never happen in PA

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 5 of 15
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
Guest
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 2852
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2012/05/17 08:04:02
  • Status: online
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 08:29:16 (permalink)
Regarding the collared deer on Game Lands studies, I hunt pheasants on one of those Game Lands in 2D.

It would take a deer at most about 2 minutes, from ANY point on that game lands to be be off of it and onto HEAVILY posted, private property when it is pressured.



#121
DarDys
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4938
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
  • Location: Duncansville, PA
  • Status: online
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 08:56:25 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: rsquared

Regarding the collared deer on Game Lands studies, I hunt pheasants on one of those Game Lands in 2D.

It would take a deer at most about 2 minutes, from ANY point on that game lands to be be off of it and onto HEAVILY posted, private property when it is pressured.





 
Can't be.  Those collared deer are required to remain where they can be harvested or they were not permitted to be part of the study.  The PGC had them put a hoof print  on a form stating so.

The poster formally known as Duncsdad

Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
#122
Big Tuna
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1882
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/02/04 16:31:51
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 09:47:59 (permalink)
I love this debate,keep it going.
#123
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 09:50:20 (permalink)
The fact that hunters are now harvesting fewer of the available legal bucks is also supported with the harvest results from the collared deer studies within the various regions of the state.

Of the known legal bucks out there and available to hunters


Interesting that he talks about KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS. The bucks captured for the collard study are taken AFTER deer season and in early spring BEFORE they have ANTLERS. Must be they talk to the deer and they tell them how big a rack they intend to grow. Note: the biologists don't make the claim of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS, that comes from the poster on this site.
#124
DarDys
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4938
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
  • Location: Duncansville, PA
  • Status: online
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 10:08:15 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

The fact that hunters are now harvesting fewer of the available legal bucks is also supported with the harvest results from the collared deer studies within the various regions of the state.

Of the known legal bucks out there and available to hunters


Interesting that he talks about KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS. The bucks captured for the collard study are taken AFTER deer season and in early spring BEFORE they have ANTLERS. Must be they talk to the deer and they tell them how big a rack they intend to grow. Note: the biologists don't make the claim of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS, that comes from the poster on this site.


Gheeeeez, don't you know anything?  They just look at the brand or read the micro chip and they know the deer's history from the day it was born.   That's how they knew there were 1.6 million deer before HR and how they know the exact number of deer in Pa now.
post edited by DarDys - 2012/01/30 11:09:44

The poster formally known as Duncsdad

Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
#125
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 10:25:40 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: psu_fish

So with RSB numbers:

1991 kill rate was 8.57/square mile. PA has 46,055 square miles. 8.57 x 46,055 = 399,927 deer killed by RSB #'s


1.28 BB killed per sqaure mile in 1991 x 46,055 = 58,950 BB killed in 1991 statewide per RSB #'s





2010 kill rate was 6.98/square mile. PA has 46,055 square miles. 6.98 x 46,055 = 321,464 killed per RSB #'s


.99 BB killed in 2010 per square mile x 46055 = 45,595 BB killed statewide per RSB #'s




Therefore:

That is roughly 78,463 less deer in 2010 vs 1991.


Based on these facts I suspect that statewide we probably had about the same number of deer in 2010 as what we had in 1991




Oh really, RSB? -78,463 is probably the same number of deer?????











 
Since deer don’t have gills and spend any of their time walking around on the bottom of the lakes I only use the total landmass of 45,301.78 when calculating the deer per square mile. That 45,301.78 also includes the cities with all their pavement though so the actual amount usable by deer is somewhat smaller that even that 45,301.78 square miles.
 
But with that said, yes if you added all of the bucks that were not legal and harvested that would have been legal and harvested in1991 the harvest would likely be about the same today.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#126
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 11:05:37 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Cold

The detractors of the deer program try to paint antler restrictions as simply a ploy to get hunters to kill more does but that is not true and really is just a red herring argument used by those that either refuse to understand the truth or in some cases are purposely trying to undermine the program for selfish and personal reasons.


Idunno, dUUd. As soon as the ARs went into effect, I know that myself and the guys I hunt with started getting an extra doe tag and taking two doe each year instead of just the one, as we went from having a decent shot at getting a buck to getting almost no chance.

The problem was and is that in Pennsylvania we have so many hunters they were over harvesting the bucks and not leaving enough males in the deer population to get enough of the does bred during the correct time the next fall.


Ah, I see.

So on one hand, we have an overpopulation of deer, and on the other hand, the problem is that the hunters are preventing the deer from reproducing properly. It all makes sense now.

 
Yes some hunters did start to take an extra antlerless deer to make up for not being able to take a buck, but that is the reason there was a decline in the number of antlerless permits in the units where they were not trying to significantly reduce the deer population. Even in the units where they were trying to make some significant reductions in the deer numbers there was no major increase in the antlerless allocations as I will post in the following examples.
 
A couple of the best examples of how much antlerless permits declined can be found in comparing antlerless allocation history from the counties that make up units like 2F and 2G. A good example of how the allocations didn’t experience any major increase even where they were trying to reduce the population can be seen in the comparison of the counties that make up unit 2A.
 
Unit_____83-87______88-92______93-97______98-02______03-07______08-11
 
2F______14.80______20.99______19.96_______20.43______14.44______14.10
2G______12.90______16.21______13.08_______12.30______8.65_______5.59
2A______14.04______17.59______24.50_______30.02______29.82______35.90
 
As you can see when we went to antler restrictions and longer antlerless seasons there was a decline in the antlerless allocations so that hunters didn’t harvest more does in the parts of the state where they were not trying to make a major reduction on the deer populations and even where they were trying to reduce the deer populations there was not a major increase in allocations or doe harvests.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#127
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 11:12:27 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: wayne c

Before antler restrictions all a hunter had to do was see a glint of an antler then take the first shot opportunity they had.


Im well aware of that. But you also have many fewer legal bucks that hunters are competing over.


The fact that hunters are now harvesting fewer of the available legal bucks is also supported with the harvest results from the collared deer studies within the various regions of the state.


VARIOUS regions? Thats a pretty liberal attitude in regard to VERY DARN FEW regions within regions! lol. But no... Actually those collared deer studies are a joke and nothing more, and youre attempting to use them in a manner they certainly should never be used, unless the intent is purely to decieve. Thats due to tiny sample sizes and limited areas of limited # of units and there were no "collared studies" to compare them to from prior years in those same areas. There is also much to question when it comes to hunter willingness to shoot collared deer (and has been mentioned to be a concern with these type studies). Its certainly not a factor for "everyone" but most certainly for some Im sure. And that alone would badly slant the results of such a limited study. Very reasonable to understand why some wouldnt shoot a collared deer. Heck youd have guys out there thinking anything and everything from, Its someones pet got loose, to maybe it was being used in some type of movement study which would be hindered by killing the deer.


Also given a harvest of less than 50% of buck population is insane. With a recent harvet level of around 120k, Can you even imagine how many bucks we would be carrying into each preseason for that to be the case with that only representing half of only the legal bucks? HA HA HA!

I used 50% and thats actually a little higher than the average of the "study results" lmao, that you presented.

Also if you harvested only such a small percentage of your buck, with steady doe numbers youd steadily stockpile buck and the numbers would grow and grow. Again absurd. Take such a small percentage of buck harvested and counter an increase in buck by further lowering the numbers of doe compared to currently, and the herd does nothing but shrink and with it, the buck harvest to unsustainable levels.

That coupled with the fact our buck harvests have not been on increasing trends for the mostpart suggests that your theory is bunk.

Nothing but your usual vividly imaginative damage control efforts.



 
There have been and are over 3000 deer being monitored so that is far from a small sample size and the data is very valid and far from the joke you want to make it appear.
 
You just don’t like the facts the deer are providing that prove you and the others with you opinions about over harvests are very much wrong.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#128
Ironhed
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1892
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2001/11/07 19:10:08
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 11:14:43 (permalink)
Interesting that he talks about KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS. The bucks captured for the collard study are taken AFTER deer season and in early spring BEFORE they have ANTLERS. Must be they talk to the deer and they tell them how big a rack they intend to grow. Note: the biologists don't make the claim of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS, that comes from the poster on this site.


So deer drop their antlers the last day of deer season!?!?! Lol

Of the 2 studies I've read, they both trapped and collared deer from January -July.
Quite a few bucks will still have their headgear during that time, prior to dropping.
I also hunt an area that has served as one of these study areas in the past.  The PGC trapped well into July near me.  We have harvested 2 collared and 3 ear tagged over the years.  Both collared animals were bucks.

Ironhed

Blacktop Charters
#129
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 11:42:19 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

The detractors of the deer program try to paint antler restrictions as simply a ploy to get hunters to kill more does but that is not true and really is just a red herring argument used by those that either refuse to understand the truth or in some cases are purposely trying to undermine the program for selfish and personal reasons.

R.S. Bodenhorn


It must be the detractors you are refering to are your own fellow PGC employees because they are the ones using the Red Herring argument you are refering to.

The following is taken from page 51 and 52 of the PGC's "Draft Whitetail Management Plan 2009-2018" right after they explain that hunters are starting to resist killing more does than they have been.----------QUOTE: To meet management objectives, the game commission employed a new strategy by providing new opportunities for hunters to harvest older antlered males while seeing fewer deer. It was hoped this new approach would improve hunter tolerance for reduced deer populations and permit the game commission to meet it's deer management objectives.

I don't know how much clearer you need to make it that AR was simply a ploy to sell HR. And RSB wonders why he doesn't have any credibility.

 
That was a good job of cherry picking just a small part of the REAL story. Picking a line or two that support your opinion, from a larger report that does not support your opinion, is a very typical flim-flam tactic used by those that want people to promote a mis-guided opinion or agenda.
 
There is no question that the harvesting of fewer bucks will result in some hunters shooting an antlerless deer. Making bucks illegal for harvest to get hunters to shoot does has been used as a management tool since back in the 1920 and 1930. But, the reduction in bucks being legal is also why the antlerless allocations were adjusted at the same time to match the need for either increased or stable antlerless harvests across the various parts of the state.
 
But, now for more of the WHOLE story about why we needed antler restrictions as taken from the same management plan you cherry picked from.
 
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, deer populations in much of Pennsylvania greatly exceeded deer management objectives. The struggle to meet deer management objectives and the controversies that surrounded them were not new to Pennsylvania deer management (Latham 1950, Latham 1953, Kosack 1995). Most Pennsylvania hunters agreed deer populations should be controlled, but they had not supported previous efforts to reduce deer populations (Diefenbach et al. 1997).
 
Pennsylvania‘s deer management program had tried to achieve deer management objectives in the past by increasing antlerless harvests. Although increased antlerless harvests successfully reduced deer populations, this strategy ultimately failed because hunter support declined and decisions were made to allow deer populations to return to high levels. To meet management objectives, the Game Commission employed a new strategy by providing new opportunities for hunters to harvest older antlered males while seeing fewer deer. It was hoped this new approach 52 would improve hunter tolerance for reduced deer populations and permit the Game Commission to meet its deer management objectives.
 
Prior to the new antler restrictions, Pennsylvania‘s antlered population was heavily harvested with 81% of all antlered deer being 1.5 years of age (based upon examination of 56,310 antlered deer between 1998 and 2000). In addition, Pennsylvania already had a one antlered deer per hunter limit. If deer harvest management was to reduce the harvest rate of antlered deer there were only two options available to increase the age structure of the antlered deer. They were: 1) a lottery, or allocation, limiting the number of hunters who could harvest an antlered deer each year or 2) antler restrictions. Antler restrictions were chosen because they provided all hunters with an equal chance to harvest a buck each year.
 
Pennsylvania‘s antler restrictions were designed to increase the number of adult males in the harvest. Realistically, the objectives were to protect at least half of all yearling antlered males and to make most adult males legal for harvest. Attempting to grow record book bucks was not, and is not, an objective of the antler restriction regulation.
 
The Game Commission considered 2 criteria for antler restrictions – antler points and antler spread. Hunters can judge each criterion in the field, but antler points were chosen as the primary criterion for two reasons. First, antler points provided greater flexibility in establishing restrictions that met the Game Commission‘s objectives. Point restrictions could be defined by any number of points; whereas, spread restrictions are usually judged on ear tip width. In many areas of Pennsylvania, a spread restriction of 15‖ (a common ear tip width estimate) would have protected nearly all 1.5 year-old males but also many 2.5 year-old and older males. This level of protection was incompatible with objectives. Second, antler points provided a larger data set upon which the regulation was based. Each year trained personnel collect age and antler point data from deer during the hunting season. In the 3 years prior to the change in antler restrictions, the Game Commission had age and antler point data on more than 50,000 antlered deer. In contrast, it had antler spread data on about 3,000 deer. Point data provided a more solid foundation for antler restrictions.
 
There is even more to the report that could help hunters better understand many of the various part of deer management so I encourage everyone to sit down and read the entire 2009-2018 Deer Management Plan found here.
 
[color=#800080 size=3]http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/deer/11949
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#130
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 11:51:44 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: rsquared

Regarding the collared deer on Game Lands studies, I hunt pheasants on one of those Game Lands in 2D.

It would take a deer at most about 2 minutes, from ANY point on that game lands to be be off of it and onto HEAVILY posted, private property when it is pressured.





 
The fact is the deer themselves are proving that harvests are higher on private land than harvests on the public land. That is especially true where there are sizable tracts of public land.
 
Since unit 2D had the highest percentage of the 2.5 and older collared bucks harvested of any of the study areas it is rather obvious they were not all that safe if they really did run onto private land as you suggested was the case.
 
Don’t you just hate it when the deer themselves prove your opinions about them, their harvests and management opinions are not really correct?
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
 
#131
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 11:58:38 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

The fact that hunters are now harvesting fewer of the available legal bucks is also supported with the harvest results from the collared deer studies within the various regions of the state.

Of the known legal bucks out there and available to hunters


Interesting that he talks about KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS. The bucks captured for the collard study are taken AFTER deer season and in early spring BEFORE they have ANTLERS. Must be they talk to the deer and they tell them how big a rack they intend to grow. Note: the biologists don't make the claim of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS, that comes from the poster on this site.

 
I would have thought someone who professed to be so knowledgeable would have known that since they have those bucks collared they also monitor them through out the year and thus also know what kind of headgear they have.
 
We have several crews out there putting collars on bucks right now and a high percentage of the adult bucks still have their antlers. So, they know darn well a high percentage of them were antler legal during this past season and will likely be even larger next fall.
 
Perhaps just more red herring argument from those that do not like having the deer proving their opinions wrong?
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#132
wayne c
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3473
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 13:12:59 (permalink)
A good example of how the allocations didn’t experience any major increase even where they were trying to reduce the population can be seen in the comparison of the counties that make up unit 2A.

Unit_____83-87______88-92______93-97______98-02______03-07______08-11

2F______14.80______20.99______19.96_______20.43______14.44______14.10
2G______12.90______16.21______13.08_______12.30______8.65_______5.59
2A______14.04______17.59______24.50_______30.02______29.82______35.90


ha ha. Only thing that illustrates is, regardless of unit, and regardless of goal, it take lower allocations where there are less deer. If goal is herd redcution, it takes less tags in an area with less deer. Same if the goal is stabilization or if its herd increase.

Only thing that shows is how ridiculous the allocation in 2a is, despite the fact its not an sra. Tags extremely high all along since day one of "the plan, continuing on today, despite the fact it was a supposed goal of stabilization, and the herd was cut by around half.
#133
wayne c
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3473
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 13:21:52 (permalink)
There have been and are over 3000 deer being monitored so that is far from a small sample size and the data is very valid and far from the joke you want to make it appear.


No. Its a joke. And Ive stated exactly why, though you seem to have intentionally ignored it. Your "theory" simply isnt possible, and you are using it in a manner it shouldnt be used.

You just don’t like the facts the deer are providing that prove you and the others with you opinions about over harvests are very much wrong.


No. I just dont like seeing complete misinformation being spread. And the overharvests are all to clear according to the "real" deer, and the deer on paper. (pgcs data)
post edited by wayne c - 2012/01/30 13:33:55
#134
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 13:26:55 (permalink)
quote:

ORIGINAL: S-10

quote:

The detractors of the deer program try to paint antler restrictions as simply a ploy to get hunters to kill more does but that is not true and really is just a red herring argument used by those that either refuse to understand the truth or in some cases are purposely trying to undermine the program for selfish and personal reasons.

R.S. Bodenhorn

It must be the detractors you are refering to are your own fellow PGC employees because they are the ones using the Red Herring argument you are refering to.

The following is taken from page 51 and 52 of the PGC's "Draft Whitetail Management Plan 2009-2018" right after they explain that hunters are starting to resist killing more does than they have been.----------QUOTE: To meet management objectives, the game commission employed a new strategy by providing new opportunities for hunters to harvest older antlered males while seeing fewer deer. It was hoped this new approach would improve hunter tolerance for reduced deer populations and permit the game commission to meet it's deer management objectives.

I don't know how much clearer you need to make it that AR was simply a ploy to sell HR. And RSB wonders why he doesn't have any credibility.


That was a good job of cherry picking just a small part of the REAL story. Picking a line or two that support your opinion, from a larger report that does not support your opinion, is a very typical flim-flam tactic used by those that want people to promote a mis-guided opinion or agenda.


Thank you for complementing me on proving what a BSer you were in incorectly stating the real reason for antler restriction. What I don't understand is why you posted all the non revelant additional info since I gave the page number where it could be found for anyone who was interested.

The only thing being discussed was whether or not you were honest in telling us the real reason for AR, which, as you just showed, you were not. The rest is a history of deer mgt as told by the PGC and many of us lived through. No cherry picking on my part, just posting the information revelent to the topic.
#135
wayne c
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3473
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 13:28:16 (permalink)
We have several crews out there putting collars on bucks right now and a high percentage of the adult bucks still have their antlers. So, they know darn well a high percentage of them were antler legal during this past season and will likely be even larger next fall.



And by your own admission, not all. Remember we are starting with small sample size to begin with. Then knock off for nonlegal bucks, consider many folks arent gonna shoot that collared deer,(which pgc themselves even stated along with the results of the study, that that indeed could play a role) and consider that the range of this study is extremely narrow in scope...

And what you have is more wasted sportsmen dollars trying to support an unsupported extremely expensive deer management plan that is flawed fatally anyway considering how few the habitat survey plots are and how ridiculously unreprentative they are of things overall throughout a unit. Unless of course we are to be naive and believe small plots 15, 20 and at times more, miles apart actually represent something other than how ridiculous this really all is. lol.

When many know this is all about simply having something...anything..to point to to fool the topic "dumb" legislators to keep them at bay, despite there is no statistical relevance to most of it.
post edited by wayne c - 2012/01/30 13:35:24
#136
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 14:00:05 (permalink)
The fact that hunters are now harvesting fewer of the available legal bucks is also supported with the harvest results from the collared deer studies within the various regions of the state.

Of the known legal bucks out there and available to hunters the hunters only harvested the follow percentage of the 2.5 and older bucks within the respective units.

Unit______________% of known 2.5 and older bucks harvested
2D___________________________62%
2G___________________________29%
4B___________________________49%



Tell me where I can find the actual study data that shows the percentages you have displayed for the three units are the percentages of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS harvested. Not the percentages of 2-1/2 year old deer harvested but percentages of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS as you stated they were. Thank you in advance
#137
Cold
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 7358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 14:13:15 (permalink)
All this tells me is that the PGC has no idea what its trying to accomplish with all these changes they're making.

Deer are overpopulated, so we're going to increase doe tags. But there's too many bucks being shot so we're going to make up some random numbers for AR. If we do this, it will help increase the deer herd...but the deer are overpopulated, so we really want to sell more tags and get people out there hunting...

So is the goal more deer or less deer? Either way, one part of the regs or the other doesn't make a bit of sense.
#138
bingsbaits
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5035
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 14:15:41 (permalink)
I wouldn't shoot a collared deer.

"There is a pleasure in Angling that no one knows but the Angler himself". WB
 
 


#139
Cold
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 7358
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 14:42:43 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: bingsbaits

I wouldn't shoot a collared deer.


I'd shoot the collar.
#140
Guest
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 2852
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2012/05/17 08:04:02
  • Status: online
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 14:47:03 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: RSB

ORIGINAL: rsquared

Regarding the collared deer on Game Lands studies, I hunt pheasants on one of those Game Lands in 2D.

It would take a deer at most about 2 minutes, from ANY point on that game lands to be be off of it and onto HEAVILY posted, private property when it is pressured.






The fact is the deer themselves are proving that harvests are higher on private land than harvests on the public land. That is especially true where there are sizable tracts of public land.
 
Since unit 2D had the highest percentage of the 2.5 and older collared bucks harvested of any of the study areas it is rather obvious they were not all that safe if they really did run onto private land as you suggested was the case.
 
Don’t you just hate it when the deer themselves prove your opinions about them, their harvests and management opinions are not really correct?
 
R.S. Bodenhorn



Whattt? Maybe the reason I don't understand PA deer management is because I don't understand a single thing you're trying to say.

My point was made in response to your claim that hunters weren't coming close to harvesting nearly enough of the collared bucks. Now you're saying that plenty of them are being harvested.

I'm confused
#141
DarDys
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 4938
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
  • Location: Duncansville, PA
  • Status: online
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 15:17:01 (permalink)





I'm confused

 
Mission accomplished.

The poster formally known as Duncsdad

Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
#142
S-10
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 5185
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 15:53:01 (permalink)
Of the 2 studies I've read, they both trapped and collared deer from January -July.
Quite a few bucks will still have their headgear during that time, prior to dropping.
I also hunt an area that has served as one of these study areas in the past. The PGC trapped well into July near me. We have harvested 2 collared and 3 ear tagged over the years. Both collared animals were bucks.

Ironhed


They may be for different studies than the survival and mortality, antlered harvest study that started about 2007/8 and may on going although it appears the final report was written in May 2010. They state in all posted annual reports that they only trapped them from Jan/April. Study 21013

As for dropping their antlers before the start of capture it doesn't really matter. What the deer had for antlers before being caught has little relation to what they will have for antlers the following year. That is more dependent on the type winter they will go through and the amount of feed available.
post edited by S-10 - 2012/01/30 16:53:38
#143
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 19:39:02 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: wayne c

A good example of how the allocations didn’t experience any major increase even where they were trying to reduce the population can be seen in the comparison of the counties that make up unit 2A.

Unit_____83-87______88-92______93-97______98-02______03-07______08-11

2F______14.80______20.99______19.96_______20.43______14.44______14.10
2G______12.90______16.21______13.08_______12.30______8.65_______5.59
2A______14.04______17.59______24.50_______30.02______29.82______35.90


ha ha. Only thing that illustrates is, regardless of unit, and regardless of goal, it take lower allocations where there are less deer. If goal is herd redcution, it takes less tags in an area with less deer. Same if the goal is stabilization or if its herd increase.

Only thing that shows is how ridiculous the allocation in 2a is, despite the fact its not an sra. Tags extremely high all along since day one of "the plan, continuing on today, despite the fact it was a supposed goal of stabilization, and the herd was cut by around half.


 
Once again the deer and harvest facts from WMU 2A do not support your opinion. Even though they have been trying for years to significantly reduce the deer population in unit 2A they still have a buck harvest that fluctuates between second and third highest in the state. I will bet it is still one of the highest again this year too.
 
Therefore your opinion the unit is being over harvested is totally unfounded based on the facts.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn  
#144
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 19:44:14 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

quote:

ORIGINAL: S-10

quote:

The detractors of the deer program try to paint antler restrictions as simply a ploy to get hunters to kill more does but that is not true and really is just a red herring argument used by those that either refuse to understand the truth or in some cases are purposely trying to undermine the program for selfish and personal reasons.

R.S. Bodenhorn

It must be the detractors you are refering to are your own fellow PGC employees because they are the ones using the Red Herring argument you are refering to.

The following is taken from page 51 and 52 of the PGC's "Draft Whitetail Management Plan 2009-2018" right after they explain that hunters are starting to resist killing more does than they have been.----------QUOTE: To meet management objectives, the game commission employed a new strategy by providing new opportunities for hunters to harvest older antlered males while seeing fewer deer. It was hoped this new approach would improve hunter tolerance for reduced deer populations and permit the game commission to meet it's deer management objectives.

I don't know how much clearer you need to make it that AR was simply a ploy to sell HR. And RSB wonders why he doesn't have any credibility.


That was a good job of cherry picking just a small part of the REAL story. Picking a line or two that support your opinion, from a larger report that does not support your opinion, is a very typical flim-flam tactic used by those that want people to promote a mis-guided opinion or agenda.


Thank you for complementing me on proving what a BSer you were in incorectly stating the real reason for antler restriction. What I don't understand is why you posted all the non revelant additional info since I gave the page number where it could be found for anyone who was interested.

The only thing being discussed was whether or not you were honest in telling us the real reason for AR, which, as you just showed, you were not. The rest is a history of deer mgt as told by the PGC and many of us lived through. No cherry picking on my part, just posting the information revelent to the topic.

 
I guess you do have a comprehension problem unless you are just deceitful and intentionally mis-represent the facts to suit your agenda.
 
The only agenda I have is to help people have a better understanding of the reality the deer themselves provide.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#145
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 19:51:58 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: wayne c

We have several crews out there putting collars on bucks right now and a high percentage of the adult bucks still have their antlers. So, they know darn well a high percentage of them were antler legal during this past season and will likely be even larger next fall.



And by your own admission, not all. Remember we are starting with small sample size to begin with. Then knock off for nonlegal bucks, consider many folks arent gonna shoot that collared deer,(which pgc themselves even stated along with the results of the study, that that indeed could play a role) and consider that the range of this study is extremely narrow in scope...

And what you have is more wasted sportsmen dollars trying to support an unsupported extremely expensive deer management plan that is flawed fatally anyway considering how few the habitat survey plots are and how ridiculously unreprentative they are of things overall throughout a unit. Unless of course we are to be naive and believe small plots 15, 20 and at times more, miles apart actually represent something other than how ridiculous this really all is. lol.

When many know this is all about simply having something...anything..to point to to fool the topic "dumb" legislators to keep them at bay, despite there is no statistical relevance to most of it.

 
What are you talking about? When you have over 3000 deer in a study that is darn sure not a small sample size.
 
No they obviously do not know if ever buck is going to be antler legal the following year when they are putting the collars and tags on them. But, they darn sure know about most of them as they continue to monitor them into the even through the next fall hunting season.
 
But, you can darn sure bet that the once that were antler legal when they put the collars on them are going to be antler legal again the next year unless they for some reason bust their rack off and I don’t know that happening to one of them yet.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#146
wayne c
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 3473
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 19:53:26 (permalink)
Once again the deer and harvest facts from WMU 2A do not support your opinion.


Ha ha ha. AGAIN? ha ha. Sorry. Not now, nor previously was I mistaken.

Even though they have been trying for years to significantly reduce the deer population in unit 2A they still have a buck harvest that fluctuates between second and third highest in the state.


Nope. Youre talking only on a square mile basis AND not considering our pathetic harvest last year which was a many many years low. The lowest in decades, and less than half what it was back just prior to reductions. Second, it SHOULD be among the top units because its the best habitat type and should have as high a carrying capacity as anywhere. And lastly, most other units have been taken lower than need be. So whats your point? Oh thats right, there is none there.

But buck harvest should be higher this season than last, simply because they lessened the restriction for the first year, and also made the unit buck only the first week, which puts added pressure on the buck. It should then be expected to decline again as has been the trend. They threw a little stone in the pond to muddy the water a little, commissioners were pointing to the significant declines to the "biologists" and pgc staff despite the claims of stabilization. Thats what prompted the changes to ar. A very temporary bandaid that will show as something other than even more significant decline in the harvest stats.


Therefore your opinion the unit is being over harvested is totally unfounded based on the facts.



W-w-w-rong! What order the units ranks says NOTHING about wether any particular unit was underharvested, or overharvested. Its based on cc, and cc alone. Also the herd was reduced despite claims of stabilization. Thats not my opinion, thats a fact. Therefore considering the goal, the herd was overharvested. Not hard to do with so ridiculously many tags available.

post edited by wayne c - 2012/01/30 19:57:29
#147
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 19:57:24 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: S-10

The fact that hunters are now harvesting fewer of the available legal bucks is also supported with the harvest results from the collared deer studies within the various regions of the state.

Of the known legal bucks out there and available to hunters the hunters only harvested the follow percentage of the 2.5 and older bucks within the respective units.

Unit______________% of known 2.5 and older bucks harvested
2D___________________________62%
2G___________________________29%
4B___________________________49%



Tell me where I can find the actual study data that shows the percentages you have displayed for the three units are the percentages of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS harvested. Not the percentages of 2-1/2 year old deer harvested but percentages of KNOWN LEGAL BUCKS as you stated they were. Thank you in advance

 
I do not know where you can find it short of requesting it from the Deer Management Section in Harrisburg. Once the study is competed I am sure there will be a full report on the results but I doubt they are going to release much before the study is complete.  
 
I got the data I posted directly from Doctor Rosenberry in a power-point program he presented to agency personnel.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#148
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 20:27:02 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Cold

All this tells me is that the PGC has no idea what its trying to accomplish with all these changes they're making.

Deer are overpopulated, so we're going to increase doe tags. But there's too many bucks being shot so we're going to make up some random numbers for AR. If we do this, it will help increase the deer herd...but the deer are overpopulated, so we really want to sell more tags and get people out there hunting...

So is the goal more deer or less deer? Either way, one part of the regs or the other doesn't make a bit of sense.

 
I guess you are confused.
 
In many areas of the state the deer populations were too high to be sustained on the limited OVER WINTER food supplies.
 
Therefore, you have two options. You can either allow hunters to harvest enough deer to be sustainable through the winter or you can pray they have an extremely mild and open winter so the population does not collapse. But, even with no winter the population will eventually crash if you do not harvest some of them out of that herd. Plus, if the population is not reduced the excess deer are going to cause damage to the habitat (read that as food supply) so that the habitat will support even fewer deer in the future. When you do that it is only a matter of time until that deer population crashes and stays lower than it would have been if you had been harvesting enough deer each and every year to keep your habitat healthy and in good supply.
 
By keeping the OVER WINTER deer herd reduced to the correct over winter population you also have higher fawn recruitment which means the next fall hunters have to remove the same or perhaps even more deer just to get the OVER WINTER population back to what it has been the year before.
 
The reason for keeping more bucks is so there are enough bucks to get the MAXIMUM number of the does you already carried through the previous winter plus any breeding mature juvenile does bred in the fall. Thus, having the highest possible fawn recruitment the next spring and summer. That is important because the higher the fawn recruitment is the more deer hunters can harvest the next fall without actually reducing the next year’s deer population.
 
Both future deer populations and future deer harvests are all dependant on basically just two things. The first of those two things is how many deer you can sustain through the winter, without the deer population actively reducing its own numbers by either winter mortality of existing deer or does that are stressed from not enough food thus losing weight and not sending enough nutrition to the unborn fawns so that they die shortly after being born. The other factor is having as many of those existing does bred so they can produce fawns the next spring.
 
That is why carrying the correct number of deer is important and also why having as many does bred as possible. Having the correct buck/doe ratio is important toward reaching both of those objectives.  
 
I know there are a lot of people that simply don’t understand those deer management principles so they cannot understand the objectives either. But, what I just posted is about as simple as I can make the explanation and still keep it reasonably understandable.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#149
RSB
Expert Angler
  • Total Posts : 932
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2010/08/11 22:55:57
  • Status: offline
RE: never happen in PA 2012/01/30 20:29:38 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: bingsbaits

I wouldn't shoot a collared deer.

 
Most people do not even see the collar or ear tags until they walk up to the dead deer.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn
#150
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 5 of 15
Jump to: