LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
04-21-2009, 12:34 PM
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
BOARD APPROVES ANTLERLESS DEER LICENSE ALLOCATIONS
The Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners today approved antlerless license allocations for each of the 22 Wildlife Management Units (WMUs) based on measurements of deer health; habitat health; and level of deer-human conflicts based on Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) input; as well as deer population trends.
The agency continues to seek a decrease in the population trends in WMUs 2B, 5C and 5D, which are the three most developed areas of the state. Based on CAC input, and supported by scientific measurements, the agency is continuing to allow for an increase in the population trend in WMUs 4E and 5A. In all other WMUs, the agency continues to seek stabilization of population trends. The only WMU to see an increase in its allocation is WMU 5C, which increased from 92,000 last year to 113,000 for the 2009-10 seasons.
For more information on these measurements, both the quantitative thresholds and qualitative labels, please see “Deer Program” on the agency’s website (www.pgc.state.pa.us) in the “Quick Clicks” box in the right-hand column of the homepage.
Following is a listing of the approved allocations for each WMU, along with last year’s allocation. More detailed information for each WMU allocation will be posted on the agency’s website in the near future, in the “Deer Program” section.
WMU 1A allocation will be 42,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 1B allocation will be 30,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2A allocation will be 55,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2B allocation will be 68,000 to continue to decrease the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2C allocation will be 49,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2D allocation will be 56,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2E allocation will be 21,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2F allocation will be 28,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2G allocation will be 26,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3A allocation will be 26,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3B allocation will be 43,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3C allocation will be 27,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3D allocation will be 37,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4A allocation will be 29,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4B allocation will be 23,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4C allocation will be 35,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4D allocation will be 40,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4E allocation will be 30,000 to allow an increase in the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 5A allocation will be 19,000 to allow an increase in the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 5B allocation will be 51,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 5C allocation will be 113,000 to continue to decrease the population trend, up from last year’s allocation of 92,000.
WMU 5D allocation will be 22,000 to continue to decrease the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
.....................................
Despite the fact most wmu in the state have had steady DECLINING deerherdtrends, and some significantly,according to the last annual report, the allocations STILL arent be dropped. Far fewer deer, same ridiculously high allocations. WTF are the legislators waiting for? Time to take out the trash!!!
HELL NO! To license fee increase. Id rather wipe my arse with the money and flush it then pay it to slit our own throats.
The Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners today approved antlerless license allocations for each of the 22 Wildlife Management Units (WMUs) based on measurements of deer health; habitat health; and level of deer-human conflicts based on Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) input; as well as deer population trends.
The agency continues to seek a decrease in the population trends in WMUs 2B, 5C and 5D, which are the three most developed areas of the state. Based on CAC input, and supported by scientific measurements, the agency is continuing to allow for an increase in the population trend in WMUs 4E and 5A. In all other WMUs, the agency continues to seek stabilization of population trends. The only WMU to see an increase in its allocation is WMU 5C, which increased from 92,000 last year to 113,000 for the 2009-10 seasons.
For more information on these measurements, both the quantitative thresholds and qualitative labels, please see “Deer Program” on the agency’s website (www.pgc.state.pa.us) in the “Quick Clicks” box in the right-hand column of the homepage.
Following is a listing of the approved allocations for each WMU, along with last year’s allocation. More detailed information for each WMU allocation will be posted on the agency’s website in the near future, in the “Deer Program” section.
WMU 1A allocation will be 42,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 1B allocation will be 30,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2A allocation will be 55,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2B allocation will be 68,000 to continue to decrease the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2C allocation will be 49,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2D allocation will be 56,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2E allocation will be 21,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2F allocation will be 28,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 2G allocation will be 26,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3A allocation will be 26,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3B allocation will be 43,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3C allocation will be 27,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 3D allocation will be 37,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4A allocation will be 29,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4B allocation will be 23,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4C allocation will be 35,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4D allocation will be 40,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 4E allocation will be 30,000 to allow an increase in the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 5A allocation will be 19,000 to allow an increase in the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 5B allocation will be 51,000 to continue to stabilize the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
WMU 5C allocation will be 113,000 to continue to decrease the population trend, up from last year’s allocation of 92,000.
WMU 5D allocation will be 22,000 to continue to decrease the population trend, which is the same as last year’s.
.....................................
Despite the fact most wmu in the state have had steady DECLINING deerherdtrends, and some significantly,according to the last annual report, the allocations STILL arent be dropped. Far fewer deer, same ridiculously high allocations. WTF are the legislators waiting for? Time to take out the trash!!!
HELL NO! To license fee increase. Id rather wipe my arse with the money and flush it then pay it to slit our own throats.
04-21-2009, 01:54 PM
#2
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: 3c pa
Posts: 1,212
RE: LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
27000 in 3c like last year didnt and dont seem like too many for the northerntier you have to be lucky to even draw a bonus tag. Looks like decent number. IMHO
04-21-2009, 02:36 PM
#4
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
Donno bowtruck about your wmu. what I do know is according to pgc annual reportMOST wmus have been declining deer densityincluding last year, and the allocation stillwasnt dropped.
2A is a flipping joke. Best area of the state well below 25 owdpsm and declining further.55k caused the herd to decline 7% in 2006 and 9% in 2007 according to annual report. We have also had ehd rip our herd, and have hadtoo many tags the last two years as well and had evenfurther decline. Thats basically 4 out of the last five years declining in 2A, despite claims of stabilization. And what is the allocation this year again? Same as 4 out of the last 5 years. 55k. Even though the herd is MUCH smaller now.[:'(]
Maverick, thats not gonna happen and thats why they need a legislator administered attitude adjustment.
2A was one of the best areas in the state. Its not a joke and becoming a bigger one by the year. For absolutely no apparent reason.
2A is a flipping joke. Best area of the state well below 25 owdpsm and declining further.55k caused the herd to decline 7% in 2006 and 9% in 2007 according to annual report. We have also had ehd rip our herd, and have hadtoo many tags the last two years as well and had evenfurther decline. Thats basically 4 out of the last five years declining in 2A, despite claims of stabilization. And what is the allocation this year again? Same as 4 out of the last 5 years. 55k. Even though the herd is MUCH smaller now.[:'(]
Maverick, thats not gonna happen and thats why they need a legislator administered attitude adjustment.
2A was one of the best areas in the state. Its not a joke and becoming a bigger one by the year. For absolutely no apparent reason.
04-21-2009, 02:44 PM
#5
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
Bowtruck, just looked into. 3C has the same allocation as last two years. I dont have the data yet of course for how much decline it caused last year, but according to the last annual report, the same allocation as this year caused a 17% decline to the deer herd in 3C in 2007.
If you feel this season your unit needs to have everyone and their mothers brother get a doe tag or two, and dont mind significant added reduction that is the cost, then your wish has been granted.
If you feel this season your unit needs to have everyone and their mothers brother get a doe tag or two, and dont mind significant added reduction that is the cost, then your wish has been granted.
04-21-2009, 03:19 PM
#7
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 584
RE: LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
ORIGINAL: Cornelius08
Donno bowtruck about your wmu. what I do know is according to pgc annual reportMOST wmus have been declining deer densityincluding last year, and the allocation stillwasnt dropped.
2A is a flipping joke. Best area of the state well below 25 owdpsm and declining further.55k caused the herd to decline 7% in 2006 and 9% in 2007 according to annual report. We have also had ehd rip our herd, and have hadtoo many tags the last two years as well and had evenfurther decline. Thats basically 4 out of the last five years declining in 2A, despite claims of stabilization. And what is the allocation this year again? Same as 4 out of the last 5 years. 55k. Even though the herd is MUCH smaller now.[:'(]
Maverick, thats not gonna happen and thats why they need a legislator administered attitude adjustment.
2A was one of the best areas in the state. Its not a joke and becoming a bigger one by the year. For absolutely no apparent reason.
Donno bowtruck about your wmu. what I do know is according to pgc annual reportMOST wmus have been declining deer densityincluding last year, and the allocation stillwasnt dropped.
2A is a flipping joke. Best area of the state well below 25 owdpsm and declining further.55k caused the herd to decline 7% in 2006 and 9% in 2007 according to annual report. We have also had ehd rip our herd, and have hadtoo many tags the last two years as well and had evenfurther decline. Thats basically 4 out of the last five years declining in 2A, despite claims of stabilization. And what is the allocation this year again? Same as 4 out of the last 5 years. 55k. Even though the herd is MUCH smaller now.[:'(]
Maverick, thats not gonna happen and thats why they need a legislator administered attitude adjustment.
2A was one of the best areas in the state. Its not a joke and becoming a bigger one by the year. For absolutely no apparent reason.
Since unit 2A has the second worst over all herd health/forest health rating in the entire state you should be happy they didn’t increase the antler less allocations for your area since that is what the deer and habitat are saying should have happened.
R.S. Bodenhorn
04-21-2009, 03:34 PM
#8
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
RE: LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
Was 2A at it's target goal for herd health in 2008? Was 2F and 2G at their target goal for forest health in 2008? Why didn't the PGC increase antlerless allocations in both 2F and 2G if deer were the reason for the poor forest health?
04-21-2009, 03:37 PM
#9
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: 3c pa
Posts: 1,212
RE: LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
ORIGINAL: Cornelius08
Bowtruck, just looked into. 3C has the same allocation as last two years. I dont have the data yet of course for how much decline it caused last year, but according to the last annual report, the same allocation as this year caused a 17% decline to the deer herd in 3C in 2007.
If you feel this season your unit needs to have everyone and their mothers brother get a doe tag or two, and dont mind significant added reduction that is the cost, then your wish has been granted.
Bowtruck, just looked into. 3C has the same allocation as last two years. I dont have the data yet of course for how much decline it caused last year, but according to the last annual report, the same allocation as this year caused a 17% decline to the deer herd in 3C in 2007.
If you feel this season your unit needs to have everyone and their mothers brother get a doe tag or two, and dont mind significant added reduction that is the cost, then your wish has been granted.
04-21-2009, 03:56 PM
#10
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: LONG OVERDUE FOR LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION. DOE TAGS 2009
"Since unit 2A has the second worst over all herd health/forest health rating in the entire state "
No it isnt not even close. Among the best in the state habitatwise and the reproductive data is "ON TARGET". Thediversity drivenchange in evaluation in habitatwas meaningless. The regeneration had been increasing was at least 61% regen. and wasnt rated as poor even with over double the ow deer prior to that. Now with a modern day low deer density, its only obvious the habitat is the best its ever been. Changing evaluation tactics as pgc recently did to fulfill an econut agenda carries no weight imho.
It also doesnt really matter since the goal was and STILL is SUPPOSEDLY STABILIZATION! You seem to forget that. Yet again, despite yourclaims of what you think should be done, PGC said the wmu is to be STABILIZED.Unfortunately ithas been proven time and again year after year that 55k DOES NOT stabilize our herd, it has continued to cause it to decline according to pgc annual report. Only makes sense when 45k tags decreased a MUCH larger herd several years ago.
No it isnt not even close. Among the best in the state habitatwise and the reproductive data is "ON TARGET". Thediversity drivenchange in evaluation in habitatwas meaningless. The regeneration had been increasing was at least 61% regen. and wasnt rated as poor even with over double the ow deer prior to that. Now with a modern day low deer density, its only obvious the habitat is the best its ever been. Changing evaluation tactics as pgc recently did to fulfill an econut agenda carries no weight imho.
It also doesnt really matter since the goal was and STILL is SUPPOSEDLY STABILIZATION! You seem to forget that. Yet again, despite yourclaims of what you think should be done, PGC said the wmu is to be STABILIZED.Unfortunately ithas been proven time and again year after year that 55k DOES NOT stabilize our herd, it has continued to cause it to decline according to pgc annual report. Only makes sense when 45k tags decreased a MUCH larger herd several years ago.