dirz1

Everyone is constantly debating the PGC deer management program on this board. So my question has the PGC given us a new number of how many deer on this state. Have they given us a projected acceptable carrying capacity. Where are we at now in regards to carrying capacity. Are we close? Are we still far away from an acceptable number of deer?

Do they not know?I am just concerned about the ultimate goal of there deer management plan. I wanted to start this thread because I helped hijack the last thread pertaining to license increase.

DougE

They're in a stabilization mode right now in most WMU's.They never have and never will know exactly how many deer are in this state.The old standby carrying capacity they used since the early 1980's was 21 deer per forested square mile,over winter in suitable habitat.That means that if the habitat was poor,the dd goal would be less.Around 2003,they took the forested part out and went to deer per square mile for each WMU.Nothing really changed.They just took out all the residential areas,farms,malls,parking lots etc.For all intensive purposes the goal was still 21 deer per forested square mile.That's why 2G(mostly forested)had a goal of 15 dpsm while some of the urban areas had a goal of 6 dpsm.Since there's less habitat in those areas,the goal per square mile was less.About a year ago,they started to get away from deer density goals and focus on the effects the deer are having with the habitat.The habitat is being monitored and the deer's health(conception rates)is being monitored to determine if we should have more deer,less deer or a stabilized herd.In some areas of the state,the habitat is so poor from decades of overbrowsing,it makes no sense to add more deer to the habitat that's already destroyed.Take 2F and 2G for an example.These areas have some of the lowest breeding rates for fawns and some of the worst habitat.You won't seethem letting the herd increase much in these areas because it makes no sense.Once the habitat is degraded to the point it is in vast areas of the NC,you need to keep the herd down because it takes very few deer to continually impact the habitat.When you see no understory except a blanket of ferns,you keep killing the deer.You don't let the herd increase.

The habitat is starting to make a comeback in many areas where I hunt on public land in 2G.As the habitat recovers,you get more deer.If the deer herd grows to much,you lose any gains that you made with the habitat.

You also have to understand that the poorhabitat in many areas kills more deer than hunters do.Some of the most remote and rugged areas of the state recieve very little pressure but have some of the lowest densities today.these were areas that were loaded with deer 20 years ago.Decades of overbrowsing have caused low fawn recruitment rates and few female fawns gaining enough weight to conceive their first year.Many of these areas have very low deer densities but the hunters aren't killing the deer and there's studies out there right now that are proving this is true.

Habitat is everything and until it gets fixed,we'll suffer with lower deer densities.

motrin

Whats going to fix the habit ? A tree growing in the forest does not produce limbs from the bottom,so for there to be new growth we need new trees. The state refuses to cut trees .The G.C. cuts 1% or less per year.
How is the habit getting better. If there was not one deer Left there would not be growth on the bottoms of old trees period. The forest needs opened up.

The win win that seems to be obvious to everyone that does not work for the G.C. is to increase cutting on game lands and state lands ,we would have a windfall of money and better habitat for all of the states animals.

DougE

Who refuses to cut trees?That statement is simply ridiculous.How much do you think they should cut per year?

There should be an understory,even in a mature forest and the vast majority of the northern tier has none.There are many shade tolerant speces that should be growing beneath the canopy but decades of deer overbrowsing took care of that.A deer needs several pounds of browseper day,especially during winter when there's no mast to eat.When there's no browse,the deer disappear.Hobble bush is an excellent shade tolerant browse species that used to cover the forest floor of the northern tier.When was the last time you saw it growing?It's been decades because the deer ate it all.

You are 110% wrong that there would be nothing growing on the forest floor if the deer were all gone.DCNR has pre-sale exclosures all over the place around here where they try to get some advanced regeneration prior to a cut.They all have regeneration to some extent.The PGC has put up exclosures under a mature canopy and the growth is spectacular in some cases.Light certainly helps but you can only cut so much per year.You can't just go in and clearcut the entire state.DCNR is mandated to cut areas no bigger than 70acres.If they don't fence the cuts,the deer congregate and destroy most of the regeneration.That's why millions of dollars are spent each year on fencing.When you have good habitat and tyen you cut an area,the deer don't have nearly the impact.When you cut an area that has poor habitat,it takes very few deer to ruin any regeneration.

archer58

Mortin,
I don't know what part of the state u are from but if u ever get a chance to walk around a fenced in area, you will certainly see what DougE is talking about. In the Moshannan State forest between DuBois and Clearfield there are several fenced areas. If u stood outside the fence and looked in u would swear u were in a different part of the state. The regrowth and understory inside the fence is phenominal. Outside the fence u can see for a long way. Not much regrowth on the outside. I will say that ithas improved some since the deer density there is around optimal for that area @ 15dpsm. It's just not enough. For an area to hold deer year around it needs all types of food that will available year around. When the mast is gone the deer will leave the area to find the available browse. That just so happens to fall right before rifle season. So what happens when the deer move on. You think there aren't any. When in actuallity they went to an area that will sustain them. And chances are they may stay there and not return if the HABITAT suits them better.

It's really not hard to put the pieces together once you've seen it, and the difference between the two habitats.

Take a ride someday and see for yourself. It's an eyeopener.

motrin

I will try to go thru this . Cutting less than 1 % of the available timber when you need the money and you need the canopy removed is irresponsible.If some one at DCNR mandated nothing more than 70 acres cut he is a fool and letting irrational regulation stand in the way of realistic goals should be wrong in everyones eyes.
From what I get out of the whole plan was to regulate all common since options away so that your original goal can be reached.
The elimination of the whitailed deer seems to be the easiest way to achieve these goals .
I am not saying there are not problems with habitat and how deer affect it but why don't we change the rules and get timbering at a realistic scale.
I live in Crawford county and we are a by product of your problems.we have fantastic deer habitat because the land is held by private citizens who understand that trees are a renewable crop that needs to be harvested. But Dr .Alts plan is still in effect here also and it has had great effect.Most ofthe land is posted and no one wants you to kill a doe.If you don't own land you are hosed. I own 149 acres of some of the best deer habitat you will ever find.You are more than welcome to come and see it.I have more deer in my woods than you people want in whole counties.The one size fits all management system might work when the government owns all the land but here that is a different story,Here land owners actually like deer,we like seeing them ,hunting them and eating them,and if the choice to me is seeing a hobble berry bush or seeing a deer I'm going to side with the deer.You guys believe that what you are doing is right ,maybe in your area it is ,in my area I believe I'm right. And since I own my land your wishes will only be wishes because until I die or sell it not you or anyone else will not kill the doe on my land.

NorthPA

I welcome someone to correct me if I am wrong, but I think there is a forestry method referred to as a "hundred year" plan.
Here again, I'm going on a fading memory of a seminar some years ago.
It seems that in order to maintain a constant and predictable flow of hardwoods (income for PGC) in perpetuity, that cutting rotation should be 1% percent per year. I don't think this is just for timber harvest purposes but also to have staged forests with all stages from seedling to old growth.
Being that the PGC mandate is for "all" wildlife.

motrin

You can call it what ever you want but that won't change the point that its stupid! And as long as stupid rules rule stupid people we will have the same problems 100 years from now. Thats why we have private property rights so that when the stupid come up with these lame ideas the rest of us can do what we know is right. A continual and select timbered forest will out perform any hand off forest in every aspect be it timber production or wildlife habitat.

DougE

It's not a stupid rule.If you cut more than 1% a year,eventually you'll end up with too much pole timber that provides zero benefit for deer.Lets say you cut 5% a year.In 20 years all you're timber will be cut and most of it will be in the pole timber stage for the next 50+ years.That's exactly what happened to Pa.Practically the entire northcentral region was cut in the early part of the 20th century.Things were great for a while but it eventually became pole timber and then saw timber and the carrying capacity dropped.If you have an oak/hickory forest,that carrying capacity will go up a little once mast starts being produced but that's only about 40% of our land mass.

Most of the private propert that I see is cut out of greed.People want the money and realize they won't be around to see any regeneration.They high grade the timber by taking all the big seed trees and leave nothing but junk to grow.I see it happening where I live right now.Our timber rights were sold about 20 years ago and we get them back in 2013.The loggers are in there right now cutting everying bigger than 14 inches at the stump.That means that basically everything is going.We had way too many deer for way too long in this area
so there's no advanced regeneration regeneration.As a result,we're going to end up with nothing but beech and striped maple.We'll hold some deer for the next 15 years or so and then the population will crash,just like it did accross much of the northern tier.On the other hand,the game lands and state forest have long term goals to prevent this from happening.The goals for the state forests are much different but at least there's an effort to rotate our forestsso have a renewable resource.Cutting our forests in a sustaiable manner is much more complicated than just going in and clearcutting an area.

DougE

Unfortuanely,those dim wits outnumber the hunters.Look at what what they've done to the timbering operations in the Alleghany national forest.I agree that it's a shame that DCNR is mandated to cut no more than 70 acres at a time but that's the way it is and it isn't their idea.