ANF =

If guys still hunt there and harvesting what few deer are left I do not see how that is the fault of the PGC...

Very simple---because it was the PGC that issued the tags and had special seasons to wipe out the deer on the ANF. In spite of claims of no food, no security, etc the ANF was supporting 25 to 40 dpsm prior to 2000. they had doe days start on the ANF only before regular doe season to kill them even before AR/HR. If there are too many or too few deer on the ANF it is solely the PGC's fault because they are the ones who issue the tags and set the seasons and bag limit.

The PGC was established in 1896 to enact and enforce laws to prevent the over harvest of the states wildlife. It is sole and only the PGC's responsibility. They make the laws, they set the bag limits, they enforce the laws, they set the season lenghts. It is their job, it is their responsibility. If the states wildlife hs been over harvested it is because of their actions.

Always thought it was the PGC that contolled the deer herd with allocations.
Guess they don't know what they are doing and should let the hunters do it themselves ,Doc.

Pure stupidity.

Been talking to the Forest Service Foresters as I am working in the ANF.

They seem to be a little disgusted with the lack of deer themselves..



Dam slobs, goons, poachers, not nice guys are killing them all.
Wonder who they got the tags from..

Blaming hunters is a cop-out. Pgc gets paid many millions of dollars to do their job, and that job inludes looking out for the well being of the sport of hunting, and it also included preventing OVERHARVEST not just under-harvest.

Hunters killed the deer NOT the PGC. Who pulls the trigger?

If that's the case then there was no reason for the PGC to be created since their JOB was and still is)to enact and enforce regulations to prevent the over harvest of the states wildlife.

Spoon, the whiners on here do not want to hear that. They just want to blame the PGC. I always love the guys who say they saw one deer and killed it! That will help the deer population won't it.

It is basic biology...

Let's use cows for an example...

If a farmer's has A 500 acre PASTURE (like a state forest or something) he knows just how many cows he can feed on those acres and how long the field will provide food... let's say it's as simple as one cow per acre... so the pasture (habitat) can support 500 cows... now if the farmers does not thin his herd every year how long will it take to get the population of cows to be more than that 500 acres can provide food for ?? He can't just let the herd grow and grow so folks can see lots of cows on the 500 acres...

The fact YOU did not see dead starved deer means NOTHING.... at some point if left alone and free roaming many of his cows are going to leave that farmers 500 acres and go somewhere else to find food..rather than stay there and die... animals are not that dumb ...


Do you think deer will stay where they can not find enough food to be healthy and re-produce..


The ANF was allowed to get way too many deer in the herd... many moved out and probably over the years many ended up in the areas of 2F that are still great hunting today even with herd reduction.....

That's why I say that if everyone hunting the ANF would stop killing deer tomorrow regardless of allocations.. just don't kill any... I believe it would still take MAYBE 5-10 years to have any habitat that could support the herd of the old days... my guess is the areas I am familiar with are SO BAD .. they may never be able to support more than one or two deer per square mile...

some deer hunters do what it takes to be successful and see deer... others kill deer and still complain about the numbers in their areas.. and others just complain..


Been that way FOREVER....

Guys wanted to stop shooting does (to let the herd build) in the north central and big woods areas since the 1960s...1970s,1980s,, 1990s,, and still complaining today.....


different strokes for different folks...

but as we see here right on this site.. the number complaining is very small compared to the successful hunters posting their harvest figures and photos of such... check out the survey that is here... and there's some more photos of nice harvests even from 2F "over there"...

The sky is not and has not been falling just because of ARs and HR .....

I completely understand the tradition type spots and the memories of great past hunts in those spots.. but as others just mentioned... if there are no deer there now.. why complain.. find where those deer moved to..

There's some of my favorite areas and "spots" right here that I have not hunted in years...
I did not see deer there on several trips or other changes ... so I don't hunt there... I hutn where I can see and harvest deer TODAY.... forget about the 60s.80s, 90s etc...


I have not hunted two spots at Clear Creek this year simply because I did not see deer there last year on several trips or on my scouting trips this summer......

2 gas wells put in and the Oak trees cut down for them..
2 new "camps build"
1 is now posted because of hunters shooting things thasn were not game animals (like the pet donkey mentioned).. not anything to do with deer
4 areas are tough to hunt and I am too old to get in there
2 areas used to have crop fields near by.. now they are just over grown fields of weeds...

It's all about CHANGE... and CHALLENGE.. and those wanting to accept that fact...

I always love the guys who say they saw one deer and killed it! That will help the deer population won't it.

You heard it said that must be the case across the board I guess. Therefore no hunter has a legitimate complaint with anything other than ourselves I guess. lmao.

It is YOU ( the hunters ) position that deer numbers are too low in the ANF, not the PGC's. So if YOU ( hunters ) want less killed, it up to YOU ( hunters ) to act accordingly.

And what if some (hunters) arent responsible or educated and those (some hunters) dont act accordingly? Everyone esle whom does should be penalized for it because some horsearse agency (PGC) wants the deer dead for the name of extreme biodiveristy (trillium) and timber (wood). So if they(hunter complaining) quit hunting there, and things dont improve because others (hunters) dont, is it then ok for them (hunters) to complain?

Sorry Spoon. But the herd is already in reduction/stabilization mode with the harvests we have already been achieving across the vast majority of the state. Harvesting more by more of us becoming super hunters or moving to other areas will simply take the herd even lower and equal even lower success rates across the board. Only solution is to first allow herd growth to accomadate more sustained harvest. That is the only way possible. And thats up to the gameless commission to facilitate.

And that is EXACTLY who's to blame....

Those who permit it, with power to stop it...whom we pay a helluva chunk of change overall, to ensure it doesnt happen.

Should we outlaw drinking alcohol because some exploit the right and drive drunk and kill other people ??????

Drinking isnt a bad thing in itself and done responsibly. Those laws in place ensure that we do so or pay the price. Not so with deer management. Kill too many deer is not only legal, but its encouraged.

If there is an overharvest of deer on the ANF or anywhere else the agency responsible for that is the PGC because they are PAID FULL TIME to prevent that from happening. Some of you have a hard time accepting FACTS. The fact is some humans will exploit any resource if given the opportunity and the PGC has the power to give them enough Tags to do just that with the deer.

Apparently s10, some believe they just arent responsible for anything. 75 million dollar per year agency getting paid just to sit on their fat cans scratching themselves.

So it's okay to punish those of us (like you) that are still having no problem filling our freezers because a few still hunt areas with few deer... They bought their license..
It's their choice where to hunt ...

The PGC issues tags to get a certain number of deer killed to control populations... just because the ANF does not have good habitat or good deer populations.. why should I not get a tag to help in this area.. lower the tags.. I don't get one... the same guys that are killing that very last deer in the ANF still does get one.. what did lowering the allcoations prove NOW ????

well everyone knows my position .. I TRULY appreciate some others coming forward who share some of those same thoughts and feeling ....

also I'll back off rather than get this into the same old debate and the thread get closed...

I have been given a final warning about getting thread closed -- so I have been laying low..

but had to comment on the idea of continuing to hunt areas that have proven to a hunter there are not many deer there, but they go anyhow, then complain..

I'll be reading though ... have fun.. keep it "above board" ...

TIL LATER...

You have no power over your own actions?

Course I do. And thats why I havent shot a doe in years. And for the overall picture, what has it accomplished other than making me able to say Im not a hypocrite and practice what I preach?

"Sorry, but it all boils down to others must harvest less, so I can have more."

No. Thats a nonsensical take on things. Im fine with what I kill every year. One buck is all that is legal for me regardless. Therefore you argument holds no water. If I said it once Ive said it a hundred times. Its NOT all about "me". Its about alot of folks, and about whats best for the sport/management tool in this state. And I think you realize that. But you just like having someone to talk to that isnt a fellow lib.

Thats it S10 blame me. Because of ME you don't see 50 deer a day like you were use to. Dude get over it, it is 2011. Live in the present and move on!! Everyone on this site knows you are the biggest whiner on here. You proved it MANY times over. Adapt or quit. I can't help it you have gotten lazy in your golden years.

That's typical, when you can't stand or accept the facts resort to name calling. You don't have a clue how I hunt or how hard I hunt or how smart or successful I may or may not be. You can't accept the facts I present so I must be a lazy road hunter.

Even the courts ruled it was the PGC's responsibility to manage the deer herd. If the wildlife numbers are too low the courts ruled who is responsible. If they want to pass it on to someone else then they should quit taking the hunters money.

"Even the courts ruled it was the PGC's responsibility to manage the deer herd."

And the last I heard, the courts found no evidence that they were not doing it appropriately. They aren't trying to "pass" anything on, because THEY are not saying too many deer are being harvested.