ORIGINAL: DarDys

ORIGINAL: RSB

ORIGINAL: DarDys

ORIGINAL: Dr. Trout

well after you reach 60 and survive "quad" heart surgery we'll see how many deer you kill...and how much "traveling in the woods" you do by yourself ..

How many times do I have to post this statement... ghezz...

I kill the first deer I can.. could care less about antlers...

Has NOTHING to do with being an expert.. never claimed to be that or a "buck/trophy hunter.

I hunt the easiest I can with the best odds of shooting a deer... I hunt deer because I enjoy it and it puts meat on our table EVERY year....

In my younger, healthy days I did alright.. IMHO.. in the 5 years before HR and ARs I got 5 does and 4 bucks... and in the past 5 years I harvested 9 deer... traded the bucks for does but still had 9 in 5 years...

You "could care less about antlers" and "never claim to be ... a buck/trophy hunter," yet you support the PGC antler restrictions that require hunters to care about antlers and force those have the philosophy of "anlters don't make the deer, antlers make the deer legal," which what you are stating in a orund about way, even if you don't realize it.  Is that dichotomy confusing? 

A person can certainly support the biological benefits of antler restrictions without caring about the size of antlers while hunting provided they have taken the time to learn why we have antler restrictions in the first place.
 
Antler restrictions were put in place because we were harvesting way too many of our bucks and ending up with a poor buck to doe ratio as a result. The poor buck/doe ratio before antler restrictions was resulting in areas where many of the does, including adult does were not being bred at all. The lack of bucks was also resulting in it taking five months or more to get the does bred while a correct buck/doe ratio results in most receptive does being bred in less than two months.
 
Antler restrictions were put in place, and remain in place, because it is beneficial to have more adult bucks in the breeding population for a correct biological and breeding balance of the deer herd. Antler restrictions are not about producing bigger antlers, and never were, even though having some older bucks in the population generally does result in having some bucks with bigger antlers than we had before antler restrictions.
 
Yep those that understand the real reason for antler restrictions and supports improved deer management practices most certain would be supportive of the antler restrictions even if they still preferred to shoot any legal buck and didn’t care about antler sizes.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn  

I'll call BS on this one.

Antler restrictions just had to be four points to a side in one part of the state for "biological" reasons, but only three in another, until it was proven that those in the west had worse eyesight and no longer needed to determine brow tines, while the eastern hunters, who obviously can see better need to carry on.

You see the problem is, some of use have an animal bioscience background and do understand the "real" reason for antler restrictions and it had nothing to do with biology.

 
You can call BS all you want and I don’t care what degrees or background you have, antler restrictions, in both the 4 point and 3 point areas, were set up for biological reasons and for you or anyone to claim otherwise only proves you don’t know what you are talking about.
 
The reason there was a four point restriction in the richer soil areas along the western edge of the state was because it required a 4-point restriction in those units to protect 50% of the 1 ½ year old bucks from harvest in those areas. The other areas of the state only required a 3-point restriction to protect 50% of the 1-½ year old bucks.
 
It was the Commissioners, instead of the professional wildlife managers, who reduced the restriction (however slightly) in the 4-point areas for this year. The change in the legal restriction though should still hit the 50% being saved mark since the change is not going to make many more bucks legal than what were already legal. Furthermore, it appears hunters are not harvesting 50% of the yearling bucks in most areas anyway so this small change should still be within the biological parameters of the original intent.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn 

ORIGINAL: S-10

Antler restrictions were put in place, and remain in place, because it is beneficial to have more adult bucks in the breeding population for a correct biological and breeding balance of the deer herd. Antler restrictions are not about producing bigger antlers, and never were, even though having some older bucks in the population generally does result in having some bucks with bigger antlers than we had before antler restrictions.

Your own PGC research has proven that the first sentence is incorrect since all age classes of bucks share equally in the breeding and superior genetics are just that regardless of the age of the buck.

While the second sentence is correct that was not how AR was sold. It was sold with Alt holding his big set of 10 point antlers up for all to see while saying that was what we would be seeing in two years. Remember--World Class Deer Hunting---Best in the Nation--- and all his other pie in the sky promises. That is documented.

The real reason for AR besides taking our mind off the herd reduction for a couple years was to make it more difficult for a hunter to kill a buck in the hopes he would get discouraged and take a doe instead thereby reducing the herd quicker.

If doc wants to pretend he is just as happy with one of his baited doe pets as he would be with a buck that his his problem. He is in the minority for sure.

 
I agree that all age classes on adult bucks 1 ½ year and older participate in the breeding. The problem before antler restrictions was not having 1 ½ year old bucks involved in the breeding, it was simply not having enough adult bucks of ANY age class to get all of the cycling does bred when they should have been bred.
 
Many adult does weren’t getting bred at all because there were so many does cycling at the same time during their first estrus cycle the few adult bucks in existence (mostly just the previous year’s button bucks) simply couldn’t cover them all. Then the buck season came around and most of the bucks were made into sausage before the does came into their estrus cycle the second, third, forth and even fifth time, therefore many of those adult does weren’t bred at all and those that were bred were often bred much later than they should have been. That then resulted in both poor fawn birth and recruitment rates.
 
Before antler restrictions it was taking over five months to get 84.4% of the adult does I was examining bred. Since antler restrictions though it has been taking less than two months to get 97.1% of the adult does bred. That is a HUGE improvement that is also resulting in higher fawn recruitment rates than we would have if we still had those old breeding rates and extended time periods.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: World Famous

Wouldn't adult does, not being bred and giving birth to 2 more fawns,help to reduce the herd population? [I.E. less new deer]...WF

 
It would but that isn’t and never really has been the objective or intent of the deer management program. The objective was to harvest more deer so there would be fewer deer during the winter and spring, so each deer would have more food during the critical times yet without adversely impacting their future food supply. Then with more of the remaining does bred and the higher fawn recruitment rates that go along with does going through the winter and spring in better condition you get both more fawns born and all things being equal with the winter conditions also higher fawn recruitment rates.
 
It is a proven fact that you can have more deer the next fall if you carry fewer over winter deer than the habitat can sustain and have a higher fawn recruitment rate than you get by carrying extra barren does or poor condition does through the winter.
 
In short the first objective is always to get the total deer population within balance of the existing habitat so they don’t damage their long-term food supply then crash. Then the objective is to maximize the breeding and fawn recruitment rates so you can carry the correct number of over winter deer and still yield the highest possible fawn recruitment each year.
 
The higher the fawn recruitment the more deer hunters not only can but need to harvest then the next fall to once again bring the over winter deer population back down to the correct over winter carrying capacity. That is the way you harvest more deer to have more deer. If you don’t harvest enough deer it is only a matter of time until the deer damage their food supply and naturally reduce their own numbers. Once that starts the deer numbers can and often will decline to extremely low numbers, especially following a harsh winter or two.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn    

That is a HUGE improvement that is also resulting in higher fawn recruitment rates than we would have if we still had those old breeding rates and extended time periods.

Seems odd that before these high fawn recruitment rates from AR/HR we had nearly twice as many bucks harvested each year as we do now and nearly as many eight points and the numbers were on an upward trend. Doc may be happy with shooting bambi but most would rather harvest a buck. I would like to know your source on the percentage bred in the two month window. The last time I saw any data it showed very little change.

Oops, I see the breeding data source is from your own data. I believe the statewide breeding data is much different with very little change.

ORIGINAL: S-10

That is a HUGE improvement that is also resulting in higher fawn recruitment rates than we would have if we still had those old breeding rates and extended time periods.

Seems odd that before these high fawn recruitment rates from AR/HR we had nearly twice as many bucks harvested each year as we do now and nearly as many eight points and the numbers were on an upward trend. Doc may be happy with shooting bambi but most would rather harvest a buck. I would like to know your source on the percentage bred in the two month window. The last time I saw any data it showed very little change.

 
I know exactly what it is and has been for Elk County for the past few decades because I have been the one cutting the dead does open and collecting the breeding and reproductive data each spring.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: S-10

That is simply your biased and misguided opinion so it can all be fit neatly into yet another or your grand conspiracy theories.

GO READ THE LATEST DEER PLAN

 
I have read it. The difference is, unlike some people, I read the entire thing, in context, and understood what I read. I also have the advantage of having the opportunity to speak directly with and question those who wrote the plan.
 
Perhaps you can copy and paste the parts you think support your convoluted opinion?
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

Perhaps you can copy and paste the parts you think support your convoluted opinion?

Nice try

ORIGINAL: World Famous

Question. Would not an alternative plan to AR and HR have been to close buck season for a year and just have a doe season?That would have allowed more bucks to reach breeding age and reduce the doe population to better levels. I believe this was done once in the 30's...WF

 
That would only address the issue for one year then we would be tight back to killing 80% of our adult bucks once again and poor breeding rates the next fall.
 
No, for it to work you have to keep the correct number of bucks over each and every winter so you have them available for the next fall’s rut.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: S-10

Perhaps you can copy and paste the parts you think support your convoluted opinion?

Nice try

 
And that was a nice deflection you presented, since you can’t find anything in context that supports the opinion you want to promote.
 
Just go ahead and point us to where you can find anything that honestly supports what you are trying to promote.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

RSB, In your opinion, will the deer population ever be allowed to increase in the state to levels anywhere near say the year 2000 amount....WF

Don't all does have 2 fawns? QDMA says so, don't they?...WF

DELETED === opppss sorry.. I forgot I was done .. thanks to S-10 I was reminded...

RSB can keep it real though ...

No doubt that RSB knows his stuff about Elk Co., but his knowledge doesn't apply to all counties Statewide.

Somebody please explain to me why there is a 4 point antler restriction in 2B????  2B covers most of Allegheny Co.  Why do we need to maintain the herd with a 4 point restriction in this heavily (human) populated area????

Do we really need deer running down Carson Street, Kennywood Blvd., Rt.22 in Monroeville, Rt.8 from Etna to Hampton, Lebanon Church Rd in West Mifflin in the shopping areas....just to name a few.

Nope, RSB doesn't have the answer for that......and neither does our beloved PGC.

Absolutely.  Have to wonder why any deer is protected in that WMU.