PA harvest #'s?????????
03-24-2008, 09:15 AM
#31
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pa.
Posts: 554
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
I too heard him speak & I never heard the 50 % # but I do recall something about the buck harvest going up.
Dr.Gary Alt right?
I too heard him speak & I never heard the 50 % # but I do recall something about the buck harvest going up.
Dr.Gary Alt right?
03-24-2008, 10:14 AM
#32
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,167
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
Just a few questions, What total deer number were we starting with to achieve a 5 % reduction per year?
When will we know if or when we have reached our set goal?
Are we looking at a scenario like N.C where hunter numbers will decrease to the point that doe tags will become unlimited or will the PGC need the fees from doe tags to finance their very existence?
The future looks very dim either way.[:-]
When will we know if or when we have reached our set goal?
Are we looking at a scenario like N.C where hunter numbers will decrease to the point that doe tags will become unlimited or will the PGC need the fees from doe tags to finance their very existence?
The future looks very dim either way.[:-]
03-24-2008, 10:49 AM
#33
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
Alt said the buck harvest would go down the first year of AR and then increase to normal numbers after that.While I do supportour present deer management plan,I never understood how Alt could make such a stupid comment.The buck harvest will continue to decrease as long as the herd is being reduced.Regardless,the message was loud and clear about the goal to greatlyreduce the deer herd.
The herd reduction efforts have been met in most areas and now they're trying to stabilize the herd.
I don't have a crystal ball but I imagine that we'll continue to lose hunters regardless of how many deer we have.Eventually,we'll most likely see a scenario that there won't be enough hunters to control the deer population.
The herd reduction efforts have been met in most areas and now they're trying to stabilize the herd.
I don't have a crystal ball but I imagine that we'll continue to lose hunters regardless of how many deer we have.Eventually,we'll most likely see a scenario that there won't be enough hunters to control the deer population.
03-24-2008, 11:06 AM
#34
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,167
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
I think what He meant with the :buck harvest increase" is that as a percentage of overall harvest it eventually will increase and become closer to one to one.
How can we say we are now stabilizing the herd when we killed more doe last year than in the year 2000 before herd reduction even began. Shouldn't stabilization some what come in line with the 5 % herd reduction per year numbers? Buck harvest numbers are half as should be with herd sized halved but doe harvest has still increased with a herd size reduction of 50 %.
I really don't believe that I ever heard that the goal was to half Pa's deer herd and I don't believe many would ever have supported such a goal.
How can we say we are now stabilizing the herd when we killed more doe last year than in the year 2000 before herd reduction even began. Shouldn't stabilization some what come in line with the 5 % herd reduction per year numbers? Buck harvest numbers are half as should be with herd sized halved but doe harvest has still increased with a herd size reduction of 50 %.
I really don't believe that I ever heard that the goal was to half Pa's deer herd and I don't believe many would ever have supported such a goal.
03-24-2008, 11:49 AM
#35
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
I can tell you for a fact that Alt mentioned itat his deer management seminars,on tape and it was mentioned in print.I don't know what to tell you but the message was loud and clear to me and I'm no fan of Alt.
Our buck harvest was very low this past year but the weather was absolutely terrible on the day when the largest harvest occurs.Truthfully,I don't think it's that out of line.Prior to AR the buck harvest used to hover around 150,000 or so bucks.This year we were faced with a smaller herd compared to years prior to 2000.We now have AR.If we didn't,how much higher would the harvest have been?Finally,we can'tdiscount the terrible weather on opening day.
Our buck harvest was very low this past year but the weather was absolutely terrible on the day when the largest harvest occurs.Truthfully,I don't think it's that out of line.Prior to AR the buck harvest used to hover around 150,000 or so bucks.This year we were faced with a smaller herd compared to years prior to 2000.We now have AR.If we didn't,how much higher would the harvest have been?Finally,we can'tdiscount the terrible weather on opening day.
03-24-2008, 11:56 AM
#36
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location:
Posts: 642
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
Weather Schmeather.
They didn't kill as many because there aren't as many. How can we have as many if there is far less breeding does around. In my WMU I would say we are probably down 70-80% versus 8 years ago(4c public land). I spend a ton of time in the woods during the fall and all winter and it is amazing that they are just plain gone.
They didn't kill as many because there aren't as many. How can we have as many if there is far less breeding does around. In my WMU I would say we are probably down 70-80% versus 8 years ago(4c public land). I spend a ton of time in the woods during the fall and all winter and it is amazing that they are just plain gone.
03-24-2008, 12:05 PM
#37
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
You're correct that there isn't as many.That was the plan as stated in the last several posts.Anyone that states that this past year's weather on opening day didn't impact the harvest is simply in denial.The same thing happened in 2G on the opening day of 2005 and the harvest results were similar.
03-24-2008, 12:35 PM
#39
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
What makes you so sure?Any data to support that claim?
You claim that 4C's herd is down about 80% over the past 8 years.If that's the case,you needed somemajor herd reductions 8 years ago since hunters still managed to kill 15000 deer in 4c this year.If they were able to do that with a herd reduced by 80%,how many deer were there in 4c 8 years ago?
You claim that 4C's herd is down about 80% over the past 8 years.If that's the case,you needed somemajor herd reductions 8 years ago since hunters still managed to kill 15000 deer in 4c this year.If they were able to do that with a herd reduced by 80%,how many deer were there in 4c 8 years ago?
03-24-2008, 01:17 PM
#40
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location:
Posts: 642
RE: PA harvest #'s?????????
15,000 is an estimate. Be careful with saying they are killing a lot and we should continue. The Public(abused) areas can't take much more of this. I assume 80% because of the log I keep and have kept for the past 15 years or so. I wish I would have done it for the past 30. During the 90's archery with 20 visits to the field each yearI bet that I saw deer about 15-18 out of 20 times. Tomorrow I will try to get the actual #'s compiled. This year was just about the opposite.
3 days with the rifle hunting great areas and I didn't see a tail.
3 days with the rifle hunting great areas and I didn't see a tail.