I do when I want data otherwise not available on the web site. But, what I do know is that there are fewer deer now than there were in 2001. Part of that reduction, in some parts of the state more that others, was very intentional and the rest of the reduction was a result having allowed way too many deer feeding on the habitat for so long the deer reduced their own numbers with reduced fawn recruitment rates. That is just how nature works when populations deplete their food supply. R.S. Bodenhorn
|
RSB
Expert Angler
- Total Posts : 932
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/16 22:03:05
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: stradic1
Reading all this b.s. is making me see red, the PGC reminds me of a door to door salesman (believe what I say even if the truth is the deer are gone). O.k. maybe I don't go far enough in the woods to see them, or maybe I just don't know how to hunt (Only been doing it for 28 years and have killed a couple). Lets face it, they are getting exactly what they want, drive the hunters out so big business can come in (logging, gas and oil drilling among others). The only way we will ever see the herd come back is for every hunter to buy their license and get as many doe tags as they can get and not use them. I made the mistake of not buying a license last year (thinking I was saving a few deer) but will this year and as much as I love hunting, I will not shoot any deer in this state. I would love to see the numbers the PGC would come up with if every hunter did it, bet it would be a record harvest. Screw this game commission and all their b.s.
There you go! That is a real intelligent way to approach the situation. We don’t believe the data and hate how it is used to manage wildlife life populations. So to help he cause we will send in even more false data so they have even worse data and information. Yep, that sounds like someone that has it all figured out! And, then some people wonder why a person would have a bad opinion of some hunters? Some of you make me ashamed of the hunting fraternity. Thankfully most hunters are a lot more intelligent than a few of the most vocal on this message board. R.S. Bodenhorn
|
RSB
Expert Angler
- Total Posts : 932
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/16 22:10:13
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: deerfly
Hey, you are the one that said the Game Commission data had to be wrong since hunters harvested more 2 ½ and older bucks than you thought would have been possible. So, what you are now asking me to prove has already been done.
I already provided the Game Commission data that proves your assumptions and predictions wrong and all you did was claim it too must be incorrect since it proves you are full of bologna.
Actually . you didn't prove anything. You simply cited the results from a study based on a very small sample size with an obvious bias. Unless you can show that the results from the study correlate with the harvest numbers , herd size and B/D ratio the results of the study are basically meaningless when it comes to making management decisions.
If you really want to show everyone that you know more than me,why don't you calculate the number of preseaon 1.5 and 2.5+ buck based on the 2009 harvest in 2G? Choose any 1./2.5 harvest ratio you want and then choose whatever b/D ratio you want to come up with the size of the OW herd.
I posted the results of the study monitoring hundreds of deer. The data is what it is and was provided by real deer that survived the hunting seasons. That study might show a different result in future years, who knows at this point. But, what we DO KNOW is that in 2009 there were a lot of bucks that avoided hunters and harvest in all four of the study areas. If you have any FACTUAL data or information to refute the results in the study area go ahead and post it. Otherwise, it is all just more of your smoke blowing nonsense in an attempt to promote a very misguided agenda. R.S. Bodenhorn
|
stradic1
New Angler
- Total Posts : 31
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2011/03/08 01:54:09
- Location: York Pa
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/17 02:10:42
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: RSB
ORIGINAL: stradic1
Reading all this b.s. is making me see red, the PGC reminds me of a door to door salesman (believe what I say even if the truth is the deer are gone). O.k. maybe I don't go far enough in the woods to see them, or maybe I just don't know how to hunt (Only been doing it for 28 years and have killed a couple). Lets face it, they are getting exactly what they want, drive the hunters out so big business can come in (logging, gas and oil drilling among others). The only way we will ever see the herd come back is for every hunter to buy their license and get as many doe tags as they can get and not use them. I made the mistake of not buying a license last year (thinking I was saving a few deer) but will this year and as much as I love hunting, I will not shoot any deer in this state. I would love to see the numbers the PGC would come up with if every hunter did it, bet it would be a record harvest. Screw this game commission and all their b.s.
There you go! That is a real intelligent way to approach the situation. We don’t believe the data and hate how it is used to manage wildlife life populations. So to help he cause we will send in even more false data so they have even worse data and information.
Yep, that sounds like someone that has it all figured out! And, then some people wonder why a person would have a bad opinion of some hunters? Some of you make me ashamed of the hunting fraternity. Thankfully most hunters are a lot more intelligent than a few of the most vocal on this message board.
R.S. Bodenhorn
Before you get all high and mighty I think you may want to read that again. I never said a word about sending false data or information. I guess you are "intelligent" enough for all of us.
Momma Always Said Fishing Is Like Going To Thailand - You Never Know What You're Gonna Catch
|
bingsbaits
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 5035
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/17 07:45:26
(permalink)
"There is a pleasure in Angling that no one knows but the Angler himself". WB
|
deerfly
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 1271
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2010/05/03 16:06:32
- Status: offline
RE: PGC DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES RELEASED
2011/03/17 08:17:58
(permalink)
If you have any FACTUAL data or information to refute the results in the study area go ahead and post it. Otherwise, it is all just more of your smoke blowing nonsense in an attempt to promote a very misguided agenda.
 I already proved beyond a doubt that the results of the study could not possibly represent the actual harvests rates in 2G,using simple math. The fact that you haven't been able to find a flaw in my reasoning or the math I used proves that you have nothing to refute my analysis. Furthermore, if 92% of the 1.5 buck survived along with 72% of the 2.5+ buck, that would mean that 3.5+ buck made up over 60% of the buck harvest in 2009 and if that actually happened the PGC would be citing that data to show how ARs are working in 2G. BTW, no other state with ARS has been able to increase the harvest rate of 3.5+ buck to over 40% of the total buck harvest.
|