The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

21 - 40 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,154 Posts
Exactly, 2G does not need or could afford a 14 day concurrent season in MO:smile2:
I was thinking the same thing ! But then again they raised the doe tags 1,000 more and what about the Dmap tags is there any info on them yet ? because If they raised them another 1,000 then they might as well have made it concurrent for 2G as well ! I hope the Dmap tags are down this year at least my area in Clinton county !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,156 Posts
I was thinking the same thing ! But then again they raised the doe tags 1,000 more and what about the Dmap tags is there any info on them yet ? because If they raised them another 1,000 then they might as well have made it concurrent for 2G as well ! I hope the Dmap tags are down this year at least my area in Clinton county !!
It's all a lot of Bull####. They were going to get their money one way or another. A 14 day concurrent season in 2G wouldn't
have given the GC $6000 more dollars in Anterless license tag sales not counting Dmap sales. It's a Disgrace.
Just another Political disguise.
I just talked to a buddy of mine yesterday and said to him I'm glad the GC held off the 14 day concurrent season in 2G
because I don't believe it's warranted and now find out they added an additional 1000 Anterless tags which we know will sell out.
Is Gary Alt working under cover here?:jestera:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,878 Posts
I like to hunt in the archery season, and adding a week seems like a win. But for many trappers, they just lost a prime week to trap canines. A lot of property owners and farmers don’t want you setting till archery season ends, as they have family, friends, or lease holders hunting their ground during the prime rut weeks. That will eliminate that week to trap on many farms, and shortens the window till when “ buck seasons “ opens. ( now two days earlier than it was), when they also don’t want trappers disturbing their deer hunts.

It’s much like when the PGC expanded the late pheasant season, and did late season bird stockings. It pretty much shut down a lot of prime PGC gameland fields that you could trap in the late season. Yea, you could still legally set there, but you would be pinching bird dogs daily and would find every trap either destroyed or gone.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
I was thinking the same thing ! But then again they raised the doe tags 1,000 more and what about the Dmap tags is there any info on them yet ? because If they raised them another 1,000 then they might as well have made it concurrent for 2G as well ! I hope the Dmap tags are down this year at least my area in Clinton county !!
lol. Keep wishing. Those DMAPs keep going up every year on the State Forest lands which are very void of deer in most of them.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,646 Posts
It's all a lot of Bull####. They were going to get their money one way or another. A 14 day concurrent season in 2G wouldn't
have given the GC $6000 more dollars in Anterless license tag sales not counting Dmap sales. It's a Disgrace.
Just another Political disguise.
I just talked to a buddy of mine yesterday and said to him I'm glad the GC held off the 14 day concurrent season in 2G
because I don't believe it's warranted and now find out they added an additional 1000 Anterless tags which we know will sell out.
Is Gary Alt working under cover here?:jestera:
So you think the 1000 license increase in 2G, or any other unit, was about money instead of sound deer and habitat management principles and practices?

Do you really think the Game Commission thought they needed to increase the allocation of unit 2G so they would have enough money to run the agency for all of another 27 minutes even entered their thoughts?

The entire amount of money if all of the antlerless licenses allocated for the entire state were sold, which they never are, it would fund the Game Commission operations for all of about 17 days.

The bottom line is that money isn't even a thought in the decisions concerning antlerless license allocations.

Dick Bodenhorn
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,818 Posts
Exactly, 2G does not need or could afford a 14 day concurrent season in MO:smile2:
Neither can 4D but they did it any way!! The deer herd here is just now recovering from their past experiments and now they are doing this!! Last time they had concurrent season here they just about destroyed the herd in my area of 4D!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,156 Posts
So you think the 1000 license increase in 2G, or any other unit, was about money instead of sound deer and habitat management principles and practices?

Do you really think the Game Commission thought they needed to increase the allocation of unit 2G so they would have enough money to run the agency for all of another 27 minutes even entered their thoughts?

The entire amount of money if all of the antlerless licenses allocated for the entire state were sold, which they never are, it would fund the Game Commission operations for all of about 17 days.

The bottom line is that money isn't even a thought in the decisions concerning antlerless license allocations.

Dick Bodenhorn
Sorry Dick
Was wondering how long it would take you to respond, whether it was $ or another reason I just can't buy into the PGC's management
tactics anymore. I'm no wildlife biologist or have a degree in any field related, but I do have eyes.
Neither you or anyone else can convince me 2G needed an increase.
You can post all you want about data but I'm far from the only Pa. hunter not buying it.
Beyond that be safe in these troubling times.:plain:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,646 Posts
Sorry Dick
Was wondering how long it would take you to respond, whether it was $ or another reason I just can't buy into the PGC's management
tactics anymore. I'm no wildlife biologist or have a degree in any field related, but I do have eyes.
Neither you or anyone else can convince me 2G needed an increase.
You can post all you want about data but I'm far from the only Pa. hunter not buying it.
Beyond that be safe in these troubling times.:plain:
It just doesn't matter if hunters are not seeing as many deer as they wish for.

The ONLY thing that really matters is whether there is improving habitat or if the habitat is showing signs that the deer are having a limiting impact on the habitat.

The bottom line is no area can support more deer than the habitat can sustain for more than short term periods of ideal environmental conditions. There are many areas of 2G that the evidence is indicating the deer populations are once again outgrowing the ability of the habitat to sustain them.

It doesn't matter if you only have two deer in the area. If you only have adequate food for one you better kill one or you will end eventually up with none.

That is just how nature works. Trying to fight or change that fact will not change the reality of the situation though.

Dick Bodenhorn
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,156 Posts
It just doesn't matter if hunters are not seeing as many deer as they wish for.

The ONLY thing that really matters is whether there is improving habitat or if the habitat is showing signs that the deer are having a limiting impact on the habitat.

The bottom line is no area can support more deer than the habitat can sustain for more than short term periods of ideal environmental conditions. There are many areas of 2G that the evidence is indicating the deer populations are once again outgrowing the ability of the habitat to sustain them.

It doesn't matter if you only have two deer in the area. If you only have adequate food for one you better kill one or you will end eventually up with none.

That is just how nature works. Trying to fight or change that fact will not change the reality of the situation though.

Dick Bodenhorn
There simply aren't not enough PGC personnel to know what adequate food sources are available in 2G
or many other WMU's to make these determinations. Some of the WMU's in this state could measure up to a 100 square miles or more from point to point.
So it becomes a guesstimate just like the harvest report system.
Trying to fight or change the fact you say?
The reality of the situation is $ and politics are the problem and that's how our Human Nature Works. ( now that's Reality).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
I think the PGC needs to implement a foil hat requirement alongside the FO regs...

Seriously guys. Hunters whine and complain all the time about not "seeing" enough deer, and there was always "more" around in years past....

It makes much more sense to trust the biologists and scientists on the PGC staff than it is to kow tow to the wills and misconceptions of upset hunters.

If the PGC was truly doing such a poor job of managing the deer populations across the state, would we really be in position of having more opportunity now than ever before?

Lost on many, it seems, is that the primary mission is the overall health of the resource, not the happiness of the hunters.
When you start scrutinizing small/specific locations, you need to take into account that things do indeed change on a local level. When you're dealing with "resource" that walks, great distances at times, you cannot effectively manage at a level/granularity that is going to "please" everyone in every point location.

To put it simply. Things change. Areas that once held and could support large numbers of deer get developed, overgrown, neglected, sold, posted, impacted by nearby changes/development, etc. Some places stay stable for incredibly long periods of time, others don't. Some areas are "harder" to hunt, some are "easy" (deer numbers, hunter numbers, terrain, access, habitat all play factors.)

It's important that folks continue to hunt the marginal habitat areas to balance the herd with the land, but it certainly isn't for everyone. Most would prefer the "sure thing" or be hunting in an area with a higher likelihood of "success".... myself included. I'm sure there are others out there who also enjoy the challenge of bagging one from a "tough" area...

Sure, the PGC could do something like going to 300 WMUs across the state and micromanage allocations to highly specific areas, but that would create more problems than it solves... It would be a never-ending game of adjustments, missed targets, and over-harvests.

I guess my bottom line is that IF one truly is not "seeing enough deer" where they've been hunting for X years, blame doesn't belong with the PGC/BOC, politicians, or "money"....
That person needs to reflect on their tactics and/or chosen location(s)...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,646 Posts
There simply aren't not enough PGC personnel to know what adequate food sources are available in 2G
or many other WMU's to make these determinations. Some of the WMU's in this state could measure up to a 100 square miles or more from point to point.
So it becomes a guesstimate just like the harvest report system.
Trying to fight or change the fact you say?
The reality of the situation is $ and politics are the problem and that's how our Human Nature Works. ( now that's Reality).
I disagree. Based on your comments I suspect you, like most other hunters, have never taken the time to learn what all is being researched and evaluated every year to guide the deer management professionals in making the best informed decisions on antlerless allocations and harvest goals.

Here is a link to the report used for the past season. There are studies and reports for every year if a person wants to go back and compare them from one year to another. That is what the Game Commission professionals do instead of just basing their decisions on what they think might be happening based on their observations or relying on hunter opinions.

https://www.pgc.pa.gov/InformationResources/MediaReportsSurveys/AnnualWildlifeManagementReports/Documents/21001-18z.pdf

You can find many other reports for the various years and different research projects in this link.

https://www.pgc.pa.gov/InformationResources/MediaReportsSurveys/AnnualWildlifeManagementReports/Pages/default.aspx

Some of you should spend a few days reading the various reports and learning the facts instead of posting about things you have never taken the time to actually learn the facts about.

Dick Bodenhorn
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,156 Posts
I disagree. Based on your comments I suspect you, like most other hunters, have never taken the time to learn what all is being researched and evaluated every year to guide the deer management professionals in making the best informed decisions on antlerless allocations and harvest goals.

Here is a link to the report used for the past season. There are studies and reports for every year if a person wants to go back and compare them from one year to another. That is what the Game Commission professionals do instead of just basing their decisions on what they think might be happening based on their observations or relying on hunter opinions.

https://www.pgc.pa.gov/InformationResources/MediaReportsSurveys/AnnualWildlifeManagementReports/Documents/21001-18z.pdf

You can find many other reports for the various years and different research projects in this link.

https://www.pgc.pa.gov/InformationResources/MediaReportsSurveys/AnnualWildlifeManagementReports/Pages/default.aspx

Some of you should spend a few days reading the various reports and learning the facts instead of posting about things you have never taken the time to actually learn the facts about.

Dick Bodenhorn
These reports are from the PGC so that automatically makes them affirmative? and we should dare not question them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,156 Posts
Do you have any reports from reviewed/published sources that contradict them?
Yes, it's called Eyes and Sightings and Deer sign.
Look at it this way, the PGC cried poor mouth for the longest time requesting a license cost increase, then comes along the
Audit showing no need for it. whether you agree or disagree with the Audit findings don't you think it's
a little Odd that we haven't heard a Peep from the GC about an increase since then.
The Moral of the story here is that just because a Governing body say's one thing doesn't necessarily make it true.
Like the old saying Don't #### down my neck and tell me it's raining.:smile2:
It just amazes me, what makes the PGC any different than any other State or Federal governing body where scandals have been uncovered.
It's like some out there just can't even Fathom the possibility of wrong doing.
I would love to be a Fly on the wall at the PGC headquarters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
Do you have any reports from reviewed/published sources that contradict them?
Yes, it's called Eyes and Sightings and Deer sign.
Look at it this way, the PGC cried poor mouth for the longest time requesting a license cost increase, then comes along the
Audit showing no need for it. whether you agree or disagree with the Audit findings don't you think it's
a little Odd that we haven't heard a Peep from the GC about an increase since then.
The Moral of the story here is that just because a Governing body say's one thing doesn't necessarily make it true.
Like the old saying Don't #### down my neck and tell me it's raining.:smile2:
It just amazes me, what makes the PGC any different than any other State or Federal governing body where scandals have been uncovered.
It's like some out there just can't even Fathom the possibility of wrong doing.
I would love to be a Fly on the wall at the PGC headquarters.
So that’s a NO then....
Sorry, but I trust the professionals more than anecdotes from a few disgruntled conspiracy theorists.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,646 Posts
Yes, it's called Eyes and Sightings and Deer sign.
Look at it this way, the PGC cried poor mouth for the longest time requesting a license cost increase, then comes along the
Audit showing no need for it. whether you agree or disagree with the Audit findings don't you think it's
a little Odd that we haven't heard a Peep from the GC about an increase since then.
The Moral of the story here is that just because a Governing body say's one thing doesn't necessarily make it true.
Like the old saying Don't #### down my neck and tell me it's raining.:smile2:
It just amazes me, what makes the PGC any different than any other State or Federal governing body where scandals have been uncovered.
It's like some out there just can't even Fathom the possibility of wrong doing.
I would love to be a Fly on the wall at the PGC headquarters.
And you think because some professional politician, who is trying to advance his political agenda, does an audit then only tells half of the story he is giving you the straight scoop on things?

The FACT is the Game Commission long has needed a license increase. Many programs important toward the future of our wildlife resources have been cut from a lack of funding. Oh sure they have the funds that would continue to fund them but that would just drain the funds needed for other critical functions even faster.

If you know you don't have a pay increase coming and could be laid off at any time with no prospect for a new source of income are you go out and spend down your reserve like you have in the past or would you try to cut back on your spending until you have a new source of income lined up?

Dick Bodenhorn
 
21 - 40 of 61 Posts
Top