DPMS 
S-10
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 5185
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
- Status: offline
DPMS
I was cruising through old crossbow forums and found one of yours from the spring commenting on the dangers facing the archers from complaints to the BOC from rifle hunters over archers harvest numbers. In it you stated that archers harvest 38% of the bucks each year as of 2013. You also stated the Biologists claim that based on several study areas archers only take 7% of the legal collard bucks and they have no concerns regarding harvests.
I think this is another example of the PGC study methods that Dardys has a fit over and rightfully so. If the archers take 38% of the total bucks killed and that is only 7% of the total legal bucks available then the rifle hunters with their 62% take is only 11% of the total legal bucks available.
What the biologists are saying, whether they realize it or not, is that all hunters together are only killing 18% of the total legal bucks available in a given season. I think their study is just a weee bit flawed.
|
DarDys
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4893
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
- Location: Duncansville, PA
- Status: offline
Agreed. Especially when before AR the PGC stance was that hunters killed 80% of the bucks (since they were all legal). I find it hard to believe that basically 60% were not AR legal.
Also, if hunters only kill 18% of the available bucks, and they kill about 100,000 of them, that would put the buck population at something approaching 600,000. With a 1:1 buck/doe ratio, the population would be over a million deer. If it were even 1:2, the population would be right back where it was, supposedly, before HR.
Anyone believe that?
The poster formally known as Duncsdad Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
|
Esox_Hunter
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 2393
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2006/08/02 14:32:57
- Status: offline
It's been a while since I've seen the study, but wasn't the study area centered in the big, mature forests in the NC part of the state? If so, the archery bucks harvests as a percentage of total buck harvest in those WMU's are far lower than the statewide average. If I recall correctly, the archery buck harvest in those areas (2G, 2H, 2F) is more in the neighborhood of 20-25% of the total buck harvest. Combine that with the fact that deer densities are very low for the most part in those areas and I don't think it is too far fetched to believe that hunters aren't killing nearly as many bucks as people seem to think in that particular study area.
Again I don't recall all of the PGC's findings, but it is pretty ridiculous to think that their little study could ever be applied statewide. My observations tell me that 7% figure is completely absurd for the areas I hunt and it is has got to be more like 4 to 5 times that.
|
eyesandgillz
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4011
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2003/06/18 11:30:03
- Status: offline
DarDys
Agreed. Especially when before AR the PGC stance was that hunters killed 80% of the bucks (since they were all legal). I find it hard to believe that basically 60% were not AR legal.
Also, if hunters only kill 18% of the available bucks, and they kill about 100,000 of them, that would put the buck population at something approaching 600,000. With a 1:1 buck/doe ratio, the population would be over a million deer. If it were even 1:2, the population would be right back where it was, supposedly, before HR.
Anyone believe that?
Actually, I believe the deer population in PA, come September, is over a million animals, easy. Granted, many are concentrated in areas that are tough to hunt or unhuntable but yes, there are a lot of frickin' deer in PA still. But, as Esox states, you cant apply the percentages from the study area statewide because the habitat varies so much. I do believe their #'s are probably correct for those particular types of rough, mountain type terrains.
|
S-10
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 5185
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
- Status: offline
Actually Dardys number is incorrect as he missed the fact it is 18% of the available legal bucks which is only about half of the antlered bucks per the PGC. You would have to double that to 1.2 million antlered bucks.
I also have a hard time believing any sizeable area only has a 18% kill rate on bucks as over a very few years there would literally be a buck behind every tree.
|
DarDys
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 4893
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
- Location: Duncansville, PA
- Status: offline
I was try to be conservative. Yes, I know the study is greatly flawed and should not be used except in an outhouse, but if they use it as a management tool, and they have, then by extension it can be used to show their idiocies
post edited by DarDys - 2015/01/07 15:07:00
The poster formally known as Duncsdad Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
|
wayne c
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 3473
- Reward points: 0
- Status: offline
I also have a hard time believing any sizeable area only has a 18% kill rate on bucks as over a very few years there would literally be a buck behind every tree. Yep, and an age structure of older bucks that would make any "trophy state" proud. What you state there is pretty much common sense, and its actually mind numbing that some don't understand such basic concepts, and quite insulting for them to ever even attempt to try to get us to think otherwise. When it very clear they lean heavily on what suits them, but don't dwell on, or even bother to mention obvious flaws in logic, it shows beyond doubt that preserving certain agendas are the foremost goal. Very biased and very flawed "science"...
post edited by wayne c - 2015/01/08 16:46:37
|
dpms
Pro Angler
- Total Posts : 3509
- Reward points: 0
- Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
- Status: offline
S-10
I was cruising through old crossbow forums and found one of yours from the spring commenting on the dangers facing the archers from complaints to the BOC from rifle hunters over archers harvest numbers. In it you stated that archers harvest 38% of the bucks each year as of 2013. You also stated the Biologists claim that based on several study areas archers only take 7% of the legal collard bucks and they have no concerns regarding harvests.
I think this is another example of the PGC study methods that Dardys has a fit over and rightfully so. If the archers take 38% of the total bucks killed and that is only 7% of the total legal bucks available then the rifle hunters with their 62% take is only 11% of the total legal bucks available.
What the biologists are saying, whether they realize it or not, is that all hunters together are only killing 18% of the total legal bucks available in a given season. I think their study is just a weee bit flawed.
Just catching up here. No doubt the data from that study cannot be applied statewide. I have no reason to doubt the data from the study area but it does show that at least in some areas, archery hunting is not having much of a impact. In other areas, I am sure it is much higher than 7%. Who knows. Bottom line is total antlered harvest has remained flat or paralleled population trends. We also are harvesting does prior to the rut by archery, early muzzeloader, and youth/senior rifle which keeps buck/doe ratios unaffected. Plus AR protect a good portion of our bucks.
My rifle is a black rifle
|
|
|