ORIGINAL: World Famous

I'm all for a tweety bird season!! 20 or 30 tweety birds roasting in an orange sauce and served over a bed of rice. A glass of Charles Krug chenin-blanc and I'm there...WF....Followed up with a scotch on the rocks and Double Taper cigar..

ORIGINAL: wayne c

The perfect example would be my archery remarks.. rifle hunters far out-number the archers...
and with archers getting 30% of the bucks it would only be a matter of taking the vote to get the season cut back so more would be available for the rifle hunters..... or even maybe a 3 day junior and senior "buck hunt" in October.. make the current one either or....I like that one too and with the number of seniors getting higher that too could get easily changed by juniors and seniors voting for it...

It was never as much of an issue prior to hr. It seems hr compounded alot of other "percieved" problems some hunters had with other things. More deer = more to go around, for both archers and rifle hunters.

allowing hunters to set policies and seasons, etc.. REALLY BAD IDEA ....

Within reason doc. I dont think hunters should write the entire script. But they most certainly could have the say in many more things that they do currently.

Folks not happy with today's policies, seasons, populations, etc.. are not going to be happy no matter what... they'll just find something else to complain about... been that way forever in Pa with deer hunting especially...

Thats a far from being true. Nowhere near as many hunters were as p-oed for the last few decades prior to 2000 as they have been since 2000. Not even close by a longshot. Most that Im aware of who are p-oed had very little complaint prior to Hr. That is one of the most asnine damage control statements I hear repeated on message boards by a select few over and over. And its nowhere close to being true. Just some trying to pass over the extreme and make it seem more "normal". If it were not for excessive HR and the environmentalist/timber agenda in place, Id have no major problems with things as they stood.

Pgc getting themselves sued, legislators forcing audits, prevented fee increases, all time high hunter dissent. Deer hunters quitting at much higher rate than others. Hunter numbers declining at over double the national average from 2001 to 2006, lil' Gary needing body guards and flack jackets just to speak in public...etc. "Deer Wars" and even the audit pointing to the high level of dissent thats lasted so long as being "unusual" and problematic. Sorry Doc, trying to pass all that off as "normal" is insane. lmao.

Guess thats what happens when you have "other" political agendas being pushed by our, what used to be, "game" management agency.

This is just one of the few remaining web sites where those apposed to professional deer management practices have been able to gather and post at any level of strength over those that do support scientific management.

Since you are so sure the Game Commission deer estimate, before herd reduction was incorrect, you should go ahead and tell us how many deer there really were and how you came up that population number.

I too disagree with your comments that more people are apposed to the current deer management direction than in the past.

I have been listening to hunters complaining and professing that the Game Commission is trying to kill off all the does for over fifty years now.

It appears to me, having spent about three and half decades listening to hunters, that there are more and more hunters becoming better educated on the REALITIES of the deer/habitat relationship and thus being more supportive of deer management and the need for harvesting does than ever before in the past

This is just one of the few remaining web sites where those apposed to professional deer management practices have been able to gather and post at any level of strength over those that do support scientific management.

ORIGINAL: psu_fish

maybe cause this site isnt in the hip pocket of the PGC like HuntPA is

ORIGINAL: RSB

ORIGINAL: S-10

This is just one of the few remaining web sites where those apposed to professional deer management practices have been able to gather and post at any level of strength over those that do support scientific management.

Care to give any EXAMPLES of SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT that has been employed by the PGC that is different than before HR/AR?

1. The method of estimating deer numbers is the same method used in the 1970's
2. The PA SAK model is from the 1950's
3. Nearly everyone of the newer research papers references studies from as far back as the 1930's
4. HR was sold on 1,600,000 million deer which was a lie.
5.HR was sold on deer being responsible for Lyme disease which was a lie
6. Pa was using scientific deer management for 100 years. Just not the kind that put the Audubons birdies in front of the game animals.

The reason we are able to post with any strength is because we have been able to prove false most of the claims that the PGC's minions have been making on here. Sorry that upsets some people but perhaps if they didn't try to BS us all the time they wouldn't be proven wrong so often.

We are still using round wheels too. There has been no need to continuously reinvent the wheel because it works the same as it did 100 or even 1000 years ago.  
 
  
R.S. Bodenhorn

ORIGINAL: DarDys

ORIGINAL: RSB

ORIGINAL: S-10

This is just one of the few remaining web sites where those apposed to professional deer management practices have been able to gather and post at any level of strength over those that do support scientific management.

Care to give any EXAMPLES of SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT that has been employed by the PGC that is different than before HR/AR?

1. The method of estimating deer numbers is the same method used in the 1970's
2. The PA SAK model is from the 1950's
3. Nearly everyone of the newer research papers references studies from as far back as the 1930's
4. HR was sold on 1,600,000 million deer which was a lie.
5.HR was sold on deer being responsible for Lyme disease which was a lie
6. Pa was using scientific deer management for 100 years. Just not the kind that put the Audubons birdies in front of the game animals.

The reason we are able to post with any strength is because we have been able to prove false most of the claims that the PGC's minions have been making on here. Sorry that upsets some people but perhaps if they didn't try to BS us all the time they wouldn't be proven wrong so often.

We are still using round wheels too. There has been no need to continuously reinvent the wheel because it works the same as it did 100 or even 1000 years ago.  

  
R.S. Bodenhorn

And those wheels are no longer made of stone, or metal, or wood, of in some cases, even rubber.  Those wheels may or may not have treads, may or may not be filled with air at varying pressures foam, or are solid.  They may be soft or hard.  But they fit the specific application they are intended for.  And the research that makes the changes, or more correctly stated, evloution of the wheel, is done by those that utilize proper methodologies because, unlike a psuedo governement agency, designing the research wrong, doing the research wrong, or coming to incorrect conclusions about the research has serious implications for their organization and them personally. 

ORIGINAL: wayne c

No, as frequently happens you have once again missed the entire point and came up with another red herring point of argument.

I think he made an excellent point. When the "mismanagement" is so blatant, and so obvious as to entail all the "extremes" that ours has, it isnt "brain surgery" and its not hard for most to recognize it. Just as it doesnt take a doctor to figure out a guy laying on the ground with his arm detached might have a medical situation on his hands.

It also doesnt take a genius to read and understand very basic principles, do 6th grade math etc. when necessary to prove a point. lmao.

Using your analogy I guess the guy that finds the person laying there with his arm cut off should just go ahead and stitch it back on?