chickory

Thats great that you are seeing lots of bigger bucks (oh, and your bretheren in the SE), even though you made such disparaging remarks.

But are you over your WMU DD goals? or are you at the goal or below. Because when you reduce your herd to the prescribed numbers then maybe you could criticize me for voicing my opinion. But as it is, the only thing you have to make your arguement so far is taxidermy shop rumors, hype, hyperbole and internet rhetoric.

We know the buck harvest has gone down, and we WISH that in that whole harvest the racks were bigger..... but we have no proof. We only have perceptions. Right?

So my perception must count as much as yours......

If the NE and SW are doing great, then more power to ya. But some concern ought to given to the REST OF THE STATE.


It seems though that I am seeing a trend on these message boards, those who are proponents of the herd reductions all seem to want to BB harvests to go down? Save the BB, is thier cry. BUT? oddly they are saying that thier sightings of large bucks is great, and things are wonderfull? If thats so, then why all the knee shaking over 20% of the harvest being BB........?

We always harvested BB before AR/HR, and we always will. So if you are seeing lots of bucks and they are bigger....then what are you sweating having more BB for?

Or aren't there as many 'big' bucks around as you make out?


Hmmmmmmm...........

chickory

Heres a nice blurb from Alabama just to lube the conversation into considering what the downside is to not shooting enough deer (trying to protect BB).

"THINNING THE HERD In some cases, clubs and landowners need to re-evaluate their self-imposed restrictions on does. Several target only big mature does because they have an aversion to shooting fawns and yearlings - sometimes out of fear that the little ones are button bucks.
The result is that more young mouths are left to eat the available food. The problem isn't helped by the people who refuse to shoot does in January because the animals might be pregnant, or others who don't shoot them in October and November because they're still nursing.
"We've done too good a job convincing people not to shoot button bucks," Chris admitted. "This has hurt the doe harvest. My philosophy is if deer numbers are way too high for the habitat, I tell people not to worry about the size of the does. They just need to take out deer, as long as they're not taking out a huge percentage of buck fawns.
"You have got to take some bad with the good," he added. "It's not a mortal sin to kill a button buck. It's not the end of the world."http://www.alabamagameandfish.com/al_aa120103a/




Does Pa want herd reductions..... or don't they?

DougE

Rob,there's a big difference from what's happening in the northeast and western part of the state vs the north central.I grew up in Wyoming county and still hunt there every year,There's still a ton of deer and yes more bigger buck.The only reason this is so is because hr has failed and the herd is still increasing or at the very least stable.This is do to limited access and the fact that they're seeing less tags.3c which is over run with deer got a decrease of 3000 tags this year.

I moved to Clearfield county in the 1992 and what these guys are saying is true.This area is mostly public land and has been pummeled to the densities Alt is shooting for.The bigger wmu's concentrated hunters where they had the most access not where they had the most deer.Hunting deer out here is a stark contrast to what it's like hunting out east.We're at Alt's goals and you're way above them.That's not the plan and when and if the goals are accomplished in your area,you'll be complaining as well.

Hunting isn't fruitless at these deer densities but it is much harder and not what Alt led hunters to believe it would be like.I've killed a buck every year since I lived out here.In fact I killed a decent buck this year on the first day of archery.These dd's haven't effected my success one bit but it ain't like Alt claimed it would be.

Like I've said from the day I logged on here,it's all about forest certification.That's why 2g got an increase of 1800 tags(including dmap) and 3c which is way above their dd goal got a decrease of 3000.It's all about the timber,not the deer.You can stand up and say how great Alt is but the truth is,anywhere the hunting is better,still have more deer than the goal allotted for.

I hunt both extremes so I see both sides.In both cases,hunters are correct in their assumptions.The difference is,the better hunting,like Alt promised,is happening where his plan failed to reduce the herd.

Rob/PA Bowyer

DougE, very well said but at no time did I comment on HR, but simply AR and BB misconceptions.

And to be honest, it was a waste of my time. I will refrain from wasting anymore.

deaddeer

It is ridiculous to call anyone that harvests any legal deer in accordance with the regulations ,a poor sportsman. If the PGC really didn't want hunters to harvest BB they would have made them a protectected class of deer , just like bucks with less than 3 pts. on on side. The simple fact is you are only fooling yourself if you think saving BB will stop the declining buck harvests, while the goal is to reduce the herd by over 50%. Buck harvests declined 30% due to AR with a herd that was increasing. Saving BB and shooting adult doe only accelerates herd reduction and will increase the rate of decrease in the buck harvest.

chickory

Yea Rob, you fit right into this category from my post...

"Rack waving was blinding some hunters who just heard the AR part, but forgot its weird cousin HR."

You only wish to talk about AR that appeals to your lesser nature, but you don't really want ot chat about HR which is a key to meeting the goals of our deer plan.

you know a healthy herd from our current program is not a cafeteria style buffet program. You don't get to just pick out the part you like and ignore the others. It don't work that way.

an I am going to post another quote from a state which has gone down this same road with AR, Hr, and BB harvests. Aksansas.

"Concerns surrounding the reluctance by hunters to kill female deer, on the chance it may be a button buck, could result in a decreased doe harvest. The agency has pressed for a balanced sex ratio in its deer management practices." Ark DNR

The only misconception about BB is that after a few year and some practice we won't be shooting many of them. As you can see from the Arkansas stats I posted after 6 years they are whacking as many as any state in the union and then some. And thay are not even harvesting 2 doe for one buck like PA.

The only reason we have AR is to accomplish HR, they are connecte at the hip and you can't separate them.





"Be not indifferent to contempt, even from very ordinary people, but rather look well to the cause of it. "

livbucks

DD,
Again, nobody is calling for increased buck harvests. This is your backdoor agenda. With HR there will be decreased harvests, most understand this. For AR to work, the bucks must survive. Again, most understand this. Some BB kill is acceptable, perfectly legal. Wanton elimination of BB, however, defeats this objective.
WOW!
It just hit me what your objective is, DEADdeer! (name says it all)

LIV.....bucks (so does mine)

deaddeer

If you don't want increased byck harvests ,why save BB? Do you just want them to get hit by cars or die from other non-hunting mortality. Obviously the main reason one wants to save BB is so there will be more buck available to be harvested.




Alt apparently didn't understand it because he promised more and bigger buck than we have ever had before. But he lied , just as he lied when he said AR would double the number of 8 pt. buck. AR will not work with HR even if we save more BB, because for every adult doe that is harvested in place of a BB, decreases breeding rates and recruitment and decreases the number of BB even faster than if we harvested BB instead of adult doe. AR can't save 1.5's that aren't born just as AR can't save 1.5's that were harvested as BB, but shooting adult doe instead of fawns decreases the number of BB faster and the effects are cummulative.

chickory

Its not just deaddeer who wants less deer, its the sportsman of pa who want less deer.

Our plan is in place to reduce the herd to balance it with its habitat.

As nebulous as that is, its what you got.

No way to candy coat it, its a bitter pill as they say.

I believe Gary said it best in Jan of this year at the PGC meeting.....

"get used to seeing less deer"

BTBowhunter

What I heard Alt say is "More big bucks" not more and bigger bucks.

More big bucks is not a lie. We are harvesting more big bucks.

As for refraining from shooting BB's not helping to enhance the buck kill, thats just plain ridiculous. It cant become a big buck if it dies as a knothead. PERIOD! Sure some will die from other causes. Sure, some will still be shot as AL deer. No, not all will make it. BUT SOME WILL!!!

Again, your argument is becoming more and more transparent. Your real problem is that you want the old days back. The days of seeing bunches of deer and being allowed to shoot the first deer with 3" of bone on his head so you can say yup, I got my buck!

Those days are past, get over it!