juniorpc

It's not just the size of the racks that's important, it's the age of the deer, just sound management to get the harvest away from what it has been, that's all. Your right- Safari club international isn't concerned with conservation or biology. I would think with the issues Africa has with habititat,poaching, extinction, etc they would have a biologist or two on staff or an idea of sound biological practices. Unlike you I could be wrong! QDMA is all about the nuts and bolts behind producing larger racks- better habitat, sound managment of the deer and the habitat, perpetuation of good habitat and good hunting. LARGE racks are just the byproduct. Please give these groups more credit. Juniorpc.

deaddeer

I give QDM credit for what it can accomplish on private leases and clubs, where the members all have the same goals and they can control all aspects of the plan. In PA we have 1M hunters with widely divergent goals and objectives . Just look at last years anterless harvest when we harvested 68,1K BB ,but only 58.7K female fawns. AR has no chance of succeeding when we harvest such a high percentage of our males before they even have a chance to be saved by AR.
Furthermore, the state has no plans to improve the habitat ,since they are more concerned about the revenue from saw timber. No matter how many doe we kill ,pole timber will only support 5 DPSM , for the 40-60 years it remains in the pole timber stage.

juniorpc

DD, something we somewhat agree upon. I heard thunder!! QDM is effective with private lands and clubs. Those folks worry about thier neighbors and attempt to get them on board sometimes forming 7,8,9 landowner collectives with the same goals. On public land it's different for sure, but more were in favor of AR than not and deer aren't being killed and left in the woods and folks are generally abiding by them. I think as more poeple get educated the percentage of button bucks will drop. I do agree folks need to be more responsible.
Like it or not, pole timber needs to be a part of PGC land, DCNR land, etc and money is an issue for any agency. Gas leases, timber sales, etc make up a part of the revenue that allows the PGC to operate. Pole timber needs to be their, not only for revenue, but for naturalized succession as well. We can argue back and forth about what percentage should be pole timber, but the bottom line is that Pole timber is necessary. Juniorpc.

DougE

Pole timber is absolutely necessary.However,proper rotation of timber keeps too much of it from being in the pole stage too long.Poor forestry practices are just as much to blame as too many deer.

BTBowhunter

Picked it up on this websites message boards

www.huntingpa.com

BTBowhunter

DD, at this point there is only one way to say it:

George Bush Won

Elvis is dead, Jerry too

there is no Santa Claus

Gary Alt is here to stay

GET OVER IT!!!

Rack-attack

I am tip toeing into this battleground with little knowledge of what going on in PA - just curious - I am on the fence - be gentle

Is this because Buck populations are at 1984 levels or is it because the majority of PA hunters can no longer wack that spike?

I would expect to see a large drop off in bucks taking with Antler regs.

mammasboy

Kind of just browsing around and came upon this topic.I live in WI, also with many hunters and many deer, and have read up on as much info as I could regarding Alt and I beleive he is doing the very best thing for Penn. and can only hope that we get the same thing for WI! IMO.

DougE

You have to ask yourself,where are the bucks that were saved by ar in 2002?Remember,Alt claimed the harvests should return to normal after the first yearof ar.This probably did happen in areas that are still above his deer density goals.However,the herd reductions and extra button bucks harvested contributed to far less bucks being available in many areas.This trend will continue until the deer density goal of less than 15 dpsm is obtained.No one is argueing that AR by itself wouldn't produce more and bigger bucks.The argument is that once his dd goals are met,none of his claims can come true.

deaddeer

Th first year of AR the buck harvest dropped by 35K as expected. The second year of AR it decreased by another 23 K ,when it should have been significantly higher than the first year. The first year of AR we harvested a record 352 K anterless deer and 25% of the anterlesss harvest is BB or adult buck that have lost their rack. Therefore ,we harvested 88K buck as antlerless in 2002 ,the first year of Ar, and that is why the buck harvest dropped the second year of AR.