Shisslers "Pa's best deer management in nation" revisited
12-11-2009, 01:49 PM
#101
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
To you it's not worth arguing because you don't like the answer. You have a 100% success rate hunting those others so why couldn't other hunters. If you would prefer we could use 200 hunters with a 50% success rate and the result would be the same. the good hunting you have would turn to crap due to increased hunting pressure.
That is not true. The 2006 DCNR Browse Study listed a high basal area stand as a reason for the lack of understory.
That is not true. The 2006 DCNR Browse Study listed a high basal area stand as a reason for the lack of understory.
It is a reason,depending on the type of timber and what's in the overstory and what's trying regenerate.That's not to say there shouldn't be a mid level understory.That's natural.Wjat's not natural is saw timber with nothing but a blanket of ferns on the forest floor.You're flat out wrong if you think nothing should be growing beneath a mature canopy.
12-11-2009, 01:55 PM
#102
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
But they are managing the statewide herd in order for DCNR to get their forests certified by SCS and there is no denying that fact. As a result , SGLs are managed at the same DD as SFL where little or no habitat work is done. The result is both SGL and SFL have DDs that are way below the carrying capacity of the habitat. That is why the herd in 2G has been reduced from 15 ODPSM in 1999 to 8 DPSM in 2007.
12-11-2009, 01:58 PM
#103
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"That's simply not true.The PGC does a ton of habitat work that helps the habitat but is counter productive to raising commercially valuable trees"
That is true, and to my knowledge they dont do "a ton" they do Very little habitatwork that compromises timber. Or for that matter, overall very little period.
That is true, and to my knowledge they dont do "a ton" they do Very little habitatwork that compromises timber. Or for that matter, overall very little period.
12-11-2009, 02:09 PM
#104
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"It certainly does apply.People are complaining about seeing few or no deer in depleted habitat.I hunt where there's food and cover and I find deer.It's a simple concept."
They are complaining of seeing too few deer. You added the rest. I dont hear alot mentioned in those complaints about depleted habitat in the area where each of the complaints originate. So is it that noone in this state realizes they dont have a clue what they are talking about because all of their habitats (or even most) are devastated.... I think it possible you are taking conditions from very few areas of the state, also considering the extreme position pgc and dcnr has thrown out there, Taking them as gospel, and grossly overgeneralizing.
They are complaining of seeing too few deer. You added the rest. I dont hear alot mentioned in those complaints about depleted habitat in the area where each of the complaints originate. So is it that noone in this state realizes they dont have a clue what they are talking about because all of their habitats (or even most) are devastated.... I think it possible you are taking conditions from very few areas of the state, also considering the extreme position pgc and dcnr has thrown out there, Taking them as gospel, and grossly overgeneralizing.
12-11-2009, 02:17 PM
#105
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
"It certainly does apply.People are complaining about seeing few or no deer in depleted habitat.I hunt where there's food and cover and I find deer.It's a simple concept."
They are complaining of seeing too few deer. You added the rest. I dont hear alot mentioned in those complaints about depleted habitat in the area where each of the complaints originate. So is it that noone in this state realizes they dont have a clue what they are talking about because all of their habitats (or even most) are devastated.... I think it possible you are taking conditions from very few areas of the state, also considering the extreme position pgc and dcnr has thrown out there, Taking them as gospel, and grossly overgeneralizing.
They are complaining of seeing too few deer. You added the rest. I dont hear alot mentioned in those complaints about depleted habitat in the area where each of the complaints originate. So is it that noone in this state realizes they dont have a clue what they are talking about because all of their habitats (or even most) are devastated.... I think it possible you are taking conditions from very few areas of the state, also considering the extreme position pgc and dcnr has thrown out there, Taking them as gospel, and grossly overgeneralizing.
You're no doubt correct in some instances.Some areas are reduced further than necessary.That used to be the case years ago as well.I've been to enough save the deer meetings and read enough off the wall posts on several message boards to know that most hunters really have no clue what good habitat consists of.They simply want more deer and easy hunting like the good ole days.Just read some of the posts on HPA.There's one guy that's afraid to not lie to his kid and tell him hunting stinks because he isn't seeing 100 deer a day anymore like he did 5 years ago.
I don't simply hunt out my back door.I several counties and rarely ever kill deer in the same spot from year to year.Perception is part of the problem as well.What you consider few deer and what I consider few deer are probaly at opposite ends of the spectrum.
12-11-2009, 02:20 PM
#106
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
But they are managing the statewide herd in order for DCNR to get their forests certified by SCS and there is no denying that fact. As a result , SGLs are managed at the same DD as SFL where little or no habitat work is done. The result is both SGL and SFL have DDs that are way below the carrying capacity of the habitat. That is why the herd in 2G has been reduced from 15 ODPSM in 1999 to 8 DPSM in 2007.
12-11-2009, 02:28 PM
#107
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
I don't simply hunt out my back door.I several counties and rarely ever kill deer in the same spot from year to year.Perception is part of the problem as well.What you consider few deer and what I consider few deer are probaly at opposite ends of the spectrum.
12-11-2009, 02:39 PM
#108
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
I don't do anything special so yes,anyone can be just as successful as me.I hunt where the friggin deer should be.I don't hunt the same spot year after year expecting dozens of deer to wonder by through a sea of ferns.Anyone can do that.
12-11-2009, 02:46 PM
#109
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 297
You're no doubt correct in some instances.Some areas are reduced further than necessary.That used to be the case years ago as well.I've been to enough save the deer meetings and read enough off the wall posts on several message boards to know that most hunters really have no clue what good habitat consists of.They simply want more deer and easy hunting like the good ole days.Just read some of the posts on HPA.There's one guy that's afraid to not lie to his kid and tell him hunting stinks because he isn't seeing 100 deer a day anymore like he did 5 years ago.
Last edited by Maverick 1; 12-11-2009 at 03:21 PM.
12-11-2009, 03:04 PM
#110
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
No, that is not true and proves once again, that just like RSB you don't have even a basic concept of the principles of deer management. No matter what the average hunter would do, 26,000 hunters that have an antlerless tag for 2G would not be able to harvest 26,000 AR legal buck in 2G. furthermore, if those 26,000 antlerless hunters harvested 26,000 antlerless deer you would be SOL next year.