Not for the purpose of determining B/D ratios. They (1-1/2 bucks and doe) do a large share of the breeding and the whole purpose of knowing the B/D ratio is to determine how many bucks there are to breed the available doe. Ask your buddy Kip if you don't believe me. BB and female fawns are not counted.

PS I think I figured out the page loads real slow when it is nearing the end and is about to change to a fresh one.

Good post Doc. I am no longer for AR but it is a fact of life that will never go away. The powers that be will continue to do what they will do. IMO, the answer of the deer population should be between what was and what is now. Hunting ,as a sport,will continue to lose members and ,unfortunatly, is a way of life. I only hope that it will remain until my grandkids have an opportunity to experience what the aspect actually is.The memories of the hunt, shared with good friends and pleasant memories ,is the real reason for hunting...WF

Come on, surely you can do better than using data compiled in 2004 and citing information from 2000/2001?

I think most hunters would agree that the PGC policy and management strategies have undergone just a few minor changes within the last 8 years, and maybe just a couple more within the last 12 years.


(in reply to RSB)

That's what I like about debating with folks who don't take the time to read and understand what is being stated before they post something. What that data he posted shows is that prior to the effects of AR/HR the hunters of this state were a pretty contented bunch contrary to the claims of some.

Always depends on how the questions are asked as to one's response.If I take a poll as to how i do at my job, it would be a cold day in Hades if I was to publicly say I was doing a poor job...WF

ORIGINAL: Esox_Hunter

Well, the 63% rating the PGC as good to excellent was pre AR/HR, which most would agree is the most controversial topic of modern PA deer hunting. After only two years of AR/HR, I don't believe hunters had suffcient time to formulate an opinion in 2004.

A few other recent changes I can think of:

-Expanded doe seasons in SRAs
-X-guns
-Modified AR policy in western PA
-Concurrent/split seasons have changed in a number of WMUs
-Early muzzy season
-Early jr doe season
-Mentored youth program
-Repealed display of license mandate
-Baiting in SE SRA has come and gone
-Expanded gun bear season in some WMUs
-Archery bear
-Bonus Spring gobbler tags
-Changes to Spring gobbler hunting hours  

I am sure I am missing some things here as well, but you get the point.  The PGC has been very eventful in the last decade making many changes to high interest level, controversial topics.

At any rate, I am looking forward to seeing new, relevant data on hunter support for the PGC.

 
Actually all of the survey results I posted came from the same survey that was conducted in 2004. Where the 2000/2001 came in was they surveyed hunters in 2004 that had purchased a 2000/2001 hunting license. They did that so they could also survey how many hunters were buying licenses every year and how many were not and why those that had not didn’t.
 
Several of the changes you listed were actually well in place before antler restrictions or herd reductions. Several others have nothing to do with deer management issues and were put in place because of hunters promoting and successfully arguing for such seasons or regulation changes.
 
Doe seasons in the SRA have been expanding since back in the 80s when their deer herds started growing rapidly.
The legality of crossbows is a social issue not a management issue with both social pros and cons.
The change in antler restrictions was one the hunters asked for that could be and was granted without adverse management impacts.
The split seasons was also one the hunters wanted and got from the Commissioners voting even though the Wildlife Management Professionals advised against it.
Early muzzleloader and Junior/senior doe seasons started in the 90s and well before antler restrictions or herd reductions started.
Mentored youth programs were heavily promoted by the hunters and have had little impact on deer management issues or concerns.
Display of license is a social issue that hunters wanted and has no management implications of any kind.
Baiting in the Southeast was requested by hunters and tried to see if it improved harvest rates in areas with too many deer yet were hunters had little access.
Bear season changes are designed to manage bear populations since bears also need to have various levels of harvest.
Archery hunters have been asking for archery bears seasons for many years, having archery bear seasons has expanded hunting opportunities and in some areas been an asset to landowners suffering crop damage to standing corn.
Second spring turkey tag and all day turkey hunting were both requested and promoted by the hunters and eventually granted after a vote by the Commissioners.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

The effects of both AR(which is still somewhat popular)and HR (which no hunter knew the level to which it was to be taken) were unknown when the survey was taken. The hunters were still basking in buck kills in the 200,000 range with over 40,000 2-1/2yo or better and lots of does. The turkey population as well as most small game have plummeted since then. That survey in no way represents what hunting or hunter attitudes is today.

My mistake, I couldn't recall when the early muzzy/jr/sr doe seasons were implemented since I never participated in them.

Just a couple points worth addressing in your post:

As for the SRA doe seasons; they been expanded to include 4 extra weeks of archery and 2 additional weeks in late Jan in the last decade.  Myself and other SRA hunters certainly consider that a substantive increase over previous season configurations.

PGC biologists stated that changing from 4pt to 3pt per side in Western PA would increase the amount of legal bucks available to harvest by 10%.  Tremendous no, but certainly measurable.

X-guns have been contributing to the shift in increasing archery harvests and decreasing gun harvest.  I would consider that to be touching on management issues.

As for the issues you state to be solely social, which I largely agree with, hunters will still use those to determine their overall satisfaction with the PGC management, whether you like it or not.  Anything that impacts the "quality" of ones hunt will impact their level of satisfaction.

Just for the record, your 2000/2001 comment I referenced several times makes no mention of "deer" management.

And I still see many controversial changes with PGC management and policy over the last decade.  You are kidding yourself if you don't see that.
 

Essox-- you have to remember who you are talking too-----the PGC can do no wrong and everything is the hunters fault. We just need wormed, learn to shut up and listen to the master, and we will be enlightened.

Doc--- PER the PGC, the turkey population is down over 30% statewide since 2000. I'am guessing it is closer to 60% in this area. Southern 1B. My relation near Pittsburgh is overrun with them.

ORIGINAL: Esox_Hunter

PGC biologists stated that changing from 4pt to 3pt per side in Western PA would increase the amount of legal bucks available to harvest by 10%.  Tremendous no, but certainly measurable.

Anxiously awaiting harvest numbers in March to see the results. In 2A antlered harvests have plummeted in recent years.  If we do not see that 10% increase this year, really is a cause for concern in this unit.  And if we do see that 10% I worry about next year and the available bucks that will be left.

X-guns have been contributing to the shift in increasing archery harvests and decreasing gun harvest.  I would consider that to be touching on management issues.

For the record, this shift has been occuring for a long time now. Fireamrs hunters are down to 750,000 from close to 1 million. Archery sales have been holding almost steady with crossbows increasing them slightly. The shift was inevitable and will continue to be.
 
Actually, as firearms participation continues to decrease, we would want to see archery harvests increasing to offset this. Unless, of course they choose to lengthen firearms seasons.

Also, as far as management issure are concerned. Really isn't any sonce the PGC manages deer based on total harvest and not when they are harvested.  As long as does continue to be harvested by archers, there are no concerns for pre-rut harvest of bucks.  Plus we have a certain percentage of our bucks protected by AR assuring that breeding gets done when it is supposed to.  Many stated harvest the bulk of their deer during the rut with no concerns.

While I might/do agree with your post as I consider my deer season basicly over when archery season is over those that do not bow hunt (still the vast majority) might have a quite different view. (Dardys for example). They managed to split the hunters on the AR/HR issue which costs us a lot of our clout and if we split again on archery/rifle we will lose again. I much prefer archery over rifle but the record books clearly show that your best chance to kill one of the better bucks is with the bow.

It would be interesting to see a side by side (ACCURATE) comparison of the percent success enjoyed by archers as compared to rifle hunters on both buck and doe. The buck side would still be somewhat skewed as many archers use archery to hold out for a good buck and rifle to kill a legal buck but the numbers would still be revealing IMO. There is no doubt that with the inclusion of crossbows the archery kill will continue to climb as a percent of the total kill.

PS- Point of clairfication---The biologists said that the 3 up rule would result in a 12% increase in buck harvest.

IMO even without a increase in licenses being sold the crossbow is a much more efficient weapon than a verticle bow and the percent success in archery season will rise as more folks go to them. Example: Not many 6-10 year olds or frail women are going to kill a deer with a verticle bow but they show up in the paper every season with the crossbow. Don't get me wrong, if I had to choose between bow hunting only or rifle hunting only I would choose bow. We just don't need another fight amoung ourselves. I do agree the trend started before crossbows but crossbows has accelerated it and one reason it's nationwide is crossbows were legal in most states long before ours.

ORIGINAL: dpms

Esox,

Bear with me for a secong while I try to make this point.  With crossbows looking like they will be permanently included in archery seasons, moving forward, those that particpate in archery seasons need to act as one as things play out. Not saying that you wouldn't take that approach, BTW.

Archery harvests are rising. Have been for a long time for the reasons I stated above. There is a perception among those that only rifle hunt that archers are kiiling too high of a percentage of the deer.

I had a conversation with a commissioner about precisely this recently. He understands that it is a perceptions and why it is occuring.  We must also understand the dynamics of this issue and act as one gorup when it comes up in conversation.  We know that firearms particpation is decreasing along with participation hours.  We also know that archery interest along with particpation hours have been increasing.

I saw grumblings about rising archery harvests before crossbows were even on the radar. There are reasons why ths trend is happening.  It is also a national trend. We, as archers must be prepared to work as one to protect archery seasons using the facts that we know to exist. 

Nothing against rifle guys as I enjoy it as well.  But those that exclusively rifle hunt can't be upset as thier number decrease that other groups are taking more deer.  No doubt that their is a social aspect at play here, but giving more weight to that aspect is not in the best interest of hunting.  Point being there are reasons the archery harvests are rising as a percentage of total harvest and it is not crossbows or any advantage that archers have as a group.

 
I understand what you are saying, and I agree.  My only point in bringing this issue up is as S-10 stated, X-Bows have accelerated the increased archery harvest trend.  The reason I said it was 'touching' on management issues is that one could perceive that the PGC DMP was catering towards archery hunters.  I have heard this argument many times over on the web, and also with plenty of work aquaintances, most of which are strictly rifle hunters.
 
As an archery hunter, I have no problem with continuance of the current trend.  I just want RSB to be a little more objective and understand that not everyone feels this way.  
 
 
 
   

ORIGINAL: Esox_Hunter

ORIGINAL: dpms

Esox,

Bear with me for a secong while I try to make this point.  With crossbows looking like they will be permanently included in archery seasons, moving forward, those that particpate in archery seasons need to act as one as things play out. Not saying that you wouldn't take that approach, BTW.

Archery harvests are rising. Have been for a long time for the reasons I stated above. There is a perception among those that only rifle hunt that archers are kiiling too high of a percentage of the deer.

I had a conversation with a commissioner about precisely this recently. He understands that it is a perceptions and why it is occuring.  We must also understand the dynamics of this issue and act as one gorup when it comes up in conversation.  We know that firearms particpation is decreasing along with participation hours.  We also know that archery interest along with particpation hours have been increasing.

I saw grumblings about rising archery harvests before crossbows were even on the radar. There are reasons why ths trend is happening.  It is also a national trend. We, as archers must be prepared to work as one to protect archery seasons using the facts that we know to exist. 

Nothing against rifle guys as I enjoy it as well.  But those that exclusively rifle hunt can't be upset as thier number decrease that other groups are taking more deer.  No doubt that their is a social aspect at play here, but giving more weight to that aspect is not in the best interest of hunting.  Point being there are reasons the archery harvests are rising as a percentage of total harvest and it is not crossbows or any advantage that archers have as a group.

I understand what you are saying, and I agree.  My only point in bringing this issue up is as S-10 stated, X-Bows have accelerated the increased archery harvest trend.  The reason I said it was 'touching' on management issues is that one could perceive that the PGC DMP was catering towards archery hunters.  I have heard this argument many times over on the web, and also with plenty of work aquaintances, most of which are strictly rifle hunters.

As an archery hunter, I have no problem with continuance of the current trend.  I just want RSB to be a little more objective and understand that not everyone feels this way.  



  

 
I certainly understand that not everyone likes the various management objectives of the Game Commission and also that many don’t like all, or in same cases any, of the various hunting seasons put in place to benefit various groups of hunters.
 
What people have to understand though is that the Game Commission is constantly receiving input from hunters wanting any number of various season and bag limit changes based on any number of reasons, for both personal and various management opinions. They can’t satisfy everyone and no matter what they do someone is not going to like it.
 
What they try to do is manage wildlife with two basic objectives. Objective number one to manage ALL wildlife and their habitats for the long term benefit of the species so that nothing is either over or under harvested. The second objective is to determine which species need hunting and trapping to properly manage species or that can be hunted and trapped without having an adverse affect on the species. Once they have done that then they try to provide as much time as possible that each species can be hunted or trapped once again without adverse affects on the resource.
 
Each group or classification of hunters wants their special interest to have priority so that is where the social aspects of wildlife management come into the picture. Some groups are more vocal and in many cases the old saying the squeaky wheel gets the grease becomes try. In other cases I am sure some Commissioners have promoted their own special interests, that may not be right but it just the way life traverses some times the same nearly all politicians feather own nests and special interest projects while in office.
 
If hunters believe some group of hunters has an advantage over another then they should get involved with the group having the advantage.
 
The point is that the Game Commission has to look at the entire picture of the big picture while hunters and non-hunters alike just tend to look at their own special interests and then blame the Game Commission when their interest isn’t the one getting lions share what little might be available.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn         

I wonder how many people got busted shooting a 6 pt this year(2 pts on beam) with brows?

I wonder the same thing.. hopefully not too many.. but before the season started I had one hell of a time explaining to folks.. even at the club guys thought it meant 3 on a side PERIOD... and forget many guys coming into the hardware.. many of them did not even know it got changed ...

ORIGINAL: Big Tuna

 I wonder how many people got busted shooting a 6 pt this year(2 pts on beam) with brows?

 
In 2A, I didn't hear of any but there were quite a few hunters that understood the new regs incorrectly going into the season. I ran into several right up to the weekend before the season opened.
 
Very little shooting where I was at the whole season.