PA HARVEST NUMBERS
03-16-2006, 01:49 PM
#1
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Posts: 3,132
PA HARVEST NUMBERS
Here's the report:
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?Q=167625&A=11
GAME COMMISSION RELEASES 2005-06 DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES
HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania Game Commission officials today announced that the total deer harvest estimate for 2005-06 seasons is 354,390, down from the previous year's harvest estimate of 409,320. While the antlered harvest was similar to the previous year, the reduction in the antlerless deer harvest followed changes in antlerless license allocations, which were decreased in response to declining deer population trends in most Wildlife Management Units (WMUs).
"Going into the year, we expected WMU antlerless deer harvests to drop in most WMUs because the Board of Game Commissioners approved an overall antlerless deer license allocation that was down 15 percent from the previous year," said Carl Roe, Game Commission executive director. "For example, in WMU 2G, a 44 percent reduction in the unit's antlerless deer license allocation resulted in a 42 percent drop in the antlerless deer harvest. Most of the changes in the antlerless harvest can be accounted for by the change in antlerless allocations, and demonstrates the strong relationship between antlerless license allocations and harvests.
"Also, as general hunting license sales are down by five percent this year, it is unreasonable to expect the overall deer harvest would have increased."
The Game Commission's 2005-06 antlerless deer license allocations were intended to hold deer population trends steady until the agency's Deer Management Section completed development of a new system of measures to gauge the impact of deer on themselves, the habitat and people. That work, which should provide a solid foundation to manage deer more knowledgeably and progressively, is nearing completion.
The 2005-06 antlerless harvest was 233,890 compared to 284,910 for the 2004-05 seasons. From 2004-05 to 2005-06, antlerless harvests varied from a drop of 42 percent in WMU 2G to an increase of 6 percent in WMU 2A, where the allocation remained the same from the previous year. The statewide antlerless deer harvest was comprised of 23 percent button bucks, which is about average.
The 2005-06 antlered deer harvest was 120,500 compared to 124,410 for the 2004-05 seasons. Between 2004-05 and 2005-06, antlered harvests varied from a decline of 27 percent in WMU 4B to an increase of 24 percent in WMU 2B. As a direct result of the three-point and four-point antler restrictions, almost 50 percent of harvested antlered deer were 2.5 years old or older this past season, compared to only 20 percent being that old prior to antler restrictions.
"Overall, we are pleased with the percentage of older bucks in the antlered harvests, and we continue to receive overwhelmingly positive comments about antler restrictions," Roe said.
Calvin W. DuBrock, Game Commission Bureau of Wildlife Management director, noted that weather, once again this year, played a role at the beginning of the rifle deer season.
"Most deer are harvested during the first two days of the rifle season," DuBrock said. "This year, hunters in some areas experienced heavy fog on ridge tops during the opening day, while heavy rain impacted the second day in many areas. As a result, harvests during the first two days were down from 2004-05, but increased on the first and second Saturdays.
"Given the antlerless deer license allocations provided to hunters, we are pleased with the overall results. The 12-day concurrent season increases hunter opportunity, reduces much of the variability in hunter effort associated with shorter seasons and unpredictable weather, and gives our deer management team a more consistent method of monitoring the impacts of the harvest. Given the relationship of antlerless license allocations to antlerless harvest, the 12-day season is a win-win situation for hunters and managers."
DuBrock noted that deer harvest data, as well as comments from hunters, demonstrates that the agency's efforts in recent years to reduce the deer herd in some WMUs are working.
"We are asking hunters to work with us and endure some short-term pain, in terms of lower deer densities than in the past, so that we can achieve long-term gain, in terms of better habitat that supports deer and other wildlife for all Pennsylvanians. In fact, many hunters, landowners and foresters have commented to us about the changes and regeneration they're seeing in the forests they hunt or manage.
"Hunters have once again performed an important service for the rest of society by controlling the state's deer herd. They do it willingly, and without burden to taxpayers. They also will enjoy many nutritious meals from the venison they added to their freezers or provided to needy families through the Hunters Sharing the Harvest program."
DuBrock pointed out that deer harvest estimates are necessary. If all hunters who harvested a deer would send in their harvest report card, as required by law, harvest estimates would not be needed. However, the agency began using reporting rates to estimate deer harvests in the 1980s, when reporting rates began to drop. This year, less than 40 percent of hunters who harvested a deer sent in their harvest report card.
"Many Pennsylvania hunters are following through with their responsibility to report deer they harvest, and they obviously do believe reporting is important," DuBrock said. "But the loss of information created by so many other hunters not reporting their deer harvests isn't helping the Game Commission in its efforts to manage deer to the best of its ability for all Pennsylvanians."
Although the current reporting rates reduce the precision of harvest estimates, they do not affect the validity of the results or procedures.
"The Game Commission's method of estimating deer harvests was designed to account for reporting rates that are less than 100 percent," said Dr. Christopher Rosenberry, who heads up the agency's Deer Management Section. "The approach the agency uses to estimate deer harvests recently underwent an independent, scientific review and was found to be scientifically valid. In addition, the agency's harvest estimates represent a substantial data collection effort on the part of the agency's personnel."
DuBrock noted that, each year, roughly 10 percent of the agency's personnel - working throughout the state - check and record information from ear tags on harvested deer. This year nearly 29,000 deer were examined. This sample is then cross-checked with nearly 136,000 report cards submitted by hunters to determine reporting rates for antlered and antlerless deer by WMUs. Deer harvests are then calculated using information from these tens of thousands of deer harvested.
"Now that these harvest data are compiled, the Deer Management Section in the Bureau of Wildlife Management can begin to assess the impact of last year's harvest and prepare antlerless license allocation recommendations for the executive director to review, prior to presenting it to the Board of Game Commissioners for its consideration," DuBrock said. "Additionally, as directed by the Board, we will explore possible changes in season lengths for the 2006-07 seasons."
The Board of Game Commissioners will be meeting on April 17-18, at the agency's Harrisburg headquarters, 2001 Elmerton Ave., just off the Progress Avenue exit of Interstate 81. The meetings will begin at 8:30 a.m. on both days.
On April 17, the Board will hear public comments on the proposed 2006-07 hunting and furtaking seasons and bag limits that were given preliminary approval in October. The Board also will receive agency staff reports and updates.
On April 18, the Board is scheduled to take official action to finalize the 2006-07 hunting and furtaking seasons and bag limits. The Board also will set antlerless license allocations by WMUs on April 18.
As was announced last year (see News Release #020-05), DuBrock noted that last year was the final year of providing county harvest estimates, as the Game Commission has completed its transition to WMUs.
Harvest figures for the Deer Management Assistance Program (DMAP), which enables landowners to target hunter pressure where needed, are not available at this time, and were not included in these harvest results.
Bowhunters took 60,940 deer (31,730 antlered deer and 29,210 antlerless deer), compared to 62,460 deer (28,070 antlered deer and 34,390 antlerless deer) in 2004-05. Muzzleloader hunters harvested 25,240 deer (1,200 antlered deer and 24,040 antlerless deer) last year, compared to 31,270 deer (1,090 antlered deer and 30,180 antlerless deer) in 2004-05.
Deer harvest estimates by WMU are as follows:
WMU 1A: archery, 1,630 antlered, 1,530 antlerless; muzzleloader, 80 antlered, 1,410 antlerless; total, 5,500 antlered, 13,400 antlerless.
WMU 1B: archery, 1,780 antlered, 890 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 780 antlerless; total, 6,400 antlered, 10,700 antlerless.
WMU 2A: archery, 1,840 antlered, 1,520 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 2,080 antlerless; total, 8,500 antlered, 19,600 antlerless.
WMU 2B: archery, 2,720 antlered, 4,110 antlerless; muzzleloader, 80 antlered, 1,060 antlerless; total, 5,200 antlered, 14,500 antlerless.
WMU 2C: archery, 1,730 antlered, 1,150 antlerless; muzzleloader, 90 antlered, 1,310 antlerless; total, 7,400 antlered, 13,700 antlerless.
WMU 2D: archery, 2,700 antlered, 1,650 antlerless; muzzleloader, 90 antlered, 2,170 antlerless; total, 10,000 antlered, 22,100 antlerless.
WMU 2E: archery, 860 antlered, 460 antlerless; muzzleloader, 40 antlered, 690 antlerless; total, 4,100 antlered, 7,500 antlerless.
WMU 2F: archery, 890 antlered, 360 antlerless; muzzleloader, 40 antlered, 740 antlerless; total, 6,000 antlered, 8,300 antlerless.
WMU 2G: archery, 520 antlered, 380 antlerless; muzzleloader, 60 antlered, 800 antlerless; total, 5,000 antlered, 6,200 antlerless.
WMU 3A: archery, 620 antlered, 720 antlerless; muzzleloader, 30 antlered, 1,060 antlerless; total, 4,000 antlered, 8,700 antlerless.
WMU 3B: archery, 1,000 antlered, 930 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 1,430 antlerless; total, 6,000 antlered, 10,900 antlerless.
WMU 3C: archery, 860 antlered, 820 antlerless; muzzleloader, 30 antlered, 1,230 antlerless; total, 5,800 antlered, 11,200 antlerless.
WMU 3D: archery, 840 antlered, 780 antlerless; muzzleloader, 40 antlered, 950 antlerless; total, 3,900 antlered, 7,300 antlerless.
WMU 4A: archery, 450 antlered, 440 antlerless; muzzleloader, 70 antlered, 830 antlerless; total, 3,700 antlered, 7,600 antlerless.
WMU 4B: archery, 810 antlered, 590 antlerless; muzzleloader, 30 antlered, 720 antlerless; total, 3,600 antlered, 6,600 antlerless.
WMU 4C: archery, 1,670 antlered, 1,100 antlerless; muzzleloader, 70 antlered, 1,260 antlerless; total, 5,900 antlered, 9,800 antlerless.
WMU 4D: archery, 1,020 antlered, 630 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 920 antlerless; total, 5,600 antlered, 8,400 antlerless.
WMU 4E: archery, 1,130 antlered, 950 antlerless; muzzleloader, 20 antlered, 1,040 antlerless; total, 4,500 antlered, 9,100 antlerless.
WMU 5A: archery, 550 antlered, 560 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 680 antlerless; total, 2,400 antlered, 4,700 antlerless.
WMU 5B: archery, 3,000 antlered, 2,530 antlerless; muzzleloader, 70 antlered, 1,280 antlerless; total, 7,400 antlered, 11,700 antlerless.
WMU 5C: archery, 3,940 antlered, 5,060 antlerless; muzzleloader, 90 antlered, 1,390 antlerless; total, 7,700 antlered, 17,600 antlerless.
WMU 5D: archery, 1,090 antlered, 2,050 antlerless; muzzleloader, 20 antlered, 190 antlerless; total, 1,500 antlered, 4,200 antlerless.
Unknown WMU: archery, 80 antlered, 0 antlerless; muzzleloader, 0 antlered, 20 antlerless; total, 400 antlered, 90 antlerless.
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?Q=167625&A=11
GAME COMMISSION RELEASES 2005-06 DEER HARVEST ESTIMATES
HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania Game Commission officials today announced that the total deer harvest estimate for 2005-06 seasons is 354,390, down from the previous year's harvest estimate of 409,320. While the antlered harvest was similar to the previous year, the reduction in the antlerless deer harvest followed changes in antlerless license allocations, which were decreased in response to declining deer population trends in most Wildlife Management Units (WMUs).
"Going into the year, we expected WMU antlerless deer harvests to drop in most WMUs because the Board of Game Commissioners approved an overall antlerless deer license allocation that was down 15 percent from the previous year," said Carl Roe, Game Commission executive director. "For example, in WMU 2G, a 44 percent reduction in the unit's antlerless deer license allocation resulted in a 42 percent drop in the antlerless deer harvest. Most of the changes in the antlerless harvest can be accounted for by the change in antlerless allocations, and demonstrates the strong relationship between antlerless license allocations and harvests.
"Also, as general hunting license sales are down by five percent this year, it is unreasonable to expect the overall deer harvest would have increased."
The Game Commission's 2005-06 antlerless deer license allocations were intended to hold deer population trends steady until the agency's Deer Management Section completed development of a new system of measures to gauge the impact of deer on themselves, the habitat and people. That work, which should provide a solid foundation to manage deer more knowledgeably and progressively, is nearing completion.
The 2005-06 antlerless harvest was 233,890 compared to 284,910 for the 2004-05 seasons. From 2004-05 to 2005-06, antlerless harvests varied from a drop of 42 percent in WMU 2G to an increase of 6 percent in WMU 2A, where the allocation remained the same from the previous year. The statewide antlerless deer harvest was comprised of 23 percent button bucks, which is about average.
The 2005-06 antlered deer harvest was 120,500 compared to 124,410 for the 2004-05 seasons. Between 2004-05 and 2005-06, antlered harvests varied from a decline of 27 percent in WMU 4B to an increase of 24 percent in WMU 2B. As a direct result of the three-point and four-point antler restrictions, almost 50 percent of harvested antlered deer were 2.5 years old or older this past season, compared to only 20 percent being that old prior to antler restrictions.
"Overall, we are pleased with the percentage of older bucks in the antlered harvests, and we continue to receive overwhelmingly positive comments about antler restrictions," Roe said.
Calvin W. DuBrock, Game Commission Bureau of Wildlife Management director, noted that weather, once again this year, played a role at the beginning of the rifle deer season.
"Most deer are harvested during the first two days of the rifle season," DuBrock said. "This year, hunters in some areas experienced heavy fog on ridge tops during the opening day, while heavy rain impacted the second day in many areas. As a result, harvests during the first two days were down from 2004-05, but increased on the first and second Saturdays.
"Given the antlerless deer license allocations provided to hunters, we are pleased with the overall results. The 12-day concurrent season increases hunter opportunity, reduces much of the variability in hunter effort associated with shorter seasons and unpredictable weather, and gives our deer management team a more consistent method of monitoring the impacts of the harvest. Given the relationship of antlerless license allocations to antlerless harvest, the 12-day season is a win-win situation for hunters and managers."
DuBrock noted that deer harvest data, as well as comments from hunters, demonstrates that the agency's efforts in recent years to reduce the deer herd in some WMUs are working.
"We are asking hunters to work with us and endure some short-term pain, in terms of lower deer densities than in the past, so that we can achieve long-term gain, in terms of better habitat that supports deer and other wildlife for all Pennsylvanians. In fact, many hunters, landowners and foresters have commented to us about the changes and regeneration they're seeing in the forests they hunt or manage.
"Hunters have once again performed an important service for the rest of society by controlling the state's deer herd. They do it willingly, and without burden to taxpayers. They also will enjoy many nutritious meals from the venison they added to their freezers or provided to needy families through the Hunters Sharing the Harvest program."
DuBrock pointed out that deer harvest estimates are necessary. If all hunters who harvested a deer would send in their harvest report card, as required by law, harvest estimates would not be needed. However, the agency began using reporting rates to estimate deer harvests in the 1980s, when reporting rates began to drop. This year, less than 40 percent of hunters who harvested a deer sent in their harvest report card.
"Many Pennsylvania hunters are following through with their responsibility to report deer they harvest, and they obviously do believe reporting is important," DuBrock said. "But the loss of information created by so many other hunters not reporting their deer harvests isn't helping the Game Commission in its efforts to manage deer to the best of its ability for all Pennsylvanians."
Although the current reporting rates reduce the precision of harvest estimates, they do not affect the validity of the results or procedures.
"The Game Commission's method of estimating deer harvests was designed to account for reporting rates that are less than 100 percent," said Dr. Christopher Rosenberry, who heads up the agency's Deer Management Section. "The approach the agency uses to estimate deer harvests recently underwent an independent, scientific review and was found to be scientifically valid. In addition, the agency's harvest estimates represent a substantial data collection effort on the part of the agency's personnel."
DuBrock noted that, each year, roughly 10 percent of the agency's personnel - working throughout the state - check and record information from ear tags on harvested deer. This year nearly 29,000 deer were examined. This sample is then cross-checked with nearly 136,000 report cards submitted by hunters to determine reporting rates for antlered and antlerless deer by WMUs. Deer harvests are then calculated using information from these tens of thousands of deer harvested.
"Now that these harvest data are compiled, the Deer Management Section in the Bureau of Wildlife Management can begin to assess the impact of last year's harvest and prepare antlerless license allocation recommendations for the executive director to review, prior to presenting it to the Board of Game Commissioners for its consideration," DuBrock said. "Additionally, as directed by the Board, we will explore possible changes in season lengths for the 2006-07 seasons."
The Board of Game Commissioners will be meeting on April 17-18, at the agency's Harrisburg headquarters, 2001 Elmerton Ave., just off the Progress Avenue exit of Interstate 81. The meetings will begin at 8:30 a.m. on both days.
On April 17, the Board will hear public comments on the proposed 2006-07 hunting and furtaking seasons and bag limits that were given preliminary approval in October. The Board also will receive agency staff reports and updates.
On April 18, the Board is scheduled to take official action to finalize the 2006-07 hunting and furtaking seasons and bag limits. The Board also will set antlerless license allocations by WMUs on April 18.
As was announced last year (see News Release #020-05), DuBrock noted that last year was the final year of providing county harvest estimates, as the Game Commission has completed its transition to WMUs.
Harvest figures for the Deer Management Assistance Program (DMAP), which enables landowners to target hunter pressure where needed, are not available at this time, and were not included in these harvest results.
Bowhunters took 60,940 deer (31,730 antlered deer and 29,210 antlerless deer), compared to 62,460 deer (28,070 antlered deer and 34,390 antlerless deer) in 2004-05. Muzzleloader hunters harvested 25,240 deer (1,200 antlered deer and 24,040 antlerless deer) last year, compared to 31,270 deer (1,090 antlered deer and 30,180 antlerless deer) in 2004-05.
Deer harvest estimates by WMU are as follows:
WMU 1A: archery, 1,630 antlered, 1,530 antlerless; muzzleloader, 80 antlered, 1,410 antlerless; total, 5,500 antlered, 13,400 antlerless.
WMU 1B: archery, 1,780 antlered, 890 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 780 antlerless; total, 6,400 antlered, 10,700 antlerless.
WMU 2A: archery, 1,840 antlered, 1,520 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 2,080 antlerless; total, 8,500 antlered, 19,600 antlerless.
WMU 2B: archery, 2,720 antlered, 4,110 antlerless; muzzleloader, 80 antlered, 1,060 antlerless; total, 5,200 antlered, 14,500 antlerless.
WMU 2C: archery, 1,730 antlered, 1,150 antlerless; muzzleloader, 90 antlered, 1,310 antlerless; total, 7,400 antlered, 13,700 antlerless.
WMU 2D: archery, 2,700 antlered, 1,650 antlerless; muzzleloader, 90 antlered, 2,170 antlerless; total, 10,000 antlered, 22,100 antlerless.
WMU 2E: archery, 860 antlered, 460 antlerless; muzzleloader, 40 antlered, 690 antlerless; total, 4,100 antlered, 7,500 antlerless.
WMU 2F: archery, 890 antlered, 360 antlerless; muzzleloader, 40 antlered, 740 antlerless; total, 6,000 antlered, 8,300 antlerless.
WMU 2G: archery, 520 antlered, 380 antlerless; muzzleloader, 60 antlered, 800 antlerless; total, 5,000 antlered, 6,200 antlerless.
WMU 3A: archery, 620 antlered, 720 antlerless; muzzleloader, 30 antlered, 1,060 antlerless; total, 4,000 antlered, 8,700 antlerless.
WMU 3B: archery, 1,000 antlered, 930 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 1,430 antlerless; total, 6,000 antlered, 10,900 antlerless.
WMU 3C: archery, 860 antlered, 820 antlerless; muzzleloader, 30 antlered, 1,230 antlerless; total, 5,800 antlered, 11,200 antlerless.
WMU 3D: archery, 840 antlered, 780 antlerless; muzzleloader, 40 antlered, 950 antlerless; total, 3,900 antlered, 7,300 antlerless.
WMU 4A: archery, 450 antlered, 440 antlerless; muzzleloader, 70 antlered, 830 antlerless; total, 3,700 antlered, 7,600 antlerless.
WMU 4B: archery, 810 antlered, 590 antlerless; muzzleloader, 30 antlered, 720 antlerless; total, 3,600 antlered, 6,600 antlerless.
WMU 4C: archery, 1,670 antlered, 1,100 antlerless; muzzleloader, 70 antlered, 1,260 antlerless; total, 5,900 antlered, 9,800 antlerless.
WMU 4D: archery, 1,020 antlered, 630 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 920 antlerless; total, 5,600 antlered, 8,400 antlerless.
WMU 4E: archery, 1,130 antlered, 950 antlerless; muzzleloader, 20 antlered, 1,040 antlerless; total, 4,500 antlered, 9,100 antlerless.
WMU 5A: archery, 550 antlered, 560 antlerless; muzzleloader, 50 antlered, 680 antlerless; total, 2,400 antlered, 4,700 antlerless.
WMU 5B: archery, 3,000 antlered, 2,530 antlerless; muzzleloader, 70 antlered, 1,280 antlerless; total, 7,400 antlered, 11,700 antlerless.
WMU 5C: archery, 3,940 antlered, 5,060 antlerless; muzzleloader, 90 antlered, 1,390 antlerless; total, 7,700 antlered, 17,600 antlerless.
WMU 5D: archery, 1,090 antlered, 2,050 antlerless; muzzleloader, 20 antlered, 190 antlerless; total, 1,500 antlered, 4,200 antlerless.
Unknown WMU: archery, 80 antlered, 0 antlerless; muzzleloader, 0 antlered, 20 antlerless; total, 400 antlered, 90 antlerless.
]
03-16-2006, 02:44 PM
#3
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 15,451
RE: PA HARVEST NUMBERS
Numbers mean nothing. I know the anterless total in 5c is wrong, to high . Lots ofpeople played games with their report cards this year. Plus thousands of doe tags were burned or filled out as a kill which never happened .
03-16-2006, 02:55 PM
#4
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location:
Posts: 317
RE: PA HARVEST NUMBERS
I did a bit of analysis of the harvest figures, comparing this year with the year before (2004 and 2005).
Total for the state 2004 2005 % decrease
Antlered deer 124,410 120,500 -3.4%
Antlerless deer 284,910 233,890 -16%
Total kill 409,320 364,390 -13.5%
Some WMU figures were down more than the average and some were down less. What really frosts my Post Toasties is that the reporting rate statewide was about 40%. This means that 60% of our "sportsmen" are too lazy to mail in a postage free postcard, and then want to grouse about how inaccurate the estimates are. Sad commentary on our sport, isn't it.
Further, it would appear that those who said that there aren't any deer were blowing smoke as usual. In 2C, where posters are saying that there aren't any deer, over 20,000 total deer were taken. Somebody must be seeing them. Maybe it's the hunters who spend time in the woods who are getting all the deer? Hard to shoot them when you are in the cabin drinking brewskis, or at home on the 'puter griping on some message board. Ah well. Let the party begin. I for one am looking forward to next deer season, and the total kill in my WMU was down 28% from that in 2004.
Total for the state 2004 2005 % decrease
Antlered deer 124,410 120,500 -3.4%
Antlerless deer 284,910 233,890 -16%
Total kill 409,320 364,390 -13.5%
Some WMU figures were down more than the average and some were down less. What really frosts my Post Toasties is that the reporting rate statewide was about 40%. This means that 60% of our "sportsmen" are too lazy to mail in a postage free postcard, and then want to grouse about how inaccurate the estimates are. Sad commentary on our sport, isn't it.
Further, it would appear that those who said that there aren't any deer were blowing smoke as usual. In 2C, where posters are saying that there aren't any deer, over 20,000 total deer were taken. Somebody must be seeing them. Maybe it's the hunters who spend time in the woods who are getting all the deer? Hard to shoot them when you are in the cabin drinking brewskis, or at home on the 'puter griping on some message board. Ah well. Let the party begin. I for one am looking forward to next deer season, and the total kill in my WMU was down 28% from that in 2004.
03-16-2006, 06:13 PM
#7
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: PA HARVEST NUMBERS
Wow, what a coincidence. PA's drop is about the same precentageas several surrounding statesthat also experienced a decline in deer harvests from the previous season.
Whaddya think, alien abductions? ;O)
Whaddya think, alien abductions? ;O)
03-16-2006, 11:30 PM
#8
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey USA
Posts: 1,279
RE: PA HARVEST NUMBERS
Numbers mean nothing. I know the anterless total in 5c is wrong, to high . Lots ofpeople played games with their report cards this year. Plus thousands of doe tags were burned or filled out as a kill which never happened .
03-17-2006, 03:03 AM
#9
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 15,451
RE: PA HARVEST NUMBERS
ORIGINAL: patrkyhntr
So you guys played games with the report cards, cardeer? You have personal knowledge of that? What a sportsman you are. You should be very proud of yourself.
So you guys played games with the report cards, cardeer? You have personal knowledge of that? What a sportsman you are. You should be very proud of yourself.
THE DEER I SHOT WAS A SPECIAL HUNT ON CLOSED PRIVATE LAND BELONGING TO A POWER COMPANY.AREA HUNTED ONLY 1 DAY A YEAR. ONLY PLACE I COULD HUNT WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE.AS LONG AS THE PGC LIE TO THE HUNTER PEOPLE WILL GROUP TOGETHER AND DO THINGS TO FIGHT BACK.AGAIN I SENT IN MY CARD. OH BUT I CAN SHOW YOU DOZENS OF DEAD DEER ON A PILE ROTTING.THE GREAT PGC GAVE A DEVELOP[ER THE PERMISSION TO SHOOT THEM AT NIGHT TO CLEAR THEM FROM THE 2600 ACRES SO THEY WONT BE PROBLEM FOR THE NEW HOME OWNERS. Oh THAT WAS A GREAT ETHICAL MOVE.JUST LET THEM ROT
03-17-2006, 06:27 AM
#10
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location:
Posts: 317
RE: PA HARVEST NUMBERS
Since you and your buddies play games with the harvest reporting system, please tell us how you would fix it. Also, since you don't believe or trust the blame commission, how about a source for some facts that you do trust. It seems to me that you are all gripe and no solution. I'll see if you post something worth reading in your next post, and if you don't, I have better things to do than to read this sort of trash.
It is interesting to me that most "sportsmen" in Pa. seemed to enjoy taking two or more does every year for about five years, but are oh so surprised when this resulted in a reduced deer population. I sat through one of Gary Alt's traveling dog and pony shows, and while he was busy rattling those nice antlers on stage, he was also talking about the need to REDUCE THE HERD. I keep coming back to the same thing. What part of "herd reduction" don't people understand?
So the population in your area is down 70% is it? Let's take the WMU I hunt in, 4A. Just in the past two years, 2004 and 2005, the doe harvest dropped from 22,000 in 2004 to 7600 in 2005. That is a pretty big drop in harvest. Now, if the blame commission was falsifying numbers, cardeer, don't you think they could have done a better job and made this look better? I sure could have. The total deer kill in 4A was down 28% in those two years. Wouldn't you have made it look better than that, cardeer? You are one of those who looks for a conspiracy where there is no logical reason for there to be one, but don't let that stop you.
If the harvest figures are not accurate, us "sportsmen" have nobody to blame but ourselves. Playing games with harvest report cards is so blatantly stupid that it defies anything in the way of common sense.
It is interesting to me that most "sportsmen" in Pa. seemed to enjoy taking two or more does every year for about five years, but are oh so surprised when this resulted in a reduced deer population. I sat through one of Gary Alt's traveling dog and pony shows, and while he was busy rattling those nice antlers on stage, he was also talking about the need to REDUCE THE HERD. I keep coming back to the same thing. What part of "herd reduction" don't people understand?
So the population in your area is down 70% is it? Let's take the WMU I hunt in, 4A. Just in the past two years, 2004 and 2005, the doe harvest dropped from 22,000 in 2004 to 7600 in 2005. That is a pretty big drop in harvest. Now, if the blame commission was falsifying numbers, cardeer, don't you think they could have done a better job and made this look better? I sure could have. The total deer kill in 4A was down 28% in those two years. Wouldn't you have made it look better than that, cardeer? You are one of those who looks for a conspiracy where there is no logical reason for there to be one, but don't let that stop you.
If the harvest figures are not accurate, us "sportsmen" have nobody to blame but ourselves. Playing games with harvest report cards is so blatantly stupid that it defies anything in the way of common sense.