deaddeer

You may in fact hae heard Alt say there would be more big buck, but that does not mean he never said there would be more and bigger buck than we have ever seen before and I have it in hard copy from an interview in PA Outdoor Times. He also said AR would double the number of 8 PT. buck and I have that in print and that is a lie and he knew it was a lie .

Apparently , you are incapable of handling more than one concept at a time in a discussion. I did not say that saving BB wouldn't increase the buck harvest the following year. I said that saving BB while reducing the herd means more more adult doe will be harvested ,which in turn results in fewer BB being produced ,which will result in fewer BB and lower antlered harvests in the future. Now unless you can provide some facts or a logical rebuttal to refute that claim, I would conclude that you have no idea of how decreased BB harvests effect future buck harvests.

BTBowhunter

Ah yes, of course, you are the only one capable of understanding the dynamics of deer management. Tell me, again, what your credentials are? Exactly how long have you been a wildlife management expert?

The rest of us do understand though, that given enough various numbers and statstics to selectively utilize, plenty of time, a calculator and a conniving mind anyone can twist and turn the numbers and by applying his own THEORIES can make any point he wants to.

deaddeer

If that is true why aren't you capable of formulating a credible rebuttal? The PGC stats clearly show that saving more BB led to the harvest of more adult doe and a reduced anterless harvest. This in turn will lead to fewer BB being born and fewer BB that will survive to become 1.5's that can be saved by AR.

livbucks

DD,
Did I read that correctly? Did you say that under AR we have had a declining AL harvest? And that we harvested more doe? The more doe part is what we need. The declining AL harvest number I question though. You seem to have all the figures at hand so give me the AL harvest numbers for the last 5 years please. And show me the declining AL harvest.

deaddeer

No , I did not say AR led to a declining anterless harvest. I said saving BB led to a decline in the anterless harvest. The first year that the % of fawns in the harvest declined was 2003. The same year the anterless harvest declined from 352K in 2002 to 323K in 2003 even though the herd was larger and more anterless tags were allocated when DMAP tags were included.

For every BB saved hunters have to shoot at least 2 adult doe, in order to reduce the herd , which means 4 fewer fawns/doe the following year and two fewer male fawns/BB saved.

The harvests stats since 1987 are available on page 71 of the hunting digest.

livbucks

DD
You get an A+ for reciting stats.
You get an F- for using the scientific method.
Although the 2003 AL harvest was down from 2002, The AL harvest for 2002 was an absolute all time high record. If you take a ten year average of the AL harvest, you get an AL average of 278,678. The 2003 AL harvest was still above average at 322,620. I think it is negligent to state that there is something wrong with this normal fluctuation first off, and then attribute some kind of negative effect in relation to the BB harvest secondly. BTB was right in the statement that you use the stats to make your point of the day, while neglecting any real scientific study of the statistics as a whole.

I could make any point I would want to if I only used one or two years stats as a model. Look at the 1991 Buck harvest of 149,598. We didn't have AR then and, according to your method, 50,000 hunters went WITHOUT their prized forkie that year..
Oh my God, I bet they were pi$$ed!

deaddeer

The 10 yr. avg. anterless harvest is irrelevant since the herd increased by 30% during that period . Therefore, in order to reduce the herd ,larger anterless harvests are required and Alt said the harvest of 352K anterless in 2002 allowed the herd to increase by 1.6%. The anterless harvest in 2003 was the first time hunters reduced the percentage of fawns in the anterless harvest fro 46% to 39%. That is why there is only one year of stats that show the negative impact of trying to save BB.

But the point you made is not valid since the highest buck harvest prior to 1991 was 170K in 1990. So 20.5K hunters didn't harvest a buck, not the 50K you claim.

livbucks

Right Bud!
You proved us right in that massive AL harvests are necessary to control the herd and not something to bellyache about when it suits you and then support when it suits you

And yet another point you help me make,
You say that 40,000 hunters went without their prized forkie and got a doe as a consolation prize. History shows that those numbers of successfull buck hunters cannot be consistantly maintained and were an abberation of the norm in the first place.
Thanks.

deaddeer

I don't have a problem with the high anterless harvests ,but apparently you do ,because those high anterless harvests result in high BB harvests which you don't like. Then when we do protect more fawns we harvest more adult doe which means fewer BB, which you don't like .

That is not what the history of our herd has shown. Buck harvests have been higher than last years harvest since 1986. So for 17 years the herd has produced larger buck harvests than the buck harvest in 2003, after just two years of AR.

AJ52

I completely concur with Rob/PA Bowyer and cardeer's statements. I ain't sayin no more.