Coburn...
I probably did speak with "Blind Emotion"  after 8 years of dealing with folks who post things with no supportive data or mis-leading data or that which is not true at all.. I some times do jump without thinking..  and I have always been willing to apologize when that is the case
and I do that now to you..

I can see from your reply you were just posting your honest thoughts and it had nothing to do with the USP... evidenced by some of your reply... the two deer had to do with color not species... and the others were just silly things that the USP like to claim...

So by reading your reply I can see you are posting your thoughts and not trying to promote the USP or they excitment in another law suit against an agency that as sportsmen we should ALL BE SUPPORTING...

NOTE.. I did not say agree with 100%...or that we should not question...

God knows in the past 8 years I have challenged the PGC folks that I know or consider as friends and qualified people when it comes to deer management decisions.

I have "banged heads" on more than one occasion and still have doubts about some of the program. but my doubts about some programs will not and has not changed my support for the organization as a whole and their deer program.

Lowering the allocations in general will not help to maintian the herd, in fact it will allow it to grow and the majority of this state's natural forest habitat can not handle that..
and the over population we had was beginning to effect private property too although many land owners did not see it happening...


Too many people are over-looking the habitat problem and thinking only of harvesting THEIR deer.

As I posted the other day.. one thing I have enjoyed doing over the 8 years is making trips to areas that certain hunters find "there are no deer left.... my goal has always been to see why..

Not to dis-credit their claims but to give my opinion why that may well be the case... and so far... I have been able to show (at least in my mind) two things..

1.. there are deer there
2.. maybe why (habitat and food sources) there are no longer the number that they grew accustom to seeing..

It is easy to blame it on increased doe harvests, and the truth is that is one factor... but lack of food... securty... and development in the area also play at huge part in having the deer leave that once populated area.

So far.... I have not found an area that I would say should have TONS of deer...

I have even visited one private property where the owner claimed it was hunters on near-by grounds causing his low deer population... what I found was deer in numbers that were destroying the habitat on the guys farm..  and now he is planting food plots...

I'd rather talk about good deer habitat than the harvest figures any day... I just wish I knew even more about prefered species and non-prefered but i'm still learning....


you just have to have habitat that will support deer... as RSB and ALL the deer experts I know say... it's a law of nature....

a species can not and WILL NOT exsisit in an area that does not supply 3 things

1.. Good YEAR ROUND food sources
2.. Water to meet their particular needs
3.. Security
(a) to allow for raising of young
(b) a safe resting place


I'll have some more comments on the AR ideas here later.... and I'll try not to respond entirely with "blind emotion"  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2008-06-19 13:09:13 --

"It is easy to blame it on increased doe harvests, and the truth is that is one factor... but lack of food... securty... and development in the area also play at huge part in having the deer leave that once populated area."

Any way you can get some groups to understand that part?
Deer numbers mean nothing if you dont have the habitat i would perfer a smaller healthier herd and better habitat any day.  

--Last edited by FlyFisher on 2008-06-19 22:02:29 --

AMEN PENN.....

I agree -- I like it just the way it is...

IF IT AINT'T BROKE DON'T MESS WITH IT

Flyfisher..

getting others to see and understand the relationship between habitat and wildlife, deer in particular, is like going to the dentist....

those that care go and those that don't  - DON'T until it's too late

Ask RSB how many nay-sayers attend any of the tours....  it's the folks that want to learn and apply what they learn to their deer hunting and those just interested in learning more about the outdoors that attend..

and I have yet to meet someone that did not learn anything from one of the tour.. nor anyone that thought they had wasted their time by attending one..

now wasting time ... does NOT include the food.... no one can resist the spread the ladies set out.... I know my wife and I sure missed the June berry muffins this spring

Would you guys here on the board like to have a tour ?????

I'm serious now....


an Outdoorworld Gamelands Tour and Seminar ????  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2008-06-19 18:45:57 --

Quote :

Dr Trout wrote : Would you guys here on the board like to have a tour ????? I'm serious now.... an Outdoorworld Gamelands Tour and Seminar ????

I would love to come up for a tour sometime.  Been wanting too for awhile as it has been a long time since I hunted up that way and I am curious about how things look now.

As usual, work and family obligations abound in the "off season".

Yeah the habitat relationship is hard for some i have always made that conection.

I would be interested in a habitat tour.  Being in Brookville I am in the area already.

I wish you folks who believe genetics is hurt by AR’S would really take a deep breath and do some googling for real information.
If you have an abundance of sub-legal bucks and you don’t shoot them or they don’t otherwise die off – you will have an abundance of “legal” bucks in a year or two ---considering that there is suitable nutrition to support antler growth.

If your area is over-populated you will see what I saw here for 30 years --- stubby little spikes, “Y” bucks and 3, 4, 5, and 6-pointers.

If you think genetics is affected by AR, then answer this:
How is it genetics when, in fact, the doe contributes to those genetics?
How is it genetics when, in fact, a large percentage of bucks disperse each year to new areas?
You cannot “appreciably” affect genetics in a wild, free-ranging deer herd.

Quote :

bowbum wrote : If you think genetics is affected by AR, then answer this: How is it genetics when, in fact, the doe contributes to those genetics? How is it genetics when, in fact, a large percentage of bucks disperse each year to new areas? You cannot “appreciably” affect genetics in a wild, free-ranging deer herd.

The same ones that think once a spike always a spike when recent research has shown that with age these spikes will carry the same headgear as yearlings that started as 8 or 10 points.

We just never had age in Pa.