PA BB Harvests
10-22-2004, 01:51 PM
#71
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,236
RE: PA BB Harvests
That statement shows you still really don't get it. If Alt's plan is successful you won't have a better chance to pursue a mature animal. There will be fewer 2.5+ buck in the future, even with AR, than we had in 2002 ,before any buck were saved by AR.
10-22-2004, 05:15 PM
#72
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 491
RE: PA BB Harvests
OH I do get it. IT is the choice between HR with AR or HR alone. HR alone would mean next to NO bucks to be had anywhere of any kind.
Here is a quote from an article about Wisc. that summarizes my position.
Also, unhunted “natural” sex ratios were also female biased and best guesses put them at about 1.3-1.4 does/buck. I have yet to see a biology-based reason why a sex ratio of 2:1 is damaging or undesirable. A factor often overlooked by those that think they want an unnatural 1:1 sex ratio is that total harvest of both bucks and does would be reduced. One does not merely stockpile bucks. If you seek a 1:1 sex ratio and shoot “adequate” numbers of does to maintain a population at an established density goal, you reduce the proportion of the herd that is productive does. Thus, fewer fawns will be born into the population and total harvest of both bucks and does could be reduced by as much as 30%. Age Structure of Bucks Where mortality (death rate) of bucks is 60% and spread equally across all age classes, the age structure will be 60, 24,10, 6 (yearlings, 2.5, 3.5, and 4+). This is fairly typical in much of Wisconsin. Some APR advocates believe that protecting yearlings will result in 60% more bucks and an age structure like 60, 60, 24,16. However as mentioned above, the reduction of females necessary to accommodate more bucks will reduce the number of male fawns added each year. Fewer does in the population mean fewer buck fawns. Therefore, saving yearlings is not simple addition. Another factor missing in this assumption is that harvest mortality is only a portion of total mortality. In northern units it is common for more than 1⁄4 of deaths to be from causes other than legal harvest (roadkills, winter, poaching, etc.). Thus, there is “leakage” from each age class even in the absence of legal shooting. And, mortality rates seem to increase in the older age classes. Even if bucks got smarter with age (as many hunters believe), prime age bucks are more vulnerable to other mortality – even guns as their antlers are attractions.
10-22-2004, 06:00 PM
#73
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,236
RE: PA BB Harvests
Sorry, but there you go comparing apples to oranges. Deer in Wisconsin live a far different life than those in PA. Wisconsin has far less hunters and yet far less deer. The OW loss in Wisconsin is much more a factor than in PA. Besides enduring harsher winters, the deer are prey of cougar, wolves and coyotes. As of right now, OW loss in PA has been negligable in recent history. Things can and do change though. They have already stocked cougar in the state and wolves will be next, and deer hunters in PA will be unnecessary first and extinct second.
10-22-2004, 06:19 PM
#74
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 491
RE: PA BB Harvests
ORIGINAL: livbucks
Sorry, but there you go comparing apples to oranges. Deer in Wisconsin live a far different life than those in PA. Wisconsin has far less hunters and yet far less deer. The OW loss in Wisconsin is much more a factor than in PA. Besides enduring harsher winters, the deer are prey of cougar, wolves and coyotes. As of right now, OW loss in PA has been negligable in recent history. Things can and do change though. They have already stocked cougar in the state and wolves will be next, and deer hunters in PA will be unnecessary first and extinct second.
Sorry, but there you go comparing apples to oranges. Deer in Wisconsin live a far different life than those in PA. Wisconsin has far less hunters and yet far less deer. The OW loss in Wisconsin is much more a factor than in PA. Besides enduring harsher winters, the deer are prey of cougar, wolves and coyotes. As of right now, OW loss in PA has been negligable in recent history. Things can and do change though. They have already stocked cougar in the state and wolves will be next, and deer hunters in PA will be unnecessary first and extinct second.
In addition, in 2001 B. Wallinford claimed that adult male mortality increased to 28% ,which was higher than the Wisc. mortality rate. The simple fact is that AR does not add any additional legal buck to the PS herd,compared to a non-AR herd. The truth is that AR increases the number of 2.5 buck, buck decreases the number of legal buck available to be harvested.
11-06-2004, 06:36 PM
#75
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10
RE: PA BB Harvests
The deer herd has not been reduced?????? PGC is full of SH!T. They LIE. In 28 years of hunting, I never saw it this BAD.
Doesn't ALT's position exist for the sportsman, then why doesn't the hunters have any input on how many "deer per square mile" we should have.
The SH!T will hit the fan after this years deer season ends. The hunters are ready to explode!
Last year we saw very few deer, and this year looks worst than last year.
Doesn't ALT's position exist for the sportsman, then why doesn't the hunters have any input on how many "deer per square mile" we should have.
The SH!T will hit the fan after this years deer season ends. The hunters are ready to explode!
Last year we saw very few deer, and this year looks worst than last year.
11-06-2004, 09:34 PM
#76
Join Date: May 2004
Location:
Posts: 255
RE: PA BB Harvests
Seriously, I'm not being facetious. No sportsmen in signifigant numbers have gone to the PGC. Last year at the January meeting there were more nonhunters and DCNR employees there to ask for MORE reductions than there were hunters.
Several big sportsmans groups asked the PGC to ignore hunters opinion and fears. United bowhunters of Pa's (UBP) Ed Wentzler spoke at the microphone and asked the commissioners to "ignore the baseless fears of sportsmen".
The federation of sportsmans clubs did NOT stand up for sportsman, and instead told the PGC they support further reductions. Stay the course they said.
If you are truly upset something is askew, then you need to plan a trip to Harrisburg, or to write to your commissioners. Because right now you are out-voiced in Harrisburg by members of several sportsmans clubs, Audubon, Sierra Club, DCNR, Pa farm Bureau and quite a few timber company representatives.
You really should attend at least one to see what hunters are up against, and to watch the PGC reps like Jerry Feaser and Joe Neville smooze with the timber company guys and DCNR/Audubon....then snub everyday hunters and ignore thier questions.
This coming season is going to be amazing. Amazing in that hunters are going to be surprised how little shooting they hear the first couple days. Last year was a letdown, but this year will be worse than last. Not for the whole state, but for a larger area than last year.
The PGC is giving you what they promised, less deer. If you don't agree with less deer, then you better plan a road trip with some friends to H-burg.
BTW, no the PGC is not obligated in any way to listen to sportsman. They are appointed by our governor and ther is no law or statute that says they have to allow decent deer numbers.
and for the record, the PGC 'says' the deer herd has not been reduced one bit since Dr. Alt took over. In fact they say the herd has grown by 20% in the last four years. Now I do not believe that at all, but all we have to go one are the PGC's numbers. No other group can produce anything to challenge the PGC's official word, unless that is sportsman take a more actice role in asking for more accurate reporting. My suggestion is that you also contact your state representatives AND attend PGC meetings. Because they will continue to put out misleading stats and under report problems -------- as long as sportsmen allow them to get away with it.
Several big sportsmans groups asked the PGC to ignore hunters opinion and fears. United bowhunters of Pa's (UBP) Ed Wentzler spoke at the microphone and asked the commissioners to "ignore the baseless fears of sportsmen".
The federation of sportsmans clubs did NOT stand up for sportsman, and instead told the PGC they support further reductions. Stay the course they said.
If you are truly upset something is askew, then you need to plan a trip to Harrisburg, or to write to your commissioners. Because right now you are out-voiced in Harrisburg by members of several sportsmans clubs, Audubon, Sierra Club, DCNR, Pa farm Bureau and quite a few timber company representatives.
You really should attend at least one to see what hunters are up against, and to watch the PGC reps like Jerry Feaser and Joe Neville smooze with the timber company guys and DCNR/Audubon....then snub everyday hunters and ignore thier questions.
This coming season is going to be amazing. Amazing in that hunters are going to be surprised how little shooting they hear the first couple days. Last year was a letdown, but this year will be worse than last. Not for the whole state, but for a larger area than last year.
The PGC is giving you what they promised, less deer. If you don't agree with less deer, then you better plan a road trip with some friends to H-burg.
BTW, no the PGC is not obligated in any way to listen to sportsman. They are appointed by our governor and ther is no law or statute that says they have to allow decent deer numbers.
and for the record, the PGC 'says' the deer herd has not been reduced one bit since Dr. Alt took over. In fact they say the herd has grown by 20% in the last four years. Now I do not believe that at all, but all we have to go one are the PGC's numbers. No other group can produce anything to challenge the PGC's official word, unless that is sportsman take a more actice role in asking for more accurate reporting. My suggestion is that you also contact your state representatives AND attend PGC meetings. Because they will continue to put out misleading stats and under report problems -------- as long as sportsmen allow them to get away with it.
