Deer Density Study Advertisement

[jowi11]

I recently started hearing an ad on the radio referring to a deer density study the game commission did, I think it says in Lehigh county. The game commission used thermal imaging and claimed 48 deer per square mile. A private group (gun club/association) used the same equipment on the same area and found far fewer deer. I believe they said 8 per square mile. I haven't trusted much of anything the game commission had said for years now, but just wondering if anyone else has heard these ads and any thoughts.

[Remington788]

What are they advertising for?

[jowi11]

What are they advertising for?

They are suggesting contacting state politicians for an investigation of the game commission's handling of the deer herd and licenses. I don't exactly trust the game commission because I have personally seen a huge decline in deer numbers in my years of hunting, but getting politicians involved seems like the only way to guarantee a worse outcome. My personal policy is not to trust politicians any farther than I could throw them and even less on some of the smaller ones.

[Remington788]

Try to catch who is behind it next time you here it. Maybe they have a website we can check out.

Or check the radio station site.

[jowi11]

I'll have to listen for it again, but I did some looking online and found the same information under the Eastern Pennsylvania Firearms Coalition. It is listing support for HB 2083.

[Hodgie]

Up here in Monroe there is certainly no shortage of deer or bear for that matter. Without knowing who's behind the ad as well as their agenda I wouldn't put much into it. Why is a single private gun club doing a study and just how did they go about it compared to the game commission? There are many questions to be asked before I would jump on the PGC conspiracy train.

[Hodgie]

I'll have to listen for it again, but I did some looking online and found the same information under the Eastern Pennsylvania Firearms Coalition. It is listing support for HB 2083.

Posted: May 3, 2016 09:49 AM
From: Representative David M. Maloney, Sr.
To: All House members
Subject: Wildlife Management and Accountability

In the near future, I plan to introduce legislation to improve wildlife management and recreational hunting in this Commonwealth. The proposal aims to address the concerns raised by parties who have been involved in the game management issue, including sportsmen, foresters, environmentalists, camp owners, as well as outdoor-related family business owners.

Hunting is an activity that is valued and enjoyed by numerous Pennsylvanians, however, without sufficient oversight and accountability, we will continue to see the alarming reduction in the Commonwealth’s wildlife population including our State Bird the Ruffed Grouse and the associated loss of sportsmen and family businesses throughout our rural communities. Among other provisions, my proposal would allow us to return to traditional separate buck and doe seasons and a maximum sustained yield method of deer management. The maximum sustained population will be determined by a newly established and independent Forest and Wildlife Advisory Council, which will scientifically determine the health of the forest and its capacity to sustain wildlife for both sport hunting and recreational activities of the public. This advisory council will work in cooperation with the Game Commission and DCNR to initiate a new habitat enhancement program that will increase the multiple-use recreational, scientific, social, and economic benefits of public and private forestlands throughout the Commonwealth.

These changes would come at a critical time especially for businesses in the outdoor industry which rely heavily on ample deer and wildlife populations for their success. It is estimated that this legislation could generate up to $400 million per year in jobs and economic activity that is impacting rural communities because of the lack of deer, providing an annual return of $1,600,000 for every $10,000 invested by the Commonwealth.

Please join me in co-sponsoring this important piece of legislation. Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Sounds like a lot of politician speak looking for new regs for things that haven't been clearly defined in this bill. When I hear things like "benefit outdoor business" I start to think limited access for everyone else except for the business. When we hear "environmentalists" who are we really talking about wildlife biologists, outdoor sportsman, or PETA?

I've seen crap like this in other states proposed and it was NOT in the benefit of the people who weren't paid outfitters or the "environmentalists" who hate hunters.

[dk99358]

The Game Commission/DCNR did several near Rockton/ParkerDam/Clearfield several years ago. One grid area had like 8 deer, another 12, a third had 128 if I remember the data right. The data is probably online somewhere but...

I know I'm seeing a lot of deer this year, I think last winter was mild enough to translate into more deer births this spring.

Dale

[Remington788]

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...io.cfm?id=1226

[jowi11]

The more I looked into this whole thing the less I like the idea. The only suggestion politicians give is spend more tax payer money we don't have and create some more regulations to screw the people that follow the law. No thanks. I'm not a big fan of the game commission, but they still are and always will be much better at what they do than politicians could ever hope to be.

I've heard a few people saying this year looks pretty good for deer. My renters said there were 26 deer in my hay field one evening. But a 4 acre open hay surrounded by neighbors doesn't really work for hunting. My personal rant is that private land hunting leases have done the most damage to us public land hunters. I've met several farmers around public land who are complaining that they are overrun with deer and the guys paying to hunt won't shoot anything but big buck so I may get some more opportunities thanks to the greed of others. I guess it eventually balances out.