BTBowhunter

Yep thats ahuge chunk of property, and that represents about 6% of Virginia, less than 1% of WVA, and .0015% of Kentucky.

Kentucky has large public holdings as well but it's still a vast minority of the huntable ground.

That doesnt change the fact that the majority of the land in many southern and Midwest states are accessable only to those hunters who own land or pay for their hunting priveleges.

bluebird2

In PA 70% of the forested land is privately owned.

Cornelius08

First off, Yes Butch, Pgc has had and continues to have a"bizarre antideer campaign" ongoing. This has supposedly been muffled down to "stabilization" now that the herd has been wrecked. Yet when you review pgcs own data on their annual reports, we find that the majority of wildlife management units are STILL being reduced further the last 4 years, despite supposed goals of stabilization.

RSB says: "What do you mean what happened to Pennsylvania?"

RSB, dont play dumb. I think that self explanatory and I think you KNOW what has happened to Pa. Econuts are running the gameless commission.

"The number of resident hunters for those three states has just been posted along with the harvests for each of those states. But, if you are going to look at hunter success rates you also have to understand that if Pennsylvania had as few hunters as those other states there would be a lot more deer per hunter and of course the hunter success rate would improve."

Would it not improve here if reasonable numbers of deer were encouraged and not wantonly slaughtered for obtuse extremist agendas?

And the current harvest isnt even sustainable due to the continued herd reduction. So in a few years we will be killing even less thanks to the inappropriately small herd size.

"So, based on the real apples to apples comparisons Pennsylvania does still have one of the best deer state’s in the nation."

Absolutely absurd and nothing more than another of your unsupported wild damage control driven claims. You dont have the lowest hunter satisfaction rating in the nation and then claim best hunting! LMFAO!!

"There is nothing wrong with the hunting in Pennsylvania other then the Commission spent way too many years listening to hunter demands instead of the information the deer and their habitat were providing. Fortunately that has started to change and we have a brighter future for both the deer and deer hunter ahead."

And we all know your extreme views of hunters... Making claims like hunters should take their money and take a flying leap!!! (sounds like eco-extremist/environmentalist statement to me) In fact that view comes directly from Audubon and other extremist groups. Hunters shouldnt pay the bills or have any say in management issues. I think it is they that should take the flying leap.

BTBowhunter

While that is basically accurate, it has nothing to do with the fact that much of the south and midwest is pay to hunt on most private land. that is very likely a consideration when we look at the much smaller hunter numbers per square mile than PA.

When PA deer hunting eventually becomes a pay to play game (and it will)
it is likely that the hunterdensities will graduallyfall more in line with those states.

To put the whole thing in context, much of the comparisons have been apples to oranges. PA has lower success rates per hunter while having respectable harvest rates per square mile. The sheer number of hunters (probably due partly to the still abundant availablity of decent hunting land for free) makes the kind of success rates that those other statesenjoy virtually impossible even with much higher deer densities.

Cornelius08

"Though I agree with farmers, nursery and large forest land owners being able to have the tools to control deer populations to levels that are consistent with their business objectives I also think we need to use caution by keeping hunters as the actual management tool they can use."

And they have PLENTY of tools to do so. A degree of overall reduction less than we recieved wouldve also addressed somewhat. The blanket statewide slaughter was 100% unwarranted, but given because of econuts like Shissler (environmentalist nutjob) that played major role in our deer management plan.

"The Game Commission has been trying to work with them to help improve the future for hunting and hunters,"

Absolutely NOT. In fact hunters and hunting has been given NO consideration whatsoever. The sport is degrading greatly, and its not only being permitted by pgc, its seemingly encouraged when the solutions are extremely simple, yet they flatly refuse to address them responsibly

"it would be a lot better if more hunters understood that and learned more about working together instead of trying to tear down the work that has already been accomplished to make a better future for hunting. "

More deer where deer can be (which is basically varying percentages of increase in all wmus except sras), smaller wmus, no more constant pgc lies that will equate to better hunter pgc relations and trust, which are currently nonexistent = the ONLY chance for better hunting future. PERIOD. Thats not being a wiseass, thats exactly how it is.

BTBowhunter

Since you've decided to criticize "unsupported" claims, I'm sure you'll have no problem providing a link to support your claim that PA has the "lowest satisfaction rating in the nation" Who did that ranking?

Cornelius08

"When PA deer hunting eventually becomes a pay to play game (and it will)
it is likely that the hunter densities will gradually fall more in line with those states. "

I agree. It will not take long with current pgc policies in place. Those who dont want their deer herd slaughtered just post. That simple. Also won't take long with pgc hunter numbers dropping at over double the national average from 2001 to 2006.... 4% nationally, 10% in Pa.

"To put the whole thing in context, much of the comparisons have been apples to oranges. "

Not so much....Not when kept in proper context.

"PA has lower success rates per hunter while having respectable harvest rates per square mile. "

Those harvests are because of one thing...Too many doe tags harvesting too many deer out of a herd that is smaller than should be. That means the harvest is NOT sustainable and thats why it continues to drop, and will on into the future with no changes made to the slaughter em all policy in place at pgc right now.

"The sheer number of hunters (probably due partly to the still abundant availablity of decent hunting land for free) makes the kind of success rates that those other states enjoy virtually impossible even with much higher deer densities."

Thats debatable, but what is NOT debatable is that they WOULD improve, significantly. Hunting satisfaction would be higher, and with responsible deer management pgc wouldnt be seen as the villain that they are currently.

Cornelius08

"Since you've decided to criticize "unsupported" claims, I'm sure you'll have no problem providing a link to support your claim that PA has the "lowest satisfaction rating in the nation" Who did that ranking?"

Do internet searches for yourself. The extremely high level of dissatisfaction is well documented....Compared to other states, you can make your own comparison, as the differences are pretty blatant and obvious. Think it has something to do with the fact no other states have gone to unnecessary extremes to cater to a tiny portion of deer mangaement stakeholders. Check out all the online deer management articles where comments can be left. See all the polls that are 70-80%+ anti-pgc deer plan.See any message board other than hpa. See "deer wars". See Dr. Alt wearing a Kevlar vest to meetings. See pgc being sued, because of hunter discontent. See Pgc having legislative intervention preventing fee increase. See hunters just about anywhere and ask them.... Look to any other section of the countries regional threads on here, and show me one that even comes close to comparing to the level of dissatisfaction...

Where else in the nation has so much been going on??

There is no state in the nation that even comes close to having HALF the level of dis-satisfaction Pa has. It is what it is, and its not good. Your solution to everything seems to be turn a blind eye and go into denial mode. Sorry, but for me thats not an option.

Cornelius08

"In PA 70% of the forested land is privately owned. "

Good point bb. And even looking at it as coparatively more public than some other states, ......Just look at it! LMAO! Not worth much to anyone other than flower sniffers or birdwatchers. Compare the hunting to some of the public lands in those other states (wayne national forest in Ohio for example) and then some of these guys might learn that sometimes less is more. >LOL.

BTBowhunter

Not according to the NSSF who has been monitoring those numbers for years. Many states could look that bad when taking a particular time slice. Overall, PA has been consistently in the middle of the national averages over the years and has actually improved more recently

Proper context would be to compare PA success rates to a state where deer AND hunters densities are similar, not to states with far lower hunter densities

The facts say otherwise. The harvests have stabilized and is therefore at a sustainable point.

BTW, did you miss the request for the link proving your claim the PA has
"lowest satisfaction rating in the nation" Where exactly did you get that information?