Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Deer Hunting Pa. Hunters: Does any of this sound familiar?

From a previous Maine poster:

We are being infiltrated by greenies, incompetent boobs who practice environmental extremism over true conservation.

To many have played into their hand by shooting every doe they could. There was a time when it was needed, it has passed, yet they don't decrease the number of doe tags. They need the money and they are a cash cow. Many say buy the tags and don't use them. I say tell them to stuff their tags.

Most take what they tell us to. Yes we bitch about it, but most take it and go on. The State has made a previous push to take some of our Game Lands-I think we have over 1million acres-that were bought with Hunter's money, along with grants from others such as the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy. Not a single penny of tax dollars has ever been spent to buy game lands. Hunters paid for them, but the State has refused to make non-consumptive users be required to buy a permit to enjoy all they have to offer.

The Pa. Game Commission used to be one of the most respected agencies in Pa. No more. Some time back, in the 80's the Director of the GC was found out to have shot over 100 deer illegally. He was fired, but after that it just went away. Doubt if he lost his car, rifles or spent any jail time.

Different political pressures have diminished it greatly. They no longer are the voice of license paying hunters and when you have lack of respect for those in authority often many look at the rules with contempt.

Great quote by battue "To many have played into their hand by shooting every doe they could. There was a time when it was needed, it has passed, yet they don't decrease the number of doe tags. They need the money and they are a cash cow. Many say buy the tags and don't use them. I say tell them to stuff their tags."

I've said from the beginning of this PA deer managment fiasco that antler restrictions are fine with me, but the continued depletion of the doe herd without any apparent baseline as to when to stop is rediculous. I hunt PA and I also hunt in Ohio. Each year in Ohio the deer kill numbers are assessed and doe tag isssue amounts are corrected to maintain a predetermined deer herd number according to region. I have contacted the PA Game Commission on several occasions the last few years and each time that they reply back to me they state that the antlered buck kill numbers are always higher (record number) that the previous year kill numbers. For some reason, this year I was lucky enough to be able to get a buck back in PA, but the other hunters in the area that live there are pretty much disgusted with the lack of game. And these are the guys that would always pass on shooting a spike and told me stories of buying Doe tags and burning the tags at the camp. Bottom line: No Does=No Bucks. Then again I'm not a scientist or biologist or politician so what do I know.

Sorry for the rant.

Nuff said,

curdog

PA deer hunters are among the largest group of crybabies I've run into yet and I've been hunting here for almost 50 years.

We had way too many deer in too many areas, by 2000. In 2001, the game commission finally grew a pair and started to do something about it. Yep, we now have far fewer deer. That's what Herd Reduction was all about. Too few deer in many areas now, to suit those who hunted there when there were too many.

Folks got to liking seeing lots of deer on opening day and By God, they want that back again.

Various reasons for "too few deer" in some areas now: Habitat was hammered by years of too many deer and it will take more than a few years to "bounce back"; High antlerless allocations and hunters that were happy to shoot lots of does. Here's a tip: Good habitat will once again hold good numbers of deer, but it will take some time.

Hell, when I was a kid some hunters were grumbling about not enough deer and that is now what today's grumblers call the good old days.

I see Wisconsin's deer hunters are now complaining about their lack of deer and want the politicians to slap their game agency upside the head.

I figure those who are qualified to manage deer, should manage deer for the best interests of the deer, their habitats and us dummies that hunt deer. Manage just to appease the demands of hunters and eventually things get out of whack elsewhere.

I've yet to meet a politician that knew his arse from his left ear about good deer management. But they know all about appeasing this group or that group. No thanks.

I gotta agree.

Did I enjoy seeing 30, 40, 50 deer a day? You bet. Did I also know that the herd was over capacity, and that couldn't go on forever? Yep.

Lots of "tradition" involving hunting in PA. Go to camp, kill the first legal buck that walks by, show up at the mill on Tuesday morning and brag "Got my buck! A real big forkhorn (or better yet, my favorite, a "nice spike" ). How 'bout you?". Go back to camp with a pocketful of doe tags, kill every doe, button buck, and yearling that walks by until you're out of tags. Go back to the mill and brag "Killed me four doe this week, how bout you?".

Those are the same guys screaming the loudest right now.

Know more than a few that fit your descriptions and yes, they are also now some of the loudest voices for "change".

My observation is that there are two groups making most of this noise: Older guys that hunted when deer were scarce, got used to the period when we had too many deer and feel they were entitled to have lots of deer. Forever.

The second group, would be folks now in their 20s and 30s who never knew anything but "lots of deer" and and are now vexed that it didn't last. It was all they knew from the time they started hunting deer and now someone has deprived them of their "right".

I would say that the vast majority of our deer hunters fixate on opening day, without spending much time learning about deer and deer management. It is a great tradition, but those who only invest a few days per year in it, deprive themselves of the joy experienced from actually learning what the score is and seeing things in the greater context.

They are doomed to disappointment if their favorite old spots no longer are productive and someone needs to bear the blame.

Back in the 1950's the woods around my camp held a deer herd that an average hunter could see 15 to 30 deer in a good day. I do not know what the doe to buck ratio was,but I remember my father saying he saw 30 deer in a day without seeing horns. Fast forward to now-- New York State doe permits plus other things have decreased the herd down. The average hunter hunting the same woods might see avg. 1 deer per day. Our records kept at camp tells tells us the doe to buck ratio is 5 to 1. -- Much bigger bucks being shot now. A large buck in the 60's or 70's was dressed out at 130 lbs. Since 1990 we have shot many bucks dressed at 150-160 lbs. -- Many hunters in our area will not hunt the bigger woods and elect to hunt the farm wood lots where they see more deer. Patience is golden in true deer hunting - I would not want to increase the deer herd in my area to what it used to be. Web

Interesting statement. Now I know that Allegheny Co. and I think parts of the Philly area have issued unlimited Doe tags for quite a few years. Never heard of any going to their camp there however. What I would like to know is what Counties did these hunters go with their four Doe tags back in the day. Because for the longest time you could only get one tag-and it was rare to not have all the tags sold, and many didn't get a doe tag-later on they went to a bonus tag if any were left over, but can't remember when you could hunt the mountain Counties and go to camp with four tags or a pocketful. Please tell me when and in which traditional deer counties you could do this.

And whats going to bring about this "good habitat"? Do you think the forest in PA will rebound on its own? Not gonna happen. Youre not gonna get the type of regen the econuts are seeking at the growth stage most of our forest is in. Are we going to wait until DCNR gets the right price to harvest? Because make no mistake about it, price(money) is what this is all about. Our forest held high numbers before, and could continue today. I always get the comments such as " Why do you think there are low numbers? The forest couldnt support higher numbers" well ask yourself something. If birth rates remained basically unchanged, where did the deer go? They dont migrate to the next county in search of food. We shot them! Thats where they went! People just need to go over the figures posted by the PGC and use their heads a little. Another question for you. Fictional numbers, but, what if the PGC wants a reduction of 20%. 20% of what? Of how many? Under the management plan, the answer would be 20% over last years harvest. Correct? Now how many deer does that let us in whatever WMU we are talking about? Huh? Whats that? Oh thats right, we dont know because we dont do deer density in PA! You sir can place all your trust in the PGC/DCNR. Meanwhile ill keep checking their numbers and call BS when I see it!

Don't know where the other poster was refering to or what time frame, but we had no problem getting a doe tag and often two bonus tags for Tioga County, from 1988 to 1996. Never used more than two (once), mostly shot one doe or none, if I got a buck during that time.

Do know folks that hunted in Potter and Tioga at the time, that would shoot at least two doe, though.

Believe whatever or whomever you wish too, doesn't bother me.

As for regen on SF lands, take a stroll in the Sproul, south of Renovo or most other parts of it. Or in several areas of SF in the northern portion of Union county. Or parts of the Tuscarora SF in WMU 4B and maybe Tioga SF in WMU 2G.

Then try to figure out what more deer could find to eat, in what is essentially thousands of acres of pole-stage timber, with little or no understory to support deer. It's been that way for years.

No one is going to cut thousands of acres of pole timber now, when much of it will be valuable timber in another generation, or less.

DCNR's job isn't to provide wildlife habitat at the expense of future returns on public land resources.

You are correct.
Up until 1988 you could only get 1 Doe license. After 1988 you could get up to 1 license plus 2 bonus tags. Many good counties sold out in the first go, but in others you could possible get a total of 3 Doe tags, but never legally 4 or a pocketful.

As you know the PGC went from County management to Wildlife Mangagement Units in order to more efficiently manage the herd.

You are also correct in that some of the areas you mentioned the woods will not support many deer because of the age of the timber. However, in places like the ANF which for the last 8 years or so have seen 5000 thousand acres or better per year being clearcut things are different. Excellent deer cover however with the PGC plan they will give out the same or more Doe tags. Again your right in that the DNR wants trees and now that they have a considerable more available cover in the ANF they don't want deer to take a bite. Now the GC which is supposed to be independent agency only dedicated to the wildlife of the State, goes along and tries to kill all they can. Do you think it will be different when the areas you mentioned are ready to be timbered? No the dollars will rule, and Deer and Hunters will get the short deal.

As you said the DCNR's job isn't to provide wildlife habitat at the expense of future returns on public land resources. They don't care about the deer only the future dollars and they want as many killed as possible. Another example is that they our cutting all the beech-a good long term deer food-down so that the cherry-a long term poor deer food-can take its place. The same plan is in for the whole Northern tier that is State land.

Now the state makes its money, but what is the bigger picture. Well the economy, read that people, of the mountain counties are also starving because they at one time received a large majority of their yearly income off of visiting Deer hunters along with those who went to their camps on a regular basis. The magnet that made many go was the Deer.

Get the picture: Make money for that State, but screw the people. Oh yea, the more people dependent on government the more welfare programs and control they will have.

Great government agencies we have and the PGC is in bed with them instead of being and independent agency separated from political influence.

Wow, you caught me on a technicality. I missed it by one. Pat yourself on the back.

The gist is still the same. Guys would get, and fill, every tag they could, and now wonder where all the deer are.

OK, back to your hating the PGC thread.

The point was that you made it sound that the majority went out and shot four. When in fact none did legally and most didn't or couldn't shoot three because the tags were usually sold.

Make up your fairy tales for the kids, but the adults ain't buying it. Of course you could have just said you were wrong and maned up to it.

Don't hate the PGC, just expect them to do the job that we pay them to do and not be in bed with the government bureaucrats. Of course if you want to go along with the sheep so be it.

I didnt ask for DCNR to cut thousands of acres of pole timber. What I did say was to harvest what is available now. I cant talk of 4B but in 2G theres plenty of saw timber available. As far as habitat, youre trying to portray a vast wasteland. Do we have areas with low available habitat? Sure, a few previously strip mined areas. For the most part though, you can stand on any ridgetop in PA and see cuts. For how many generations now logging has been big business in PA? Theres practically no old growth forest left. Through logging we have the different stages of growth to provide for a healthy number of deer and have in the past. Sure, mast crop alone isnt going to sustain deer. But wheres the massive winter kills? Wheres the lower reproductive rates? Surely without feed those problems would show. Correct? Problem is, that hasnt happened. Dig through the PGC data, if you can. They are in the process of updating, and it can be hard to find most studies right now. Again, if you want to believe whats being spewed, go for it. Just as they like to "let the trees tell you about the habitat" I like to let the deer tell me how healthy they are. And until someone shows me studies that show evidence of starvation Ill continue to believe the PGC/DCNR went to extremes on this one.

For all the sheep out there, just wait until you young guys are told that you can't buy a license each year-maybe every 2 or 3years-because we really don't have that many deer to accommodate our large number of hunters, and they want those that do have a license to have a "quality" hunting experience.

Wake up and get involved before its to late or just baaaa, baaaa yourself at home..

Think it can't happen? Go to the Alaska guys and ask them about applying for tags to shoot a Moose or Grizzly bear and sometimes not getting one for quite awhile. And just like there you will have to share with the nonresidents. That's Alaska-there is less residents than we have hunters in a state 4times the size of Texas-this is just little old Pa.

You wont know what hit you till its over.

I'm a young guy, and I've come to the conclusion that hunting on PA public land is essentially a shot in the dark, or an exercise in futility. The PGC doesn't do a great job at managing the herd on public land, especially State Game Lands. While I do have the chance to hunt some private property with exceptional numbers of deer and quality bucks, I choose to try my chances in State Parks, Forests, and the SGL's.

I went to Ohio for the first time hunting this year, and the 15,000 acre tract of public land we hunted on was just unreal. The Ohio DNR planted unreal amounts of corn, soy, etc. to help sustain a large, healthy deer herd. While here in PA, the PGC's version of a "food plot" is a grown up CRP field or an old clearcut. I hope something changes here for the better, I'm just not positive as to what needs done.

It's to the point I'd rather spend my time and money hunting out of state, where those in power have a clue. I spent the majority of my archery and rifle season hunting an almost continuous tract of SF, SGL, and SP and didn't see anywhere near the numbers of deer that one could expect (I guess).

I spend a lot of time in Pittsburgh where I go to school, and it is almost starting to look attractive to hunt here, due to the size of the deer herd...

If people dont believe PGC/DCNR have gone to extremes, take a look at DMAP figures. We use DMAP to control unreasonably high numbers of deer correct? 2G would be the last area you'd think of as a problem area. Yet DCNR has pounded the NC region with DMAP. 2G is the only WMU that regularly experienced 20-30% DMAP harvest over tradition doe harvest. DCNR is in control, and it needs to stop.

OK, how about four deer total? Happy? If you want to fight over one tag, you're on a weak argument.



What "fairy tale" would that be? That the typical hunter is only interested in body counts? Ain't no fairy tale there.



Helluva chip you got going there. I was wrong. I said it above. I missed it by one. Or did you skip that part? Is your ego feeling better now?

I got an idea... why don't you run for PGC Commissioner or President, and then we can "pay" YOU to fix all of the problems.