And the affects of the previous plan did not begin in 2000.

The previous DMP was implemented in 1980!!! And, I did not say the effects of the current plan were apparent in 2000.However, by 2005 the effects of the plan were obvious and by 2010 they were even more obvious.

Essox says: A quick check shows that the total buck harvest in all of Westmoreland, Beaver, Butler, Washington, and Allegheny counties was around 22k in 2001.

The 2B buck harvest has remained pretty steady since the transition to the WMU system.

The audit is available on the Pa legislative budget and finance site. On it, the previous county based harvests were converted to "wmu" harvests so as to compare past pre-wmu years to current harvest using pgcs data. You can easily compared harvests as "apples to apples" back to 1996 to today by simply looking at the "deer population characteristics charts fro 1996-2008". And of course you can add in 2009 and 2010 data from pgc if we wanted as well for further comparisons.

but that decreasing buck harvest will change starting this year thanks to the current BOC...

#1... split seasons cause higher buck kills in general

#2... alot more 1.5 year olds will be killed in the old "4 point" areas...

ran off to check this--- every single WMU that was added to the split season last year had an increase in the buck harvest... except one that stayed the same .

The buck harvest did increase in 7 of the 8 counties with a split season, but the buck harvest also increased in 9 other WMUs.so it is silly to assume that the split season was responsible for the increase in the buck harvest.

ARs would not have resulted in a decrease in the buck harvest after the first year if the herd was increasing instead of decreasing.

Here are the harvest history facts for both bucks and does in five-year averages for the counties that make up units 2A & 2B, in the southwest, and unit 5C in the southeast, expressed in harvests per square mile so they can be reasonably comparable. Then for comparison purposes I am going to throw in the data for the big woods units or 2F and 2G and finally the statewide results.
 
Unit 2A
 
Data type……….83-87……….88-92…….93-97……..98-02………03-07……..08-10
Antlered………..2.66…………3.57………4.40………5.23………...4.29……….3.55
Ant’less………...3.02…………5.09………6.62………8.03………...9.49……….7.86
 
Unit 2B
 
Data type……….83-87……….88-92…….93-97……..98-02………03-07……..08-10
Antlered………..2.56…………3.44………4.28………5.26………...3.52……….3.01
Ant’less………...2.97…………5.00………6.45………8.25………..10.70.…….11.81 
 
Unit 5C
 
Data type……….83-87……….88-92…….93-97……..98-02………03-07……..08-10
Antlered………..1.87…………2.46………2.64………3.48………...3.31……….3.95
Ant’less………...2.12…………3.69………5.08………5.84…………7.94.…….10.35 
 
Unit 2F
 
Data type……….83-87……….88-92…….93-97……..98-02………03-07……..08-10
Antlered………..4.20…………4.56………4.70………5.13………...2.64……….2.57
Ant’less………...5.34…………6.76………7.06………7.43………...4.50……….2.96
 
Unit 2G
 
Data type……….83-87……….88-92…….93-97……..98-02………03-07……..08-10
Antlered………..3.82…………4.02………3.59………3.88………...1.65……….1.52
Ant’less………...3.98…………5.48………4.36………4.66………...2.35……….1.37
 
Statewide data
 
Data type……….83-87……….88-92…….93-97……..98-02………03-07……..08-10
Antlered………..3.09…………3.60………3.68………4.18………...2.79……….2.60
Ant’less………...3.30…………4.93………5.07………5.81………...5.66……….4.47
 
 
From this everyone can draw their own conclusions but we can all see at what point the deer populations shifted from the big woods areas to the southern areas of the state. It is also interesting to note that the buck harvests in unit 5C, where Deerfly hunts, are higher now than they had ever been in the past, even with the current antler restrictions.
 R.S. Bodenhorn

From this everyone can draw their own conclusions but we can all see at what point the deer populations shifted from the big woods areas to the southern areas of the state. It is also interesting to note that the buck harvests in unit 5C, where Deerfly hunts, are higher now than they had ever been in the past, even with the current antler restrictions.

The populations didn't shift from the northern counties to the southern counties. The populations in the northern counties were just killed off at a faster rate than in the southern counties. So in areas where the plan was successful like 2G, the buck harvest has reduced to the lowest levels in 30 years. At the same time according to RSB,where the plan has failed to reduce the herd to the goal of 6 DPSM in 5C, we are harvesting more buck than ever. I sure am glad that I live in an area where the plan has failed because if I lived in 2g I would probably quit hunting.

Even though the buck population returns to normal after the first year all of the historical facts prove that the buck harvest with antler restrictions not only protects about 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks but also a pretty significant number of the antler legal bucks
 
The fact is that since hunters now have to look at bucks long enough to evaluate the number and length of points many legal bucks are also avoiding harvest.

Are you claiming those bucks are never harvested and die from natural causes and are wasted? Ihat would be reason enoug to eliminate ARs.

If 92% of the 1,5 buck survive and 71% of the 2.5 buck survive, then all you have to do is provide the PGC data that shows that 60% of the bucks harvested in 2G are 3.5+ buck You can't do it because it isn't true.

ORIGINAL: deerfly

Even though the buck population returns to normal after the first year all of the historical facts prove that the buck harvest with antler restrictions not only protects about 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks but also a pretty significant number of the antler legal bucks
 
The fact is that since hunters now have to look at bucks long enough to evaluate the number and length of points many legal bucks are also avoiding harvest.

Are you claiming those bucks are never harvested and die from natural causes and are wasted? Ihat would be reason enoug to eliminate ARs.

 
I wouldn’t say that yet but we will know the answer to that in time. It might very well lead to relaxing the antler restrictions though in some units if hunter harvests continue to stay as low as they were in some area during the 2009 season.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: deerfly

If 92% of the 1,5 buck survive and 71% of the 2.5 buck survive, then all you have to do is provide the PGC data that shows that 60% of the bucks harvested in 2G are 3.5+ buck You can't do it because it isn't true.

 
Look, no one said that one year of data is conclusive of anything. Unlike you, intelligent people realize one year of data doesn’t prove any trends even though it does start to dispel some myths.
 
No one said that those 71% of the older bucks not harvested were all 2 ½ years old either, some of them were even older than 2 ½ years old. And yes the bucks being harvested in unit 2G are among the oldest bucks being harvested anywhere in the state. A couple years ago there was a 10 ½ year old buck harvested in 2G.
 
But, the FACTS are conclusive that in 2009 hunters did not come close to harvesting any way near all of the legal bucks available to them in ANY unit for which the harvest percentage could be obtained. But, as I already said it is a multi-year study and perhaps the results will change some in the other years of the study.
 
The fact that you don’t like the data and are too narrow minded to accept it for what it shows, inconclusive as it may yet be, goes far toward establishing your lack of both knowledge and acceptance of a scientifically established fact.
 
Just because the facts are proving you wrong doesn’t mean the facts are any less factual. Sitting around with your head in the sand and pretending there is no lion does nothing more than remove your knowledge of the reality that surrounds you.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: S-10

quote:

ORIGINAL: S-10

quote:

all of the historical facts prove that the buck harvest with antler restrictions not only protects about 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks but also a pretty significant number of the antler legal bucks

Care to post the HISTORICAL FACTS that shows A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER of legal antlered bucks are protected as a result of AR. I know there may be a few and have always added that but I challenge you to show data to back up that statement you just made.


How many times am I going to have to post the evidence that hunters aren’t harvesting anywhere near all of the older and legal bucks available to them? I have posted it several times in the past, you have commented on it and how you don’t believe. But just because you don’t like the facts proving you wrong doesn’t make those facts any less factual.

Here it is again.

In 2009 there were hundreds of collared deer in four separate WMU across the state that were being tracked with radio equipment. When one of them was dead the researchers knew it and they also knew how many were still out there at the end of the hunting seasons.

Here are the percentages of those bucks NOT harvested by hunters in each of those units.

Unit……………..1 ½ year old bucks………………older bucks (antler legal bucks)
2D……………………78 %………………………………38 %
2G……………………92 %………………………………71 %
3C……………………83 %………………………………same to small
4B……………………61 %……………………………….51 %

The evidence you asked for clearly proves there are a lot of antler legal bucks that don’t get harvested in EVERY UNIT it has been tested in.

The plain and simple fact is there is a HUGE difference between buck numbers and buck harvests and the evidence suggests that spread is greater with antler restrictions then it had even been before antler restrictions. Even common sense, without the evidence, would lead a logical person toward that conclusion, but as the evidence proves what common sense only suggested.

R.S. Bodenhorn


(in reply to S-10)
Report | Post #: 72

What kind of B.S. is that. You said that HISTORICAL FACTS show AR protects A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF LEGAL BUCKS. I challenged you on that and all you can do is post data showing we aren't harvesting all the 1-1/2 year olds.
The reason for that is MANY ARE NOT LEGAL at 1-1/2 or even 2-1/2. It has nothing to do with not seeing the points, it's because they aren't there. The Wildlife Professionals YOU tell us to listen to state that on the KQDC survey 38.7 of the 2 year olds and 9.7% of older bucks wouldn't make a 4 point restriction.

Again I say don"t tell me it's so, prove it with the historical data you claim to have. B.S. is easy. Proof is a bit more difficult.

 
Unless you are completely reading deficient you should go back and read the data I posted again. It clearly showed the percentage of bucks 2 ½ and older that avoided harvest too.
 
Perhaps I shouldn’t have included the 1 ½ year old data and certainly wouldn’t have had I known it was do complicated for you to separate the two sets of data results.
 
Also, remember they know the facts and history of those older bucks since they are monitoring them and thus they know that almost all of them were antler legal. The only reason they weren’t harvested is because they were either successful at avoiding hunters or hunters passed them up because they either didn’t want to harvest them or they couldn’t determine if they were legal in the short period of time they had to look at them.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn  

ORIGINAL: S-10

Look, no one said that one year of data is conclusive of anything. Unlike you, intelligent people realize one year of data doesn’t prove any trends even though it does start to dispel some myths.

THEN WHY DO YOU KEEP POSTING IT TO TRY TO PROVE YOUR CLAIMS.

 
Because even though it isn’t conclusive for every year it most certainly does establish some very factual and valid evidence that hunters are not harvesting anything close to all of the legal bucks available to hunters since antler restrictions, as you claim.
 
What’s wrong, are you having problems facing the facts that take even the first steps toward proving you wrong? Well brace your self because I am pretty confident those facts are going to get even stronger and more convincing as even more years of data become available.
 
That is the reason scientifically generated data is so valuable. It eventually dispels the myths people like a few of you like to spread, at least for those intelligent enough to accept scientific facts as being closer to reality than myths.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: deerfly

Stop playing silly games and just post the PGC data that shows that the average buck harvested in 2g is a 3.5+ buck. Then , explain why hunters are passing on legal 1.5 and 2.5 buck when the buck harvest rate in 2g in 2009 was only 1.26 BPSM.

 
There are no silly games on my part, just facts based on science and the common sense that comes from experience.
 
There are many reasons why the buck harvest in unit 2G, or any other unit for that matter, doesn’t come close to taking anyway near all of the legal bucks.
 
One reason is that there are so many remote hard to hunt areas hunters simply don’t go there to hunt let alone harvest a deer they may not be able to get out of the woods. Then because I believe most hunters actually look to see if it is legal instead of just shooting at the first sight of any antler as they used to be able to do there are many bucks that simply slip away before the hunter can be sure if it was legal or not. I know since antler restrictions I have passed on at least a dozen bucks that I wasn’t sure enough of to take a chance before they got into a position where I couldn’t shot them. On some of them I could tell they had plenty of beam length and height but due to various factors of light, brush, tall grass or just poor positioning I couldn’t be sure of the number of points. From those hunting experiences I am certain there are many bucks that avoid harvest because ethical hunters counting points is a lot different than just seeing a piece of antler and finding a spot to get a bullet into that deer. I am sure other hunters have had many of  the same experiences since antler restrictions and I am equally sure those factors save a lot of legal bucks.  
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

Unless you are completely reading deficient you should go back and read the data I posted again. It clearly showed the percentage of bucks 2 ½ and older that avoided harvest too.

I read it and the math shows you are saying there are approx 3 antlered bucks for every antlerless deer in 2G. Care to try again.

g-nite

ORIGINAL: S-10

Unless you are completely reading deficient you should go back and read the data I posted again. It clearly showed the percentage of bucks 2 ½ and older that avoided harvest too.

I read it and the math shows you are saying there are approx 3 antlered bucks for every antlerless deer in 2G. Care to try again.

g-nite

 
Well then go ahead and tell us how many deer, antlered and antlerless are in unit 2G. No one seems to know how many of each there are so go ahead and tell us.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

quote:

all of the historical facts prove that the buck harvest with antler restrictions not only protects about 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks but also a pretty significant number of the antler legal bucks

Care to post the HISTORICAL FACTS that shows A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER of legal antlered bucks are protected as a result of AR. I know there may be a few and have always added that but I challenge you to show data to back up that statement you just made.

(in reply to RSB)

Now- just to get back on track, the above is what You posted and my challenge to you to provide data to back up that claim.

The 2009 study you refer to DOES NOT back up that claim. It really is only valid for that particular year and for those bucks in the study. If you did the math as I suggested you would realize it isn't even valid for WMU 2G as you claim unless you also claim there are more antlered bucks than does in 2G.

I didn't ask you to lose your temper and call me names as is your past history for anyone disagreeing with you.

I didn't ask you to insult me.

I didn't ask you to give me some more of your opinions.

I challenged you to post the HISTORICAL DATA showing A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT
NUMBER of LEGAL bucks were saved by antler restrictions that you claim exists.

If you can do that without the childish name calling then we can continue the discussion. If you don't have such data revelant to your claim then don't bother answering and we can move on to something else.