Post by: 2manybows on February 19, 2007, 11:38:00 PM
I was watching the news tonight and I was shocked at what I saw.
In Mt Lebanon PA they are sending in sharpshooters to shoot off excess deer. They say they are going to go in and shoot soft bullets at them because it will be safer in the populated area. If they will drop a deer they will drop a man.
This is ridiculous. I do agree that there may be a deer pop. problem down there but why not trap them and relocate them throughout the state ? I know up here in Venango county it would be a welcome site to see a few more deer. Heck I would even volunteer to help the relocation. But to go in with so called sharpshooters is insane.
They were showing the locals down there are even camping out in the woods with protest signs.
I do not believe this is a good image for hunting all around. I think they should be able to relocate the deer. They also stated that the Department of Agriculture is the ones that are setting up the hunt.
Has anyone else in PA heard about this. Or has anyone outside the area had it done in thier neck of the woods ? It kinda reminds me of the dart shooting game show (WHO)
Post by: Rusty in Fla. on February 20, 2007, 12:55:00 AM
Rusty <><
Post by: buck-tamer00 on February 20, 2007, 03:32:00 AM
there was a forest fire,
and they wanted to kill the deer that were in the area that were goin to die eventually from stavation.
you still had to use tags,
you'd just get them over the counter for like 30 bucks if I rememeber correctly.
Post by: 702plmo on February 20, 2007, 03:56:00 AM
I have not taken part of these hunts but some friends have and they said it was a good time. The deer that were taken did not count towards you regular hunting permits.
Post by: barebow on February 20, 2007, 05:21:00 AM
Post by: LCB on February 20, 2007, 06:11:00 AM
Post by: **oneshot** on February 20, 2007, 06:29:00 AM
Post by: TimZeigler on February 20, 2007, 06:40:00 AM
Post by: jimneye on February 20, 2007, 08:17:00 AM
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 11:32:00 AM
I also believe though this is imoral. It would be very effective to go in and trap these deer and relocate them. I for one would volunteer to see these deer relocated to areas that have scarse deer populations, my back yard for one. The doe season has wiped out our deer herd up here.
I also believe they could go to the local colleges and ask them for help and as part of studies in the classrooms they can use this relocation as a Project. And i am more than sure you could ask all of those people that were on the news last night to help, and get alteast a 50% turnout from them.
They mentioned a few times in the news cast that the auto accidents are up from the deer population. And it is playing a factor in this shooting.
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 11:40:00 AM
Our deer have to contend with 2 weeks of Doe Season that run the same weeks as Buck Season, bonus tags, the game commission and insurance companies dumping coyotes.
When I was at the '05 Penninsula hunt a fellow hunter asked the game warden at the meeting before the hunt about Mountain Lions and they confirmed that they did indeed place Lions in various counties to help control the populations. On top of all of this They send "Sharpshooters" in to thin the already overall thin PA deer herd.
Just completely sick. What will the future hold for my son ? He definately will have no passion for the outdoors without deer in the woods.
How can I keep his interest in the woods with nothing to see out there ? I know when I started out , I hated waiting but I knew they were there and I would see them, now I go out just to measure the grass.
Just fustrating.
Post by: bowfiend on February 20, 2007, 11:41:00 AM
Realstically, I don't think relocation would be an effective method of population control. Animals would always move back into the area in question. I, of course, am all up for utilizing the readily available bowhunter population as a remedy. If the state gov. can send in sharpshooters, I'm sure they could arrange for hunter access to private lands.
Also, I have some family in wetsern PA (self described as Pennsyltucky) and they have a hard time finding mature bucks to fill their tags. With this in mind, it seems like a drastic reduction in the doe population would serve the remaining population well.
They should be doing it with bowhunters, though...
Post by: Minuteman on February 20, 2007, 11:43:00 AM
Perhaps you should lobby yer nat. resources dept to change the bag limits to protect yer does and bring the #'s up near you.
Post by: Wudstix on February 20, 2007, 11:48:00 AM
Post by: fflintlock on February 20, 2007, 12:05:00 PM
Just like, who wants to shoot at already spooky deer in january with a flintlock ?
I was born there, spent half of my life there, but it just ain't the same any more, I do miss the scenery though, I'll tell ya that !
Jerald
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 12:08:00 PM
The real bad part of it is I have noticed more and more posted land every year. Because landowners do not want to see the deer population diminish. I too will be posting this year. It's sad when you have to keep fellow neighbors off your land just so your so and daughters have a place to hunt in the future.
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 12:12:00 PM
I just have this bad feeling these der will be shot and thrown in a land fill by the truck loads.
Post by: Jeff Strubberg on February 20, 2007, 12:13:00 PM
Snipers are a silly option. What a waste of a resource.
Post by: vermonster13 on February 20, 2007, 01:04:00 PM
Here is a link on how effective bowhunting can be as an urban management tool. Thing is this is not a quick fix and is most effective when put into effect before the deer become so overpopulated. I would be pushing for instituting such a plan for after the snipers do their work.
http://www.wlfa.org/interactive/features/Read.cfm?ID=1954
Also you might want to post these types of threads in the Hunting Issues and Politics Forum. that way folks who are involved in this kind of stuff are much more likely to see it and help where they can. Also there is always the chance a thread like this could be deleted in Pow Wow.
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 01:12:00 PM
Jeff S. is right about a high mortality rates. The figure we used in Bow Ed classes was near 75% death rate due to shock. That figure may have been updated since I was a MBIT.
As far as insurance co's go.... that is a big farce and is easily proved yet never believed.
As far as no deer in SW PA- 2 weeks AFTER deer hunting season was over, 40 deer were sighted by my son and I, within 1/2 mile of each other on PUBLIC huntable ground, within a 10 minute walk from my house. A 1 mile diameter. PA has ALWAYS had high deer numbers in some spots and NOT in others. It's still the same, just different spots.
The shame of it all is that BOWHUNTERS- no matter what type of equipment- are being pushed aside. The taxpayers are paying $19,000 for this cull to take place, and they arent happy.
Now that the public has to pay it's only a matter of time until we see what "pull" the hunting community has in affluent, liberal suburbia. This is one to watch as the animal rights cult was behind this protest.
With a democratic government in PA, the time is prime for such a conflict to take place. You guys in Utah remember when Klinton stole the Grande Escalante?? How 'bout Kate McGinty?? She was a big part of the Klinton's team that came up with hat scheme. She is a major player in Rendell's administration.
Stayed tuned!
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 01:44:00 PM
I live in NW PA. The deer are near non-existent in my area. If you have high population where you hunt. Please invite me down for a hunt this fall. I have been 2 yrs with no meat in the freezer. I almost forget what it tastes like.
And the coyotes were proven. 5 to be exat were taken with tags, the numbers were traced to State Farm Ins. That was in 2004 and 2005.
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 01:47:00 PM
Would it be okay to post it over there ? I do not want anyone upset for posting it in 2 places ? If someone else wants to post it there it is fine by me.
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 02:03:00 PM
BTW my wife has been in the ins. business for over 25 years.
Post by: LCB on February 20, 2007, 02:44:00 PM
There is no way you will get me to buy off on the insurance company stocking yote's. If you have any understanding of coyote's you will easily understand how they got here, if you think that they kill fawns and drag them back to the den for the pups, you are mistaken again.
I would love to sit here and educate the masses on the coyote, but I got to start getting in shape for the upstream canoe trip. Dang we could be like the bald Lewis and Clark:)
Good post on the cull Dale?????
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 02:46:00 PM
It didnt take long for this thread to digress.
I ask you sir- is it more important that you have too few deer or that there is a deer kill taking place without the participation of local hunters??
The latter is of utmost importance to me.
Post by: vermonster13 on February 20, 2007, 03:22:00 PM
Post by: Ray Hammond on February 20, 2007, 03:26:00 PM
If you would spend your time DOING something positive you could kill two birds with one stone.
Take a look at www.swmnga.org (http://www.swmnga.org) That's an organization I founded in 1999 to take care of situations just like what you are talking about.
It takes time, dedication, and care to operate..it takes time dedication, and care to select members who will operate within the rules and believe in the mission. It takes time, dedication, and care to meet with potential landowner/clients and explain the benefits and win-win that the program has for all involved- the landowner, the hungry, and the hunters.
But if you will take the time to do it the landowners will see the benefit of using you, and you will have gained hunting a friend for life by your good deeds as well as provided you and the members of the organization some fantastic hunting opportunities on private ground, golf courses, subdivisions, commercial spaces, and airports as well as other areas you may run across.
If you don't like the way the rules are written, write new ones and get folks to accept them instead of complaining..that never gets any of us anywhere.
Recognize this planned extermination has NO effect on hunters good or bad- it isn't hunters at all doing it- they are USDA sharpshooters- and if you will meet with those sharpshooters they will likely become your biggest proponents with prospective landowners, helping you actually get properties to hunt on.
But, starting a hunting group to help the public with an overpopulation problem coupled with donating the venison to homeless shelters or food bank networks WILL have a positive effect on the public.
If I can help, you but need to call.
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 03:36:00 PM
How many times over the years I have heard the ole rumor about 15 fawns being found outside a coyote den?? SHOW ME PICS!!! I WILL then follow!! :readit:
Now as far as Insurance companies being behind the deer management plan:
Deer/auto collisions are considered comprehensive coverage. Should a company raise rates it is done by county, after given approval by a state board.
So if you hit a deer your insurance does not go up until the ins company asks for and is granted a raise FOR ALL POLICYHOLDERS in that area- not JUST the accident victims. The risk is then that you get mad and move your business to another company- where you face that same risk again.
Here's a similar example:
More cars are stolen in Philly(I dont remember the danged county it's in). So all things being equal(past driving record for example) your insurance for the same car would be a bit higher if you live in Philly as opposed to living here in Westmoreland, maybe even to the point if you have a sought after car.
Chuck yer welcome to hunt the mighty Loyalhanna with me! I've been offering and actually pulled the offer before last year. Yer bigger than me so ya gotta sit in back!! :bigsmyl:
Hey you ever go up to the Laurel Mountain Ski resort road??It goes over to Linn Run. They just did a timber cut there and fenced OUT the deer. So now would be a good time to start to see the effectiveness of deer exclosures, if yer interested.I'm going to take pics of different times of the year.
Thank God the moderators took this off the main forum page! WHEW! :clapper:
Post by: vermonster13 on February 20, 2007, 03:46:00 PM
If you folks want to talk about coyotes start another thread though.
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 03:52:00 PM
I was also fortunate enough to be part of a small team of bowhunters that help create the current program of the Penn. Game Commissions Advanced Bowhunter Education Program which is still mandatory, to be part of the deer management programs in the 'burgh.
The WMA groups to this point have split into 2 groups over there. Not only have I been able to "train" many of those bowhunters my students have taken over and now are the Bow Ed Instructors for those same organizations. I am VERY proud of them!!
I'm also VERY proud of the WMA groups!! Those deer management groups have done a wonderful job of thwarting the animal rights cult for many years now. As I said, now that it is OUT of the hunters hand and into the pockets of the general public.
The deer management groups take a thrashing from bowhunters that arent a prt of it. It's a shame because they have done so much good for bowhunters all over the state.
I apologize for taking this thread off topic.
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 05:34:00 PM
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 06:28:00 PM
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 07:29:00 PM
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 07:33:00 PM
So as you see it all related to my original topic.
I thank the rest of you for participating
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 08:22:00 PM
Post by: vermonster13 on February 20, 2007, 09:09:00 PM
Post by: Steve Kendrot on February 20, 2007, 09:34:00 PM
Relocating deer sounds like a nice solution to the uninformed, but the reality is it is prohibitively expensive and results in very high mortality rates for the relocated deer. Add to that the risks of disease transmission etc. and it is neither economically nor ecologically effective.
I know this because I am an employee of the USDA WS program and have been involved with this work in three states. I am also an avid traditional bowhunter. We often do recommmend recreational hunting as a management option when it is socially acceptable and realistic for controlling the problem. We have however, seen many instances where managed bowhunts have been ineffective in meeting population reduction targets.
I'm always amazed at how quick some hunters are to criticize professional wildlife managers. Do they not realize that most of us are in the field because we love to hunt and fish also? In this day of QDM, foodplots, and trail cameras, every hunter becomes a backyard biologist. Part of being a responsible conservationist is to make informed decisions. Managing wildlife is far more complicated than simply providing hunting opportunities.
Post by: 2manybows on February 20, 2007, 09:35:00 PM
Everyone has their opinions. And if Dale would like to put past comments to rest I will do the same and let the thread continue to better our sport.
Once again, I thank you for your comments.
Great Minds do not always think alike.
Post by: vermonster13 on February 20, 2007, 10:06:00 PM
http://www.mikehanback.blogs.com/
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 10:21:00 PM
Again, this area WAS being hunted by bowhunters at one time or another. The political climate is now one where ALL facets of the equation are looking other ways when it concerns bowhunters and suburbian wildlife(whitetail) management.
There ARE other methods to control animal populations, when hunting just doesnt work. We will measure the success of the hunter IF bowhunting is used to maintain that status of the herd AFTER reductions. I do not expect it to happen.
My biggest fear is that eventually there will be a way to transfer a sterilization drug to the deer herd-as well as other animals. I would bet that some college, some chemical lab or company, somewhere in this country will be using mast trees-food sources- to deliver sterilization to wildlife. A scary possibility for the entire state, whatever the habitat. Deer herd in deep snow near food sources- say a corn field or an area with much browse. These areas get treated and deer do not multiply at traditional rates.
Steve I would like your thoughts on the maintenance of these areas AFTER the reduction.
What is commonplace practice afterward??
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 20, 2007, 10:36:00 PM
My brother hunts in a group that hunts a different area around Pittsburgh. This group is controlled by the local police. I believe they determine who and how many bowhunt there. Hopefully politics will not deter any of the other programs from doing wondrous work.
Post by: vermonster13 on February 20, 2007, 10:38:00 PM
Post by: Steve Kendrot on February 20, 2007, 10:54:00 PM
I think it all depends on the specific human/deer population in question. Landowners willing to allow recreational hunting as a management tool is the first hurdle that must be leapt, and often the largest. Probably the second is the presence of a motivated, responsible, ethical, and highly self-regulated hunting community as Ray Hammond mentioned. Those two factors combined with a community with enough green space to safely hunt and minimize conflict with non-hunters would be good places for managed hunting to keep reduced herds in check. Lacking any of those three, I would say recurring culls are probably the wiser (and more effective)choice. Unfortunately, the best efforts of a volunteer force often fall short of what is needed to keep a deer herd in check.
Immuno-contraceptives (birth control) are getting lots of attention these days. My personal belief is that death is a much more natural and predictable method of population control than birth control. The concept will not go away, however, and I have little doubt the current questionably effective birth control methods will be imroved upon. I doubt to the point where they can control free ranging populations, but that won't stop people from trying and claiming it is a silver bullet. Sportsmen should follow the issue closely.
Post by: LCB on February 21, 2007, 10:33:00 AM
Chuck
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 21, 2007, 12:28:00 PM
However the only place that this is true- OUTSIDE A LAB- is the wild horse population down along the outer banks. The horses there are basically in a captive state. They are not free ranging animals like deer. In other words their location does not permit the horses to run all over the place. The IC's can be administered to the chosen animal time after time again.
Whereas deer, once a doe was given the IC's she would then have to be given it again and again and again. Hard to do here in PA or any other state that isnt an island or LAB.
IC's have been proven to be SOMEWHAT successful ONLY as long as hunting is also used as part of that management plan.
Now it's been about 4 or 5 years since I was in the BE program here but at the time I was active, this information was current.
What we will see IMHO is that sooner or later the local news stations in the 'Burgh will be plastering the homes of Pittsburgher's -and the tri-state area- with IC uses. The important FACT here is that most of 80% of those folks DO NOT HUNT. But they do vote.
Steve Do you have any current info on IC's, that would prove any different on the above wild horse scenario??
Thank You
Post by: LCB on February 21, 2007, 02:07:00 PM
Thank you for the explination.
I can't help but think that a program like this would be costly, time consuming, and eventually fail due to lack of support. How on earth could they controll the dosage?????
I understand what you mean when you speek of political support, and can see where your concerns stem from.
Thanks again.
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 21, 2007, 03:07:00 PM
Post by: Steve Kendrot on February 21, 2007, 04:03:00 PM
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 21, 2007, 10:22:00 PM
My fears are starting to come to fruition.
Imagine "laced White oak stands" as a possible scenario. Crabapple trees maybe. In small areas like this area near Pittsburgh IC's thru an edible medium may become a viable option. Or at the least we will be told that.
Steve your input has been greatly appreciated.
Thank You!
Post by: fflintlock on February 22, 2007, 11:18:00 AM
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 22, 2007, 11:47:00 AM
Post by: fflintlock on February 22, 2007, 12:36:00 PM
I was thumbing through it last night and remembered this conversation.
Post by: ratgunner on February 22, 2007, 04:38:00 PM
Post by: Steve Kendrot on February 23, 2007, 10:27:00 PM
Post by: vermonster13 on February 23, 2007, 10:48:00 PM
Post by: Ray Hammond on February 23, 2007, 11:05:00 PM
You are right, recreational bowhunters (the bowhunting public) is NOT an effective management tool.( I did not see your post ref. my website when I originally posted this) I swear I read through the whole thread before posting this...oh well, old age creepin up, I guess!)
There are other alternatives to recreational hunting- see our website and see what CAN be done with bows in urban and suburban environments- www.swmnga.org (http://www.swmnga.org)
We have 55 members and the AVERAGE member takes 6 deer per year...but many limit out on their twelve tags each season. Bowhunting, when done properly rather than just letting anyone with a bow participate, CAN be a tremendous tool in the arsenal of game departments...they just can't get past their own meager experience with recreational bowhunters...which is NOT what I am talking about.
Post by: Steve Kendrot on February 24, 2007, 12:43:00 PM
How many applicants do you receive a year? How many are denied membership? Is there a large contingent of non-member urban bowhunters in these same areas? Do you ever fight image problems caused by non-member hunters? How large is the area covered by SWMNGA? If all 55 members took their max of 12 deer that's 660 deer out of what kind of area? The relative importance as management tool is dependent on the size and geographic scope of the herd . The biggest benefit may be to individual property owners, (and that in itself is reason for the program to exist), but I wonder if on a regional level, take by your organization scratches the surface.
Again Ray, I am NOT criticizing, just looking to better understand. I have a friend in a MD housing development that is struggling with deer problems. They don't seem interested in sharpshooting, but have had limited success with bowhunting efforts. (I have not participated- BTW).
Post by: Hatchet Jack on February 24, 2007, 05:51:00 PM
Hatchet Jack
Post by: Ray Hammond on February 25, 2007, 09:23:00 PM
We get lots of applicants we turn down.There are a lot of wannabes out there, who will TELL you how great they are to get access to big bucks. We've gotten pretty good at separating the men from the boys, though.
Not everyone is cut out for this stuff- shooting does when a big buck is nearby? It's not easy..but its what you NEED to do to keep the access. We allow our guys to shoot one big buck per season..but it has to be a gagger. Most bucks taken in one season? About 6. they all broke P&Y minimums by a good margin.
we don't operate where we are not exclusive. Too many problems could be created by non members operating on the same property and our group being blamed for their actions?
We operate in 13 metro Atlanta counties. No criticism felt at all...we do too many good things for too many people for me to let anyone's opinion about us trouble me too much anyway.
We offer to help ANYONE form their own group to EXPAND the effect of what we are doing beyond our capabilities. We are always looking for opportunities to expand ourselves, as well, but I refuse to hire members and not have places for them to hunt...so its a catch 22 in that I do it for free- and have to work, as our other board members do- to earn a living. So its a labor of love.
If I made money at it I could afford to go out and find new properties every day, accept new members, and have a bigger impact.
I do not see any lack of validity to what we are doing and we are having a decided impact on the properties we do operate on..if we were not they would not be bringing us back year after year.we just don't have the numbers of guys or access to enough locations to regionally impact the deer herd- YET.
But its coming. All that has to happen is for the housewives to hit a deer with their minivan, or have their pansies eaten and their tunes change from "oh, aren't those deer cute?" to "kill every one of those flower-munching rats!"
If anyone wishes to start an urban hunting program just let me know and we will keep you from reinventing the wheel, so to speak.
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 25, 2007, 09:28:00 PM
Steve again thank you for your participation.
Your statement -"Talk that it will replace the need for hunting is a marketing tool to make it appealing to the non-hunting public." Is absolutely true. There-in lies the true goal- the non-hunting public will decide against bowhunting.
Post by: Ray Hammond on February 25, 2007, 09:34:00 PM
What can other hunters do to them besides run their mouths? If I let things other people say affect me and what I do I wouldn't ever get anything done in this world.
The do-ers do, and those that are too lazy, or inept, or too foolish to DO- well, they talk a lot!!!
You don't find too many successful folks that worry about what other people say or do- they're usually too busy getting the job done.
Starting a program like this and interacting with the 80% of our population that do not hunt and are not anti hunters yet can have more impact on future votes than all the efforts against the anti's ever will- because the great mass of people in this country, the ones who will vote for or against us, will only know the real story of hunting if we get the chance to tell it to them.
Do something positive, start your own program, and make an impact on those 80%. Save hunting for your grandchildren.
Post by: Steve Kendrot on February 25, 2007, 10:09:00 PM
Or for it, as Ray points out. Sounds like an awesome program and I hope I didn't come across as a naysayer. Ray, is your group active on any public lands (parks, etc) or is it all private?
I see Maryland has a SWWM chapter. Is there an national umbrella organization or are these groups springing up indipendently?
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 26, 2007, 02:44:00 PM
http://www.huntingpa.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/666815/an/0/page/0#Post666815
These orgs have donated thousands of lbs of venison to the food kitchens yet they get trashed. I dont live close enough to belong to the WMA areas- However when I was involved with the NBEF program I did travel there for several years to do 1 day classes.
"Do something positive, start your own program, and make an impact on those 80%. Save hunting for your grandchildren."
As for this comment I will reply to you via PM.
Post by: Dale Hajas on February 26, 2007, 03:58:00 PM
Steve the political climate in PA right now and especially Pittsburgh is very Liberal. 8 years ago the TV media would never have given these folks the airtime to show their protest. That's due mainly to the success of the whitetail management groups and a testimony to their good work. The political climate has changed.
!["[dntthnk]"]("graemlins/dntthnk.gif" "\"\"")
When I find my link to these groups I will post it. Dang I cant find it now..... :mad: