The Truth About PA, MAPRs, QDMA, and the Deer Herd by Rut
Feb 25, 2017 0:47:38 GMT -5
daappleknocker likes this
Post by ridge on Feb 25, 2017 0:47:38 GMT -5
reducing the herd, if it is overpopulated, may result in greatly increasing the number of bucks available for harvest. The highest rate of buck production occurs when a herd is reduced to about 1/2 carrying capacity.
" partial quote from Dr. Jim
THE FOLLOWING IS A REPLY BY RUT-N-STRUT accompanied by various quotes on Pennsylvania Game Management:
Lower deer numbers like Pennsylvania after they instituted MAPR's statewide.
The graph that you like to post that shows how hunky dory everything is in PA, is a graph where the PCGA grades..... ITSELF... ....There is a reason there is an investigation of the PCGA.
There is a lot more going on in PA, and your group is trying to lead Michigan into a similar statewide MAPR for Michigan.
Here are some articles of interest what is really going on in PA.
THE EMPEROR'S NEW CLOTHES PGC's Deer Team is Conducting a Masterful Campaign of Deception
www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org/pdf/emperorsnewclothes.pdf
Sportsmen and many legislators have become accustomed to the deceptive antics of the Pennsylvania Game Commission – telling sportsmen that collapsing the statewide deer herd was in their best interest, and claiming that hunters are now harvesting as many deer per year as were harvested during the heydays of Pennsylvania deer hunting in the 1970s, '80s, and '90s. In order for hunters to have harvested 352,920 deer in 2013 and 303,973 deer in 2014, there would need to be a statewide population of 1,834,847 deer – representing densities of 69 deer per square mile (dpsm) on every square mile of forested land area in the state, or 41 dpsm on every square mile of land area including forests and agricultural fields, towns and suburban backyards, playgrounds and soccer fields, roadways and parking lots, and the city streets of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Of course, PGC's claims are absurd. Their collective noses must be growing faster than forest seedling regeneration.
THE UNIFIED SPORTSMEN OF PENNSYLVANIA
www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org/deermanagement.htm
In 2000-01, John Eveland was asked by the senate majority leader to assess PGC's deer-reduction program, and again was requested by the Office of the Governor and the majority leader of the House Game and Fisheries Committee in 2007. In 2010, members of PGC's Board of Commissioners asked Eveland to prepare a new deer management plan for them in the event that they could muster a majority of votes to halt the deer-reduction program.
AN INDEPENDENT, SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT OF THE PENNSYLVANIA GAME COMMISSION'S ESTIMATED 2015 DEER HARVEST
www.gousp.org/pdf/john15harvest.pdf
Abstract. This report represents the sixth in a series of independent, scientific assessments of PGC's annual deer harvest estimates. PGC has estimated that 315,813 deer were harvested in Pennsylvania during the 2015-16 hunting season. However, the author has calculated that in order for this number to be accurate, from a biological perspective there would need to be 1.6-1.9 million deer in the state. From a geographical perspective, this number would represent 59-72 deer per square mile (dpsm) on every square mile of forestland in the state up to one acre in size, or 35-43 dpsm on every square mile of Pennsylvania land area including the city streets of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Further, from social and economic perspectives, considering that many woodlands during the fall deer season are devoid of orange coats and gun shots, that camps stand empty and for sale across the northern tier, that bankruptcies and lost family businesses proliferate throughout Potter and other northern-tier counties, and that an official Pennsylvania Legislative Budget and Finance Committee investigation reported that as of 2012 PGC's deer-reduction program was costing the Commonwealth $285 million per year, then even without the scientific evidence within this document, common sense dictates that the agency cannot be harvesting today nearly the same number of deer per year as were harvested during the heydays of deer hunting from the 1960s through the '90s – not even close. Therefore, it is again concluded that PGC's erroneous harvest claims can only be explained by incompetence or deception. This circumstance clearly exemplifies the need for change and accountability regarding PGC's deer management program.
THE MISMANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA'S DEER HERD
www.mdi.net/dml/archives/DVD-DeerMismanagemntOverView-Final.pdf
• WHY IT HAPPENED • • HOW IT WAS ACCOMPLISHED • • WHO WAS INVOLVED •
Pennsylvania Deer Herd Reduction
sakocollectors.com/forum/threads/pennsylvania-deer-herd-reduction.6702/
The Allegheny County Sportsman’s League (ACSL) sponsored an investigation by John Eveland into the Mismanagement of PA’s Deer Herd. Refer to the following website:
www.acsl-pa.org/JohnEveland.htm
John Eveland’s credentials and experience support his qualification to conduct the investigation and determine the truth about the state of the Pennsylvania Deer Herd and management by the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC). The documentation authored by Eveland is not a rant based on opinion. It is a methodically researched and professionally presented report based on facts.
RESULTS OF AN INVESTIGATION OF
PENNSYLVANIA DEER MISMANAGEMENT
www.acsl-pa.org/JohnEveland.htm
ABOUT JOHN EVELAND
Take note of this one bio, as it brings up "Chesapeake Farms" which you are so fond of.
www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org/dmseries6.htm
DEER MANAGEMENT SERIES, NO. 6: STACKING THE DECK
PGC Hired Three Deer Biologists who were all Trained at Chesapeake Farms to Eliminate Deer Impacts by Eliminating Deer.
At Chesapeake Farms, PGC's three deer biologists were trained in a deer management philosophy called Quality Deer Management—reducing deer impacts accomplished by increasing antlerless harvests toward decreasing herd size. Whereas students from most university wildlife degree programs are educated to view deer as an asset to the natural ecosystem and society, PGC's three deer biologists were trained in a setting that views deer as a negative impact-causing element with little to no emphasis placed on the value of deer, the tradition of recreational hunting, and sportsmen. Hence, PGC's deer biologists brought with them from Chesapeake Farms a wildlife management philosophy that was better suited for private organizations such as Audubon and the Sierra Club than for a traditional state game management agency.
" partial quote from Dr. Jim
THE FOLLOWING IS A REPLY BY RUT-N-STRUT accompanied by various quotes on Pennsylvania Game Management:
Lower deer numbers like Pennsylvania after they instituted MAPR's statewide.
The graph that you like to post that shows how hunky dory everything is in PA, is a graph where the PCGA grades..... ITSELF... ....There is a reason there is an investigation of the PCGA.
There is a lot more going on in PA, and your group is trying to lead Michigan into a similar statewide MAPR for Michigan.
Here are some articles of interest what is really going on in PA.
THE EMPEROR'S NEW CLOTHES PGC's Deer Team is Conducting a Masterful Campaign of Deception
www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org/pdf/emperorsnewclothes.pdf
Sportsmen and many legislators have become accustomed to the deceptive antics of the Pennsylvania Game Commission – telling sportsmen that collapsing the statewide deer herd was in their best interest, and claiming that hunters are now harvesting as many deer per year as were harvested during the heydays of Pennsylvania deer hunting in the 1970s, '80s, and '90s. In order for hunters to have harvested 352,920 deer in 2013 and 303,973 deer in 2014, there would need to be a statewide population of 1,834,847 deer – representing densities of 69 deer per square mile (dpsm) on every square mile of forested land area in the state, or 41 dpsm on every square mile of land area including forests and agricultural fields, towns and suburban backyards, playgrounds and soccer fields, roadways and parking lots, and the city streets of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Of course, PGC's claims are absurd. Their collective noses must be growing faster than forest seedling regeneration.
THE UNIFIED SPORTSMEN OF PENNSYLVANIA
www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org/deermanagement.htm
In 2000-01, John Eveland was asked by the senate majority leader to assess PGC's deer-reduction program, and again was requested by the Office of the Governor and the majority leader of the House Game and Fisheries Committee in 2007. In 2010, members of PGC's Board of Commissioners asked Eveland to prepare a new deer management plan for them in the event that they could muster a majority of votes to halt the deer-reduction program.
AN INDEPENDENT, SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT OF THE PENNSYLVANIA GAME COMMISSION'S ESTIMATED 2015 DEER HARVEST
www.gousp.org/pdf/john15harvest.pdf
Abstract. This report represents the sixth in a series of independent, scientific assessments of PGC's annual deer harvest estimates. PGC has estimated that 315,813 deer were harvested in Pennsylvania during the 2015-16 hunting season. However, the author has calculated that in order for this number to be accurate, from a biological perspective there would need to be 1.6-1.9 million deer in the state. From a geographical perspective, this number would represent 59-72 deer per square mile (dpsm) on every square mile of forestland in the state up to one acre in size, or 35-43 dpsm on every square mile of Pennsylvania land area including the city streets of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Further, from social and economic perspectives, considering that many woodlands during the fall deer season are devoid of orange coats and gun shots, that camps stand empty and for sale across the northern tier, that bankruptcies and lost family businesses proliferate throughout Potter and other northern-tier counties, and that an official Pennsylvania Legislative Budget and Finance Committee investigation reported that as of 2012 PGC's deer-reduction program was costing the Commonwealth $285 million per year, then even without the scientific evidence within this document, common sense dictates that the agency cannot be harvesting today nearly the same number of deer per year as were harvested during the heydays of deer hunting from the 1960s through the '90s – not even close. Therefore, it is again concluded that PGC's erroneous harvest claims can only be explained by incompetence or deception. This circumstance clearly exemplifies the need for change and accountability regarding PGC's deer management program.
THE MISMANAGEMENT OF PENNSYLVANIA'S DEER HERD
www.mdi.net/dml/archives/DVD-DeerMismanagemntOverView-Final.pdf
• WHY IT HAPPENED • • HOW IT WAS ACCOMPLISHED • • WHO WAS INVOLVED •
Pennsylvania Deer Herd Reduction
sakocollectors.com/forum/threads/pennsylvania-deer-herd-reduction.6702/
The Allegheny County Sportsman’s League (ACSL) sponsored an investigation by John Eveland into the Mismanagement of PA’s Deer Herd. Refer to the following website:
www.acsl-pa.org/JohnEveland.htm
John Eveland’s credentials and experience support his qualification to conduct the investigation and determine the truth about the state of the Pennsylvania Deer Herd and management by the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC). The documentation authored by Eveland is not a rant based on opinion. It is a methodically researched and professionally presented report based on facts.
RESULTS OF AN INVESTIGATION OF
PENNSYLVANIA DEER MISMANAGEMENT
www.acsl-pa.org/JohnEveland.htm
ABOUT JOHN EVELAND
Take note of this one bio, as it brings up "Chesapeake Farms" which you are so fond of.
www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org/dmseries6.htm
DEER MANAGEMENT SERIES, NO. 6: STACKING THE DECK
PGC Hired Three Deer Biologists who were all Trained at Chesapeake Farms to Eliminate Deer Impacts by Eliminating Deer.
At Chesapeake Farms, PGC's three deer biologists were trained in a deer management philosophy called Quality Deer Management—reducing deer impacts accomplished by increasing antlerless harvests toward decreasing herd size. Whereas students from most university wildlife degree programs are educated to view deer as an asset to the natural ecosystem and society, PGC's three deer biologists were trained in a setting that views deer as a negative impact-causing element with little to no emphasis placed on the value of deer, the tradition of recreational hunting, and sportsmen. Hence, PGC's deer biologists brought with them from Chesapeake Farms a wildlife management philosophy that was better suited for private organizations such as Audubon and the Sierra Club than for a traditional state game management agency.
