vBCms Comments
Welcome To Hunting Country
General Hunting Forums
Archery & Bowhunting
Shooting Sports
Manufacturers' Corner
Firearms
Classifieds
Not Hunting / General Chit Chat
1.) Deerminator - 04/16/2015
Anyone have any results of the antler restrictions that have been in place in PA for like the last 15 years?
What's the hunting like now? All the hunters should be harvesting big bucks, 10ptrs, 12pointers, 14ptrs.
The normal body weight should be. What, 200/ + lbs for a buck.
What's the [I]REAL[/I] story.?
What's the hunting like now? All the hunters should be harvesting big bucks, 10ptrs, 12pointers, 14ptrs.
The normal body weight should be. What, 200/ + lbs for a buck.
What's the [I]REAL[/I] story.?
2.) Swamp Fox - 04/16/2015
This is an excellent article making several important points and laying things out nicely. Well worth a read all the way through:
[url]http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/land-management/huntingtactics_naw_0907_10/[/url]
Also this, which addresses area-specific concerns. It especially bugs me when people here point to the Texas experience as justification to shoot spikes in the Carolinas. Ain't gonna work. But you hear from plenty of people ready to roll with it because, well, Texas. :tap::bang::re: :
[I]Data from Texas show that 25 percent of all yearlings are spikes, while 93 percent of spikes are yearlings. In other words, hunters could take every spike from the yearling age-class, and that would still leave 75 percent of the yearlings alive and well in the field.
Not only did the spike-only option promote hunter opportunities, but it also opened the door for the TPWD to raise the annual bag limit from one buck to two, as long as one of the bucks had at least one spike antler.
Additionally, this strategy may have helped reduce any “high-grading” in the 1˝-year-old age class. High-grading means that hunters harvest all the top-end bucks and leave the lower-quality bucks (spikes) to breed. In addition to increasing the bag limit to two bucks in the antler-restriction counties, the TPWD dropped the option of six or more points on one antler.
...
C.J.’s Summary: Do antler restrictions work as a way of increasing the age structure of bucks? Yes! Although this is a controversial and emotional topic among hunters and wildlife managers, what choice do state wildlife agencies have but to embrace this management scheme if the majority of hunters and landowners want improved buck hunting?
[B]With that said, one thing that keeps some states from implementing antler restrictions is the percentage of spikes in the 1˝-year-old age class. Some southeastern states report that 70-80 percent of yearlings are spikes. Thus, harvesting spikes only could take a huge bite out of the yearling buck population. Additionally, in the Midwest, many yearling bucks have antler spreads of 15 inches and greater. Would an inside spread criteria work in this region? Probably not. The point is that antler restrictions can be wonderful, but they must be evaluated on a site-specific basis.
[/B]
Read more: [url]http://www.bowhunter.com/feature_articles/feature_articles_bw_antlers_0409/#ixzz3XTkaWV6O[/url]
[/I]
[url]http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/land-management/huntingtactics_naw_0907_10/[/url]
Also this, which addresses area-specific concerns. It especially bugs me when people here point to the Texas experience as justification to shoot spikes in the Carolinas. Ain't gonna work. But you hear from plenty of people ready to roll with it because, well, Texas. :tap::bang::re: :
[I]Data from Texas show that 25 percent of all yearlings are spikes, while 93 percent of spikes are yearlings. In other words, hunters could take every spike from the yearling age-class, and that would still leave 75 percent of the yearlings alive and well in the field.
Not only did the spike-only option promote hunter opportunities, but it also opened the door for the TPWD to raise the annual bag limit from one buck to two, as long as one of the bucks had at least one spike antler.
Additionally, this strategy may have helped reduce any “high-grading” in the 1˝-year-old age class. High-grading means that hunters harvest all the top-end bucks and leave the lower-quality bucks (spikes) to breed. In addition to increasing the bag limit to two bucks in the antler-restriction counties, the TPWD dropped the option of six or more points on one antler.
...
C.J.’s Summary: Do antler restrictions work as a way of increasing the age structure of bucks? Yes! Although this is a controversial and emotional topic among hunters and wildlife managers, what choice do state wildlife agencies have but to embrace this management scheme if the majority of hunters and landowners want improved buck hunting?
[B]With that said, one thing that keeps some states from implementing antler restrictions is the percentage of spikes in the 1˝-year-old age class. Some southeastern states report that 70-80 percent of yearlings are spikes. Thus, harvesting spikes only could take a huge bite out of the yearling buck population. Additionally, in the Midwest, many yearling bucks have antler spreads of 15 inches and greater. Would an inside spread criteria work in this region? Probably not. The point is that antler restrictions can be wonderful, but they must be evaluated on a site-specific basis.
[/B]
Read more: [url]http://www.bowhunter.com/feature_articles/feature_articles_bw_antlers_0409/#ixzz3XTkaWV6O[/url]
[/I]
3.) Swamp Fox - 04/16/2015
This is an excellent article making several important points and laying things out nicely. Well worth a read all the way through:
[url]http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/land-management/huntingtactics_naw_0907_10/[/url]
Also this, which addresses area-specific concerns. It especially bugs me when people here point to the Texas experience as justification to shoot spikes in the Carolinas. Ain't gonna work. But you hear from plenty of people ready to roll with it because, well, Texas. :tap::bang: :re: :
[I]Data from Texas show that 25 percent of all yearlings are spikes, while 93 percent of spikes are yearlings. In other words, hunters could take every spike from the yearling age-class, and that would still leave 75 percent of the yearlings alive and well in the field.
Not only did the spike-only option promote hunter opportunities, but it also opened the door for the TPWD to raise the annual bag limit from one buck to two, as long as one of the bucks had at least one spike antler.
Additionally, this strategy may have helped reduce any “high-grading” in the 1˝-year-old age class. High-grading means that hunters harvest all the top-end bucks and leave the lower-quality bucks (spikes) to breed. In addition to increasing the bag limit to two bucks in the antler-restriction counties, the TPWD dropped the option of six or more points on one antler.
...
C.J.’s Summary: Do antler restrictions work as a way of increasing the age structure of bucks? Yes! Although this is a controversial and emotional topic among hunters and wildlife managers, what choice do state wildlife agencies have but to embrace this management scheme if the majority of hunters and landowners want improved buck hunting?
[B]With that said, one thing that keeps some states from implementing antler restrictions is the percentage of spikes in the 1˝-year-old age class. Some southeastern states report that 70-80 percent of yearlings are spikes. Thus, harvesting spikes only could take a huge bite out of the yearling buck population. Additionally, in the Midwest, many yearling bucks have antler spreads of 15 inches and greater. Would an inside spread criteria work in this region? Probably not. The point is that antler restrictions can be wonderful, but they must be evaluated on a site-specific basis.
[/B]
Read more: [url]http://www.bowhunter.com/feature_articles/feature_articles_bw_antlers_0409/#ixzz3XTkaWV6O[/url]
[/I]
[url]http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/land-management/huntingtactics_naw_0907_10/[/url]
Also this, which addresses area-specific concerns. It especially bugs me when people here point to the Texas experience as justification to shoot spikes in the Carolinas. Ain't gonna work. But you hear from plenty of people ready to roll with it because, well, Texas. :tap::bang: :re: :
[I]Data from Texas show that 25 percent of all yearlings are spikes, while 93 percent of spikes are yearlings. In other words, hunters could take every spike from the yearling age-class, and that would still leave 75 percent of the yearlings alive and well in the field.
Not only did the spike-only option promote hunter opportunities, but it also opened the door for the TPWD to raise the annual bag limit from one buck to two, as long as one of the bucks had at least one spike antler.
Additionally, this strategy may have helped reduce any “high-grading” in the 1˝-year-old age class. High-grading means that hunters harvest all the top-end bucks and leave the lower-quality bucks (spikes) to breed. In addition to increasing the bag limit to two bucks in the antler-restriction counties, the TPWD dropped the option of six or more points on one antler.
...
C.J.’s Summary: Do antler restrictions work as a way of increasing the age structure of bucks? Yes! Although this is a controversial and emotional topic among hunters and wildlife managers, what choice do state wildlife agencies have but to embrace this management scheme if the majority of hunters and landowners want improved buck hunting?
[B]With that said, one thing that keeps some states from implementing antler restrictions is the percentage of spikes in the 1˝-year-old age class. Some southeastern states report that 70-80 percent of yearlings are spikes. Thus, harvesting spikes only could take a huge bite out of the yearling buck population. Additionally, in the Midwest, many yearling bucks have antler spreads of 15 inches and greater. Would an inside spread criteria work in this region? Probably not. The point is that antler restrictions can be wonderful, but they must be evaluated on a site-specific basis.
[/B]
Read more: [url]http://www.bowhunter.com/feature_articles/feature_articles_bw_antlers_0409/#ixzz3XTkaWV6O[/url]
[/I]
4.) Deerminator - 04/17/2015
There is a very enlightening article in the NY Outdoor news.
I couldn't find the article online. Toxo might post the info.
In general The outcome has really destroyed the hunting of the average Joe. The only benefit was to the hunters that are wealthy enough to have land and lots of food plots.
There is a lower number of bucks and a significantly smaller heard over all after 15years.
I couldn't find the article online. Toxo might post the info.
In general The outcome has really destroyed the hunting of the average Joe. The only benefit was to the hunters that are wealthy enough to have land and lots of food plots.
There is a lower number of bucks and a significantly smaller heard over all after 15years.
5.) Swamp Fox - 04/17/2015
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31269]...In general The outcome has really destroyed the hunting of the average Joe. The only benefit was to the hunters that are wealthy enough to have land and lots of food plots.[/QUOTE]
How have antler restrictions pushed a wedge between wealthier hunters and average Joes? Seems to me attractive hunting conditions attract tourism and efforts to improve habitat even further. Some land is going to be attractive enough that people will want to buy it or lease it. The alternative to attractive hunting conditions is hunting no one cares to opt for if they have choices, and land that is under-utilized, unimproved, and probably damaged by deer overpopulation. Maybe that's all average Joe has ever known and he's happy with the way things are, but if that's the case then it isn't antler restrictions that are going to hurt the hunting.
I look at it this way: Antler restrictions and other active management techniques may create the environment for attractive hunting, but they don't destroy the hunting of the average Joe. The case could be made that they can expand his opportunities. He will be hunting older, smarter, healthier animals where those animals didn't exist when younger age-classes were not protected, and he should have plenty of opportunities to fill the freezer with delicious doe meat if his philosophy is "You can't eat the horns."
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31269]There is a lower number of bucks and a significantly smaller heard over all after 15years.[/QUOTE]
I would be interested in seeing the numbers on this, though a smaller deer population is often a good thing. If somebody came to me and said the deer population is down 25% from 10 years ago, I'd be thinking of the bigger deer, the healthier deer, and the reduced human conflict that means, not "I'll never be able to eat venison again."
An excerpt from a NAW article on NY ARs (2010):
[I]So what’s been going on in these WMUs? In terms of protecting yearling bucks, the program has been an overwhelming success. Prior to 2005 in WMU 3C, yearling bucks constituted 58 percent of the buck take. They now represent only 23 percent. The harvest of 2 1/2-year-olds has increased from a historical average of 31 percent to 42 percent.
What’s even more interesting is the fact that the take of 3 1/2-year-old and older bucks has gone from 11 percent to a whopping 35 percent. This means that over one-third of the bucks being harvested in these study areas are 3 1/2 years old or older. That’s unprecedented in New York. The data is very much the same in the other WMUs, with the exception being that slightly fewer older bucks were taken in units 3H and 3J.
THE PROGRAM WORKS!
Looking at the data from a statewide perspective, we see that yearlings still amount to 64 percent of the total take, 2 1/2-year-olds account for 25 percent, and bucks that are 3 1/2 years old or older account for a mere 12 percent. It’s obvious that the antler restriction program is working!
One of the ways the DEC measures the buck population is by the number of bucks taken per square mile. Prior to the start of the program, the average number of bucks taken per square mile within the study units was 2.5. Following the 2007 season, the number dropped to 1.8 bucks per square mile. This was a decrease for sure, but not nearly as significant as one would expect when you consider that, historically, over 70 percent of the bucks in the woods were yearlings when the hunting season opened.
Another measure of the success of this program is the average number of antler points on the bucks taken. Across all four WMUs, the average number of points prior to the study was 4.6. In just three years, the average number of antler points has increase to nearly 7 in two of the study units. In two other units, the average number of antler points increased to 7 in just two years!
Read more: [url]http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/land-management/deermanagement_wt_antler_0109/2/#ixzz3XZrINhf1[/url]
[/I]
Some thoughts from the peanut gallery:
[url]http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/northeast/359881-antler-restrictions-new-york.html[/url]
How have antler restrictions pushed a wedge between wealthier hunters and average Joes? Seems to me attractive hunting conditions attract tourism and efforts to improve habitat even further. Some land is going to be attractive enough that people will want to buy it or lease it. The alternative to attractive hunting conditions is hunting no one cares to opt for if they have choices, and land that is under-utilized, unimproved, and probably damaged by deer overpopulation. Maybe that's all average Joe has ever known and he's happy with the way things are, but if that's the case then it isn't antler restrictions that are going to hurt the hunting.
I look at it this way: Antler restrictions and other active management techniques may create the environment for attractive hunting, but they don't destroy the hunting of the average Joe. The case could be made that they can expand his opportunities. He will be hunting older, smarter, healthier animals where those animals didn't exist when younger age-classes were not protected, and he should have plenty of opportunities to fill the freezer with delicious doe meat if his philosophy is "You can't eat the horns."
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31269]There is a lower number of bucks and a significantly smaller heard over all after 15years.[/QUOTE]
I would be interested in seeing the numbers on this, though a smaller deer population is often a good thing. If somebody came to me and said the deer population is down 25% from 10 years ago, I'd be thinking of the bigger deer, the healthier deer, and the reduced human conflict that means, not "I'll never be able to eat venison again."
An excerpt from a NAW article on NY ARs (2010):
[I]So what’s been going on in these WMUs? In terms of protecting yearling bucks, the program has been an overwhelming success. Prior to 2005 in WMU 3C, yearling bucks constituted 58 percent of the buck take. They now represent only 23 percent. The harvest of 2 1/2-year-olds has increased from a historical average of 31 percent to 42 percent.
What’s even more interesting is the fact that the take of 3 1/2-year-old and older bucks has gone from 11 percent to a whopping 35 percent. This means that over one-third of the bucks being harvested in these study areas are 3 1/2 years old or older. That’s unprecedented in New York. The data is very much the same in the other WMUs, with the exception being that slightly fewer older bucks were taken in units 3H and 3J.
THE PROGRAM WORKS!
Looking at the data from a statewide perspective, we see that yearlings still amount to 64 percent of the total take, 2 1/2-year-olds account for 25 percent, and bucks that are 3 1/2 years old or older account for a mere 12 percent. It’s obvious that the antler restriction program is working!
One of the ways the DEC measures the buck population is by the number of bucks taken per square mile. Prior to the start of the program, the average number of bucks taken per square mile within the study units was 2.5. Following the 2007 season, the number dropped to 1.8 bucks per square mile. This was a decrease for sure, but not nearly as significant as one would expect when you consider that, historically, over 70 percent of the bucks in the woods were yearlings when the hunting season opened.
Another measure of the success of this program is the average number of antler points on the bucks taken. Across all four WMUs, the average number of points prior to the study was 4.6. In just three years, the average number of antler points has increase to nearly 7 in two of the study units. In two other units, the average number of antler points increased to 7 in just two years!
Read more: [url]http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/land-management/deermanagement_wt_antler_0109/2/#ixzz3XZrINhf1[/url]
[/I]
Some thoughts from the peanut gallery:
[url]http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/northeast/359881-antler-restrictions-new-york.html[/url]
6.) toxophilite - 04/18/2015
15 years ago PA. hunters bagged 504,600 deer, in 2005 one year after the start of AR restrictions they bagged 354,390 deer, this past year PA. hunters harvested 303,973 deer. so in 15 years PA. hunter success has dropped 40%. :tap: don't drink the cool aid guys AR doesn't work :td:
7.) Deerminator - 04/18/2015
I"M going to find the article.
It indicated that the average hunter who only gets a few days to hunt or the 1 week of vacation lost out cause they couldn't spend the extra time in the woods to try and bag an allowable
Deer. Wealthier hunters with land and large food plots were able to hold more deer, ( BUCKS )Than the surrounding areas. Hence those lucky guys got to fill there tags .
Might take a day or 2 but I'll get the info.
The data above does not refleck how many hunters went home with out a deer. It's data that only tells you what they want you to hear.
Wish the P.A. guys would chime in.
It indicated that the average hunter who only gets a few days to hunt or the 1 week of vacation lost out cause they couldn't spend the extra time in the woods to try and bag an allowable
Deer. Wealthier hunters with land and large food plots were able to hold more deer, ( BUCKS )Than the surrounding areas. Hence those lucky guys got to fill there tags .
Might take a day or 2 but I'll get the info.
The data above does not refleck how many hunters went home with out a deer. It's data that only tells you what they want you to hear.
Wish the P.A. guys would chime in.
8.) Deerminator - 04/18/2015
There ya go;
There's more, but I don't have it now.:-)
There's more, but I don't have it now.:-)
9.) Swamp Fox - 04/18/2015
And yet 2013's total harvest was just about the same as 2005's, with about 12% more bucks in the take. 2014's total deer kill (by hunting) is down maybe 15% from 2005, but the number of bucks taken is about the same.
It probably does takes more effort to kill an older, smarter deer, but Pa. hunters seem to be holding their own.
It seems from the data that the deer harvest in Pennsylvania is up by about 10% since 1986 (the first year to use the current tally method), with an increase in the size, age and quality of the bucks taken since ARs were instituted more recently.
It probably does takes more effort to kill an older, smarter deer, but Pa. hunters seem to be holding their own.
It seems from the data that the deer harvest in Pennsylvania is up by about 10% since 1986 (the first year to use the current tally method), with an increase in the size, age and quality of the bucks taken since ARs were instituted more recently.
10.) Deerminator - 04/18/2015
Here is some of the info. Note that it says that the hunters in P.A. don't believe the game commission.
March 24, 2015
It’s amazing how differently Pennsylvania’s deer-hunting situation is viewed by some outside the state compared to many inside the state. That discrepancy was perhaps never clearer than this year.
As most Pennsylvania Outdoor News readers are aware, the Keystone State’s hunter deer harvest, according to Game Commission estimates, was down significatly from last year.
The commission says hunters killed 303,973 deer in 2014-15. That's about 14 percent fewer than the 352,920 the agency says they took the year before.
The buck harvest was reportedly down 11 percent, with hunters taking 119,260 last year. The doe harvest, the commission claims, was down 16 percent, to 184,713.
It’s safe to say many Pennsylvania deer hunters are unhappy with the hunting here, but according to the Quality Deer Management Association‘s annual “Whitetail Report,” things are not so bad.
In 2013-14, according to the report, Pennsylvania ranked fifth nationally in total buck harvest, trailing only Texas, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia. It also produced three bucks per square mile, which also ranked fifth nationally.
The report also said Pennsylvania ranked third nationally in doe harvest and fourth in does harvested per square mile, at 4.9.
The deer harvest estimates recently released by the commission – though down from the year before – likely will rank Pennsylvania among the nation's leaders in harvest again.
But many hunters in the state don’t believe the Game Commission’s harvest estimates and, as a result, are highly skeptical of Pennsylvania’s high national ranking for hunter buck and doe kills.
Many Keystone State deer hunters are convinced deer populations in large sections of the state – especially on the Northern Tier’s vast public lands – are so low that they are nearly unhuntable.
Because fewer than one in three deer hunters report killing deer, the Game Commission uses a peer-reviewed process and formula to estimate deer harvests that seems to be widely respected nationally, but is widely panned by Pennsylvania hunters.
The Keystone State's deer debate shows no sign of dissipating.
March 24, 2015
It’s amazing how differently Pennsylvania’s deer-hunting situation is viewed by some outside the state compared to many inside the state. That discrepancy was perhaps never clearer than this year.
As most Pennsylvania Outdoor News readers are aware, the Keystone State’s hunter deer harvest, according to Game Commission estimates, was down significatly from last year.
The commission says hunters killed 303,973 deer in 2014-15. That's about 14 percent fewer than the 352,920 the agency says they took the year before.
The buck harvest was reportedly down 11 percent, with hunters taking 119,260 last year. The doe harvest, the commission claims, was down 16 percent, to 184,713.
It’s safe to say many Pennsylvania deer hunters are unhappy with the hunting here, but according to the Quality Deer Management Association‘s annual “Whitetail Report,” things are not so bad.
In 2013-14, according to the report, Pennsylvania ranked fifth nationally in total buck harvest, trailing only Texas, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia. It also produced three bucks per square mile, which also ranked fifth nationally.
The report also said Pennsylvania ranked third nationally in doe harvest and fourth in does harvested per square mile, at 4.9.
The deer harvest estimates recently released by the commission – though down from the year before – likely will rank Pennsylvania among the nation's leaders in harvest again.
But many hunters in the state don’t believe the Game Commission’s harvest estimates and, as a result, are highly skeptical of Pennsylvania’s high national ranking for hunter buck and doe kills.
Many Keystone State deer hunters are convinced deer populations in large sections of the state – especially on the Northern Tier’s vast public lands – are so low that they are nearly unhuntable.
Because fewer than one in three deer hunters report killing deer, the Game Commission uses a peer-reviewed process and formula to estimate deer harvests that seems to be widely respected nationally, but is widely panned by Pennsylvania hunters.
The Keystone State's deer debate shows no sign of dissipating.
11.) Deerminator - 04/18/2015
TOxo has a different article with more data, the article above also only goes back 1 year.
12.) Swamp Fox - 04/18/2015
Thanks for posting that. It goes to show that some people won't be happy no matter what you do, especially if they have the Keystone gene. LOL.
I deal with Pa. hunters and fishermen a fair amount, and a bigger group of grousers I've never met in my life. :re: :p There must be something in the water up there. So much so that they've become my favorite group to pick on, with a slight lead over the French and the Germans, and even the Canadians.
BTW, Pennsylvanians, don't get your knickers or your lederhosen all in a knot when I poke fun on this forum. If I really didn't like you, I'd ignore you. :-) As to why I pay attention to the deer wars in Pa. in the first place, as an outsider: I'm interested in whitetail management. Wherever it's done. So suck it. :wink LOL. ( A little bit of Philly humor there. :dig:)
Pennsylvania went through an intense herd-reduction management program from about 1999-2006 because a vast over-population of deer was causing so much damage to the habitat, and yet people want to compare the high harvest numbers of the early 2000's to today. Almost as bad, they want to compare numbers from one year to the next as if looking at two consecutive years of kill data is how you determine a trend here on Planet Earth. It wouldn't surprise me if 2014 deer harvests were down from 2013 all over the U.S., as I at least implied in another thread. It has absolutely nothing to do with ARs. Moreover, I put precisely zero stock in comparing harvest figures from the herd reduction years to the figures of the last several, and neither should anyone who takes a minute to think about it.
It's estimated that Pennsylvania still has about twice as many deer as is good for the habitat, unless a fairly recent report has been revised without my knowledge. Yet the aggressive efforts of recent history to get that under control may be backsliding because of political pressure. I have no doubt that there are areas with few deer, because that's the way it's supposed to be. You go up on Scrapple Mountain where there's nothing but rock and rhododendron, and you're not in Kansas anymore, Toto. You can't whine about there's no deer in the mountains the way there are in the valleys and on the river drainages if you have half a brain in your head.
I'm not positive where the idea that deer populations have to be spread equally across an entire state's different habitats came from, but it sure seems like it originates from the Participation Trophy school of big-game management. Furthermore, just because you park your butt on a stump for X hours per season doesn't mean that, according to state law, you're supposed to come out of the woods with a deer. This is why we call it "hunting."
Someone might argue that you can't shoot as many deer as you used to in Pennsylvania. Someone might argue that they don't see as many deer as in the past. Someone might complain that it's harder to kill a bigger deer than a smaller deer. Someone will probably even whine that the hunting is getting better in Pa. and so there are more people interested in hunting there.
But to argue that ARs are "hurting the hunting" or are "not working" just isn't supported by the evidence.
I deal with Pa. hunters and fishermen a fair amount, and a bigger group of grousers I've never met in my life. :re: :p There must be something in the water up there. So much so that they've become my favorite group to pick on, with a slight lead over the French and the Germans, and even the Canadians.
BTW, Pennsylvanians, don't get your knickers or your lederhosen all in a knot when I poke fun on this forum. If I really didn't like you, I'd ignore you. :-) As to why I pay attention to the deer wars in Pa. in the first place, as an outsider: I'm interested in whitetail management. Wherever it's done. So suck it. :wink LOL. ( A little bit of Philly humor there. :dig:)
Pennsylvania went through an intense herd-reduction management program from about 1999-2006 because a vast over-population of deer was causing so much damage to the habitat, and yet people want to compare the high harvest numbers of the early 2000's to today. Almost as bad, they want to compare numbers from one year to the next as if looking at two consecutive years of kill data is how you determine a trend here on Planet Earth. It wouldn't surprise me if 2014 deer harvests were down from 2013 all over the U.S., as I at least implied in another thread. It has absolutely nothing to do with ARs. Moreover, I put precisely zero stock in comparing harvest figures from the herd reduction years to the figures of the last several, and neither should anyone who takes a minute to think about it.
It's estimated that Pennsylvania still has about twice as many deer as is good for the habitat, unless a fairly recent report has been revised without my knowledge. Yet the aggressive efforts of recent history to get that under control may be backsliding because of political pressure. I have no doubt that there are areas with few deer, because that's the way it's supposed to be. You go up on Scrapple Mountain where there's nothing but rock and rhododendron, and you're not in Kansas anymore, Toto. You can't whine about there's no deer in the mountains the way there are in the valleys and on the river drainages if you have half a brain in your head.
I'm not positive where the idea that deer populations have to be spread equally across an entire state's different habitats came from, but it sure seems like it originates from the Participation Trophy school of big-game management. Furthermore, just because you park your butt on a stump for X hours per season doesn't mean that, according to state law, you're supposed to come out of the woods with a deer. This is why we call it "hunting."
Someone might argue that you can't shoot as many deer as you used to in Pennsylvania. Someone might argue that they don't see as many deer as in the past. Someone might complain that it's harder to kill a bigger deer than a smaller deer. Someone will probably even whine that the hunting is getting better in Pa. and so there are more people interested in hunting there.
But to argue that ARs are "hurting the hunting" or are "not working" just isn't supported by the evidence.
13.) crookedeye - 04/18/2015
so why doesn't luv2 shoot deer in pa??? while the drurys farm in iowa was hit hard by ehd . they still manage to kill big bucks while luv2 only manages to capture them on his cameras, that he hangs not on the trunk of trees, but above in the tree tops...only luv2 is smart enough to do that...
14.) Swamp Fox - 04/18/2015
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;31282]...
I deal with Pa. hunters and fishermen a fair amount, and a bigger group of grousers I've never met in my life. :re: :p There must be something in the water up there. So much so that they've become my favorite group to pick on, with a slight lead over the French and the Germans, and even the Canadians.
...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=crookedeye;31283]so why doesn't luv2 shoot deer in pa??? while the drurys farm in iowa was hit hard by ehd . they still manage to kill big bucks while luv2 only manages to capture them on his cameras, that he hangs not on the trunk of trees, but above in the tree tops...only luv2 is smart enough to do that...[/QUOTE]
Don't even get me started on the Polacks...:wink: :-) :wave:
Not that you don't raise a good question....LOL
I deal with Pa. hunters and fishermen a fair amount, and a bigger group of grousers I've never met in my life. :re: :p There must be something in the water up there. So much so that they've become my favorite group to pick on, with a slight lead over the French and the Germans, and even the Canadians.
...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=crookedeye;31283]so why doesn't luv2 shoot deer in pa??? while the drurys farm in iowa was hit hard by ehd . they still manage to kill big bucks while luv2 only manages to capture them on his cameras, that he hangs not on the trunk of trees, but above in the tree tops...only luv2 is smart enough to do that...[/QUOTE]
Don't even get me started on the Polacks...:wink: :-) :wave:
Not that you don't raise a good question....LOL
15.) crookedeye - 04/18/2015
the bucks are there for luv ... but he doesn't no how to put the finishing touches on them like the drury brothers do..
16.) Swamp Fox - 04/18/2015
I am so tempted to call him right now, but he probably has my number blocked...If he even believes in telephones...
17.) crookedeye - 04/18/2015
lol...
18.) Deerminator - 04/19/2015
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;31282]
But to argue that ARs are "hurting the hunting" or are "not working" just isn't supported by the evidence.[/QUOTE]
SO you think they are providing un bias data?
Ya think they are going to provide data INDICATING they screwed up?
OR
Data that does not support THERE cause.
[B]Not a chance. [/B] Antler worship AND big money are the drivers.
But to argue that ARs are "hurting the hunting" or are "not working" just isn't supported by the evidence.[/QUOTE]
SO you think they are providing un bias data?
Ya think they are going to provide data INDICATING they screwed up?
OR
Data that does not support THERE cause.
[B]Not a chance. [/B] Antler worship AND big money are the drivers.
19.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
who's THEY? lol...
20.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
they take there deer hunting seriously in pa.....remember that guy that walked across luv2's deer scent trail?? yeh me neither! that just go's to show you...
21.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31288]SO you think they are providing un bias data?
Ya think they are going to provide data INDICATING they screwed up?
OR
Data that does not support THERE cause.
[B]Not a chance. [/B] Antler worship AND big money are the drivers.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=crookedeye;31289]who's THEY? lol...[/QUOTE]
Very decent question...
[QUOTE=crookedeye;31290]they take there deer hunting seriously in pa.....remember that guy that walked across luv2's deer scent trail?? yeh me neither! that just go's to show you...[/QUOTE]
LOL...Er schlaft mit der Fische. :wink (Some assembly required; Zoomlaut not included.)
:wave:, Dutch, wherever you are! :wink
*********
D, I'm still waiting for ANY evidence supporting your position. Even just a little bit. Please.
BTW, I've looked on my own, and I admit I'm having trouble. There doesn't seem to be any. Just a lot of grousing and "Change is bad, m'kay?" I'd be happy to consider a different perspective if it came with some foundation.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion about ARs and game management, but not to their own facts or to an opinion completely unsupported by facts. As best I can tell, success rates in Pa. are about the same pre-AR and post-AR. Even if they weren't, do you think the wildlife people's primary job is to make sure Average Joe can put his tag on any old (or young) deer he pleases every year?
The goal of the wildlife people in Pennsylvania was first to reduce the herd because overpopulation had become a serious issue for the habitat. They've apparently done that. Many of them seem to think that the progress is insufficient or that it is in danger of backsliding. They would love to hear from more hunters who don't care about a buck's headgear and are willing to do their job they so often self-describe: as stewards of wildlife and protectors of the resource--people who would concentrate on killing more does and don't care a fig about running into a large buck in the woods. And yet it seems there are fewer of these upstanding citizens than the noise level would indicate.
With ARs and souped-up doe harvest goals, the age-class mix in the kill--and we presume in the herd-- is vastly improved in AR states like Pennsylvania, which-- along with bringing sex ratios into a more natural alignment and protecting the habitat--is the whole point. As a result, hunters are seeing bigger-bodied deer, larger-racked deer, healthier does and fawns, and more intense rutting activity and sign.
What they're not seeing is their hunting being "destroyed" or ARs "not working." If they were, there wouldn't be large majorities of hunters in favor of antler restrictions where they have been instituted. Mississippi, Georgia and yes, Pennsylvania come immediately to mind if you want to look up the evidence.
Finally and also: There's a pretty clear track record of wildlife agencies modifying ARs and other active management techniques when they've found that something is not working. These guys didn't get into wildlife biology for the women, and they didn't get into it to fail or to join a government conspiracy, either.
If you don't want to take the word of state biologists, though, and if even the work of non-affiliated biologists and researchers is suspicious to you, AND if the testimony of the vast majority of hunters in AR states is insufficient to hint that there just might be something to this crazy new management stuff, post up some good sound research from someone else so we can discuss it.
Ya think they are going to provide data INDICATING they screwed up?
OR
Data that does not support THERE cause.
[B]Not a chance. [/B] Antler worship AND big money are the drivers.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=crookedeye;31289]who's THEY? lol...[/QUOTE]
Very decent question...
[QUOTE=crookedeye;31290]they take there deer hunting seriously in pa.....remember that guy that walked across luv2's deer scent trail?? yeh me neither! that just go's to show you...[/QUOTE]
LOL...Er schlaft mit der Fische. :wink (Some assembly required; Zoomlaut not included.)
:wave:, Dutch, wherever you are! :wink
*********
D, I'm still waiting for ANY evidence supporting your position. Even just a little bit. Please.
BTW, I've looked on my own, and I admit I'm having trouble. There doesn't seem to be any. Just a lot of grousing and "Change is bad, m'kay?" I'd be happy to consider a different perspective if it came with some foundation.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion about ARs and game management, but not to their own facts or to an opinion completely unsupported by facts. As best I can tell, success rates in Pa. are about the same pre-AR and post-AR. Even if they weren't, do you think the wildlife people's primary job is to make sure Average Joe can put his tag on any old (or young) deer he pleases every year?
The goal of the wildlife people in Pennsylvania was first to reduce the herd because overpopulation had become a serious issue for the habitat. They've apparently done that. Many of them seem to think that the progress is insufficient or that it is in danger of backsliding. They would love to hear from more hunters who don't care about a buck's headgear and are willing to do their job they so often self-describe: as stewards of wildlife and protectors of the resource--people who would concentrate on killing more does and don't care a fig about running into a large buck in the woods. And yet it seems there are fewer of these upstanding citizens than the noise level would indicate.
With ARs and souped-up doe harvest goals, the age-class mix in the kill--and we presume in the herd-- is vastly improved in AR states like Pennsylvania, which-- along with bringing sex ratios into a more natural alignment and protecting the habitat--is the whole point. As a result, hunters are seeing bigger-bodied deer, larger-racked deer, healthier does and fawns, and more intense rutting activity and sign.
What they're not seeing is their hunting being "destroyed" or ARs "not working." If they were, there wouldn't be large majorities of hunters in favor of antler restrictions where they have been instituted. Mississippi, Georgia and yes, Pennsylvania come immediately to mind if you want to look up the evidence.
Finally and also: There's a pretty clear track record of wildlife agencies modifying ARs and other active management techniques when they've found that something is not working. These guys didn't get into wildlife biology for the women, and they didn't get into it to fail or to join a government conspiracy, either.
If you don't want to take the word of state biologists, though, and if even the work of non-affiliated biologists and researchers is suspicious to you, AND if the testimony of the vast majority of hunters in AR states is insufficient to hint that there just might be something to this crazy new management stuff, post up some good sound research from someone else so we can discuss it.
22.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
no one cared when the germans bombed pearl harbor though did they?
23.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
LOL...:p
24.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
////
25.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
remember... more hunting accidents happen in pa then any other state...like the time the guy got shot in the back of the head by a 22 caliber wingmaster 22...
26.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
his fiancé still to this day and her new husband say they where no way involved,...
they thought it was a deer...
they thought it was a deer...
27.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
they say 75 % of all hunting accidents in pa ...the victim was shot in the back of the head..
28.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
LMAO!
In New Jersey, it's near the cement plant....
LOL
In New Jersey, it's near the cement plant....
LOL
29.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
I remember that one story from PA. a couple of buddys went hunting deer and he accidently shot his buddy 3 times in the back...they say it was a deer hunting accident..
30.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
most cases was near where luv 2 hunts..
31.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
LOL...
One of my favorite stories is this one...I'll abbreviate:
Two Pennsylvania hunters climb the "mountain" before dawn in search of the elusive whitetail buck. At sunrise they hear gunfire all around them down in the valley, but nothing's moving where they are. By 7:30 they decide that still-hunting (stand-hunting) is for suckers and it would be better to pick up and go wandering.
In not too long, they come across a beautiful young woman in short shorts, a halter top and some cute hiking boots catching some rays on a flat rock overlooking the golden farms below.
"Hey, baby," says one of the Pa. hunters..."How about a roll in the leaves?"
The young woman eyes both of the men mischievously, cocks her head and bats her lashes and says, "Sure, boys... I'm game!"
That's when they both shot her.
One of my favorite stories is this one...I'll abbreviate:
Two Pennsylvania hunters climb the "mountain" before dawn in search of the elusive whitetail buck. At sunrise they hear gunfire all around them down in the valley, but nothing's moving where they are. By 7:30 they decide that still-hunting (stand-hunting) is for suckers and it would be better to pick up and go wandering.
In not too long, they come across a beautiful young woman in short shorts, a halter top and some cute hiking boots catching some rays on a flat rock overlooking the golden farms below.
"Hey, baby," says one of the Pa. hunters..."How about a roll in the leaves?"
The young woman eyes both of the men mischievously, cocks her head and bats her lashes and says, "Sure, boys... I'm game!"
That's when they both shot her.
32.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
the one I read was actually a murder case where a pa guy went hunting one evening..while walking to his stand he found another hunter hunting in his stand and shot him then beat him in the head with his rifle butt. I mean you don't want to screw around in PA..they take there deer seriously over there...
33.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
As I said...Something in the water...LOL.
If Luv2 doesn't show up tomorrow, I AM gonna call him...:wink:grin:
If Luv2 doesn't show up tomorrow, I AM gonna call him...:wink:grin:
34.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
you no he isn't going to answer...he's to busy with the heavy highway..
luv2 would make the perfect general from the north of my reenactment of the civil war..
luv2 would make the perfect general from the north of my reenactment of the civil war..
35.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
He DOES have the proper goatee, last time I checked. LOL.
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
:-)
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
:-)
36.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
every pic I seen him in..he was stoic.. didn't really smile to much..he was firm..except for that time he had his skinny stretch geans on...
37.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
LOL...
Tell me there's no resemblance...Jacob Ammen...Born in Virginia, raised in Ohio, which I hear is close to Pennsylvania...Do we know where Luv2's great-great grandmother was at the time? Brigadier General, Union Army...
Personality-wise, though, I think Luv2 resembles George McClellan...Kind of a homebody, doesn't really like to engage...:wink
Tell me there's no resemblance...Jacob Ammen...Born in Virginia, raised in Ohio, which I hear is close to Pennsylvania...Do we know where Luv2's great-great grandmother was at the time? Brigadier General, Union Army...
Personality-wise, though, I think Luv2 resembles George McClellan...Kind of a homebody, doesn't really like to engage...:wink
38.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
he was the quiet type..never engaged or interacted with his peers while growing up in the farmlands of pa...but had a fancy with small mammals that he would call friends.
39.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
If I had a picture of Luv2 driving the boat with the gorillas on the riverbank, I'd post it for comparison, but it's not on this computer...Spittin' image, though...Some of you know what I'm talkin about...:-)
40.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
that was the greastest pic of all time...
41.) crookedeye - 04/19/2015
we had a lot of good times on here...
42.) Swamp Fox - 04/19/2015
[QUOTE=crookedeye;31308]he was the quiet type..never engaged or interacted with his peers while growing up in the farmlands of pa...but had a fancy with small mammals that he would call friends.[/QUOTE]
:laugh:
:laugh:
43.) Swamp Fox - 04/20/2015
Well, I checked and I don't think I have a pic of Luv2 driving the boat on this computer either. Coulda sworn I saved it.
I do have a picture of him showing off his red Miata, but I'm holding that back until we come up with the boat picture. It's a rare photo, so some of you may not have seen it or don't remember it. It was taken just before Luv took it up the "mountain" to do some scouting. Really what he did was park it on the side of a gravel road and listen to NPR all afternoon, and then went back home for supper. He just needed some peace and quiet, is what he told me.
Anyway, think of that picture as a bonus treat for coming up with the boat pic...
I do have a picture of him showing off his red Miata, but I'm holding that back until we come up with the boat picture. It's a rare photo, so some of you may not have seen it or don't remember it. It was taken just before Luv took it up the "mountain" to do some scouting. Really what he did was park it on the side of a gravel road and listen to NPR all afternoon, and then went back home for supper. He just needed some peace and quiet, is what he told me.
Anyway, think of that picture as a bonus treat for coming up with the boat pic...
44.) bluecat - 04/20/2015
These are the only two I could find from the official archives.
"High Plains Jordacher"
"High Plains Jordacher"
45.) Swamp Fox - 04/20/2015
Billy might have it. Otherwise I might have to put in a call to JB or OKY. LOL
46.) Swamp Fox - 04/20/2015
[QUOTE=bluecat;31317]These are the only two I could find from the official archives.
[/QUOTE]
You should have saved the red Miata pic...Just in case something happens to me, like a bullet to the back of the head on a Pa. turkey hunt. :wink
By the way, I like your new signature, LOL.
[/QUOTE]
You should have saved the red Miata pic...Just in case something happens to me, like a bullet to the back of the head on a Pa. turkey hunt. :wink
By the way, I like your new signature, LOL.
47.) bluecat - 04/20/2015
BAM!
48.) bluecat - 04/20/2015
Ich heisse Luv2VonGerryhausen auf Pennsylvania sein. Geboren sie infanteiss mit Gote und baumleanin and legsgebroken und Jordache skinny Kleide und rote Miata zu Auto. Ich arbeite BobDieBuilder sein.
49.) Swamp Fox - 04/20/2015
LOL...
Now for your next trick, put my Union general pic and a headshot of either High Plains Gerry or Unterseeboot Kapitan Gerry in the same post so we can make an easy comparison and better understand Luv2 the man, the myth, and the legend.
:grin:
Now for your next trick, put my Union general pic and a headshot of either High Plains Gerry or Unterseeboot Kapitan Gerry in the same post so we can make an easy comparison and better understand Luv2 the man, the myth, and the legend.
:grin:
50.) bluecat - 04/20/2015
51.) bluecat - 04/20/2015
52.) Swamp Fox - 04/20/2015
LMAO!
Ausgezeichnet!
:-)
There might be more to this Luv2 character than even we imagined...:pop:
Ausgezeichnet!
:-)
There might be more to this Luv2 character than even we imagined...:pop:
53.) Swamp Fox - 04/20/2015
I'll have to mess with Photobucket for the Miata picture...:bang:...Won't load directly from here.
But I will post it eventually. :wink
But I will post it eventually. :wink
54.) bluecat - 04/21/2015
Ich liebe Drury Bruders aber nicht es sagen. Ich vership und idolizgeschlaf und have photoshoppiern auf meine wall. LiebeSchweiHuntern
55.) Swamp Fox - 04/21/2015
LOL
"My German is pre-Industrial and mostly religious."----Dwight Schrute, [I]The Office [/I]
One of my favorite of his quotes, LOL.
From this scene, where Pam is trying to set up the new copy machine:
[I]Dwight Schrute: You want me to translate the German instructions for you?
Pam Beesley: No, I'm sure they're pretty much the same as the English instructions.
Dwight Schrute: Pssh. Typical American arrogance that got us involved in a war we never should have been in. World War Two.
Pam Beesley: Well, fine. Do the German instructions say what this is supposed to do?
Dwight Schrute: [looking through manual] Deutsch. Let me see here...It is either an incense dispenser...or a ceremonial sarcophagus.
Pam Beesley: Humph.
Dwight Schrute: My German is pre-Industrial and mostly religious.[/I]
"My German is pre-Industrial and mostly religious."----Dwight Schrute, [I]The Office [/I]
One of my favorite of his quotes, LOL.
From this scene, where Pam is trying to set up the new copy machine:
[I]Dwight Schrute: You want me to translate the German instructions for you?
Pam Beesley: No, I'm sure they're pretty much the same as the English instructions.
Dwight Schrute: Pssh. Typical American arrogance that got us involved in a war we never should have been in. World War Two.
Pam Beesley: Well, fine. Do the German instructions say what this is supposed to do?
Dwight Schrute: [looking through manual] Deutsch. Let me see here...It is either an incense dispenser...or a ceremonial sarcophagus.
Pam Beesley: Humph.
Dwight Schrute: My German is pre-Industrial and mostly religious.[/I]
56.) bluecat - 04/21/2015
Hilarious!
57.) Lonescout - 04/21/2015
:tu: You guys are something else. I don't know what, but defiantly something else.
Back to the AR restrictions.
I have seen and consistently killed larger bodied and larger racked bucks since AR was instituted and they seem to be getting better every year.
And I hunt two very different areas of the state. I live in the south central PA outside of Gettysburg and we have a family camp in north central PA in the Pine Creek Valley.
And in both areas I am seeing a lot more and larger bucks and a lot better buck to doe ratio. But I also get out and away from the crowds as much as possible, especially upstate.
However, what I am seeing as the problem with our herds now is the over harvest of does, especially in the North central part of the state in the big woods.
That with the heavy predator populations (coyote and bear) are putting a hurt on the deer numbers up there. But I am able to get into deer every year, mainly because I hike back into areas that very few others are willing to go. One of my favorite areas to hunt is about three miles back in from the closest access, but when I get one back there it takes the best part of the day to get it out.
If I get a chance, I'll take a picture of the racks from the bucks that I've killed in PA to show some kind of progression.
Back to the AR restrictions.
I have seen and consistently killed larger bodied and larger racked bucks since AR was instituted and they seem to be getting better every year.
And I hunt two very different areas of the state. I live in the south central PA outside of Gettysburg and we have a family camp in north central PA in the Pine Creek Valley.
And in both areas I am seeing a lot more and larger bucks and a lot better buck to doe ratio. But I also get out and away from the crowds as much as possible, especially upstate.
However, what I am seeing as the problem with our herds now is the over harvest of does, especially in the North central part of the state in the big woods.
That with the heavy predator populations (coyote and bear) are putting a hurt on the deer numbers up there. But I am able to get into deer every year, mainly because I hike back into areas that very few others are willing to go. One of my favorite areas to hunt is about three miles back in from the closest access, but when I get one back there it takes the best part of the day to get it out.
If I get a chance, I'll take a picture of the racks from the bucks that I've killed in PA to show some kind of progression.
58.) Swamp Fox - 04/21/2015
Kewl.
:beer:
:beer:
59.) Deerminator - 04/21/2015
I'm having trouble uploading the info that got me going on this topic. Stupid computer. Toxo sent it to me in jpeg form and this stupid putor is being difficult.:bang:
I'll get it sooner or later.
feel free to insert some very bad language.
I'll get it sooner or later.
feel free to insert some very bad language.
60.) Swamp Fox - 04/21/2015
I can't get pics/jpegs to load from mine either...A consistent problem but for some reason it's a complete fail today even with a file that I don't get a "too big" warning on.
Try going around your knee to get to your elbow and try Photobucket if you have the patience. :rage::tu:
Try going around your knee to get to your elbow and try Photobucket if you have the patience. :rage::tu:
61.) Wild Bob - 04/21/2015
Send it to Luv2 to post it.
62.) Swamp Fox - 04/21/2015
Naw, I'd like to make sure it doesn't get disappeared...:p
Like I said, in case something happens to me. :wink
Like I said, in case something happens to me. :wink
63.) Deerminator - 04/21/2015
I'll get it if I have to re write it myself.
64.) Swamp Fox - 04/21/2015
If you meant he sent it to you in PDF form (rather than jpeg, which I always think of as for a photograph or picture, rather than a common way to reproduce a document ) send it via email to one of us and see if we can figure it out. I might not be the one most adept at it, though, LOL...I can copy/paste, though. Pretty good at that. :wink
65.) Deerminator - 04/22/2015
I'll se what I can do tomorrow
66.) Deerminator - 04/23/2015
Different article on low harvest rates.
Email this page Email Print this page Print Feed Feed
Deer harvests fell in neighbor states, too
Posted on March 30, 2006
By Jeff Mulhollem Editor
Altoona, Pa. — Pennsylvania was not the only state in the Northeast to see its 2005-06 deer harvest fall. In fact, the deer kills in most neighboring states dropped by similar amounts.
According to Pennsylvania Game Commission estimates, the deer kill of 354,390 was nearly 55,000 deer lower than the 2004-05 harvest of 409,320. That represents a dropoff of 13 percent.
The buck harvest of 120,500 was only slightly lower than the year before. But the antlerless harvest of 233,890 was 18 percent lower than the previous year.
One of the major reasons for the drop, according to statements from the agency, is that it sold 15 percent fewer antlerless deer licenses in regions where deer numbers had declined. Also blamed was a 5 percent drop in the number of hunters who bought general licenses.
Interestingly, New York’s whitetail harvest decline nearly mirrored Pennsylvania’s, falling by 14 percent from the previous year. In the Empire State during the 2005 season, hunters harvested slightly more than 180,200 deer, including 89,000 bucks and approximately 91,200 antlerless deer.
The year before, hunters in New York took 208,000 deer. The 2005 harvest was the lowest in New York since 1994, but it was expected because New York wildlife-management officials had cut back by 35 percent on the availability of deer management permits (doe licenses), an action they said was intended to rebuild and stabilize the deer population in many areas of the state.
In Ohio, for the third year in a row, hunters killed more than 200,000 deer - a milestone in the Buckeye State. Still the 2005-06 harvest of 209,513 whitetails represented a 3 percent decline in the harvest from the year before.
In West Virginia, the total 2005 harvest of 84,137 was comprised of 64,547 bucks and 27,790 antlerless deer. The buck harvest was 12 percent lower than the year before.
The antlerless harvest was 37 percent lower than in 2004 and, according to a West Virginia Department of Natural Resources spokesman, the direct result of more conservative antlerless deer-hunting regulations in place last fall, including fewer counties open to antlerless deer hunting and lower antlerless bag limits in many areas.
Deer hunters in Maryland killed 94,052 deer during the 2005-06 season, according to that state’s Department of Natural Resources. That harvest was a modest increase over the 93,868 deer harvested in the 2004-05 season.
The Maryland buck harvest of 32,837 decreased 5.2 percent from the year before (including 798 sika deer), while the antlerless harvest increased approximately 3.4 percent to 61,215 deer (including 866 sika deer).
Even among Pennsylvania game commissioners, the deer harvest numbers drew widely different reactions, from derision to support.
“When I read the press release I felt it had to be a joke - how are they able to stand there and look people in the eye and tell them that many deer were taken?” said Commissioner Steve Mohr, of Lancaster County.
“All the hunters know it’s not true. I just didn’t think that (agency Executive Director) Carl Roe would allow statements to go out that we can’t back up. I never thought he would do that.
“I don’t know that there is any intentional dishonesty in the numbers, but there sure isn’t a lot in them to give you any faith in the system,” Mohr added. “I don’t know who would benefit from misrepresenting the harvest, because sooner or later they’ll have to pull their foot out of their mouth.”
“It just continues to put doubt even in the minds of the folks who had previously supported the Game Commission.”
Commissioner Greg Isabella, of Philadelphia, on the other hand, believes the harvest numbers are credible. “I have faith in the figures because the method our biologists use has been certified and peer-reviewed,” he said. “Hunters gotta have a little faith in our program. We just finished the fourth year of our program, and we are going into the fifth year.
“I want to see everything reviewed soon - even the antler restrictions, but a lot of big bucks were shot this year, so I believe they are working. Talk to the butcher shop owners - the deer are bigger.”
Mohr couldn’t disagree more strongly. “Why give out harvest numbers if you can’t defend them? Why come out with numbers that are just guesses?” he asked. “I think we should just tell the people the truth - that we don’t know how many deer were killed.
“I don’t think hunters would get upset the way they are now if we told them that we are working on the program and trying to figure it out,” Mohr continued. “People want numbers, but they want accurate numbers. This is a j-o-k-e. That’s what it is. Our biologists are working from data that they have admitted is not valid. No way hunters killed that many deer.”
Isabella expects members of the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsyl-vania - who have sued the Game Commission over its deer herd-reduction policy - to refuse to accept the harvest numbers. “The people with agendas in these fringe groups are going to try to pick our numbers and our decisions apart,” he said. “A lot of these people want to go back to the old ways - two weeks of buck season followed by three days of doe season. But that’s what got us to where we are now with the depleted habitat.
“The executive director has said he wants several options by the April 17-18 meeting for managing deer in every WMU. But we are managing by WMU now by adjusting the number of antlerless licenses we make available to hunters.”
Mohr isn’t buying it, and he points to both New York and West Virginia backing way off their own deer-herd reduction programs as proof the Pennsylvania Game Commission is on the wrong track.
“It wasn’t so long ago that New York and West Virginia were in lock step with the commission in selling so many doe licenses,” he said.
“But you saw that it didn’t take very long that those states changed their tune and started talking about rebuilding and stabilizing their deer herds. That’s what we should be doing in Pennsylvania.”
Which translates into more hunters went home with tag soup or quit hunting.
Email this page Email Print this page Print Feed Feed
Deer harvests fell in neighbor states, too
Posted on March 30, 2006
By Jeff Mulhollem Editor
Altoona, Pa. — Pennsylvania was not the only state in the Northeast to see its 2005-06 deer harvest fall. In fact, the deer kills in most neighboring states dropped by similar amounts.
According to Pennsylvania Game Commission estimates, the deer kill of 354,390 was nearly 55,000 deer lower than the 2004-05 harvest of 409,320. That represents a dropoff of 13 percent.
The buck harvest of 120,500 was only slightly lower than the year before. But the antlerless harvest of 233,890 was 18 percent lower than the previous year.
One of the major reasons for the drop, according to statements from the agency, is that it sold 15 percent fewer antlerless deer licenses in regions where deer numbers had declined. Also blamed was a 5 percent drop in the number of hunters who bought general licenses.
Interestingly, New York’s whitetail harvest decline nearly mirrored Pennsylvania’s, falling by 14 percent from the previous year. In the Empire State during the 2005 season, hunters harvested slightly more than 180,200 deer, including 89,000 bucks and approximately 91,200 antlerless deer.
The year before, hunters in New York took 208,000 deer. The 2005 harvest was the lowest in New York since 1994, but it was expected because New York wildlife-management officials had cut back by 35 percent on the availability of deer management permits (doe licenses), an action they said was intended to rebuild and stabilize the deer population in many areas of the state.
In Ohio, for the third year in a row, hunters killed more than 200,000 deer - a milestone in the Buckeye State. Still the 2005-06 harvest of 209,513 whitetails represented a 3 percent decline in the harvest from the year before.
In West Virginia, the total 2005 harvest of 84,137 was comprised of 64,547 bucks and 27,790 antlerless deer. The buck harvest was 12 percent lower than the year before.
The antlerless harvest was 37 percent lower than in 2004 and, according to a West Virginia Department of Natural Resources spokesman, the direct result of more conservative antlerless deer-hunting regulations in place last fall, including fewer counties open to antlerless deer hunting and lower antlerless bag limits in many areas.
Deer hunters in Maryland killed 94,052 deer during the 2005-06 season, according to that state’s Department of Natural Resources. That harvest was a modest increase over the 93,868 deer harvested in the 2004-05 season.
The Maryland buck harvest of 32,837 decreased 5.2 percent from the year before (including 798 sika deer), while the antlerless harvest increased approximately 3.4 percent to 61,215 deer (including 866 sika deer).
Even among Pennsylvania game commissioners, the deer harvest numbers drew widely different reactions, from derision to support.
“When I read the press release I felt it had to be a joke - how are they able to stand there and look people in the eye and tell them that many deer were taken?” said Commissioner Steve Mohr, of Lancaster County.
“All the hunters know it’s not true. I just didn’t think that (agency Executive Director) Carl Roe would allow statements to go out that we can’t back up. I never thought he would do that.
“I don’t know that there is any intentional dishonesty in the numbers, but there sure isn’t a lot in them to give you any faith in the system,” Mohr added. “I don’t know who would benefit from misrepresenting the harvest, because sooner or later they’ll have to pull their foot out of their mouth.”
“It just continues to put doubt even in the minds of the folks who had previously supported the Game Commission.”
Commissioner Greg Isabella, of Philadelphia, on the other hand, believes the harvest numbers are credible. “I have faith in the figures because the method our biologists use has been certified and peer-reviewed,” he said. “Hunters gotta have a little faith in our program. We just finished the fourth year of our program, and we are going into the fifth year.
“I want to see everything reviewed soon - even the antler restrictions, but a lot of big bucks were shot this year, so I believe they are working. Talk to the butcher shop owners - the deer are bigger.”
Mohr couldn’t disagree more strongly. “Why give out harvest numbers if you can’t defend them? Why come out with numbers that are just guesses?” he asked. “I think we should just tell the people the truth - that we don’t know how many deer were killed.
“I don’t think hunters would get upset the way they are now if we told them that we are working on the program and trying to figure it out,” Mohr continued. “People want numbers, but they want accurate numbers. This is a j-o-k-e. That’s what it is. Our biologists are working from data that they have admitted is not valid. No way hunters killed that many deer.”
Isabella expects members of the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsyl-vania - who have sued the Game Commission over its deer herd-reduction policy - to refuse to accept the harvest numbers. “The people with agendas in these fringe groups are going to try to pick our numbers and our decisions apart,” he said. “A lot of these people want to go back to the old ways - two weeks of buck season followed by three days of doe season. But that’s what got us to where we are now with the depleted habitat.
“The executive director has said he wants several options by the April 17-18 meeting for managing deer in every WMU. But we are managing by WMU now by adjusting the number of antlerless licenses we make available to hunters.”
Mohr isn’t buying it, and he points to both New York and West Virginia backing way off their own deer-herd reduction programs as proof the Pennsylvania Game Commission is on the wrong track.
“It wasn’t so long ago that New York and West Virginia were in lock step with the commission in selling so many doe licenses,” he said.
“But you saw that it didn’t take very long that those states changed their tune and started talking about rebuilding and stabilizing their deer herds. That’s what we should be doing in Pennsylvania.”
Which translates into more hunters went home with tag soup or quit hunting.
67.) Deerminator - 04/23/2015
Still working on the original article search.
68.) Deerminator - 04/23/2015
another similar to the one above
Deer kill numbers embraced, rejected
Posted on March 30, 2006
By Bob Frye Capital Correspondent
Harrisburg, Pa. — Is Pennsyl-vania’s deer hunting glass half empty or half full? That depends on who you talk to.
The Pennsylvania Game Commission recently released its estimated deer harvest figures for the 2005-06 hunting seasons. Reaction to those numbers has varied from satisfaction to surprise.
Overall, the kill was down about 13 percent from 2004-05 to 2005-06. Hunters took 354,390 last season, compared to 409,320 the year before. Those numbers do not include harvest figures from the deer management assistance program, which will be released later.
According to the commission, the drop in the harvest was almost entirely attributable to hunters killing fewer does. The buck harvest was down just about 3 percent, from 124,410 to 120,500.
The doe harvest fell by about 18 percent, however, going from 284,910 in 2004-05 to 233,890 in 2005-06.
That was not unexpected, said Carl Roe, executive director of the commission. General license sales were down 5 percent, he noted, and deer populations have been reduced in some places.
The biggest factor in the decline of the harvest, however, is that there were 15 percent fewer doe licenses available in 2005-06 than there were the year before, Roe said. Hunters had the opportunity to buy 879,000 doe tags last fall; the year before, the commission made 1,039,000 available.
There’s a direct link between the number of doe licenses available and the size of the doe harvest, he added.
“For example, in Wildlife Management Unit 2G, a 44 percent reduction in the unit’s antlerless deer license allocation resulted in a 42 percent drop in the antlerless deer harvest,” Roe said.
The doe kill was not down in every wildlife management unit, however. In unit 2A in south-western Pennsylvania, for example, the doe kill went up 6 percent, even though the number of doe licenses available for that unit stayed the same.
Statewide, the doe harvest was comprised of 23 percent button bucks, which is about average, according to the commission. As for the buck harvest, almost 50 percent of those deer were 2.5 years old or older this past season. Prior to antler restrictions, only about 20 percent of the deer killed by hunters each year were that old.
What all of those numbers mean will be determined in Harrisburg April 17-18. That’s when commissioners will meet to set seasons, bag limits and doe license allocations for 2006-07.
The board has been split almost evenly in recent months as to whether now is the time to change course with the deer management program or stay on the current path a while longer. Indications are that gap remains.
For instance, Roxane Palone, a game commissioner from Greene County, said she is pleased with last year’s harvest, especially considering that fog and then rain marred the first two days of the season in many places.
“We expected the doe harvest would be down because we sold fewer tags and because we know there are fewer deer in some places, but I still thought it was a very good harvest,” she said.
Commissioner Tom Boop, of Northumberland County, admitted that he expected the harvest “would be down more” than it was. That said, he remains convinced that the commission needs to rework its deer-management program.
“There’s nothing in these numbers that changes my basic thought that we need individual management plans for individual management units,” Boop said.
“License sales are down significantly. There’s a reason for that. I think a lot of that is based on dissatisfaction with this program, and I think it’s broad-based dissatisfaction, not the dissatisfaction of a minority, as some have suggested.”
Melody Zullinger, executive director of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, said she has members on all sides of the deer issue. Generally, the federation is advocating patience.
“I think, for the most part, we have to remember that the goal of the program was to reduce deer numbers. And they’ve done that,” she said. “Now I think the agency needs to look at where they’ve been reduced and make adjustments where needed.”
The members of the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania figure to be less patient. The group is already suing the commission over what it alleges is a program of deer mismanagement, and Greg Levengood, chairman of the unified board of directors, said a few days before the harvest figures were released that his members would look with disbelief at any estimates that suggested hunters killed more than 100,000 bucks last year.
“Not only are deer numbers down, but the weather on the first two days of the season was terrible,” Levengood had said. “That’s why, if the buck harvest number they give us is over 100,000, no one is going to have any confidence in it. I know I won’t.”
Cal DuBrock, director of the commission’s bureau of wildlife management, defended the agency’s system for estimating deer harvests. He also pointed out that it’s necessary because of hunter apathy. This year, less than 40 percent of hunters who harvested a deer sent in their harvest report card.
DuBrock also agreed that the weather in most of the state was bad on the first two days of the season. It’s true, too, that more than half of the deer harvest occurs on those days, he added.
But the weather for the remainder of the two-week rifle season was much better, and the harvest on the two Saturdays of the season reflected that, increasing over the year before, he said.
If anything, this past season showed the wisdom of offering concurrent buck and doe seasons, he said.
Deer kill numbers embraced, rejected
Posted on March 30, 2006
By Bob Frye Capital Correspondent
Harrisburg, Pa. — Is Pennsyl-vania’s deer hunting glass half empty or half full? That depends on who you talk to.
The Pennsylvania Game Commission recently released its estimated deer harvest figures for the 2005-06 hunting seasons. Reaction to those numbers has varied from satisfaction to surprise.
Overall, the kill was down about 13 percent from 2004-05 to 2005-06. Hunters took 354,390 last season, compared to 409,320 the year before. Those numbers do not include harvest figures from the deer management assistance program, which will be released later.
According to the commission, the drop in the harvest was almost entirely attributable to hunters killing fewer does. The buck harvest was down just about 3 percent, from 124,410 to 120,500.
The doe harvest fell by about 18 percent, however, going from 284,910 in 2004-05 to 233,890 in 2005-06.
That was not unexpected, said Carl Roe, executive director of the commission. General license sales were down 5 percent, he noted, and deer populations have been reduced in some places.
The biggest factor in the decline of the harvest, however, is that there were 15 percent fewer doe licenses available in 2005-06 than there were the year before, Roe said. Hunters had the opportunity to buy 879,000 doe tags last fall; the year before, the commission made 1,039,000 available.
There’s a direct link between the number of doe licenses available and the size of the doe harvest, he added.
“For example, in Wildlife Management Unit 2G, a 44 percent reduction in the unit’s antlerless deer license allocation resulted in a 42 percent drop in the antlerless deer harvest,” Roe said.
The doe kill was not down in every wildlife management unit, however. In unit 2A in south-western Pennsylvania, for example, the doe kill went up 6 percent, even though the number of doe licenses available for that unit stayed the same.
Statewide, the doe harvest was comprised of 23 percent button bucks, which is about average, according to the commission. As for the buck harvest, almost 50 percent of those deer were 2.5 years old or older this past season. Prior to antler restrictions, only about 20 percent of the deer killed by hunters each year were that old.
What all of those numbers mean will be determined in Harrisburg April 17-18. That’s when commissioners will meet to set seasons, bag limits and doe license allocations for 2006-07.
The board has been split almost evenly in recent months as to whether now is the time to change course with the deer management program or stay on the current path a while longer. Indications are that gap remains.
For instance, Roxane Palone, a game commissioner from Greene County, said she is pleased with last year’s harvest, especially considering that fog and then rain marred the first two days of the season in many places.
“We expected the doe harvest would be down because we sold fewer tags and because we know there are fewer deer in some places, but I still thought it was a very good harvest,” she said.
Commissioner Tom Boop, of Northumberland County, admitted that he expected the harvest “would be down more” than it was. That said, he remains convinced that the commission needs to rework its deer-management program.
“There’s nothing in these numbers that changes my basic thought that we need individual management plans for individual management units,” Boop said.
“License sales are down significantly. There’s a reason for that. I think a lot of that is based on dissatisfaction with this program, and I think it’s broad-based dissatisfaction, not the dissatisfaction of a minority, as some have suggested.”
Melody Zullinger, executive director of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, said she has members on all sides of the deer issue. Generally, the federation is advocating patience.
“I think, for the most part, we have to remember that the goal of the program was to reduce deer numbers. And they’ve done that,” she said. “Now I think the agency needs to look at where they’ve been reduced and make adjustments where needed.”
The members of the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania figure to be less patient. The group is already suing the commission over what it alleges is a program of deer mismanagement, and Greg Levengood, chairman of the unified board of directors, said a few days before the harvest figures were released that his members would look with disbelief at any estimates that suggested hunters killed more than 100,000 bucks last year.
“Not only are deer numbers down, but the weather on the first two days of the season was terrible,” Levengood had said. “That’s why, if the buck harvest number they give us is over 100,000, no one is going to have any confidence in it. I know I won’t.”
Cal DuBrock, director of the commission’s bureau of wildlife management, defended the agency’s system for estimating deer harvests. He also pointed out that it’s necessary because of hunter apathy. This year, less than 40 percent of hunters who harvested a deer sent in their harvest report card.
DuBrock also agreed that the weather in most of the state was bad on the first two days of the season. It’s true, too, that more than half of the deer harvest occurs on those days, he added.
But the weather for the remainder of the two-week rifle season was much better, and the harvest on the two Saturdays of the season reflected that, increasing over the year before, he said.
If anything, this past season showed the wisdom of offering concurrent buck and doe seasons, he said.
69.) Deerminator - 04/23/2015
Still having trouble finding the artical in the April 17th issue.
70.) Swamp Fox - 04/23/2015
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31393]Different article on low harvest rates. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31393]
[I]...Deer harvests fell in neighbor states, too
Posted on March 30, 2006
By Jeff Mulhollem Editor
Altoona, Pa. — Pennsylvania was not the only state in the Northeast to see its 2005-06 deer harvest fall. In fact, the deer kills in most neighboring states dropped by similar amounts...
[/I] [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31393]Which translates into more hunters went home with tag soup or quit hunting.[/QUOTE]
The article supports my earlier points.
And before we get too far along, let's make sure we're on the same page to start : a harvest tally is not a "rate." Tally (kill) numbers fluctuate. They don't tell you much about how easy or how hard it was to kill a deer, in and of themselves. The [B]success rate [/B]tells you how well hunters did per unit of effort (days in the field, say). It is a figure that affects the harvest tally, but it is independent from it.
The stats say that Pa.'s hunter success rates pre-AR and in the AR era are similar. If you want a source for that, it is available from at least one of the many studies done on the Pa deer management program. It's not that hard to find on-line, but I can zero in on it if someone can't find it themselves.
I can't help anyone who doesn't want to believe statistics and methods that are considered valid in most precincts, and which are offered in good faith, though.
As to the statement that more hunters went home with tag soup or quit hunting, it would be nice if we could know that for a fact, but I'm guessing we can't. Since success rates have apparently not changed, why did certain individuals skunk or quit? I don't know. Maybe they just suck at hunting, or they got too old. But there's no evidence that ARs caused a problem that will crash the chest freezer market or spike shuffleboard equipment sales. None. Zero. Nada.
Now, individual hunters may have had a problem finding a legal, older buck, but it seems that the opportunities to take does were/are there. Again, the stats are not going to support the idea that hunter success rates are down, or that hunting has been "destroyed" or that ARs are not working.
If you want to concentrate just on the buck part of the equation, though (I don't want to hear about "antler worship" if we don't give doe hunting and doe management its proper due, but let's leave that alone for now) what you'll see is a drop in the hunting kill of younger smaller deer[B] that is made up for[/B] in the harvest totals of older larger deer. I'm not talking percentage of kill here, though that also shows this result. I'm taking about the raw numbers: how many bucks were taken.
Under Pa.'s antler restriction regimen, the number of 1.5 year-old bucks killed by hunters fell dramatically, while the number of 2.5- and 3.5 year-olds rose to make up for it. Again, this is all information that is out there and accessible with only a small amount of effort. If I'm not mistaken, 2010 is the date of the report I'm thinking of, but I can try to verify that if someone fails to find it on their own.
So, for me the bottom line of our discussion so far is that if someone wants to kill a 1.5 year-old buck, maybe they have had a harder time doing that under antler restrictions. That's the whole point: protect the young bucks. The hunting population as a whole is making up for that by killing older, larger bucks, though, in what looks like an almost statistically exact trade-off. Overall hunting success rates remain unchanged. Does are available and encouraged for the meat hunters.
What's not to luv???
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31393]
[I]...Deer harvests fell in neighbor states, too
Posted on March 30, 2006
By Jeff Mulhollem Editor
Altoona, Pa. — Pennsylvania was not the only state in the Northeast to see its 2005-06 deer harvest fall. In fact, the deer kills in most neighboring states dropped by similar amounts...
[/I] [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31393]Which translates into more hunters went home with tag soup or quit hunting.[/QUOTE]
The article supports my earlier points.
And before we get too far along, let's make sure we're on the same page to start : a harvest tally is not a "rate." Tally (kill) numbers fluctuate. They don't tell you much about how easy or how hard it was to kill a deer, in and of themselves. The [B]success rate [/B]tells you how well hunters did per unit of effort (days in the field, say). It is a figure that affects the harvest tally, but it is independent from it.
The stats say that Pa.'s hunter success rates pre-AR and in the AR era are similar. If you want a source for that, it is available from at least one of the many studies done on the Pa deer management program. It's not that hard to find on-line, but I can zero in on it if someone can't find it themselves.
I can't help anyone who doesn't want to believe statistics and methods that are considered valid in most precincts, and which are offered in good faith, though.
As to the statement that more hunters went home with tag soup or quit hunting, it would be nice if we could know that for a fact, but I'm guessing we can't. Since success rates have apparently not changed, why did certain individuals skunk or quit? I don't know. Maybe they just suck at hunting, or they got too old. But there's no evidence that ARs caused a problem that will crash the chest freezer market or spike shuffleboard equipment sales. None. Zero. Nada.
Now, individual hunters may have had a problem finding a legal, older buck, but it seems that the opportunities to take does were/are there. Again, the stats are not going to support the idea that hunter success rates are down, or that hunting has been "destroyed" or that ARs are not working.
If you want to concentrate just on the buck part of the equation, though (I don't want to hear about "antler worship" if we don't give doe hunting and doe management its proper due, but let's leave that alone for now) what you'll see is a drop in the hunting kill of younger smaller deer[B] that is made up for[/B] in the harvest totals of older larger deer. I'm not talking percentage of kill here, though that also shows this result. I'm taking about the raw numbers: how many bucks were taken.
Under Pa.'s antler restriction regimen, the number of 1.5 year-old bucks killed by hunters fell dramatically, while the number of 2.5- and 3.5 year-olds rose to make up for it. Again, this is all information that is out there and accessible with only a small amount of effort. If I'm not mistaken, 2010 is the date of the report I'm thinking of, but I can try to verify that if someone fails to find it on their own.
So, for me the bottom line of our discussion so far is that if someone wants to kill a 1.5 year-old buck, maybe they have had a harder time doing that under antler restrictions. That's the whole point: protect the young bucks. The hunting population as a whole is making up for that by killing older, larger bucks, though, in what looks like an almost statistically exact trade-off. Overall hunting success rates remain unchanged. Does are available and encouraged for the meat hunters.
What's not to luv???
71.) Pa bowhunter - 04/24/2015
Antler restrictions do and have worked, what has not worked is the over harvesting that was allowed to happen and now they are starting to pull back on doe tags, the next thing is the amount of poaching and road hunting that has gone on in this state.
Now with the reduction of the deer herd some hunters have not filled tags due to actually having to hunt and not just walk 50' in the woods and see 20 65lb deer, I have been watching the hunting on he sgl that I hunt most get better and better over the last 12yrs, I am not wealthy and I only state game land, mainly because I don't have any private land.
So in conclusion don't drink the kool aid that antler restrictions don't work, are there as many deer now as 15 years ago? no, are they bigger and healthier? no doubt. do the ar's have anything to do with the lower number of deer? absolutely not. The deer population from what I have watched has increased in my area by round 20% in the last 8 years, as the doe population has recovered so has the rest of the herd.
Now we can get to the bug point that some areas have not recovered as well because some of the sgl units are to large and need to be split up so they can be managed better and to suite the specific needs of that area. Next you have the hunters who moan and groan anytime you tell them that they are going to cut doe permits, which needs to be done on a large scale for about 4-5 years in some areas, will the herd ever be as it once was? I hope not, from whet I could see in a lot of areas it was way to big and very unhealthy, we had a very high browse line and minimal under growth, and that would lead into another problem which has been forest degradation, but I will leave it at that for now.
And now you know the rest of the story...
Now with the reduction of the deer herd some hunters have not filled tags due to actually having to hunt and not just walk 50' in the woods and see 20 65lb deer, I have been watching the hunting on he sgl that I hunt most get better and better over the last 12yrs, I am not wealthy and I only state game land, mainly because I don't have any private land.
So in conclusion don't drink the kool aid that antler restrictions don't work, are there as many deer now as 15 years ago? no, are they bigger and healthier? no doubt. do the ar's have anything to do with the lower number of deer? absolutely not. The deer population from what I have watched has increased in my area by round 20% in the last 8 years, as the doe population has recovered so has the rest of the herd.
Now we can get to the bug point that some areas have not recovered as well because some of the sgl units are to large and need to be split up so they can be managed better and to suite the specific needs of that area. Next you have the hunters who moan and groan anytime you tell them that they are going to cut doe permits, which needs to be done on a large scale for about 4-5 years in some areas, will the herd ever be as it once was? I hope not, from whet I could see in a lot of areas it was way to big and very unhealthy, we had a very high browse line and minimal under growth, and that would lead into another problem which has been forest degradation, but I will leave it at that for now.
And now you know the rest of the story...
72.) Deerminator - 04/24/2015
Thanks PA, any other PA hunters out there?
I have learned in the past few days that the on line NY Outdoor news contains different articals than the one in print.:bang:
I have learned in the past few days that the on line NY Outdoor news contains different articals than the one in print.:bang:
73.) Deerminator - 04/24/2015
I FO[SIZE=7]UND IT BY ACCIDENT[/SIZE]:shocked:
[url]http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/article/20150420/SPORTS/150429963/2000/NEWS[/url]
[url]http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/article/20150420/SPORTS/150429963/2000/NEWS[/url]
74.) Deerminator - 04/24/2015
note;
[FONT=Arial Narrow][I] obfuscation[/I][/FONT]- ( fancy word meaning BULL SHEEET )
[FONT=Arial Narrow][I] obfuscation[/I][/FONT]- ( fancy word meaning BULL SHEEET )
75.) Swamp Fox - 04/24/2015
From the article:
[I]Deer hunters this past season in Pa. killed 303,973 whitetails, dropping precipitously from the previous year's tally of 352,920 in 2013-14, about 14%.
But to gain perspective, back at the end of the 2005 season, the year after Pennsylvania instituted AR's, the deer take was pegged at 354,390. So from then up to today, 10 years after, now over 50,000 more Keystone deer hunters went home empty-handed. Those deer hunters would have filled a tag a decade earlier. That's a lot of empty freezers and disappointed stump sitters.
[/I]
This is the biggest piece of pickle barrel nonsense I've come across in a long time. I've already refuted everything he claims, but this here is the new silliness that made my jaw drop: If the deer harvest decreases, every deer less equals one hunter who went home empty-handed? That's just too stupid to argue with.
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;31399]...So, for me the bottom line of our discussion so far is that if someone wants to kill a 1.5 year-old buck, maybe they have had a harder time doing that under antler restrictions. That's the whole point: protect the young bucks. The hunting population as a whole is making up for that by killing older, larger bucks, though, in what looks like an almost statistically exact trade-off. Overall hunting success rates remain unchanged. Does are available and encouraged for the meat hunters.
What's not to luv???[/QUOTE]
I would like to know if NY biologists in Area 9Y think they have too many deer, too few, or the right amount. Then we could make a fair comparison to Pa. 3A, if we knew Keystone biologists' answers to the same questions. Comparing bucks per square mile from one state to the next means nothing without the context.
And again, two different phases of a management plan (reduction and stabilization) are being compared as if there is no intentional fundamental difference in desired outcomes. Argue the merits or demerits of each, but don't compare them as if one is better than the other. Jeez. Once again, too stupid. It's like complaining that your football team's defense scored fewer points than its offense.
Lastly, the author notes the area he is complaining about is partially made up of "third-growth" timber in addition to old farms and woodlots. I'm not a forester, but I imagine he means the land is between "second-growth" and "old growth." The closer it is to old growth, the fewer deer it will be able to support.
Again, I'd like to hear from the biologists about what they think of the bucks and does per square mile, rather than entertain sweeping conclusions from raw numbers when the author has shown an inability to interpret statistics in context.
[I]Deer hunters this past season in Pa. killed 303,973 whitetails, dropping precipitously from the previous year's tally of 352,920 in 2013-14, about 14%.
But to gain perspective, back at the end of the 2005 season, the year after Pennsylvania instituted AR's, the deer take was pegged at 354,390. So from then up to today, 10 years after, now over 50,000 more Keystone deer hunters went home empty-handed. Those deer hunters would have filled a tag a decade earlier. That's a lot of empty freezers and disappointed stump sitters.
[/I]
This is the biggest piece of pickle barrel nonsense I've come across in a long time. I've already refuted everything he claims, but this here is the new silliness that made my jaw drop: If the deer harvest decreases, every deer less equals one hunter who went home empty-handed? That's just too stupid to argue with.
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;31399]...So, for me the bottom line of our discussion so far is that if someone wants to kill a 1.5 year-old buck, maybe they have had a harder time doing that under antler restrictions. That's the whole point: protect the young bucks. The hunting population as a whole is making up for that by killing older, larger bucks, though, in what looks like an almost statistically exact trade-off. Overall hunting success rates remain unchanged. Does are available and encouraged for the meat hunters.
What's not to luv???[/QUOTE]
I would like to know if NY biologists in Area 9Y think they have too many deer, too few, or the right amount. Then we could make a fair comparison to Pa. 3A, if we knew Keystone biologists' answers to the same questions. Comparing bucks per square mile from one state to the next means nothing without the context.
And again, two different phases of a management plan (reduction and stabilization) are being compared as if there is no intentional fundamental difference in desired outcomes. Argue the merits or demerits of each, but don't compare them as if one is better than the other. Jeez. Once again, too stupid. It's like complaining that your football team's defense scored fewer points than its offense.
Lastly, the author notes the area he is complaining about is partially made up of "third-growth" timber in addition to old farms and woodlots. I'm not a forester, but I imagine he means the land is between "second-growth" and "old growth." The closer it is to old growth, the fewer deer it will be able to support.
Again, I'd like to hear from the biologists about what they think of the bucks and does per square mile, rather than entertain sweeping conclusions from raw numbers when the author has shown an inability to interpret statistics in context.
76.) Swamp Fox - 04/24/2015
[QUOTE=Pa bowhunter;31416]...Now we can get to the bug point that some areas have not recovered as well because some of the sgl units are to large and need to be split up so they can be managed better and to suite the specific needs of that area. Next you have the hunters who moan and groan anytime you tell them that they are going to cut doe permits, which needs to be done on a large scale for about 4-5 years in some areas, will the herd ever be as it once was? I hope not, from whet I could see in a lot of areas it was way to big and very unhealthy, we had a very high browse line and minimal under growth, and that would lead into another problem which has been forest degradation, but I will leave it at that for now.
And now you know the rest of the story...[/QUOTE]
I have heard this bit about the doe permits and the management unit size from a number of people. It makes sense.
Why do you think the game management people have overharvested does? Was it by mistake or miscalculation, or do you think they intended to be that aggressive (in those areas where people feel they erred)?
What's the general feeling of hunters in those areas where some say there's been an overharvest of does? Do most agree, or is there a split?
Lastly (for now) is there a move to split units, and if not, is there a reason?
:beer::wave:
And now you know the rest of the story...[/QUOTE]
I have heard this bit about the doe permits and the management unit size from a number of people. It makes sense.
Why do you think the game management people have overharvested does? Was it by mistake or miscalculation, or do you think they intended to be that aggressive (in those areas where people feel they erred)?
What's the general feeling of hunters in those areas where some say there's been an overharvest of does? Do most agree, or is there a split?
Lastly (for now) is there a move to split units, and if not, is there a reason?
:beer::wave:
77.) Deerminator - 04/25/2015
It's interesting to see reasoning that's tells the other side of the issue of AR's.
interesting points; ( Not believing everything you read. )
Forecasting is like fantasy baseball and football.
The producers of the data have to make themselves look good.
Different ways of calculating the data ( Statistics 101, How to manipulate data. )
"Liars figure, but figures don't lie"
Ranking buy hunter success; ( Lucky/unlucky ) or ( are we really that good or just have a great spot )
Comparing data from 15years ago when the AR's started. Not just last year. ( again, How to massage data 101. )
Closed door political agendas.
Just to add some fuel to the fire; :-)
When did hunting change from a mandatory task to obtain food in order to sustain life, to Basic antler shopping and Big business?
interesting points; ( Not believing everything you read. )
Forecasting is like fantasy baseball and football.
The producers of the data have to make themselves look good.
Different ways of calculating the data ( Statistics 101, How to manipulate data. )
"Liars figure, but figures don't lie"
Ranking buy hunter success; ( Lucky/unlucky ) or ( are we really that good or just have a great spot )
Comparing data from 15years ago when the AR's started. Not just last year. ( again, How to massage data 101. )
Closed door political agendas.
Just to add some fuel to the fire; :-)
When did hunting change from a mandatory task to obtain food in order to sustain life, to Basic antler shopping and Big business?
78.) Swamp Fox - 04/25/2015
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31469]... Ranking buy hunter success; ( Lucky/unlucky ) or ( are we really that good or just have a great spot )
Just to add some fuel to the fire; :-)
When did hunting change from a mandatory task to obtain food in order to sustain life, to Basic antler shopping and Big business?[/QUOTE]
Re.: Evaluating results by hunter success rates
I don't see any problem with this as long as you use the same method over time, or the same general method, given that some variables do change, such as season length, timing, permits available etc. Other variables like weather, location and the things we call luck get evened out by comparing rates over longer periods of time, and things like different skill levels and unequal access to prime opportunities would be as well.
I do think that if one has limited options as to where to hunt, then--by definition---he's not liable to be as successful as someone who has options. You can't kill bucks where they aren't, so my suggestion would be don't try. Comedian Sam Kinison had a bit about starving people needing to move out of the desert. “There's a reason they're starving: It's a desert!”
Just like that, I think some people want the deer to come to them, rather than go to where the deer are. When the deer are scarce, whether because of natural or unnatural population fluctuations, or bad weather, disease, or changing food sources, it's easier to shake your fist at the sky than go find a better place to hunt.
Re. When did hunting change ?
I think hunting has changed in at least two stages: When we got the free time and food alternatives, which puts that back a loooong time ago, and when we got to a certain level of education about wildlife and how it affects us and how we affect it, which is a much more recent development, but still goes back at least 100 years.
At some point when people realize that does are made of meat, that in most places it’s easy to have too many of them, and that we’re doing the deer population no favors by shooting the first young buck that walks by, hunting changes.
Just to add some fuel to the fire; :-)
When did hunting change from a mandatory task to obtain food in order to sustain life, to Basic antler shopping and Big business?[/QUOTE]
Re.: Evaluating results by hunter success rates
I don't see any problem with this as long as you use the same method over time, or the same general method, given that some variables do change, such as season length, timing, permits available etc. Other variables like weather, location and the things we call luck get evened out by comparing rates over longer periods of time, and things like different skill levels and unequal access to prime opportunities would be as well.
I do think that if one has limited options as to where to hunt, then--by definition---he's not liable to be as successful as someone who has options. You can't kill bucks where they aren't, so my suggestion would be don't try. Comedian Sam Kinison had a bit about starving people needing to move out of the desert. “There's a reason they're starving: It's a desert!”
Just like that, I think some people want the deer to come to them, rather than go to where the deer are. When the deer are scarce, whether because of natural or unnatural population fluctuations, or bad weather, disease, or changing food sources, it's easier to shake your fist at the sky than go find a better place to hunt.
Re. When did hunting change ?
I think hunting has changed in at least two stages: When we got the free time and food alternatives, which puts that back a loooong time ago, and when we got to a certain level of education about wildlife and how it affects us and how we affect it, which is a much more recent development, but still goes back at least 100 years.
At some point when people realize that does are made of meat, that in most places it’s easy to have too many of them, and that we’re doing the deer population no favors by shooting the first young buck that walks by, hunting changes.
79.) crookedeye - 04/25/2015
once Hillary is in office things are going to change around here for the better...
right billy...
right billy...
80.) crookedeye - 04/25/2015
billy has an eye for Hillary... he just wont admit it on a public forum seen by hundreds..
81.) crookedeye - 04/25/2015
I was reading on msn news this morning and it said bruce jenner's courage on what he was doing...I was thinking its more mental more than anything..plus it's taking him way to long to make the change over...I mean just get in there and get it done....
82.) Swamp Fox - 04/25/2015
LOL...
I haven't been keeping up with it as much as you, :wink but I saw the other day Dr. Phil said Bruce was past his prime with this change...I thought," Past his prime for what?"....LOL
If he's taking the slow boat, he'll REALLY be past his prime.
I haven't been keeping up with it as much as you, :wink but I saw the other day Dr. Phil said Bruce was past his prime with this change...I thought," Past his prime for what?"....LOL
If he's taking the slow boat, he'll REALLY be past his prime.
83.) Deerminator - 04/25/2015
one butt ugly woman/man/it
84.) crookedeye - 04/25/2015
he still has that flat hair...some curlers maybe some eyelash..the potential there...he just needs to bring it out...
85.) crookedeye - 04/25/2015
you drink enough beers and put a wig on Floyd..things are going to get funky...
86.) Swamp Fox - 04/25/2015
LOL...
87.) luv2bowhunt - 04/27/2015
It always amazes me how people will only believe what they read, when it suits their presuppositions.
I don't need any of you or any other authors of gossip articles in the country, to tell me what I have witnessed with my own eyes. The bucks that are out there are much, much, bigger than the average buck 15 years ago. Not even close, not even arguable by any rational thinking person.
The point you are missing, there are 2 separate issues. The AR's and the doe license allocations. The AR's had little to do with the deer herd size, but the doe allocations did. They raised them for several years and then we got hit with a couple severe winters. Deer numbers went down in much of the northern part of the state and it has taken much longer to recover than anticipated.
But of course what do I know, I only live and hunt here. Maybe someone from another state or the Drury's can help explain this all to me.
I don't have time for your foolishness, I'm trying to rebuild our highway infrastructure.
PS - You all suck.:wave:
I don't need any of you or any other authors of gossip articles in the country, to tell me what I have witnessed with my own eyes. The bucks that are out there are much, much, bigger than the average buck 15 years ago. Not even close, not even arguable by any rational thinking person.
The point you are missing, there are 2 separate issues. The AR's and the doe license allocations. The AR's had little to do with the deer herd size, but the doe allocations did. They raised them for several years and then we got hit with a couple severe winters. Deer numbers went down in much of the northern part of the state and it has taken much longer to recover than anticipated.
But of course what do I know, I only live and hunt here. Maybe someone from another state or the Drury's can help explain this all to me.
I don't have time for your foolishness, I'm trying to rebuild our highway infrastructure.
PS - You all suck.:wave:
88.) Deerminator - 04/27/2015
.....
89.) Swamp Fox - 04/27/2015
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31537]...
The point you are missing, there are 2 separate issues. The AR's and the doe license allocations. The AR's had little to do with the deer herd size, but the doe allocations did.[/QUOTE]
Who is this "you"you speak of, Kemosabe? :p
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31537] PS - You all suck.:wave:[/QUOTE]
Oh, okay, never mind, LOL...I should have known...LOL
P.S. ---Look up "Lone Ranger joke" if you need this post explained to you..."You" know who "you" are....LOL
The point you are missing, there are 2 separate issues. The AR's and the doe license allocations. The AR's had little to do with the deer herd size, but the doe allocations did.[/QUOTE]
Who is this "you"you speak of, Kemosabe? :p
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31537] PS - You all suck.:wave:[/QUOTE]
Oh, okay, never mind, LOL...I should have known...LOL
P.S. ---Look up "Lone Ranger joke" if you need this post explained to you..."You" know who "you" are....LOL
90.) Swamp Fox - 04/27/2015
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31539].....[/QUOTE]
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Classic, D! :grin:
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Classic, D! :grin:
91.) Hunter - 04/27/2015
:wave: Gerry!
92.) bluecat - 04/27/2015
Good one D.
93.) Swamp Fox - 04/27/2015
You know Luv2 won't be able to sleep tonight after seeing this thread...
:p
:p
94.) Deerminator - 04/27/2015
:grin:
95.) luv2bowhunt - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31425]I FO[SIZE=7]UND IT BY ACCIDENT[/SIZE]:shocked:
[url]http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/article/20150420/SPORTS/150429963/2000/NEWS[/url][/QUOTE]
OK, I want someone to explain this to me. How did PA Antler Restrictions reduce the deer herd? How is it when I let a spike or a 4 pt. walk, the deer herd will now plummet? Please explain that in a simple paragraph or two, no double space required.
That had nothing to do with what happened here. Can't wait to read about it though.
[url]http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/article/20150420/SPORTS/150429963/2000/NEWS[/url][/QUOTE]
OK, I want someone to explain this to me. How did PA Antler Restrictions reduce the deer herd? How is it when I let a spike or a 4 pt. walk, the deer herd will now plummet? Please explain that in a simple paragraph or two, no double space required.
That had nothing to do with what happened here. Can't wait to read about it though.
96.) luv2bowhunt - 04/28/2015
Not to confuse us with science, but here is an interesting blog from the Penn State University Deer Study team. A quote;
[COLOR="#FF0000"]"At the start of the 2014 rifle seasons, we were tracking 32 deer with GPS collars. These deer were located on state forest lands where along with the regular antlerless allocation hundreds of DMAP permits had been purchased by hunters.
So who lived to see the other side of the season?
When the sun set on the last day, 31 of these deer were still alive. One deer died of a gunshot, but was not recovered."
[/COLOR]
That's a 97% survival rate. So why are reported kill numbers going down in PA? Has to be the AR's. Can't be the combination of decreasing license sales, less willingness to go hunt where the deer are, or a newer breed of hunter who only sits in a treestand for 3 hours and then goes home if they haven't seen anything. So many factors at play here.
[url]http://ecosystems.psu.edu/research/projects/deer/news/2015/do-deer-stand-a-chance-on-public-lands[/url]
[COLOR="#FF0000"]"At the start of the 2014 rifle seasons, we were tracking 32 deer with GPS collars. These deer were located on state forest lands where along with the regular antlerless allocation hundreds of DMAP permits had been purchased by hunters.
So who lived to see the other side of the season?
When the sun set on the last day, 31 of these deer were still alive. One deer died of a gunshot, but was not recovered."
[/COLOR]
That's a 97% survival rate. So why are reported kill numbers going down in PA? Has to be the AR's. Can't be the combination of decreasing license sales, less willingness to go hunt where the deer are, or a newer breed of hunter who only sits in a treestand for 3 hours and then goes home if they haven't seen anything. So many factors at play here.
[url]http://ecosystems.psu.edu/research/projects/deer/news/2015/do-deer-stand-a-chance-on-public-lands[/url]
97.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31554]...
That had nothing to do with what happened here. Can't wait to read about it though.[/QUOTE]
Do you think maybe this is the greatest thread of all time?....:grin:
That had nothing to do with what happened here. Can't wait to read about it though.[/QUOTE]
Do you think maybe this is the greatest thread of all time?....:grin:
98.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
Anytime you got all six members going back and forth with scientific data, you have the recipe for success. :wink
99.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
100.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
ROTFL....Both of those! :grin:
101.) luv2bowhunt - 04/28/2015
And I'm reminded why it pains me to even post on here anymore.
This site "coulda been somebody, coulda been a contender, instead of just a bum."
This site "coulda been somebody, coulda been a contender, instead of just a bum."
102.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
Ouch!
103.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31571]And I'm reminded why it pains me to even post on here anymore.
This site "coulda been somebody, coulda been a contender, instead of just a bum."[/QUOTE]
I tell ya...This site...This site doesn't get any respect. No respect at all. Just the other day, we had a consultant come in. He said the members should talk about hunting every day...Now we'll never speak to each other...
:wink
With apologies to Rodney Dangerfield:
"My psychiatrist said my wife & I should have sex every night. Now, we'll never see each other."
:wave:
This site "coulda been somebody, coulda been a contender, instead of just a bum."[/QUOTE]
I tell ya...This site...This site doesn't get any respect. No respect at all. Just the other day, we had a consultant come in. He said the members should talk about hunting every day...Now we'll never speak to each other...
:wink
With apologies to Rodney Dangerfield:
"My psychiatrist said my wife & I should have sex every night. Now, we'll never see each other."
:wave:
104.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
Can't we all just get along...:laugh:
105.) luv2bowhunt - 04/28/2015
I want someone to explain this to me. How did PA Antler Restrictions reduce the deer herd? How is it when I let a spike or a 4 pt. walk, the deer herd will now plummet?
If I get an honest response from someone who opposes PA Antler Restrictions, I'll stick around and talk. I popped on here for a legitimate discussion. If you can't have it anymore on here, I have better things to do.............like sniffing burlap or replacing string on the trimmer.
If I get an honest response from someone who opposes PA Antler Restrictions, I'll stick around and talk. I popped on here for a legitimate discussion. If you can't have it anymore on here, I have better things to do.............like sniffing burlap or replacing string on the trimmer.
106.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
Where are City or Legolas when you need them?
But seriously, just keep an eye on the signed-in section for the usual suspects. That's the best one can do these days. Still no idea who the 20-25 lurkers are that we always have, but I've given up on them having any desire to contribute. Not that there's a government regulation forcing you now, but still...
But seriously, just keep an eye on the signed-in section for the usual suspects. That's the best one can do these days. Still no idea who the 20-25 lurkers are that we always have, but I've given up on them having any desire to contribute. Not that there's a government regulation forcing you now, but still...
107.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
Well well well, looky what I found.
108.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
Hey, quick, Hide that! You'll run him off!
:shocked:
:shocked:
109.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
We've been through this a dozen times. When you decrease the carry capacity K by the inverse logarithm of delta birth rate because of PA antler restrictions you get a reduced deer herd in Pennsylvania.
110.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31578]I want someone to explain this to me. How did PA Antler Restrictions reduce the deer herd? How is it when I let a spike or a 4 pt. walk, the deer herd will now plummet?
[/QUOTE]
Point of curiosity: Assuming people can distinguish between ARs and doe management, do you find that people who oppose ARs in Pa. (or elsewhere) are also against/complaining about doe goals? And by doe goals, I mean both intentionally and successfully executed and also botched/miscalculated/affected by unforeseen events.
[/QUOTE]
Point of curiosity: Assuming people can distinguish between ARs and doe management, do you find that people who oppose ARs in Pa. (or elsewhere) are also against/complaining about doe goals? And by doe goals, I mean both intentionally and successfully executed and also botched/miscalculated/affected by unforeseen events.
111.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
That's a great diagram. Whoever came up with it and the original idea was a genius, LOL.
112.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
And...He's gone...
But I know how he feels. Sometimes I come on here and want to talk politics with whoever's responsible for Barack Obama in the White House---not just once, but twice---and no one around here will admit to it...
But I know how he feels. Sometimes I come on here and want to talk politics with whoever's responsible for Barack Obama in the White House---not just once, but twice---and no one around here will admit to it...
113.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
LOL! We'll always have the Bee Gees...
114.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
LOL...The Bee Gees...In the good old days, Luv2 would have been all over that, LOL...Does he seem extra grumpy today to you, too?
I mean, "I probably have to work through turkey season :td:" and "I came here for a legitimate discussion" ----
Seems to me like he came here for an argument...:wink
I mean, "I probably have to work through turkey season :td:" and "I came here for a legitimate discussion" ----
Seems to me like he came here for an argument...:wink
115.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
He's got a bee in his bonnet. I don't think he is getting the sympathy he wants from us. He acts surprised that there is some merriment going on here. I don't get it either. Oh well. LOL!
116.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
To be fair to Luv2, it's possible he didn't notice this thread is in Podunk, probably on purpose, LOL.
But I don't want to hear about how this place is dead from people who are never here, or how there's not enough hunting/fishing talk going on from people who never (or rarely) talk hunting and fishing with us. :bang::tap::dh:
And here's where I'd steal Deerminator's Edith Ann video if it wouldn't be a blatant and shameless rip-off from just yesterday, LOL.
But I don't want to hear about how this place is dead from people who are never here, or how there's not enough hunting/fishing talk going on from people who never (or rarely) talk hunting and fishing with us. :bang::tap::dh:
And here's where I'd steal Deerminator's Edith Ann video if it wouldn't be a blatant and shameless rip-off from just yesterday, LOL.
117.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;31589]
But I don't want to hear about how this place is dead from people who are never here, or how there's not enough hunting/fishing talk going on from people who never talk hunting and fishing. :bang::tap::dh:
[/QUOTE]
Bam!
But I don't want to hear about how this place is dead from people who are never here, or how there's not enough hunting/fishing talk going on from people who never talk hunting and fishing. :bang::tap::dh:
[/QUOTE]
Bam!
118.) luv2bowhunt - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=bluecat;31588]I don't think he is getting the sympathy he wants from us. He acts surprised that there is some merriment going on here.[/QUOTE]
Sympathy? No and no. Never surprised.
Why talk hunting when there is nothing to talk about or no one who cares? It's just you two talking to each other, with an occasional guest appearance from CrOokeDEye.
Sympathy? No and no. Never surprised.
Why talk hunting when there is nothing to talk about or no one who cares? It's just you two talking to each other, with an occasional guest appearance from CrOokeDEye.
119.) luv2bowhunt - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;31589]To be fair to Luv2, it's possible he didn't notice this thread is in Podunk, probably on purpose, LOL.[/QUOTE]
Nope, I noticed. Not a problem, just thought those who took a stand a few days ago against AR's might want to talk about it. No problems, Chris, you're the new boss around here. I'll take my grader and go home.
See you in 6 months or so.:wave:
Nope, I noticed. Not a problem, just thought those who took a stand a few days ago against AR's might want to talk about it. No problems, Chris, you're the new boss around here. I'll take my grader and go home.
See you in 6 months or so.:wave:
120.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
They'll be back before that!
Besides, I'm coming up for re-election soon. Don't you want to run the smear campaign against me? LOL
Seriously, Gerry, stick around. :beer:
Besides, I'm coming up for re-election soon. Don't you want to run the smear campaign against me? LOL
Seriously, Gerry, stick around. :beer:
121.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
...Or at least answer my question from Post 108, LOL
122.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31591]... It's just you two talking to each other, with an occasional guest appearance from CrOokeDEye.[/QUOTE]
....
....
123.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
LOL! Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
You're right, he'll be back. You can only play in the dirt so long by yourself before you get a little lonely.
You're right, he'll be back. You can only play in the dirt so long by yourself before you get a little lonely.
124.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
I'm sure Luv2 can survive without Hunting Country, but Hunting Country can't survive without Luv2...The man's a legend.
This could be like back in the caveman days before the invention of fire, tools, weapons and stories about monsters...All there was to do all day was stare at the walls and make googley eyes at the cave women...
It could be a long six months...:bad:
This could be like back in the caveman days before the invention of fire, tools, weapons and stories about monsters...All there was to do all day was stare at the walls and make googley eyes at the cave women...
It could be a long six months...:bad:
125.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
When he said he hated us, I knew it was a cry for help.
126.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
I don't want to laugh...but I'm gonna...LOL
127.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
He must be forgetting how important we were in his rehab. :wink
128.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
I think we motivate him by anger...LOL
129.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
Our gift to him is tough Luv.
130.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
[QUOTE=bluecat;31602]Our gift to him is tough Luv.[/QUOTE]
:-)
I hope I don't have to play clips from [I]Shane[/I] again...LOL
:-)
I hope I don't have to play clips from [I]Shane[/I] again...LOL
131.) bluecat - 04/28/2015
I know that's what he always wants.
132.) Swamp Fox - 04/28/2015
Hey, you can't fool me...I'm not up on all the gnarly jams you kids are listening to these days, but I know that's not from[I] Shane[/I]....
133.) Deerminator - 04/28/2015
DUBSTEP
134.) Deerminator - 04/28/2015
.....
135.) Deerminator - 04/28/2015
Try and get them to play at the same time.:wink
136.) bluecat - 04/29/2015
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;31603]:-)
I hope I don't have to play clips from [I]Shane[/I] again...LOL[/QUOTE]
:-):-)
I hope I don't have to play clips from [I]Shane[/I] again...LOL[/QUOTE]
:-):-)
137.) Swamp Fox - 04/29/2015
If I were Deerminator and Toxo, I'd be scouting turkeys for opening day if I had the free time, not typing on HuntingCountry debating ARs with us...LOL...
On the other hand, if they don't step up, we may never see Luv2 again.
It's gotta be a hard decision...:wink
But I WOULD like Luv2 to come back, LOL...
On the other hand, if they don't step up, we may never see Luv2 again.
It's gotta be a hard decision...:wink
But I WOULD like Luv2 to come back, LOL...
138.) Swamp Fox - 04/29/2015
Here's an EXCELLENT reason to be choosy about your bucks, LOL...
[I]A Bainbridge deer hunter shot and killed one of the biggest whitetails ever taken in Pennsylvania on Dec. 1.
Within a week afterward, the Pennsylvania Game Commission confiscated the 172-inch, 14-point rack and charged Scott Garner, 33, with illegally killing the deer.
Garner was charged with exceeding the state's limit for antlered deer by killing the buck during the firearms season after he already had shot a five-pointer during archery season.
[/I]
Full story here. It's a pretty good one. Lots of meat on this bone for forum members to discuss, LOL.
[url]http://lancasteronline.com/sports/hunter-regrets-killing-deer/article_2299f3be-e5ea-5026-8176-9a8c066d0fb2.html[/url]
[I]A Bainbridge deer hunter shot and killed one of the biggest whitetails ever taken in Pennsylvania on Dec. 1.
Within a week afterward, the Pennsylvania Game Commission confiscated the 172-inch, 14-point rack and charged Scott Garner, 33, with illegally killing the deer.
Garner was charged with exceeding the state's limit for antlered deer by killing the buck during the firearms season after he already had shot a five-pointer during archery season.
[/I]
Full story here. It's a pretty good one. Lots of meat on this bone for forum members to discuss, LOL.
[url]http://lancasteronline.com/sports/hunter-regrets-killing-deer/article_2299f3be-e5ea-5026-8176-9a8c066d0fb2.html[/url]
139.) Deerminator - 04/29/2015
Luv2 's got to be drool'n over this one.- lived on 3 mile island no less. Prolly glows in the dark .
140.) Swamp Fox - 04/29/2015
LOL...I missed that.
141.) Wild Bob - 04/29/2015
What do you expect from a guy that wears a bird hunting vest deer hunting, and I doubt that hat meets hunter-safety orange requirements either...:re::wink
Sorry...guess I'm not being very nice this morning...
Sorry...guess I'm not being very nice this morning...
142.) Swamp Fox - 04/29/2015
How's your back, WB?
Did you hear Luv2 needs surgery on his funny bone again?
Did you hear Luv2 needs surgery on his funny bone again?
143.) Wild Bob - 04/29/2015
The back is great Swampy...thanks for asking. I'm pretty well back to 100% now.
I actually changed the oil in both our rigs last week and this past weekend rolled around installing a trailer hitch on my pick-up over the weekend with no adverse affects! A little fatigued afterwards, but just from using mussels that I haven't used in a while...nothing back related, and fortunately nothing that didn't feel fine after a nice cold Bakken Bock! :tu:
I actually changed the oil in both our rigs last week and this past weekend rolled around installing a trailer hitch on my pick-up over the weekend with no adverse affects! A little fatigued afterwards, but just from using mussels that I haven't used in a while...nothing back related, and fortunately nothing that didn't feel fine after a nice cold Bakken Bock! :tu:
144.) Swamp Fox - 04/29/2015
Glad to hear it! :beer:
145.) Swamp Fox - 04/29/2015
I referenced Mississippi deer management earlier in this thread, and made a couple of posts for the Pennsylvanians to address about doe population/management in the last few pages, most recently Post 108.
I thought I'd throw this article out there as a classic example, in the meantime, of what may or may not be going on out there in the woods, LOL.
I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts. I might editorialize on it later, or maybe I'll save my powder. Who nos?
Please read the whole article, but I'll post the lede:
[I]If you look around the internet, it won’t take long to get the idea that the 2014-15 deer season has been relatively quiet in Mississippi. On websites and forums where there would typically be pages of pictures and stories about jaw-dropping bucks, there are a handful.
Speculation as to why sightings have been low vary, but the idea that a generous bag limit on does has hurt the population is one that keeps coming up.
[/I]
Correct link here:
[url]http://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/outdoors/2015/01/31/hunters-harvesting-many/22673099/[/url]
I thought I'd throw this article out there as a classic example, in the meantime, of what may or may not be going on out there in the woods, LOL.
I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts. I might editorialize on it later, or maybe I'll save my powder. Who nos?
Please read the whole article, but I'll post the lede:
[I]If you look around the internet, it won’t take long to get the idea that the 2014-15 deer season has been relatively quiet in Mississippi. On websites and forums where there would typically be pages of pictures and stories about jaw-dropping bucks, there are a handful.
Speculation as to why sightings have been low vary, but the idea that a generous bag limit on does has hurt the population is one that keeps coming up.
[/I]
Correct link here:
[url]http://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/outdoors/2015/01/31/hunters-harvesting-many/22673099/[/url]
146.) Swamp Fox - 04/29/2015
Oops...First link no workie for some reason...
Hope I fixed it but here it is again just in case.
Try this
[url]http://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/outdoors/2015/01/31/hunters-harvesting-many/22673099/[/url]
Hope I fixed it but here it is again just in case.
Try this
[url]http://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/outdoors/2015/01/31/hunters-harvesting-many/22673099/[/url]
147.) Deerminator - 04/29/2015
Well, I guess if there are very few does to produce the next generation that means a smaller heard.
148.) Deerminator - 04/30/2015
Hope the antler gene survives;
---Think about it, ------ All the nice rack bucks get shot off---- hence a lack of or obliteration of the antler gene.
---Think about it, ------ All the nice rack bucks get shot off---- hence a lack of or obliteration of the antler gene.
149.) Swamp Fox - 04/30/2015
That must be why there are no spikes and forkhorns in the woods after thousands of years of brown it's down...People shot them out, and the gene disappeared.
If you look at the studies, a very high percentage of passed-up, under-racked bucks survive and are never killed by hunters. We like to think that we kill them when they grow up, but chances are extremely high that they survive our efforts. If anyone needs a source for that, I'll give it a whirl when I have time. I believe it is a Pennsylvania study.
Also, there's a history where ARs have shown some high-grading or were too stringent for the area's nutritional capability (poor soils grow poor racks that often even old age can't fix) that the standards were changed. Mississippi would be a good example, and the Pennsylvanians can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Pa. has tweaked some of their ARs in some areas in response to biologists' concerns.
Remember, ARs are not in place primarily to grow bigger and bigger racks. They are to protect young bucks so as to get a greater age-mix in the hunting kill, which should result in bigger bucks in the harvest (among other benefits to both hunters and the deer herd), but does not necessarily mean that the antlers of a 4.5 year-old deer, say, are going to be larger than a 3.5 y/o's just because of ARs.
ARs CERTAINLY don't mean you're killing out your best deer, and the research is out there to put that notion to rest should anyone care to look it up. There's probably nothing that hunters can do to affect genetics of free-range deer for better or for worse, and absolutely zero chance that any change would be noticeable in several lifetimes.
Boosting the nutrition and age of deer is the best thing we can do for them. Population control is part of the nutrition equation.
If you look at the studies, a very high percentage of passed-up, under-racked bucks survive and are never killed by hunters. We like to think that we kill them when they grow up, but chances are extremely high that they survive our efforts. If anyone needs a source for that, I'll give it a whirl when I have time. I believe it is a Pennsylvania study.
Also, there's a history where ARs have shown some high-grading or were too stringent for the area's nutritional capability (poor soils grow poor racks that often even old age can't fix) that the standards were changed. Mississippi would be a good example, and the Pennsylvanians can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Pa. has tweaked some of their ARs in some areas in response to biologists' concerns.
Remember, ARs are not in place primarily to grow bigger and bigger racks. They are to protect young bucks so as to get a greater age-mix in the hunting kill, which should result in bigger bucks in the harvest (among other benefits to both hunters and the deer herd), but does not necessarily mean that the antlers of a 4.5 year-old deer, say, are going to be larger than a 3.5 y/o's just because of ARs.
ARs CERTAINLY don't mean you're killing out your best deer, and the research is out there to put that notion to rest should anyone care to look it up. There's probably nothing that hunters can do to affect genetics of free-range deer for better or for worse, and absolutely zero chance that any change would be noticeable in several lifetimes.
Boosting the nutrition and age of deer is the best thing we can do for them. Population control is part of the nutrition equation.
150.) Wild Bob - 04/30/2015
Good points...
151.) luv2bowhunt - 05/01/2015
[QUOTE=Deerminator;31633]Hope the antler gene survives;
---Think about it, ------ All the nice rack bucks get shot off---- hence a lack of or obliteration of the antler gene.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, we could have saved them by shooting him when he was a spike or 4 pt. That makes absolutely no sense. This buck was shot in rifle season, Dec. 1, after the rut had taken place. He bred does that year and the year before. Those doe had fawns and they will breed other deer and more fawns are born and on and on and on.
You couldn't eliminate a strain of genes in a wild deer herd it you tried to. Bucks that are allowed to live past their first breeding season have a much GREATER chance to pass on their genes than one who is killed his first year.
This kind of thinking always makes me scratch my head.
OK, I'll shut up now, who really no's all this stuff anyway, it is what it is.
....where's my freaking coffee, I've got to get out of this office anyway.........
---Think about it, ------ All the nice rack bucks get shot off---- hence a lack of or obliteration of the antler gene.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, we could have saved them by shooting him when he was a spike or 4 pt. That makes absolutely no sense. This buck was shot in rifle season, Dec. 1, after the rut had taken place. He bred does that year and the year before. Those doe had fawns and they will breed other deer and more fawns are born and on and on and on.
You couldn't eliminate a strain of genes in a wild deer herd it you tried to. Bucks that are allowed to live past their first breeding season have a much GREATER chance to pass on their genes than one who is killed his first year.
This kind of thinking always makes me scratch my head.
OK, I'll shut up now, who really no's all this stuff anyway, it is what it is.
....where's my freaking coffee, I've got to get out of this office anyway.........
152.) Swamp Fox - 05/01/2015
[QUOTE=luv2bowhunt;31649]
OK, I'll shut up now, who really no's all this stuff anyway, it is what it is.
....[B][SIZE=2]where's my freaking coffee, I've got to get out of this office anyway[/SIZE][/B].........[/QUOTE]
Potential to join the ranks of the other HuntingCountry Classic Phrases, right there....I know the feeling. :wave:
OK, I'll shut up now, who really no's all this stuff anyway, it is what it is.
....[B][SIZE=2]where's my freaking coffee, I've got to get out of this office anyway[/SIZE][/B].........[/QUOTE]
Potential to join the ranks of the other HuntingCountry Classic Phrases, right there....I know the feeling. :wave:
153.) Wild Bob - 05/01/2015
"....where's my freaking coffee, I've got to get out of this office anyway........."
:applause:
Hang in there, it'll only get worse.
:applause:
Hang in there, it'll only get worse.