Like ya Doc but please dont put periods halfway through my sentences- can change the whole thought being presented.
   Back when I was in PA every year for a few weeks in Deer Season and a few weeks in the Summer and some other weeks just visiting with family or goin to the car races it was during the late 50s into the very early 70s.
   Dont recall the DPSM numbers or kill stats from back then but seem to think about a million deer were in the State and the number of about 50,000 Deer/vs car kills seems about right. Your car kill was bigger back then than most entire  deer populations in some NE states..
  Now I'm gettin older and things have certainly changed- not just in PA but in some of those other states too.

    Thanks for the edit Doc-appreciated.

the highlighted part above is what you have to remember.. it's just some people's opinion.. not necessarily the facts...

Yes. But in this case it is also the FACT.


And the below which you posted...is not.

Top 10 states – average season harvest thru 2009 ... (according to HuntStats.com)

#10 – Louisiana – 247,800

#9 – South Carolina – 274,890

#8 – New York – 276,696

#7 – Mississippi – 311,676

#6 – Texas – 417,462

#5 – Georgia – 420,800

#4 – Alabama – 424,420

#3 – Pennsylvania – 452,925

#2 – Wisconsin – 467,808

#1 – Michigan – 495,303

Just what kinda monkey compiled those stats on that site? L-M-A-O! Pa's deer harvest in 2009 was 308,920 deer!...not 452,925!!! Id say your info is off by more than just a little here!

And another thing, even when you use the REAL number you are still comparing Pa's harvest estimate to other states that do not add in for reporting noncompliance. Pa isnt even close to 3rd! lol. Nice try though.

Still laughin' but here is the actual harvest for 2009

Like ya Doc but please dont put periods halfway through my sentences - can change the whole thought being presented.

It was purely unintentional.. after posting I noticed you had edited your post at the same time I was typing my reply ...and you added something after the ""some folks opinion.""

I just cut the added words and edited my post but forgot to erase the period.. sorry....

ORIGINAL: bingsbaits

http://lbfc.legis.state.pa.us/reports/2010/42.PDF


Here's your link.

Looks like they have the oppotunity to make quite a pretty penny on the gas...


What I find quite disturbing is their lack of forestery skills.
They get 20% of their budget from timber sales, yet have only cataloged about 1/3 of their timberland.

How in God's name can you have a compehensive timber management plan when you have no clue how much timber you even have..Silly.

Mabee hire a couple more foresters and fire the tweety bird biologists...

 
They had a PhD forester on staff.  His timber management plan was to kill as many deer as possible.  Now he works for the tweety bird people.

FC, If the average thru 2009 is 452,925, and currently we kill 308,000...

Wouldn't that prove that the herd is in decline as Retired guy commented he hated to hear?
The deer kills of the past are obviously driving this number up almost 50%!!
So when Trout posts his numbers and they support the opposite of what he wants illustrated, "Monkey" may be a warranted term.

Tull,

Yes it would seem based on them numbers that the herd is in decline but we already know that.
Numbers are numbers, any Monkey with half a brain can make them represent exactly what they want them to represent.

Wayne
It's not that you refuted the good Doc's claim its how you went about it.

As far as Agendas around here. It is this. A handful around here support the DMP blindly, a handful want it back the way it was before HR and the rest of us want it somewhere in between.

and on a side note why is everyone of your posts edited? don't you have a preview button on your screen
Mike

"Yes it would seem based on them numbers that the herd is in decline but we already know that.
Numbers are numbers, any Monkey with half a brain can make them represent exactly what they want them to represent."

No they cant. Not if they expect to be taken seriously by people that arent at the intellectual lower end of the totem pole.

"As far as Agendas around here. It is this. A handful around here support the DMP blindly, a handful want it back the way it was before HR and the rest of us want it somewhere in between."

Are you sure about that? Who are the handful that wants things exactly the way it was before hr?

"and on a side note why is everyone of your posts edited? don't you have a preview button on your screen"

I type kinda quick and not sure if its that or the site distorting my spellings on some words, also frequently think of something to add after hitting submit. I'll try to work on it.

Isnt it funny how all was fine when Doc was posting other wordly numbers that he thought supported him, but now that it has been refuted, its just another "deer wars" thread that didnt start out as one. Kinda convenient dontcha think yote? But if you retrace the posts you'll find it was not taken there by me. Figured you realized that, but just didnt want anyone to think you were implying something stupid....and that it was actually a group effort, that started with others. And also a conversation you had no problem with taking part in until the facts "didnt fit your agenda".

Dwell on that for awhile. But have a good day chief. SInce its very important to you...Im going off line now.

Using the total combined harvest numbers by state as a gauge of PA hunting is absolutely meaningless.  We have been down this road before and data must be presented in the proper form to be useful. 

In this case, harvest per square mile or hunter success rates would give a much better account of how we stack up with other states.  Also, the reporting methods would need to be adjusted (as Wayne said) to make a fair comparison.


 

I was just saying that at a minimum, hunter numbers and huntable area need to be considered to draw any kind of comparison.  It just doesn't make sense to compare our total harvest with a state like Texas and not adjust for the difference in land area.  Likewise, it wouldn't make sense to directly compare PA with OH and not compensate for the difference in hunter numbers.
 
I really don't know what the numbers would say when corrected, but in the form reported by Doc, they are nothing more than a fun fact and are virtually meaningless for comparison purposes.  
 
  

To get this back on topic,

Re: drilling on game lands, until gas prices go way up, what RSB states about the feasability of extracting the gas has lots of merit.

Generally speaking, much of the PGC's land holdings isn't what you could consider "prime" drilling ground. Sure, there may be plenty of gas locked up in the Marcellus and just as much if not more in the Utica shale formations but, you can only horizontally drill so far.

This isn't logging where you can put in some "rough" trails and have a skidder going up and down. You need to put in honest to goodness graded roads with a good subgrade with proper drainage and erosion control so you don't get wash outs or get mudded out during inclement weather. These roads need to support larger, heavy drilling rigs and water trucks not to mention all the other maintenance trucks, trailers to house all the hands when drilling/fracking takes place 24/7, etc. Not to mention, on some of the more mountainous game lands, it would take LOTS of earth moving, grading and fill to create a drill pad large enough to support all the infrastructure it takes to drill one well. Some areas, even though they contain lots of gas, may never be drilled just due to topography.

I'm with Esox on this one for sure: I sure wish things would slow down a bunch until the regulation can catch up to the technological advancements. If that means the PGC doesn't get a "windfall" and license fees need to increase, then so be it. Much better than the alternative. I am also not against drilling, I just want it done responsibly and also believe there should be an extraction tax attached to it (on the lower mid end of what all the other states charge) to offset all the regulatory enforcement and eventual clean-up and infrastructure repair that is inevitable. No matter how well regulated an industry is, there will be accidents. It is a cost of doing business.

This will all be "new" revenue with little or no expense involved, and if the leases were decent leases resident hunting licenses should be free in a little while, and the potential for tax reduction in the state "should" be there as well.

I have little doubt that there will be impacts on infrastructure, and there will probably be "clean up" issues and those costs should not be shouldered by taxpayers that aren't benefiting from the exploitation of the resource. Granted, there will be folks making lots of money in this play but the property owner with a nice house on a 3/4 acre lot won't be getting any.

The Pennsylvania Game Commission was created in 1896 for the purpose of making and enforcing laws and regulations TO PREVENT the over harvest of the states wildlife. They are the ones responsible for issuing the tags, setting the bag limits, and implementing the regulations to assure there is no overharvest. If the wildlife is overharvested it is solely and only the PGC's fault. Man, by nature, will exploit the states resources if not kept in check by rules and regulations and it is the PGC's job to prevent the exploitation of wildlife not to promote it.

And they get paid one healthy chunk of change to do it. I will obsolve them of all blame the day they quit taking my and everyone elses cash for the purpose of game managment. Hunters are not organized in a way to take things upon themselves, but if we were to accept 70-80 mil a year for that responsibility, im sure we would be willing to figure something out. IF they have no responsibility and are not to be the ones looking out for our sport and our resources, then they have absolutely no purpose and should be dismantled and restructured with people who can and will.

Oh yeah, and sticking with the gas theme, they're gonna need to quit siphoning off the funds from the gas on "our" gamelands. We'll be needing that in our management exploits as well.

Aw Tull, ya just had ta go and beat me to it while i was postin'. Oh well, 2 people catching it immediately only shows how blatantly obvious it was i guess. lol. My slight lag time in posting can be explained by the need to recover from a mild case of shock upon seeing the level of accuracy depicted on that fine website. lol.

TIP OF THE HAT to fishin coyote .. at least one person besides me READS what I post.... wayne and tull obviously are in such a hurry to reply to my posts they don't take the time to read and understand what they just read...

I knew when I posted that table the "AVERAGE" would totally 100% escape their brains.. but yet they call someone else a monkey ???????????

I'd have to say if the guy who did the table was a monkey those two showed they are jackasses in their understanding of what they read ....