MikeE51848

You are correct, there is no forestry program in Carbon Cnty. Much of the land is in watershed property or state forests. Very little farming takes place. All the more reason to cut doe permits, and not increase them yearly.

Big Country

Mike, BTBowhunter is corret. I meant to say the Unified Sportsmen, and I sincerely apologize to the Federated Sportsmen for that slip.

Slinsky is one of the SMALL but vocal group against Alt, and our GC.

Any program designed to get us a more balanced herd(which Alts program can accomplish)is a program we need to work with.

Now, as to utilizing smaller management units, I will agree with you there.

Do we know that we will not get smaller units once solid data becomes available?

I have been hunting in many states for along time, and PA is unique in sheer volume of hunters AND in hunter mentality.

The mentality of the average Pa hunter is disappointing to say the least.

Way too many hunters here are not worried about game laws, or helping to manage out resources.

If you have been hunting here long, you know what I am talking about.

I have to get "my" buck, regardless of size. That is a pathetic position to take.

Fine if you are a new hunter, but sooner or later, you must do your part in helping to balance the herd.

Shooting does to keep the ratio in line, and harvesting mature bucks are both proven tactics to reach this goal.

Sure, harvesting mature(older)bucks is the best method, but to teach the average hunter how to age a deer on the hoof is way harder than just having a point restriction.

Point restrictions are not as good as age restrictions, but still WAY better than doing nothing.

You, Mike, came here with the intent of slamming Gary Alt, did you not?

Well, your buddy got slammed instead. Maybe by working with the guy who knows what the heck he is talking about, instead of agains him, you would be happier with the final outcome.

You obviously care about our herd, or you would not be complaining in the first place.

MikeE51848

"You, Mike, came here with the intent of slamming Gary Alt, did you not?"

No, not Dr Alt, just his proposals. Even the board of commisioners feels he goes to far (turned thumbs down on doe season the week of Thanksgiving, which would have given you a three week gun season for them). And yes, I care about the deer herd. I've hunted them for 28 years in this state.

rem700man

I've stated in other forums that in the past 25 years of hunting the same land in clinton co. that it is easy for me to sit in the stand & see 35-50 deer a day the first week of rifle season. This year 13 deer the 1st 3 days? Now im not gonna sit here & pretend to know it all,,, but theres a problem and a damn big one somewhere in the area. I've done some talking around since season end to find out that between the amish & the area being red tagged for a friggin free for all that there were over 180 deer killed in two farms in the valley below my land just this past fall before hunting season even started!!!!!! THATS WRONG & I DONT CARE WHAT ANYONE SAYS! the area i hunt cant stand that kind of slaughtering. And thats just 2 farms,,,Due to tight lips God only knows what has been killed on the other 50 farms but most of them are owned by amish so you can bet they were hammered as well. Clinton/Centre co. deer herds are down WAY DOWN!!!!!!!!!!

ilbback

Mike you are not getting my point........The reason you have fewer deer in your area is not increased doe licenses its poor habitat. Your area is not going to have alot of deer until the habitat can support it (by logging and opening up the forest floor to sunlight so the deer can have something to eat.) If you decrease the number of licenses you are still going to have few deer cause there is nothing for them to eat, simple biology. Fewer deer = a healthier herd and bigger bucks.

If you want to see a deer behind every tree and little spikes here and there i dont know what to tell you other than "times they are a changing" and most people believe its for the better including myself.

MikeE51848

Well, I don't think you're getting my point. Since the state is not about to timber off it's SGL's, nor is DCNR logging off it's state parks, in order for deer to maximize, you have to either (1) reduce the amount of deer taken or (2) reduce the amount of hunters able to take deer. The WMU's, the PGC's attempt to stabilize the deer herd in certain areas, are larger than the county system it replaced. How does WMU 4C for instance, bigger than 2 counties, allow for that? I have nothing against the AR's, if that's what everybody wants. I'd just like to see deer, in huntable situations, something that occured rarely this year.