Do you want more deer in PA

[tex3012]

Hello fellow PA hunters.

We have all noticed the drop in deer population the past few years, resulting in less and less deer and buck each year. Here is one way we can help ourselves, the "hunters"

Be very selective on shooting doe. Why? Doing some calculation i have come up with what ONE doe kill would be like 3 years down the road. Killing ONE doe = NINE deer 3 years later. Giving a breader doe has 2 fawns each year, one buck and one doe. The equals to 5 doe and 4 buck !!

ONE doe kill = 9 deer 3 years later, 4 buck
TWO doe kills - 18 deer 3 years later, 8 buck
Three doe kills = 27 deer 3 years later, 12 buck

My plan for you is buy your doe tags but try not to use as many as possible. Buy more doe tags then you plan on useing and that equalls to that many more tags that are gone off the shelves for the trigger happy hunters out there to buy.

Guys do that math were destroying our own deer herd. Yeah the game commission is selling thousands upon thousands of doe tags which allow us to kill more and more deer. But, we the hunters have the final decision.

Be smart, think of our future!!

[Jldombach]

hey tex just curious what part of the state do you hunt in, if you are in the mountain regions of central Pa from Junianta all the way to Potter county then i agree with you. However i hunt in the rolling hills farm country of Bradford county and things really aren't that bad. I wouldn't go crazy on killing doe, but over the last couple years i've seen numbers increase despite a healthy doe harvest

[tex3012]

@jldombach.. i hunt in four parts of the state. near gaines, tioga county;southwest cameron county; south of towanda, bradford county and northampton county.. besides a few farms i hunt in bradford county, the deer numbers are down bigtime.. let me state i am 24 years old so i havnt seen the "25+" deer heards, but i have seen the deer hunting before the 3pt rule and numerous doe license. also, i just want to say im not against killing a doe.

[Jldombach]

alright i think we are on the same page, i get three doe tags a year and at most use one. I was just interested in the part of the state you hunted in because i hear different reports from different people and its all about location. As far those big deer herds, i don't really remember them either i'm only 28 so i'm not some old timer.

[danesdad]

I usually get three tags a year and use one, if even that. But it has nothing to do with using up tags. I do that to allow myself as many options on different places to hunt. I'd say the population is down in most places(2C) and pretty stable in a few (2A).

[Everyday Hunter]

First, Stephen, welcome to the D&DH forums. You've had some good questions and responses so far.

I appreciate your willingness to shoot does, and your math that shows how quickly the deer population can rise to levels that a lot of hunters would appreciate. And, I do think we should be as selective as possible about shooting does. However, I'm certain that your solution, as follows, would not be effective in reducing the number of does killed:

ORIGINAL: tex3012

My plan for you is buy your doe tags but try not to use as many as possible. Buy more doe tags then you plan on useing and that equalls to that many more tags that are gone off the shelves for the trigger happy hunters out there to buy.

Guys do that math were destroying our own deer herd. Yeah the game commission is selling thousands upon thousands of doe tags which allow us to kill more and more deer. But, we the hunters have the final decision.

There's a factor you're leaving out. The Game Commission knows how many doe tags it must issue in order for a doe to be killed. Let's say it's 2.5 tags to harvest one doe. If they want to kill 10000 does in a WMU, the must issue 25000 tags. Here's where I question your solution. If we buy tags and don't use them and the kill goes down, say, to 3.2 tags to harvest each doe, and they still want to kill 10000 does, they'll just raise the number of tags issued to 32000 to kill 10000 does. Those additional 7000 tags actually puts an additional $42000 in the hands of the Game Commission, and they'll still get 10000 does killed.

You say, "we the hunters have the final decision." That's not quite true. It's more accurate to say that "we the hunters who will fill doe tags have the final decision." The Game Commission keeps careful track of how many tags it takes in each WMU to kill a doe, and will adjust the tag allocation accordingly.

Steve

[ajkrem22]

There's a factor you're leaving out. The Game Commission knows how many doe tags it must issue in order for a doe to be killed. Let's say it's 2.5 tags to harvest one doe. If they want to kill 10000 does in a WMU, the must issue 25000 tags. Here's where I question your solution. If we buy tags and don't use them and the kill goes down, say, to 3.2 tags to harvest each doe, and they still want to kill 10000 does, they'll just raise the number of tags issued to 32000 to kill 10000 does. Those additional 7000 tags actually puts an additional $42000 in the hands of the Game Commission, and they'll still get 10000 does killed.

You say, "we the hunters have the final decision." That's not quite true. It's more accurate to say that "we the hunters who will fill doe tags have the final decision." The Game Commission keeps careful track of how many tags it takes in each WMU to kill a doe, and will adjust the tag allocation accordingly.

Steve

Steve,

I agree with you. His idea might work for one year but the game commission would simply increase doe allocations to get the kill level to where they want it.

For the hunters to change the game commissions practices we would need to somehow change the directions they are taking the deer herd. Not an easy thing because I can honestly say I have talked to very few people who like what they have done. It is obvious they have there own agenda and don't want to listen to the people who buy the license and pretty much sign there pay check.

[mhouck06]

andy,
 
first of all, i dont mean to single you out, just replying to your post. you really have to think about what you are saying. you are right, we do buy the licenses and give a lot of money to the PGC by doing so, but do you think they really want to wipe out the deer herd? if that happened they would be out of a job. i posted my response to a similar statement under Most antlerless allocations reduced in PA  ... but I will put a few points here
 
 
pa did not get it perfect, but they got pretty darn close. most wmu's are right where they should be.
 
look at where the deer herd was before the changes.. way too many, they were about to eat themselves out of the state.
 
with reduced deer herd, our woods will now be able to regenerate and be healthier all around for all species of animals
 
you may not see as many deer in the woods as you used to, but they are much healthier than before, you may have to hunt a little harder, but if you are in the woods hunting in the first place, you must enjoy it. so spend a little more time out there, doing what you enjoy. its worth it.
 
the number of hunters in pa is unreal. the PGC cannot cater to everyone of them, but they are doing their best. on top of that, they do give opportunities for hunters to keep up on what they are doing, usually its backed by hard proven facts.
 
a study was done at raystown lake, the woods around the lake were destroyed. hardly any sapplings or anything of the sort. the deer were destroying it. in the study, they took one side of the lake and let it go with usual regulations, the other side of the lake they tried to accelerate the harvesting of does with extra permits. by doing this, that side of the lake had a much lower deer count than the side that was left alone. now a few years later, the side of the lake that was hunted hard had a chance for the forest to regenerate... result: it now holds more deer than ever before. it still must be kept in balance though. so staying with the PGC license allocations will help that. healthier woods = ability to hold more deer, healthier deer. but like i said, it does not end there, you cannot let it go back to the way it was before or that side of the lake will be destroyed again.
 
this is one reason PGC did what they did. our state as a whole had a very unhealthy forest. the study at raystown proved that if PGC holds true, we the hunters will reap the benefits.
 
as everyday hunter pointed out in Most antlerless allocations reduced in PA   . the allocations in some WMU's has been reduced. thats good. they are reaching desired goals and acting accordingly.
 
if you enjoy hunting and hunt hard, it should be worth every second. killing is not everything, which it doesnt sound like thats what you are worried about. but if you hunt hard you should still see some game. its just another challenge thrown into the mix. if deer hunting was easy, i do not think there would be as much hype about it, tons of magazines or even this forum. so roll with what you got and go out there and get some!! season starts in less than two weeks, be wise with your decisions and have fun out there! i know i have some hammer bucks in my hunting area, but if a mature doe happens to walk near my stand you better believe i will be taking the shot and hopefully eating some delicious back straps that night!
 
being educated is one of the most valuable things a hunter can have. it cannot be taken from you. the study done at raystown can be found with some searching on google under the army corp of engineers, and like i said, the PGC holds some seminars to educate hunters along with QDMA. i take every ounce of education on deer and hunting as i can get. this is my passion. i like many hunters in PA was against the PGC doings until I took the time to listen and learn.
 
to all pa hunters good luck this season! enjoy your time in the field and realize the PGC is not trying to "allocate" themselves out of a job.
 

[mhouck06]

here is a perfect article summarizing the study at raystown lake i mentioned
 
 
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10066/1040860-358.stm
 
please check it out.

[ajkrem22]

mhouck06

No offense taking on your reply. I joined this forum for good discussion.

While I agree with some of what you said, I just don't agree with all of it.

I usually hunt the first two days of rifle season in the mountains of PA. Near Benezette. My first season there I think I saw 40 deer the first day. Now I agree that there was probably way to many deer in most areas of PA and the herd needed thinning. Last year I hunted for 2 solid days without leaving the stand and only saw 2 deer. I agree 40 was to many, but I only saw 2 deer in two days of hunting. The herd there is gone. What the game commission has done there is a freaking crime. It doesn't take that long to see what they were doing was wrong and change it. I understand they can't cater to everyone but I am pretty sure they have destroyed a tradition of hunters going to the mountains.

Now I also do most of my bow hunting in WMU 1A and 2B. There are plenty of deer there and usually every time I go out I see something. I too have no problem shooting a mature doe if she walks by. I love the 4 point restrictions in these areas because I am staring to see some monsters on my cameras and when I am out hunting. Buck to doe ratio is starting to balance and the future of the herd in these areas has never been better. I think the game commission deserve a pat on the back for what they have done here.

But I just can't forgive them for what they have done in other areas. They need to understand they can't manage an entire state the size of PA the same. They have started to make good changes for some of these mountain deer like not allowing doe hunting the first week of rifle when most of the people are in the woods and the reduction of doe allocations. But I am sorry, they need to do so much more. They need to slash the number doe allocations and let the herd come back a little more in these areas. Only then will I be happy with the PA game commission.