Pahick-do you think the AR plan was a bad thing? Interested in everyone's take on this. I'm a meat hunter, not a horn hunter, but I still think this was in the best interest of the deer herd.
Sure AR's are a bad thing. The sole reason for AR's wasnt for the benefit of hunters, or deer, but to sell hunters on HR. Did it work? For its intended purpose, sure! Everyone swallowed it hook line and sinker. And now? Crying like babies. Tell me something. Are the deer healthier? How about live weights? Fawn ratio? Breeding dates? Etc etc etc...
All we did was bring herd numbers down, along with hunter numbers. The forest, by DCNR's own admission, isnt any better today. And that can be easily backed up by PSU data. When questioned by the Legislature, the GC could not tell you why the forest isnt regenerating, nor could they tell you when to expect results. But they did tell you it would take time. Theres something wrong when over a decade goes by and no change or further problems occur after we eliminated the number one problem on their list regarding forest regeneration, deer. Huge failure!
So what came of AR's? HR. Which lead to more posted land, hunters joining leases, food plots, trespassers, poachers, and a whole lot of pissed off hunters. Not to mention a MY program which hasnt progressed to greater junior hunters, and hunters afield less per season overall.
