Well, we are now into our seventh year of antler restrictions. We have improved the age of our bucks, improved the buck/doe ratio and closed the breeding windows somewhat.

All good things for our deer herd and the future of it.

I am curious as to what some of you think about were we go from here.  My feeling is the benefits of the current point restrictions have plateaued in some ways.  I do not forsee the average age of our bucks improving from where they are now and the buck/doe ratios and breeding windows can now be better controlled by antlerless allocations.

I still believe firmly that we need to keep our antlered harvest restricted in some way or we will be right back to where we started at in 1-2 years.

Now that many of the goals of HR/AR are being realized, can we tweak the program even more or will that anger the politicians and hunters against the current program farther than they already are which will lead to more financial problems?

Some options that come to mind quickly are:

* remove the current point restrictions in select WMU's and shorten the antlered season to three days and study the effect

* initialize antlered tags statewide by drawing and remove the current point restriction

* select WMU's with good habitat targeted as trophy WMU's with heavily restricted antlered tags

* eliminate the current point retriction and change the restriction to 15" spread

* turn select WMU's to archery and/or muzzleloader only for antlered deer

* eliminate AR's statewide but reduce the season to three days

Point is there are many ways to restrict antlered harvest other than a point restiction which may benefit us and the deer even more than our current program is capable of.  The problem, as with any change, is trying to keep everyone happy by not limiting opportunity or reducing the financial support the PGC so desperately needs.

Personally, I am happy with where we are now but I think that some opportunities exist to improve our program beyond were it is now.  I would like to see some limited draw WMU's or limited draw areas within some WMU's with to restrict the antlered harvest further and see where it goes. I also like the idea of some areas being archery/muzzleloader only for bucks.

As long as the numbers of deer as a whole remain stable to allow the habitat to recover in areas that still need it.

What do you guys think?  

--Last edited by dpms on 2008-06-18 12:49:18 --

My personal idea and i dont know how popular this would be is a one week antlered season followed by one week of antleress.  

I really think that we need to get rid of the early muzzel loader season and Senior Hunts.  I think Juniors should still have the early hunt.  Antler restrictions should stay the same except making it 4 on a side across the state.  I know many will disagree but i think we are putting to much hunting preasure on the deer during the Rut with the early seasons.  

I agree i am not a big fan of the early hunts. (they ruin prime time predator trapping!) But i do feel it is a good idea to give our younger hunters a better chance of getting a deer and seeing more deer. This is purely for the future any yo Keep our youngsters interested.  

--Last edited by Flyfisher on 2008-06-18 16:22:11 --

I know I will hear it for this, but I think antler restrictions have ruined the hunting in our area.  The balance of the buck herd has swing to non-legal deer.  This past year, we saw 7 non-shooter bucks on our farm.  This little deer would always have been harvested in the past, but now they are the breeding stock for our herd.  I am not sold on the fact that with proper nutrition and habitat any buck can grow to be an 8 point.  Genetics plays too much of a factor - if it didn't, then why does a farmer breed his cows to his top bull - too get those traits out of the offspring.  A buck can go through his whole life as a spike - we have seen it and I am sure many of you have as well.  Now, the only deer we are allowed to harvest are the prize bulls, and the poorer genetic deer are left to breed during the second rut.  Go ahead guys, fire away.

Dpms, you mention funding as the reason why things that could be improved arent.  Fact is many good changes could of been made that wouldnt have costed another dime to implement, like reasonable numbers of doe tags....The only cost would be the money lost for the sale of those licenses.  But keeping the numbers high for income alone isnt justifiable, so wouldnt be a problem.    

PGc also made NO CLAIMS that anything else beneficial would occur WITH or WITHOUT more money.  All one can expect is "staying the course" with some Minor meaningless tweaks here and there, to kill a few more deer when and where they deem necessary.

As for your "tweaks" you have listed, some are interesting.  Dont think most would be practical or accepted widely especially on a wmu-wide basis.  Would be another very good reason to break those management units down further though, then may be feasible.. As well as provide opportunity for much better management to boot.    I think trophy areas, some bow only, some muzzleload only etc. would be great on more localized areas.. Its a big state, and the sportsmen of Pa should have more options then just a fistfull of doe tags.  

--Last edited by Coburn on 2008-06-18 18:07:03 --

Quote :

FlyFisher wrote : My personal idea and i dont know how popular this would be is a one week antlered season followed by one week of antleress.   I really think that we need to get rid of the early muzzel loader season and Senior Hunts.  I think Juniors should still have the early hunt.  Antler restrictions should stay the same except making it 4 on a side across the state.  I know many will disagree but i think we are putting to much hunting preasure on the deer during the Rut with the early seasons.

One week of antlered with the current AR's would save some more bucks for sure but not by much as most of the harvest is the first week.  

When you say too much pressure, how so?  Do you feel it may effect breeding success?

Quote :

Penn wrote :Now the competition with early season hunters are driving them to go nocturnal to early in the hunting season. Just my humble opinion.

Good point, I have seen bucks moving later in the day here in the SRA's with the addition of crossbows and extra hunters.  It has effected how I hunt.

But, on the flip side, the extra pressure will limit buck harvest somewhat which was a goal of AR's.

Quote :

bearfisherman wrote   I am not sold on the fact that with proper nutrition and habitat any buck can grow to be an 8 point.  Genetics plays too much of a factor - if it didn't, then why does a farmer breed his cows to his top bull - too get those traits out of the offspring.  A buck can go through his whole life as a spike - we have seen it and I am sure many of you have as well.

Very few inferior bucks will remain spikes thier whole lives.  You are correct that not every buck will grow into a 8 point even with age and nutrition.

There has been some recent studies done by Dr James Kroll that has shown that bucks that are spikes as yearlings will catch up to yearling 8 and even 10 point bucks in 4-5 years in the antler category.  This study was rather conclusive in its sample size and was published in North American Whitetail Magazine.  The study pretty much debunked the theory that once a spike always a spike.  The problem is it takes age to accomplish this.

Also, genetics are important but in a wild free ranging herd without fences, it is very dificult to effect the genetic makeup of a deer herd through selective harvest.  

And welcome aboard by the way!!  

Quote :

Coburn wrote :  Fact is many good changes could of been made that wouldnt have costed another dime to implement, like reasonable numbers of doe tags....The only cost would be the money lost for the sale of those licenses.  But keeping the numbers high for income alone isnt justifiable, so wouldnt be a problem.     As for your "tweaks" you have listed, some are interesting.  Dont think most would be practical or accepted widely especially on a wmu-wide basis. I think trophy areas, some bow only, some muzzleload only etc. would be great on more localized areas..

I do disagree with you that antlerless allocations are driven by the need for $$.  That is speculation and implies the PGC's need for funding overides the responsibility to manage all wildlife properly.

Anyway, I also think that some tweaks could be made to improve the situation farther than it is now and allow for more opportunities for all.  I do believe that we are sort of at a plateau with what the current AR can accomplish in regards to bucks and the goals that were set for habitat, ratios and breeding windows can maintained through antlerless allocations from here on out.

Also, welcome aboard!!

I'd like to comment on only a couple of the ideas here this evening.... one is strictly my feelings and the others are part my thoughts and part what I have been told by folks like RSB..Dr Rosenberry.. Bret Wallingford.. Kip Adams..

1... I can not believe what I read...
I hope it is a typo...
no handicapped permits at ALL for someone to use a crossbow...?????

I am getting to ( if not reached) the point I find it almost impossible to draw and hold my bow at full draw for more than a few seconds..

and someone believes I have to now give up any hopes of ever archery hunting again ????

If I want a buck I'll have to brave the colder weather  -- NO OTHER CHOICE ???

And to make things worse others are saying I should not be allowed to hunt in warm weather with a rifle... FOR A DOE...
when I am 65 ???

I thought we were trying to GET and KEEP more people in the sport of deer hunting... those are two ideas to get LESS ??????

Make it 4 points state wide.... another thing that would decrease the number of hunters

I have only seen two bucks (in season, while hunting for them) in the 20 years I have lived here that were 4 on a side here in 2F.. that I could have harvested....

This would just make for MORE disgruntled deer hunters.. and personally I think we have enough of those for now...

.....SPREAD RESTRICTION....
While many of the experts and deer biologists agree a spread type restriction would help better the age structure in our herd... But that said.. they all agree.. Pa. deer hunters would find it almost IMPOSSIBLE to accurately estimate the spread on a buck.

What will happen when they get up to the downed buck and get out the ruler and it says 1/2 or 1 inch under...

remember the mess with the first year of AR and determining if the "point" was one inch...

I can introduce you guys to several here in 2F that missed by fractions of an inch and it cost them $500.00 for an illegal kill...  and all agreed that if it ever happened again they would not report the "mistake" they would just leave it....

This is not just a terrible idea.. it's an idea that will NEVER happen in Pa...

Coburn....

Got to be another of those USP guys  

Let's find out...

he wrote --

Quote :

But keeping the numbers high for income alone isnt justifiable,

Where is your evidence that that is being done ???

That is simply another of the USP claims.. LIKE --
the "two kinds" of deer...500,000 deer herd...DCNR wanting to introduce cougars.. 30,000 members...deer ruining trees by scratching the bark off with their hooves...ETC...ETC..  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2008-06-18 22:08:24 --

Quote :

Dr Trout wrote : .....SPREAD RESTRICTION.... While many of the experts and deer biologists agree a spread type restriction would help better the age structure in our herd... But that said.. they all agree.. Pa. deer hunters would find it almost IMPOSSIBLE to accurately estimate the spread on a buck.

While I agree that it would be impossible to enforce in Pa. as a whole, it could be interesting if implemented in select areas with alot of education.

I find it easier estimating spread on a deer in the woods than counting points especially in the 4 points areas where that 4th point is usually a brow tine.  It does take practice though.

But I tend to agree it will never come to Pa.  Just throwing some ideas out there for discussion.

Quote :

Dr Trout wrote : 1... I can not believe what I read... I hope it is a typo... no handicapped permits at ALL for someone to use a crossbow...????? And to make things worse others are saying I should not be allowed to hunt in warm weather with a rifle... FOR A DOE... when I am 65 ??? I thought we were trying to GET and KEEP more people in the sport of deer hunting... those are two ideas to get LESS ?????? Make it 4 points state wide.... another thing that would decrease the number of hunters

I agree we cannot afford to take opportunities away from juniors or seniors in any way.  Those should be expanded.

Also, AR's whether point or spread restictions should be based on antler growth in each WMU's and not a blanket restriction IMO.

Penn I agree with just about everything you are throwing out there.  My reasoning for the no early hunt is two fold I hunt archery and that season ruins the prime time archery season in my areas in 2D and 2G.  I do think it is a good Idea for youngsters becasue they are the future and we need them to get interested.

I agree with you on the crossbow thing but I think that they need to just be stricter on what is requred to use a cross bow. Like if you are in a wheel chair yes you should be allowed to use one. The new bows on the market that have 80% let off anyone can hold them once they get them drawn.  

The early season also ruins the best time for predator trapping.  I that this is not a concern to most people but when I get hunters blowing holes in my Foxes and Coyotes with a 50 cal. I get pretty upset.  It also causes Coyotes in my area to shift there hunting practices. I am much more of a trapper than a hunter and its amazing how many deer i see trapping before the season and how they disapear or go nocturnal after the early hunt.  I will see deer until the sunrises then they are hard to find.  Mind you I am in the woods everyday trapping at the same time while trapping so it is easy to see how things change over the course of a week.

using the early deer seasons as a reason

archery hunting is not what it use to be is also an "excuse" in my book.

There are less deer out there running around period , and those that are smarter.... or at least they appear to be around here... I can remember stopping and have deer stand there for minutes allowing all the photos I wanted to take... now... you'd better be fast... they are not standing long before they take-off.

I honestly feel the deer have become more "spooky" than they have ever been.

Maybe they can sense their lower numbers ???

Flyfisher wrote --

Quote :

The new bows on the market that have 80% let off anyone can hold them once they get them drawn.

I highlighted the KEY WORDS...

Sorry if it appears I am looking for EASY... I really did not mean to give that impression.

I just do not want to see any changes that would cause more folks to leave the sport...

using the "drag out the deer" is also not what I was referring too... I was talking about the temperature in general... as many of us get older we find we can not travel as far as we once could and find it neccassry to SIT..
I can sit much longer in warmer weather than cold...

I agree no one should be in the woods if they are not in fairly good heath to begin with..

I find it hard to believe that a few days set aside for muzzies, elders, and youths, "mess up" your archery hunting....

most of my archery hunting is "messed up" by small game hunters looking for squirrels,,
then there are the turkey hunters and now some will have dogs...
pheasant/grouse hunters and their dogs....

should we cancel small game during archery season too.... ??

COME ON GUYS , I love my archery hunting too, but lets be honest -- we archers have:


#1 and IT'S A BIGGY!!!

... the chance to hunt BUCKS at the best time EVER.. the rut....

...the best weather
...most relaxed targets (deer)
...longest season.. in fact TWO of them
... best food sources to hunt
...quiet woods to be in
...least amount of intrusion from other hunters.
I have never seen nearly as many other hunters in archery season as I do in rifle season.

Not sure we should be the ones complaining about sharing our woods with others.

What about moving bear season  ???

All those bear hunters trampling thru the woods 3-4 days before opening day sure disturb the deer too... Maybe after the concurrent seasons would be a better time or in September before there is dening activity...that would allow us rifle hunters a chance to harvest mature deer before they head for secure ground until after the season..

EASY.  ????   ...

I'd say wanting to keep everyone but archers out of the woods during the best time of the year TO BE IN THE WOODS... is looking for the easy hunt too.... ????

I have no problem with small game hunters as far as archery goes they are normally not a major concern since they tend to be comming into the woods as i am lavign my stand in the morning and leaving when I am comming back to hunt the evening.  Not only that there really are not that many small game hunters anymore.  The predators have the small game numbers in pretty good check in the areas that I hunt and trap.  

I rally have nothing aganist the crossbow idea I just feel it should be better reagulated to only be alllowed by those who truely need to use them or set aside a designated time frame where anyone can use a crossbow.

I am just bitter about this early hunt do to having some traps on my trapline tampered with by inconsiderate hunters.  I have never had a problem sharing the woods with small game hunters or archery hunters but once they started the early muzzloader I have been forced to pull my sets in prime areas due to having my traps tamperd with during that time frame.  My issue with it is different than most a 50 caliber hole in a red fox pelt really ruins my day.

"Where is your evidence that that is being done ???"

Dr. Trout, YOu and dpms took the statment out of context. I DID NOT say that they are setting the doe allocations so they can 'live off of them", I said since thats not appropriate (and supposedly not the case) that there is NO EXCUSE FOR NOT LOWERING THEM.  I was speaking of no money being necessary to implement the change itself, and it was in rebuttal to another who suggested more funding WAS NEEDED before any real changes could be initiated.  It doesnt cost a dime of spending to lower the alloation, BUT some money is lost and that is all I was pointing out!!  You guys should really pay attention and not let blind emotion dictate the discussion...and again..Like this:

"That is simply another of the USP claims.. LIKE --
the "two kinds" of deer...500,000 deer herd...DCNR wanting to introduce cougars.. 30,000 members...deer ruining trees by scratching the bark off with their hooves...ETC...ETC.. "

HUH??  First, Im not usp. Dont know the accuracy of some of those statements, and frankly couldnt care less...  THough there were deer stocked in Pa from 2006 to 1925.  Of those some came from Wisconsin, Michigan and WestVirginia.  Wisconsin has BOTH the dakota subspecies as well as the northern woodland that is predominant in the northeast as well.  Michigan has the northern, but West Virginia is made up mostly of th "Virginia Whitetail" subspecies.  So one could actually argue the genetics of THREE subspecies very well could be within our borders.  Our subspecies is predominately the norther woodland, but as pgc puts it...  in MOST of the state.

Not sure what that has to do with anything or what context usp was speaking of etc...  I dont know about dcnr or cougars, I do know the audubon society would like to reintroduce predators...  They say on their website the only reason they support hunting is because we extirpated the predators that should be doing the job of herd management... Maybe dcnr has strong alliance with theM?? Dont know and cant speculate..

30,000 members?  Dont know.  Dont find it hard to believe.  So many current disgruntled hunters... Not hard at all.  PFSC claims even more...  Not so hard to believe either.  Theyve included audubon society members and other "conservationist extremists".  

--Last edited by coburn on 2008-06-19 12:09:42 --

Quote :

Coburn wrote Dr. Trout, YOu and dpms took the statment out of context. I DID NOT say that they are setting the doe allocations so they can 'live off of them", I said since thats not appropriate (and supposedly not the case) that there is NO EXCUSE FOR NOT LOWERING THEM.  I was speaking of no money being necessary to implement the change itself, and it was in rebuttal to another who suggested more funding WAS NEEDED before any real changes could be initiated.  It doesnt cost a dime of spending to lower the alloation, BUT some money is lost and that is all I was pointing out!!

I re-read your post and I now see your intention.  Sorry for that.

As for the allocations, with the herd in stabilization mode in most areas, I don't see a need to lower them as of now.