Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Deer Hunting

Where did all the PA deer go?

Uploaded on December 21, 2010

My passion for hunting, specifically white-tail deer, started when my dad took me hunting for the first time when I was 13 (about 11 years ago). He took me to his old stomping grounds in the Allegheny National Forest of Pennsylvania. His stories of hunting with his family and friends and seeing herds and herds of does (few small bucks) excited me, and on my first trip I lived what I had always believed and got my first deer, a very small doe. The next year was pretty similar, but as the seasons went on it became harder and harder to find any deer. I haven't hunted in Pennsylvania in the last two years do to my job, but my dad still goes and it's always the same bleak story. My philosophy is that, every year, I want to go to deer camp just to see family, friends, play cards and drink beer and if I even get a chance to shoot at a deer for some good meat, then I had a great time. But, it's literally been years since I have seen a deer in Pennsylvania, and since I'm an out of stater, I'm not even fortunate to see a doe permit! Where in the heck did all the deer go?

Top Rated
All Replies
from steve182 wrote 3 years 16 weeks ago

Like you i grew up seeing herds of deer in the Northern Pa. deer woods. Rarely a buck though. Today i see fewer deer but still see plenty. This year i hunted 4 full days in Archery season and saw multiple bucks every day. I did see more bucks than does but that was coincidental i believe. During rifle, which i couldn't make, our camp saw many does and few bucks. There're still plenty of deer in the penn woods. Hope your luck changes.

-6 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 3 years 16 weeks ago

I grew up hunting in Central PA in the mid-70's and 80's. It wasn't uncommon to see a dozen deer a day. Getting a doe during the two day doe season wasn't a great feat but I was sixteen before I got a buck. I was estatic because it was a "huge" 6 point.

Those days are gone. I live in North Central PA now. Most hunters here won't see a dozen deer in 5 years of hunting. Deer numbers are definitely way down. The number of hunters are also way down. Deer have become even more nocturnal than ever, especially during the rifle season.

But...buck numbers and big buck numbers are way up. With the antler restrictions, I've seen and taken beautiful bucks each year but one for the last 5 years. (8+ points). The key is scouting and being able to spend a lot of time in the woods. You need to know where the deer are and aren't. (They aren't everywhere anymore.) It may take me six weeks of archery hunting and/or two weeks of rifle hunting to see a dozen deer but chances are several of these will be nice bucks. ("Seeing" and "bagging" are different things.)

I share your concerns though. Can you hunt 20 days a year for deer? Because deer numbers are way down and hunting for days at a time without seeing deer can often be the norm, I know a lot of people have quit the sport. I don't see many young hunters in the woods. I think a balance has to be struck between the demands of the car insurance and timber companies who would like to see every deer dead and interests of sportsmen. I love the antler restrictions but think we've gone too far with the "if it's brown shoot it down, philosophy" pushed onto the Game Commission by special interests. (Yes, I've found those spike bucks that some slob shot and left dead in the woods because he took a shot at the first deer that walked by.)

But I think if you wait it out, as hunter numbers continue to drop, you will see more deer. I've seen an increase in deer numbers over the past 3 years after a very dramatic drop from 2000 to 2007. Fewer hunters equals more deer. But...what does that mean for the longterm future of hunting in Pennsylvania? Apparently, the anti-hunters are looking at mandatory deer birth control .

Anyhow...that's my thoughts.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 3 years 16 weeks ago

The scaling back of the 2 week doe season to a week or whatever it is now in 2g where i hunt will definitely help bring deer numbers back up a bit. The days of seeing 30 deer a day in the penn woods are certainly long gone(at least in the North), but i have had very few days afield in recent memory where i failed to see a deer. In pa that is. In NJ it happens daily.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from bobbyirwin81 wrote 3 years 15 weeks ago

The deer in northern PA have declined drastically over the past 25 years because of overhunting. They are few and far between, but there are some monster bucks in the Alegheny Forest and surrounding areas. If you want to see many deer in PA , go south. The numbers of deer in the SW portion of the state are impressive.
The archery hunting is great , and many nice bucks are taken every year.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahunter30 wrote 3 years 15 weeks ago

I hunt deer all seasons in PA (exclusively on public land) and see deer consistently. I frequently speak to other public land hunters who say that they don't see anything. When I ask where they hunt, they usually tell me about some spot 50 yards off the road where they hang a stand and sit from 6 to 11 and 2 to 6. The fact of the matter is that if you want to see deer, you have to go where others aren't willing to go, and stay in the woods when everyone else goes out for lunch and heat. That usually means long hilly walks, thick brush, prickers, burrs, numb fingers and toes, ect. If your lucky, it will also mean a long painful drag out. For some reason it also seems to me that the guys who come out empty handed look like they won the lottery and emptied out a Cabelas with the proceeds. Hunting hard has been the difference for me year after year. Not sweet private land or mountains of gear. Take it from someone who lives and hunts here. There are lots of deer if your willing to study a bit and work harder than the next guy. There's my 2 cents.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerhunterrick wrote 3 years 15 weeks ago

Way to go pahunter30. You have to be willing to work for your deer. if you want to see deer 50 yards off the road go to a deer park or zoo. The deer have not moved out of state, nor have they all gone nocturnal. Fact of the matter is that too many deer hunters are not hunters at all. Deer are not stupid animals, you get a bunch of beer drinking fools with guns smelling up the woods and they go where they can fell safe. Amazed that anyone would even put beer drinking in with deer hunting. To all you beer drinking, smoking, non scouting, weekend shooting, wanna be deer hunters.Deer hunting is not something you can just shoot a few arrows or bullets a year sport and walk into a Walmart parking lot and see a deer sport. It's a knowledge based sport that requires skills and time.Favre didn't take off practices and just show up one day to throw the football around, did he? No. You don't perform brain surgery with a filet knife and a popular mechanic either.Starting by reading everything you can about whitetails. Then spend countless hours learning how they survive. Don't skim and there are no short cuts. The deer are alive and well in Pa. They got smarter by learning just how dumb humans are.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahunter30 wrote 3 years 14 weeks ago

Just as an example, I was out this past Saturday till about 1pm with the bow (on public land) and filled my last doe tag. I saw 9 deer in 6 hours. I didn't see one other hunter. I guess nobody really wants to shoot a deer?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from scratchgolf72 wrote 3 years 14 weeks ago

i hunt in 2A and have never had a problem seeing deer, i hunt public lands in Greene County. Im a Michigan resident so i typically only drive out and hunt opening day there. past 2 opening days ive hunted ive seen a 4,6, 8, 8, and 10 point bucks (i shot the two 8 points). and ill usually see 5-6 does a day. all i can say is south western deer numbers are great. My dad is from Pittsburgh and has hunted there all his life, and if there is one thing ive learned from him its go where the people arent, and those words of wisdom have seemed to help me alot when hunting PA's public lands.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from .300winmag wrote 3 years 13 weeks ago

About 8 years ago when I was seven was the last of the good deer years up at my grandfathers camp. They built it in 1953, and about 30 years ago seems like the golden age of deer herds in pa, where story goes that you could empty your quiver or your box of muzzleloader balls in a day. Last year walked for seven miles in 8 hours and saw two deer running 500 yds away. To many people and too long a doe season. People are seeing less deer and not coming back up so the heard is starting to make a comeback

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 3 years 13 weeks ago

.300winmag, I guess I'd suggest hunting pockets where you'd be lucky to see a deer at 50 yards. You'll need to scout out these places and find areas that are being used as bedding and hiding areas, the thicker the better.

As for what seems like an invitation for all the Northern PA hunters to come south and help all of you with your massive deer herd, be careful what you wish for. We got the deer under control here. Do you want more hunters down there on what little public land there is? Or, are you inviting us on to some of the private-posted land?

Actually, even with few deer, I'm not trading a hunting experience for me that begins when I walk out the back door and ends when I get tired of wandering. A 3 hour drive for hunting in the suburbs isn't for me. "God's Country" means wide open spaces, no posted land, and certainly more than ever, no other hunters. Life is about tradeoffs I guess.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pat Simpson wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

They really screwed up the deer herd in Pa. Ive never heard so much complaining. And its coming from all corners of the state. 2G, 2F, 2C, 2A, are some that i hear the most complaints about as well as others.

I think the agency needs to be held responsible for their actions. Firings are in order and some have been calling for just that. There are some environmental extremists apparently within the agency it has been found, and some others were involved as well when it came to putting the plan into place. I saw an extensive report that was posted that came from the largest sportsmen group in pa. ACSL. And it is very eye opening. Absolutely incredible that this could actually be permitted to go on.

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Sorry Pat. As of early this month, the Game Commission has permission to continue business as usual. The Unified Sportsmen lawsuit challenging the Game Commission's deer management practices has been dismissed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20110209/pl_usnw/DC45396

The management plan will continue to focus on a major reduction in deer numbers statewide with the particular emphasis on applying practices that have worked in the north central part of the state toward the rest of the state.

There's no arguing that the Game Commission has been effective so far. Look at management area 2G for example where doe numbers have fallen so much that there are more bucks than does in the overall population. Now that the tipping point has been reached in 2G, a continued focus on anterless harvests there will all but eliminate deer as a threat to the timber industry within 3 or 4 years in that particular WMU.

So all of you down-state, grab up all the doe tags, bonus tags, and DMAP tags you can...and if you have some private land, take down your posted signs while your at it (or at least invite me down to hunt) I've changed my mind about the 3 hour drive. Let's see if we can all bag 4 or 5 deer in 2011 in your neck of the woods!

In the meantime, the real forest issues in Pennsylvania - acid rain, climate change, and non native insects are being ignored in terms of the quick fix of all but eliminating the whitetailed deer because they browse on hardwood seedlings.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

allegnmtn, I bowhunted 2G four days this year, saw about 18 deer (while hunting) and about 2/3 of them were bucks. My uncle a mile away saw 6 or 7 bucks chasing a single doe. Most of my camp saw more bucks than doe that week. I agree they went to far with the doe kill the past several years, but they have started to level off on that. I'm willing to take a wait and see attitude. A level buck to doe ratio can create some really good hunting. It is a little harder on the kids who want to see 20 deer a day though.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from scrawford8872 wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Southern PA has a great deer population.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Deer numbers suck here in this part of 2a. 55,000 tags obliterated them. Maybe some off limits not hunting highly posted lands like parts of all units have lots of deer... But not here.

Its a joke. The tags need slashed.

There are less in areas like 2g and there should be. The mature woods and all the other things effecting those forests there....you cant hold nearly as many deer as the better areas of the state.

So man up, learn to hunt, or quit trying to throw "the other guy" under the bus while you try to lobby for "your little area".

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pat Simpson wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

"Sorry Pat. As of early this month, the Game Commission has permission to continue business as usual. The Unified Sportsmen lawsuit challenging the Game Commission's deer management practices has been dismissed"

Sorry Pat? I didnt say anything at all about Unified sportsmen or a lawsuit. Ive heard about it, but it doesnt have anything at all to do with anything ive said.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahollowhunter wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Pat Simpson is right. These guys need to get out and kill some deer. Me and my dad and my brother got 8 last year. We're going to get 12 this year. The game commission is doing a good job. I love hunting deer in PA

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 3 years 1 week ago

Pahollowhunter, you are a joke. This is one of the enviromentalist nuts that doesnt even hunt but is trying to do damage control. He posts on about 5 other boards under various handles. Reason i know this, is because he has said the exact same thing, and hes been tracked to other sites under one of those aliases talking badly about hunters and promoting a "hands off" ecosystem.

Real Nut this'n.

Btw, you cant read, Pat didnt say one word about the gameless commission doing a good job.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 3 years 1 week ago

FIRE ROSENBERRY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!

+12 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahollowhunter wrote 3 years 1 week ago

Nope. For real. Live in South PA. Lots of deer to shoot here. And like our game warden says if we don't kill about half of them soon there going to come in like they are around Philly and shoot them for us. I say get out and get a few deer. Don't need the government doing it.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 45 weeks ago

I'm ok with the negatives by those who disagree with me as i'm not always right. I've found personally that there are plenty of deer still in the Penn woods. Perhaps hunting skills are waning.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 45 weeks ago

Perhaps your a blowhard.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

"Southern PA has a great deer population."

Southern Pa HAD a great deer population.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from mdpaulus wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

I have never hunted hunted PA so I do not know the situation. However I am with the game and parks in south dakota and will start by saying the commission has reasons for every move they make. It sounds to me like there is a concern because there is less deer than in the past. This could be a good thing because there is a "carrying capacity" for the deer population and to maintain a healthy deer population, the total deer per acre better be less than the carrying capacity. I would imagine there are plenty of deer around it just a matter of finding land with higher carrying capacities. From reading all the post it seems that southern PA has higher carrying capacity than does northern PA. My guess is that before the deer herd was over the carrying capacity and that raised concern within the game commission and they are trying to get the herd back into check with what the land can handle before something bad happens and the deer herd kills itself off.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from PigHunter wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Ignore the -1's with this bunch. F&S points are meaningless anyway. It's obvious the tactic is to flood discussions about PA deer management with multiple accounts, either with multiple people or many accounts belonging to the same person. It doesn't matter which, the results are the same. This is an attempt to shut down reasonable discussion.

Make a statement against the current game commission and/or note the lower deer population and you get 'rewarded' with 6 to 7 +1's. Defend the game commission or give an opinion that there are plenty of deer and you will get 'punished' with 6 to 7 -1's. One 'person' states his opinion about how bad the game commission is or how 'stupid' another poster is and very quickly one of the 'buddy' accounts will agree.

Being so bold as to state your contrary opinion will earn you personal attacks. They will research your earlier posts to try and find weaknesses. The 'friends' of this person will join in with such childishness as questioning someone's gender, accuse them of being a poster from another site, and try and portray them as being 'environmentalist' and not really hunters.

If you are secure in your opinion/gender/hunting ability/etc. then just ignore these 'people'. As for me, I don't hunt in PA and couldn't care less about the deer population there. Not my problem...

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Pighunter, it appears yo are simply doing damage control to help out your "friend". The persons gender was questioned because some comments "he/she" made, were WORD FOR WORD the exact same posts made on another popular hunting message board.

I am not surprised that the plusses and minusses are flying, due to the fact that your "FRIEND" made a post asking that some of you pile them up on other users, including me. Guess that plan backfired, because people can see right through the lame arguments and personal attacks....then whine when they get the exact same in return.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

"Being so bold as to state your contrary opinion will earn you personal attacks. They will research your earlier posts to try and find weaknesses"

TO make a long story short about pighunters very selective memory, someone said their hunting was fine... But less than a year ago made a post, still in place on this site, saying they didnt even own a gun and had never hunted!!! Am i lying about that too pig hunter?? You are getting to sound just like another id of one irrational antideer environmentalist.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

"As for me, I don't hunt in PA and couldn't care less about the deer population there. Not my problem..."

Then i guess you have no reason to post in these threads unless you are lonely or simply looking to stir the pot and argue.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Btw, noone flooding anything with posts or minuses except you biguy, but failing miserably. Hunter of Pa are VERY passionate and usually dont put up with lies and bs being posted on the topic. Sorry about your luck.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

PGHUNTER SAYS: ""Ignore the -1's with this bunch. F&S points are meaningless anyway. It's obvious the tactic is to flood discussions about PA deer management with multiple accounts, either with multiple people or many accounts belonging to the same person."

I SAY: It seems to me it was you and your other alias that made the thread asking people to inundate denny with plusses and minusses because you were losing sadly in the debate? Now you are whining because it backfired and people have seen the truth thanks to Denny and others pointing it out.

Pig says: Make a statement against the current game commission and/or note the lower deer population and you get 'rewarded' with 6 to 7 +1's.

I say: So? If people dont agree thats fine and their perogative. The ones i see arent loaded with minuses just for mentioning lower deer populations. The ones i see loaded are the ones with 1) lies told by "known" liars, characters making strong untrue statements. 2) same type as 1, but with personal attacks and false allegations levied against other posters.

Pig says: Defend the game commission or give an opinion that there are plenty of deer and you will get 'punished' with 6 to 7 -1's.

So? People strongly disagree. If you lived here you would know this. Tell me the game commission is doing a good job and i'll minus you all day long. Its a ridiculous statement to make unless you are an audubon nitwit or forester.

As far as being plenty of deer, the facts speak for themselves. Buck harvest was 200,000 plus. Last few years its been in the 109 to 122,000 range. And more reductions are on the way. And the harvest total is with the ridiculous reporting percentage applied to bloat the numbers. The actual harvest reported is usually like 40,000 bucks!--- In a state with 900,000 hunters!

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Pighunter says: As for me, I don't hunt in PA and couldn't care less about the deer population there. Not my problem...

I say: Way to support your fellow hunters.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Some good links that might enlighten our friends.

http://foac-pac.org/dmdocuments/DVD-DeerMismanagemntOverView-Final.pdf

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

The largest sportsmen group in the state backs Mr. Eveland and does not support pgc at all.

The second largest has taken legal actions against pgc.

Those things alone should point any reasonable person to the fact there are severe problems.

All those people are not unskilled, clueless louts wanting a deer behind every tree.

The hunters in my area belong to none of those groups, and noone i know would take a leak on the game commission if they were on fire.

I know this sounds harsh to outsiders or those not overly familiar with our situation. But there is no longer nice ways to address the game commission. Most here wish they did not even exist.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kevin Ortz wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

I have been looking into the Pa Audubon society. I never realized how radical they were.

I read one article from a Ted Williams asking that fellow environmentalists take officer positions in sportsmen groups, post as hunters on some of the message boards and other things... So that their political voice could be magnified. That guy had 2 or 3 similar articles, i believe one was titled GUNS & GREENS or something like that.

I read anothe audubon article that basically proves what everland has been saying. And i found it right on Audubons websight. From Audabahns website;

***Alt had been on the job only two years when Audubon Pennsylvania and a coalition of environmentalists and sportsmen called the Pennsylvania Habitat Alliance hired 10 eminent scientists to prescribe ecosystem-based deer management for the East, with Pennsylvania the case study.****

Seems to parellell everlands claims.

Here is the link to that one.

http://www.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite0507.html

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from mdpaulus wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Denny,
Obviously carrying capacity has everything to do with it. From everything I have read they did this because the forest production was falling and could not maintain itself, which is first sign of over population. Second it says that they were concerned with deer herd health with would be a concern with a large deer herd. So you can bash them and they might be as you say they are but from the true scientific papers they had their reasons and rightfully so. Now to take it to the extreme they did that might not be necessary but I do no live/ or work there so I don't know what the land can handle. Here in the good grazing land we can have 1-2 deer per acre. But in a good mature forest it is not that high. I wish all you PA hunters luck and hopefully it all works out for you in the end.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from PigHunter wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

LOL, you proved my point ;-)

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

IF YOU SEE PLENTY OF DEER IN PA YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY AN IDIOT AND WILL HAVE YOUR PRECIOUS POINTS TAKEN!!!

Hmm. Who looks stupid here? Those seeing deer and saying so, or those that are whining and giving out dings?

If you drink a bunch of beer the night before and smell like it, then go sit on the same stump you've always sat on for years, you won't see deer. Period.

Hunting involves scouting and using your brain. The deer aren't obligated to show up within range. You have to find them.

As to where all the deer in PA are? ALL OVER THE DAD-GUM ROADS! I drive across both northern, central and southern PA yearly and see PLENTY. I have to watch out for them.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I dont see a tenth of the deer from the roads we used to see here in unit 2-A.

The herd is being smashed by sixty thousand doe tags.

That is where the deer went.

I also think some people should be fired at the commission.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Last weekend in 2G i saw a good number of bucks, does and fawns, although this is the time of year they like to show themselves so i know it means little. I'm fairly confident come hunting season i'll be able to find a few of them.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Unit 2a has been reduced severely and what you are seeing tyty is exactly what the pgc data tells us. The buck harvest is the determining factor used to guage herd size trends growing stable or reducing.

Here are the buck harvests for last several years as compiled by the audit:

2000--13700
2001--11600
2002--9900
2003--7500
2004--7800
2005--8500
2006--8100
2007--6600
2008--6700
2009--6800
2010--5800

Hardly stable. lm-a-o. Rosenberry himself even finally admitted at the April pgc meeting that the herd in 2a has been reduced even more over the last several years that STABIZATION was supposed to have been the case. Apparently some of the commissioners where wisened up to the fact and put him on the spot about further reductions despite claims of stabilization. He had no choice but to acknowledge,since the data spoke for itself. This was also the summary of the antlerless allocation recommendation report and also can be seen on the recorded april meeting on the pgc website.

The audit conclusions & opinions were nothing more than a fraud and it had been pointed out on here many times that the audit was a hand picked audit actually dont by a company whose chairman and other high ranking employee were previous PGC executive director and deputy exec. director that was fired for payroll manipulation allegations.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kevin Ortz wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Boy, i'm taking a beating here.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I'm not worried about it at all, just making fun.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Ready to see some -1's to fly in folks? I have been putting off commenting on anything related to PA deer management for about 2 weeks now, but I'm getting to the point where I can't hold out any longer."

Wow. No self control as well as a liar.

" 1. First off, lets look at the data presented by deerz1. It covers only 1 WMU in the entire state and shows a steady decline in buck harvests."

We could just as easily point to just about every single unit in the state which have also been reduced according to the annual reports data.

"because in 2004 the PGC switched from using county based management units to habitat based management units. In other words, you're not comparing "apples to apples" throughout your data set."

WRONG> The data was compiled in the SAME format in the AUDIT. IF you had any clue what you were talking about, youd have known this.

" This being the case, lets look at 2004 forward and only look at the does (since its the doe harvest that needs to remain stable, not the bucks):"

You dont look at the DOES! lmao. The allocations control doe harvests. Also the doe harvests DECREASED even though the allocations INCREASED! lma o.

Roseberry himself said the herd had been further reduced, there is no conspiracy theory or big secret...at least not any more. All along he claimed stabilization until the lies were pointed out. See the recorded video of the April pgc meeting on the pgc website. Going off half cocked again biguy/extremist.

"2. After sifting through all of the conspiracy theories that Eveland writes about,"

Documented facts that even a kid can crosscheck for themselves if they care to put forth the efforts.

"3. The lack of regeneration in PA is NOT caused by acid deposition. If it were, then you would see the exact same lack of regeneration INSIDE of deer exclosures that you see outside of them. Instead, what you see is a jungle inside a deer exclosure, and nothing but ferns outside."

Acid rain effects growth and effects plant abilities to recover from browsing or outgrow the browsing pressure. And invasive species, timbering practices etc. are all well known and proven contributors that effect regeneration and magnify effects of normal deer browsing.

"5. PA's deer herd is most limited by the abundance (or lack-there-of) of winter food sources."

Wrong. The carrying capacy overwinter has been PROVEN in many areas to be double what it is no. Its only limited by nearly 2 million total deer tags! Unreal. lol

"6. This year we had WINTERKILL!"

HA Ha Ha! ....No we didnt. No significant winterkill. Nada. Nyet. Even through our all time high density years winter kill was a nonissue and very insignificant according to Pa records, no more significant than any other similar northern retion of the nation. Also with high harvests and 1.6 million deer, Seems we had plenty surviviing! lma o.

"Winter kill should not happen in PA. The winters here, even in the northern parts of the state, are mild in comparison to the ADKs of NY and throughout New England."

Wrong. We should and we will, at minimal numbers, and especially in harsh years. The ADK's speak for themselves. High winter kill due to harsh winters will not ALLOW the herd to grow. Ours has been proven to grow and flourish at FAR higher densities, thereby alleviating your cockandbull story.

A". If you want to read more on what I'm talking about, check this out: http://huntamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?3990-Evelands-claims-shot-do... and http://skunkinthewoodpile.com/?p=3456"

That says heaps about you. Frequenting the site of the antideer queen herself. The commissioner responsible for putting together the deer plan. the most environmentally extreme commissioner of our 100 year history.

"8) You have the power to influence your local deer herd. Statewide management changes do not need to take place when you could be putting in effort to manipulate your own hunting experience. "

The average guys do not. If you dont own land, and the HUGE percentage do not, whether you like it or not. Not a reasonable or rational solution to anything other than taking the blame from where it belongs.

"Alright...I'm done...let the -1s roll in!"

You expect it, because you realize completely that what you said there is complete bunk and aside from your other aliases everyone else knows it.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://www.acsl-pa.org/pdf/eveland_makes_population_progress_crunch2.pdf

Thanks for the article. Now those are the fact.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Bioguy, as i see it, your problem is you are not well educated on these issues and you also state completely untrue proven false statements and push them as fact. I will not even try to figure out if it is intentional or just due to lack of knowledge on the topic. But either way, you then turn 'round and whine that your *opinions* arent accepted by others. I dont think anyone has a problem with another person giving *opinions* no matter what they are. But pushing complete mistruths on an already controversial topic is not the way to make many friends.

Those are just my thoughts on the matter.

Since you want it so bad -1 for you on the way.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

10 Modern Myths about Hunting in PA.
http://www.pabucks.com/10Modern.html

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I have been following this. By my count Bioguy/crookedstick/liljohn/treehorn have all used alot of the same phrases and arguments, posted shortly after each other, including in the middle of the night minutes apart! lol. Also always attacking the same users. Funny thing is all of his aliasses arent doing him any good other than make him look even more foolish.

Moderators really need to can this clown and his pgc luvin' aliases.

Just an observers 2 cents.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

PA: Eveland, his critical report create buzz
http://outdoornews.com/pennsylvania/news/article_5c60e12c-2295-11e0-ac4f...

Described by some as given to extremes and self-aggrandizement, Eveland has allied himself with the Allegheny County Sportsmen's League in the state's deer wars, laying blame for "the disappearance" of the commonwealth's flagship species on politics, "a green certification scam," and the Pennsylvania Game Commission's kowtowing to a non-hunting agenda."

Eveland's qualifications have been debated on hunting-related websites, and a former Eveland colleague who spoke on condition of anonymity described him as smart, "but not always able to process information properly."

He said Eveland "likes to blow his own horn." His motivation for jumping into deer wars, the source said, may in part be "sour grapes."

Eveland lost a bid in 2009 to conduct an audit of the Game Commission's deer program, which state legislators instead awarded to the nonprofit Wildlife Management Institute of Virginia.

Although WMI came in with a much lower bid, Eveland claims WMI got the contract because the institute's vice president Scot Williamson had been part of the Game Commission working group that in 1998 helped craft the current deer-management plan.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

bio-crooked-treehorn.... That statement was made by a pgc insider and by someone that didnt even know eveland. The writer was a highly biased one and the magazine took alot of heat for the slander attempt and misinformation.

another good link from the states largest sportsmen organization of 200,000 strong.

http://www.acslpa.org/html/is_the_deer_audit_a_con.html

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

QDMA and others dispute part-time biologist's claims (Mr. John Eveland's claims)
http://www.pabucks.com/deer-hunting-forum/viewtopic.php?p=47530

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Pa qdma is a complete joke and part of the pgc support system. A bunch of real characters running that show. Environmentalists that got on board to help a struggling fledgling organization and in return gave themselves legitimacy and magnify their voice. In the mean time the only other sportsmen group that supported pgc was pennsylvania fed. sportsmen, and it lost them over 30,000 members.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

of course QDMA is a joke, Kyle, deerz1, taterd, dexy, dennyf, whoever you are! it isn't what you want or beleive in! duh! you have all the answers! you are right, everyone else is wrong.

i tell you what; you and the other 230,000 hunters who are soooo aginst the PGC's method, and also don't report your harvests to help assist in the process by the way, DON'T HUNT deer this year! that would fall in line with your problem with the issue at hand, right?

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

We have several hunters who actually hunt Pa and know what is going on that do not support the bullcrap.

Then we have you Jackie, a guy with umpteen identities, one of which(jackie treehorn) is a por nographer form a movie!!! And have been caught on another thread actually LYING about being a hunter when you admitted a few months previously in another discussion that you WERE NOT and didnt even own a gun!!!!

Now just based upon that, what in gods name would make anyone think you have any credibility here whatsoever????

You have none.

And i DIDNT say qdma was a joke. I think their practices are just fine for anyone who wants to implement them or whatever.

I said the PA branch of qdma is a joke, and stand by it. It is largely run by some politically motivated buffoons.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Jackietreehornliljohnbioguycrookedsticks said: "deerz1, you write the same (especially the quoting) in every post under every username you have. You are seriously the dumbest person to try and defend and convince others of your ideas I have ever seen! and on a national website! jackwagon!"

You mean like you and liljohn using the word 'SICKO' many many times on a couple of different threads including this one. Or you and every id you have posting the exact same quotes word for word from the deer audit? It sounds like someone is trying to take the attention from theirself.

Then as someone else mentioned, how you got caught lying flat out about being a hunter, and you want to call anyone else dumb, or a jackwagon?

I think the jackwagon is in your mirror! Hows that foot taste?

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

my foot is yummy! seriously, if you go back and read my inquiries you'll see that I was only trying to learn. I have one handle. I hadn't had opportunity to go after a deer (large game), yet. that was last year. I don't care what you think about my experience, and you'll never get the satisfaction of more detail about me than that. I'm young. Isn't that something you anti-PGC deer hunters want? young hunters drinking your flavor of kool-aid? you've failed!

I agree... I really do suspect all of these anti-PGC posters are Eveland being a baby and pissed he was exposed as not being thorough with his "deer science."! go cry into your pillow...

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Its not a matter of what i think of your experience. You flat out lied. Deer hunting was discussed... You said your hunting was just fine... Then someone pointed out you never even owned a friggin gun a few months earler! you werent trying to learn anything, you just lied to make a point in the discussion and got caught... You also dont "try to learn something" by using several id's and hurling personal attacks with each one and little else.

Now all the antipgc posters are cumulatively Mr. Eveland? HA he he he HA.AH HA HA HA! HE HA UH, LOL SNORT HEE HAW!

And his science has been exposed? he he he ha ha ha ho ho ho! lolol

Brilliant deductions there Inspector Cousteau/liljohn/jackietreehorn/biguy.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Did i mention... HA HA HA HA HA HA!

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"1) Since neither of us knows the answer to how those numbers were derived,"

No my friend....YOU dont know how they were derived. ON the audit the data was stated as UNIT DATA that went back prior to formation of the units I happen to know how, its no puzzling riddle but quite simple. In fact it has been explained to you before, so i can only assume you want to intentionally be misleading. They used the per square mile data and also the township data.

'the best data set to analyze is the one from 2004-2010 because those numbers were calculated in a consistent manner in accordance with the PGC. I'm not debating that a decline in harvest occurred in that time frame, because it did, but the numbers from those years look pretty stable on a year to year basis."

Who cares about year to year when there is a significant CUMULATIVE effect. And the data is also assessed every 5 years, so the trends would have been quite clear.

" To get a more accurate representation of the herd size and its impacts on society and other wildlife, all of the sources of mortality need to be monitored, as well as relative abundance of food sources, fecundity, and social acceptance (usually monitored in the form of nuisance complaints)."

Its really not necessary to do guesswork for us, because THE FRIGGIN HERD ESTIMATES ARE GIVEN IN THE AUDIT! BOTH NUMBERSWISE AND PER SQ MILE! lol

And human conflict was measured at the onset of the program, when we had MUCH higher deer numbers and in most units it was rated low or moderate. With only the urban special regulation units having desire for less overall.

" The bottom line is that the herd has been reduced (fact), and neither of us agrees on what the new population should be."

Dont need to. Im open to suggestion to a level between "now" and "then". There is no acceptable excuse to stay as is or worse...go lower. which appears to be the direction headed.

"2) Documented facts? Are you sure of that? "

Absolutely. FACT. I dont just take peoples word for things. Have looked into myself, and the facts are what they are.

"So basically what you're saying is that browsing occurs at levels that the forest cannot support because acid rain affects the plant growth...I'll buy that. What's your alternative to reducing the herd so that regeneration can occur at normal levels? Lime all of the forest land in the state?"

No. Though on limited scale would be a reasonable part of proper forestry. Id say larger cuts that would take pressure off of the cuts and more... But not going to go into a total 300 page booklet of my forestry plan here. lol. Forestry practices both past and present are largely to blame for our situation as well as some other factors.

"Yup, they sure do...still care to explain how the outside of the fence is just ferns and the inside of the fence is a jungle,"

I just did, in my last statements which you said you agreed with. Try and pay closer attention please. Are you really that friggin slow that you cannot remember from one sentence to the next?

"4) Where are the areas where it has been "PROVEN" that the carrying capacity is double what it is now?"

Look at the 2000 level herd size and look at now. Nuff said.

"If it was "PROVEN" then there should be some scientific documentation out there stating so"

There is. Every bit of pgc data shows it. Deer herd health was NEVER rated as poor in the huge majority of the wmus on the annual reports....including during our highest herd years and after the herd had been high for many years in some cases. What does that tell you?

"5) Oh yes we did! You don't live in the Northern part of the state..."

Oh no we didnt. The pgc winter mortality studies are available on the website on the anual reports of the years they were conducted.

"winter kills were a common observation in this area this year."

Um. No they werent. And that makes sense because there would be no reasonable expectation for it in an areas of barely double digit deer densities. Please show the data for this "kill"(LOL) It didnt happen period. If you found a roadkill or coyote kill, a diseased deer whatever, im sorry for your loss. Btw, Pgc doesnt agree with you that overwinter mortalis a real factor in Pa in fact i believe they quit monitoring it, at least to the extent they were, because after decades it was proven to be a nonfactor.

"I googled "Eveland QDMA" and "Eveland PGC" and clicked on the first links because both searches pulled up the articles I was looking for. Google it yourself if you don't believe me."

Believe you about what? lol. I believe it was already addressed Pa Qdma is a joke. Ask the policital lobbyist Ms Davis. WHo is a nonhunting environmentalist lobbyist, a license buyer, hates deer, loves pgc & audubon and is an officer there.

"7) It's that kind of thinking that separates the "complainers" from the "do-ers".

The doers keep applying pressure to the legislators as they should.

"Average hunters have weekends off and can absolutely influence their hunting experience if they put in the effort."

Dont wanna influence my hunting. I wanna see beneficial changes to statewide management. Thats my #1 concern. If that effects me in some way, great. If it doesnt great. If i want to be a "better" hunter i'll ask for advice. And if i did, you would be the last person i would ask.

8"you didn't address any of my numbers, nor did you attack my population model."

"YOUR' population model is a joke and not even worthy of consideration. It has no basis in reality and you have no ability for fashion one. If you would like to discuss fantasy land please do it with someone else. I dwell in the world of reality.

" All of that stuff was attacked on the PA Outdoor News website,"

Gee i wonder why? ha ha.

Eveland contributed greatly to the Pa elk and bear programs. Thats already been established and you can kick and whine all you like. The guy is above your grubby reach. All you do is raise eyebrows of anyone legitimate and rationale by your clear slander attempts. Makes one wonder what is your motivation...

But i already know that dont i GTF? ;.)

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Btw, Mr. eveland doesnt need the money, and the only reason he was involved was because he was sought out as an independent source which was hard to come by. Unlike the handpicked wmi by audubon and the legislative money man Levdansky that got him voted out of office for picking a company with ex high ranking fired pgc employees running it.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR
THE DEER REDUCTION PROGRAM
In 1996, the deer reduction process was begun in Pennsylvania by Bryon Shissler (an
independent natural resources consultant) and Dan Devlin and James Grace of DCNR. As
described previously in this website, by the year 2000 DCNR had enrolled in Shissler's Green
Certification program (a process that demanded deer reduction), and Gary Alt had been assigned
to implement deer reduction.
Witnessing the imminent decline of the deer herd in 1999, Audubon Pennsylvania (Cindy Dunn
and Timothy Schaeffer, each successive Executive Directors of Audubon who now are employed
as executives in DCNR and the Fish and Boat Commission, respectively) assumed an
opportunistic role and began a series of aggressive actions to exacerbate herd reduction and
advance Audubon's biodiversity agenda. By 2000, Audubon was joined by the few individuals
in PGC and DCNR who were the original designers and who remain active proponents of the
deer reduction program.
Following are those few original designers of DCNR's Green Certification process and the
associated deer reduction program.
Bryon P. Shissler
On or about 1995, Scientific Certification Systems, Inc. (SCS) of Oakland, California was
approved to represent the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) of Bonn, Germany toward
advancing FSC's "Green Certification" program. By 1996, Bryon Shissler had been certified to
represent SCS in the Green Certification process as its Appalachian regional auditor. As such,
Mr. Shissler proposed a pilot-year study to DCNR's Bureau of Forestry to determine if DCNR
should become America's first enrollee in FSC's Green Certification program. At a 1996
workshop in Harrisburg, although other states chose not to participate in the Green Certification
program because they claimed that it was a subjective process that was not based on sound forest
ecology, DCNR chose to enroll. At that time, Mr. Shissler selected deer reduction as the
criterion for which DCNR would be judged in achieving Green Certification, and assumed the role
of auditor. Thus, Mr. Shissler was the original designer and founder of the deer reduction
program. To date, Bryon Shissler has continued to be a dominant proponent of the deer
reduction program.
Dan Devlin
In 1996, DCNR's James Grace and Dan Devlin approved of DCNR's enrollment into the Green
Certification program, and worked with Bryon Shissler in adapting the program to meet DCNR's
needs. Along with Bryon Shissler, Dan Devlin has continued to date to be a dominant proponent
of the deer reduction program as well as Audubon's ecosystem management philosophy.
Calvin DuBrock
Ultimate approval for the deer reduction program was granted in 1998 by Calvin DuBrock and
Vernon Ross of the PGC. At that time, Calvin DuBrock created the Deer Management Section
and assigned Gary Alt as the Section's supervisor. In 1998, he was instrumental in creating the
Deer Management Working Group, and in selecting Scot Williamson of the Wildlife Management
Institute as its chairman. Scot Williamson and other members of the Group (including Bryon
Shissler, Susan Stout, Cindy Dunn, and Ben Moyer) worked with DuBrock and Gary Alt from
1998-2000 in designing the new deer reduction program. In 1999, Mr. DuBrock was a main
speaker at the Audubon-sponsored reduce-the-deer-herd conference in Harrisburg.
Gary Alt
By 1999, Gary Alt had become the PGC's voice for their new deer-reduction program. He was
the principal PGC implementer of the program, and along with Bryon Shissler and Timothy
Schaeffer, remains as a dominant proponent of the deer reduction program.
Scot Williamson
As previously described, in 1998 Scot Williamson was selected to serve as Chairman of the Deer
Management Working Group, and as such, was the responsible party who designed the deer
reduction components of PGC's new deer management program. He recommended deer reduction
through increased antlerless allocations, the concurrent buck/doe season, DMAP, and the change
from the county-based management system to Wildlife Management Units. In 1999, Williamson
was a main speaker at the Audubon-sponsored reduce-the-deer-herd conference where he
advocated deer reduction. In 1999, former PA Representative David Levdansky awarded Scot
Williamson $95,000 to conduct an audit of the PGC's deer reduction program. In so doing, Rep
Levdansky had selected the designer of the deer reduction program as its auditor – a blatant
conflict of interest and possible violation of state ethics law. This audit has proven to be a
fraudulent, and therefore irrelevant, process, and a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Including the above founders of the deer reduction program, key participants, as acknowledged
by Audubon and DCNR, who were instrumental in accomplishing the statewide reduction of the
deer herd toward achieving DCNR's Green Certification and Audubon's ecosystem management
plan are listed in the following table. In addition, a second table lists those 13 individuals who are
considered to be the principal architects of the plan according to the degree of their involvement
in the Audubon/DCNR/PGC deer-reduction process.
ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT / DEER REDUCTION TEAM
KEY PARTICIPANTS
AS ACKNOWLEDGED BY AUDUBON AND DCNR
AUDUBON-RELATED PRINCIPALS
• Roger Earl Latham, Project Leader • Mary Ann Fajvan
• Bryon P. Shissler, Co-Leader • Ronald R. Freed
• Marrett D. Grund, Co-Leader • Jan Beyea
• Timothy D. Schaeffer, Co-Leader (Now PFBC) • Stephen B. Horsley
• Cindy Adams Dunn (Now DCNR) • Ann Fowler Rhoads
• Scot Williamson (WMI) • Ben Moyer
FROM DCNR
• Dan Devlin, Forum Sponsor • James Bailey
• Roy Brubaker, Forum Organizer • E. Michael Blumenthal
• Sara Nicholas, Forum Co-Organizer • Mark W. Diebler
• Merlin Benner • James R. Grace
• Paul Troutman • Thomas J. Hall
PGC STAFF ACKNOWLEDGED BY AUDUBON
• Gary Alt • Vernon R. Ross
• Calvin W. DuBrock • Robert C. Boyd
• Christopher S. Rosenberry • Benjamin C. Jones
LEGISLATIVE AGENT
• PA State Rep. David K. Levdansky, D-39, Elizabeth
OTHER SELECT AUDUBON FORUM PARTICIPANTS
• Susan L. Stout (USFS) • Patrick H. Brose (USFS)
• Kip P. Adams (QDMA) • Todd Ristau (USFS)
PRINCIPAL ARCHITECTS OF THE ECOSYSTEM
MANAGEMENT / DEER REDUCTION PROGRAM
From the previous table which lists the key participants of the ecosystem management/deer
reduction program (as acknowledged by Audubon, DCNR, and related documents), only thirteen
(13) people emerge as the principal architects of this agenda – those people whose names have
been repeatedly documented as promoting a reduction in the state's deer herd. According to
documentation, therefore, it is these 13 people who have been the principal architects in the
design and orchestration of the PGC's deer management program, and who, along with other key
participants, are responsible for the demise of Pennsylvania's deer herd during the past decade.
Again, based on Audubon-related documentation, the names of the principal architects include:
(1) Audubon-Related Principal Architects
• Roger Earl Latham: principal author of Audubon's 2005 362-page ecosystem
management/reduce-the-deer master plan; and co-organizer and report editor of DCNR's
2009 49-page ecosystem management/deer reduction plan.
• Bryon P. Shissler: member of the pre-2000 Deer Management Working Group; a main
speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer herd; member of
Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and co-author of Audubon's 362-page
ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; co-organizer of DCNR's
2009ecosystem management/deer reduction forum; and co-author of the Pinchot
Institute's2009 report toward certifying the PGC's deer management program.
• Marrett D. Grund: member of Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and co-author of
Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; reviewer and
conferee of DCNR's 2009 ecosystem management/deer reduction plan and forum; and
co-author (with Bryon Shissler) of the Pinchot Institute's 2009 report toward certifying
the PGC's deer management program.
• Timothy D. Schaeffer: former Audubon Pennsylvania Executive Director who, along with
Rep. David Levdansky, proposed the perceived-to-be-fraudulent 2007 deer audit to Rep.
Ed Staback; reviewer of Audubon's 2005 362-page ecosystem management/deer
reduction master plan. He is now an executive in the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat
Commission.
• Cindy Adams Dunn: member of the pre-2000 Deer Management Working Group; a main
speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer herd; former
Audubon Pennsylvania Executive Director; member of Audubon's 2005 Deer
Management Forum and co-author of Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer
reduction master plan. She is now an executive in DCNR.
• Scot Williamson, Wildlife Management Institute: member of the pre-2000 Deer
Management Working Group and 1998 speaker to the PGC's BOC regarding deer herd
reduction; a key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer
herd whose speech was entitled What can be Done? What is being Done?; 2009 WMI
auditor of the Levdansky deer audit.
• Susan L. Stout, U.S. Forest Service: member of the pre-2000 Deer Management Working
Group; key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer herd;
member of Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and reviewer of Audubon's 362-
page ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; participant in 2-hour television
panel discussion promoting PGC's deer reduction program.
• Ben Moyer, Outdoor Writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: member of the pre-2000 Deer
Management Working Group; key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to
reduce the deer herd; member of Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and
reviewer of Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan;
frequent newspaper columnist supporting PGC's deer reduction program.
(2) DCNR Principal Architect
• Dan Devlin: co-author (along with three employees of The Nature Conservancy) 2004
publication entitled "System Design and Management for Restoring Penn's Woods" – a
state master plan for creating a centuries-long-old-growth forest on over 500,000 acres of
Pennsylvania state forests through the drastic and permanent reduction of the deer herd;
the sponsor of DCNR's 2009 ecosystem management/DMAP deer reduction forum and
corresponding 49-page report.
(3) PGC Principal Architects
• Calvin W. DuBrock: key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the
deer herd; acknowledged by Audubon as a participant of Audubon's 2005 Deer
Management Forum and in Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction
master plan; Gary Alt's direct supervisor; Christopher Rosenberry's direct supervisor;
Chief of the Game Commission's Wildlife Research and Management Division who is
responsible for the PGC's deer reduction program.
• Gary Alt: keynote (dinner) speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the
deer herd; principal designer and public promoter of the PGC's deer reduction program;
acknowledged in Audubon's 2005 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction
strategic plan as key to the success of their deer reduction agenda.
• Christopher S. Rosenberry: acknowledged as a participant of Audubon's 2005 Deer
Management Forum and acknowledged as a participant in Audubon's 362-page
ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; principal member of DCNR's 2009
ecosystem management/deer reduction forum and co-author of the associated 49-page
report; current director of the PGC deer reduction program.
(4) Legislative Facilitator/Audubon Agent
• Rep. David K. Levdansky (D-39), Elizabeth: co-sponsor with Timothy Schaeffer, former
Audubon Pennsylvania Executive Director, of the perceived-fraudulent 2007 deer audit;
responsible for awarding this predesigned audit to Scot Williamson of WMI; advocate of
the elimination of the PGC's Board of Commissioners.

Btw, nice of you to speak of "ROUND 2". But i believe you were already down and out k-oed in about 30 seconds of ROUND 1. ;.)

+12 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

dude, who can even read your copy & paste rants?!

"Now, it seems only fitting that Eveland, who has thrust himself into the public spotlight, eat some crow with those grapes, or at the very least, a large serving of humble pie. Like so many selfish sportsmen who equate the worth of the overall hunting experience to filled tags, he has allowed neither facts nor research in preventing him from making many allegations that, at best, are erroneous and others that are - knowingly or unknowingly - completely false."

http://republicanherald.com/study-disproves-deer-allegations-1.1148288?l...

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

If they are copied and pasted then they arent MY rants are they boy? lma o.

Thats the same article that you and your other alias biguy have posted a hundred times. Only thing funny it that Doyle dietz is a joker than noone takes seriously. A pgc apologist and one of the reasons why Pa qdma has no credibility as well.

If you cannot see that the article is completely factless and nothing more than emotion filled drivel, then youre about as wise as he is. lol

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

If you legitimately want to learn something this is a good place to start. From a biologist/ecologist/forester that is supported by the states largest sportsment organization. (unless you think the states largest sportsmen organziation is corrupt and the audubon/environmentalist extremist riddled pgc are "the good guys" l mao.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

you have an answer for everything! only you are right! wah wah wah.

how do you know Eveland "doesn't need the money" from a couple of your posts back? that sounds like something only someone close to him would say? are you his financial adviser? seems shady to me...

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I have dug into his claims and who the guy is. I have also spoken to legislators on the issue. Unlike you i dont just believe anything just written on the internet. lol.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Good article:

“Ayuh” by John C. Street

Up in the New England states there is an old-time colloquial utterance that sounds something like "Ayuh" which means, "I hear what you are saying but I don't agree with you."

For going on ten years, Pennsylvania deer hunters have been questioning the “science” driving the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer management program. “Ayuh,” they kept telling each other, “we hear what you’re saying but we don’t agree with you.”

Now, thanks to the hard work and diligence (and, although most people aren’t aware of it, the courage) of John Eveland and the support (and an equal dose of courage) provided by the Allegheny County Sportsmen’s League, the full extent of the “mismanagement of Pennsylvania’s deer herd” has come to light.

But even though (to paraphrase the former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives) Pennsylvania’s deer hunters have now lived through ten years of this abomination to find out what’s in it, there is no consensus on how to proceed.

Some deer hunters – by all indications a vast majority – want to throw it out (repeal it) entirely while others argue for tweaking it around the edges to make it better. But what is it they’d like to tweak?

As John Eveland’s report (“The mismanagement of Pennsylvania’s deer herd” available at www.acsl-pa.org) reveals, both the “objectives” of the program and the “science” driving it are more than just flawed, they are irreconcilably wrong.

Neither Pennsylvania’s forest nor its deer herd (as evidenced by research documents prepared by the PGC and the DCNR and referenced in John Eveland’s report) are unhealthy.

How, therefore, does one go about “tweaking” a management program that was designed to produce “A healthy deer herd and a healthy forest?”

Reportedly, at least four members of the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s sitting Board of Commissioners have decided the program is too flawed to be tweaked and, consequently, believe it’s time for a fresh start.

There have even been rumors (reported in the January 7 edition of PENNSYLVANIA OUTDOOR NEWS) that these four Commissioners are considering “terminating the ‘science personnel’ employed by the Pennsylvania Game Commission to conduct the deer management program.”

Despite the persuasive evidence provided by John Eveland, however, not all the Commissioners seem convinced that starting over is the best idea. In response to written questions, Commissioner Ralph Martone (northwest region) opined that “It is difficult to reduce a deer herd statewide without causing too few deer in some areas.”

And then he explained that “The Board of Commissioners recently began addressing these problems but it is a difficult process and requires some patience.”

Still, despite the difficulty, Commissioner Martone made it clear he is not one of the board members calling for the termination of the agency’s science personnel.

“Personnel matters are operational and under the jurisdiction of the Executive Director,” the commissioner explained and he has “complete confidence in Executive Director Roe and the agency staff to effectively carry out the policies of the Board.

”All my decisions,” Commissioner Martone concluded, “are based on the resource and the recreation.Unfortunately, it is difficult to balance what is best for the resource and the needs of the hunters of Pennsylvania but I assure you - the Board is trying.”

Research documents referenced in John Eveland’s report reveal that both Pennsylvania’s forests and its deer herd are healthy. Importantly, though, this is not just John Eveland’s opinion.

These conclusions are drawn from the research reports prepared by the Pennsylvania Game Commission and the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

But rather than addressing these inconsistencies, the “science personnel” of the Pennsylvania Game Commission chose instead to impugn (in the pages of the January 21 edition of PENNSYLVANIA OUTDOOR NEWS) the character of the person who exposed them.

So, “Ayuh,” Commissioner Martone, we heard what you said about “what happened and why it happened [not being] as important as how we proceed from here.”

But we’ve read the Eveland report. And we know “what happened and why it happened.”

And, frankly, Mr. Commissioner, after ten years of this program, we don't need to pass any more of it to find out what's in it.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://skunkinthewoodpile.com/?p=3456
PA Game Commission answers John Eveland, Wednesday, May 11th, 2011

'Based on his miscalculations, Mr. Eveland then concludes that “a dire circumstance likely exists – the deer herd is being grossly overharvested and is collapsing.” There is no evidence to support his conclusion.'

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Mr. Eveland’s finger-pointing, erroneous calculations, and inaccurate reporting mislead the public. None of his claims promote a constructive discussion on deer management, nor do they do anything to improve deer management for Pennsylvania’s citizens, wildlife or habitats."

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

The Game Commission employs an objective and open process to manage Pennsylvania’s white-tailed deer. The Game Commission has engaged the public to identify deer management goals. It also has completed citizens advisory committees in each of the state’s wildlife management units. These committees provided deer population recommendations that were considered along with deer and forest habitat health. In most cases, the Game Commission followed the citizens advisory committees’ recommendations.

The Game Commission’s deer program has been reviewed by professional wildlife biologists, investigated under a legislatively-sponsored audit, and challenged in court by lawsuits brought by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania. None of these reviews or investigations has identified deceptive practices or agenda-driven recommendations. The reason for this is simple: the Game Commission’s deer management program is an objective and scientific program that strives to meet our state constitutional obligation to manage wildlife and habitats for current and future generations.

The deer program routinely has solicited constructive criticism and uses the best available science to improve management decisions. Game Commission staff continually scrutinizes the deer program and strengthens it through field research, evaluations, and external reviews from wildlife professionals throughout the country. For information on all aspects of the Game Commission’s deer management program, please visit the Game Commission’s website, www.pgc.state.pa.us, and click on “White-tailed deer.”

In closing, as hunting and deer inspire deep and personal passions, I am under no delusion that this reply will end the debate. On the contrary, democracies are kept alive by thorough and rigorous debate. What I certainly do hope can be put aside are the outlandish conspiracy theories and claims that the Game Commission is attempting to “exterminate” the state’s deer. No one who works for the state’s wildlife management agency at any level would sit still or quiet if that were the goal, and such claims do nothing to move the discussion forward.

Jerry Feaser

Press Secretary

PA Game Commission

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I spent lunch watching the 8 part video of Eveland's presentation and I think it was better to hear it directly from the man than through all of this message board BS. He clearly has some experience with bear & elk and was working with the PGC a while back. He is also clearly passionate about what he does.

I was turned off by the conspiracy theories about state congressmen and a perceived lack of fairness in this process. it's politics. it's the way it is. that's life.

on the other hand, there's always some truth in there... I don't like how this is such a political issue. also, I feel he's reaching when he mentions 2nd amendment ramifications. let's not go there. no one is taking our guns because of PA whitetail deer.

I think Part 6 of presentation was the most worthwhile part to watch. I agree, the suggestion of merging the PGC with the DCNR is a scary proposition, and a conflict of interest (ironically, since deer need the forests).

Maximum Sustained Yield vs. Ecosystem Management is where we are at.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Well lets analyze this. We have statements from pgc whom are the ones accused. And we have a statement from the site of a ex pgc commissioner Pallone, one of the most hunter hated commissioners of all time, who spearheaded the deer plan and helped put this all together in the first place.

Yeah. Thats really worth alot.

Keep diggin' boyz, but the opposition has been over evelands claims with a fine tooth comb and have yet to come up with anything of substance.

Maybe a few more unbiased roxanne pallone skunk in the woodpile or Doyle Dietz articles will do the trick. (laugh)

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

~John Eveland Answers PA Game Commission Claims ~

On May 11, 2011, the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) released a rebuttal to my independent investigation of the agency's deer management program. In the first paragraph of PGC's rebuttal, the agency stated that "...there have been many mistakes and errors on the part of Mr. Eveland, as well as completely false allegations." I will, herein, respond to PGC's rebuttal, as well as reaffirm my investigative conclusions regarding the PGC's management of the Commonwealth's deer herd.

http://blogs.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/sports/rod-a-gun-club/2740...

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://www.outdoortalknetwork.com/art353.html

Commissioners, others, decry Game Commission deer policies

February 11, 2011

By JIM RUNKLE - jrunkle@lockhavencom

Save | Post a comment |

LOCK HAVEN - Is there any other state agency less responsive to the concerns of its constituents than the Pennsylvania Game Commission?

For attendees at Thursday's meeting of the Clinton County commissioners, the answer to that question was a nearly universal and unequivocal "no."

Local residents joined the commissioners in decrying ongoing policies they say have damaged the state's hunting quality, specifically when it comes to the white-tailed deer.

The conversation was sparked by Timothy L. Havener, local president of a group called Firearms Owners Against Crime, who has been at odds with some local governments concerning his support of the right to bear arms and his opposition to local restrictions on weaponry.

However, this is a big hunting area, and Commissioners Tom Bossert, Adam Coleman and Joel Long are among those who count themselves friends of the hunting tradition.

The commissioners say hunters are paying more in license fees each year, but are seeing fewer and deer "because of deliberately misleading and deceptive Game Commission policies that call for management of wildlife while actually promoting lumbering interests over hunters."

The criticism also arrives on the heels of a recent Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruling dismissing the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania's legal challenge to the state Game Commission's deer management program

Senior Judge Barry Feudale's summary judgment against The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania was made public Wednesday.

In his opinion, Feudale said the group offered no evidence that the commission's management of the state's deer herd is based on fraud or any abuse of its discretion. He said its arguments reflect "merely a disagreement" with the commission's philosophy.

The group, a longtime critic of the PGC, claimed agency's policies are based on inadequate data and allow overhunting of does that will hurt deer-hunting opportunities in the long run.

Coleman, an avid hunter, has a different story.

"We were driving ... and saw a herd of five deer and we stopped for 15 minutes because you never see five deer in one place in Clinton County anymore," he charged.

Coleman said studies based upon the more populated areas of the state might show deer in abundance, but an infrared scan of actual numbers in central Pennsylvania will show a different story, a dwindling of the herd that's hurting hunting, tradition, tourism and the forest itself.

Havener pointed to a study that counters the PGC's claims, one that was conducted by wildlife biologist John Eveland.

The Game Commission, in 2000, began a deer-reduction campaign that has collapsed the herd in many parts of the state "with no intention of returning the deer population to a respectably huntable status," Eveland concludes. "The PGC chose to unilaterally decimate the dominant herbivore from the Commonwealth's natural ecosystem and to destroy one of the nation's top deer hunting programs - setting in motion great and increasing impacts to Pennsylvania's hunting tradition and socioeconomy."

"I'm 100 percent with you on this," Coleman told Havener. "It's pretty clear to me that somebody doesn't want any deer in Pennsylvania."

Bossert, also a long-time hunter, said he believes the Game Commission should be stripped of all authority and its duties should be turned over to the state Legislature for the creation of a "more responsive" organization.

Long said he was not a hunter, but he believes in wildlife management and in balancing varied interests within the environment. He said he does not believe PGC is living up to its mission.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntinhuntinhuntin wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I see tons of deer at my property in PA. I manage it very well and I have strict policies with my neighbours with how many deer we take a year. Management is a huge key to having succesful deer herds.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

All well and good to quote Eveland, if his musings support your position, but understand a few "minor" details about his involvement in this haggle.

He is the one that approached ACSL with his "expose" on deer management, not the other way around. They have happily picked up his campaign and are now championing his views. While I've had regular contact over the years with ACSL/FOAC folks working on behalf of Second Amendment and other sportsmen's issues, their campaign to support Eveland, is not one that I support.

IIRC, Eveland initiated the first submition to the Legislative Budget/Finance Committee to do the proposed deer management audit. He was rejected by that Committee, in favor of WMI, which did the audit for far less money and oddly enough, actually has far better credentials than Eveland has. WMI regularly does similar audits for many other state wildlife agencies and have long had a stellar reputation among wildlife management professionals.

Eveland has made numerous claims in his resume, as to his wildlife research experience (claimed to have occured while at PSU), including taking credit for early bear studies in PA and doing work for the PGC. Thus far, no one at PSU can validate any of his claims, instead noting that he once did some research work as an undergraduate student in a group project overseen by their professor. The PGC has no record of him ever having done any sort of "research" for them. Ever.

Eveland has numerous commercial irons in the fire, including several focusing on wildlife photography and land projects. Google him, for a complete list of his assorted endeavors.

Nothing wrong with commerce, since we live in a capitalistic society, where doing well and making money, are both applauded.

Some may find something wrong with a guy who consistantly blows his own horn loudly, in search of other projects from which he may eventually profit?

I know several of the people personally, that he has villified in his "mismanagment" blather. None of the ones I know personally, are capable of the sort of conspiracies and misdeeds of which he accuses them. Most of them are far more accomplished deer hunters and outdoorsmen (and women), than I will ever be.

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Fillmore:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_XWCtL3EEc

Eveland states he was involved at Penn State and did the PGC's bear management plan in the 70s. He said he did it for elk as well, but it was shut down at some point. He did this starting a presentation to the ACSL.

Is this a straight up lie? Jesus, what a bunch of BS... all these anti-PGC guys beating down reasonable discussion here and elsewhere are nuts.

I don't even know who to believe. I'm out of this. Thanks for the exposure. I have better stuff to do...

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

oh, and before taterd and deerz1 and the other clowns start pissing and moaning, I tend to believe the guy on here using his real name; Denny Fillmore. before any of you other sick f**ks.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I have followed this nonsense for some time now off and on, and cannot believe how little life some of you must have. Especially the biodude = little john + Jackie treehorn guy.

Making one post here and done. Will not be drug in by the infantile screamers and lying. Just had to clear up some of the lying and water muddying.

1. Denny F is a pen fed moutpiece. An environemental group with more than its share of extremists. Hes also a proven liar and one of pgcs unofficial internet mascots. About 95% of his last post are lies.

2. Bioguy has several other ids, not guessing its a fact. Have seen them in action on other posts. He also has been known to lie like crazy and get mad when caught over on Pa outdoor news. He also made a ridiculous post asking for help from friends on this site because he could not carry his end of the conversation intellectually. He asked for them to attack other users that were giving him the 'what for'. He also asked that they minus the other users... Guess it backfired.

3.Evelands credentials are all fact, and all the distortions and lies in the world cant change that. It has been looked into by those that matter and confirmed. The man was instrumental in early studies in this state and he has the documentation to prove it. But a couple of jagoffs on a website can say anything they like in their smear campaign.

4. Jackie has lied in this argument on another thread, and got caught. The foul mouthed greenie isnt even a hunter, yet pretended to be and forgot he made an earlier post saying he was not only last fall. What a tool...

Done.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

" He was rejected by that Committee,"

Because DaVe Levdansky was the head of budget and finance committee. The environmentalists politician/hero who frequently did their bidding. Anyone wanting to can do an internet search. He was voted out after decades in office due to his role. He was also branded an antigun legislator by the nra. Great friend for pgc to have had. lol. But they dont have to worry about that any more do they? ha ha ha ha.

" in favor of WMI,"

Because as was already pointed out, they were run by two previous high ranking pgc employees. The ex-executive director of pgc and ex duputy exec director of pgc. Fired for payroll manipulation charges years ago.

" WMI regularly does similar audits for many other state wildlife agencies and have long had a stellar reputation among wildlife management professionals."

Wrong. They are also trying to screw over the hunters of Wisconsin. They are pushing for herd annihilatin there, though with limited success thusfar.

"Eveland has made numerous claims in his resume, as to his wildlife research experience (claimed to have occured while at PSU), including taking credit for early bear studies in PA and doing work for the PGC. Thus far, no one at PSU can validate any of his claims, instead noting that he once did some research work as an undergraduate student in a group project overseen by their professor. The PGC has no record of him ever having done any sort of "research" for them. Ever."

Thats cal dubrocks attempt to discredit the man who is attacking "his" deer plan. Nothing more. There are too many twists and turns by you to even bother addressing in detail. But that statement was in regard to pgc saying he didnt actually WORK FOR THEM, which he didnt, and never said that he did. The work he had done was picked up on by them but he was never a pgc employee or claimed to be.

"Eveland has numerous commercial irons in the fire, including several focusing on wildlife photography and land projects. Google him, for a complete list of his assorted endeavors."

SO? The man works Denny. You should try it sometime. I dont see him gaining millions by getting involved in the deer wars to further a photography career, something done as more of a recreational hobby than anything the way i understand.

"Some may find something wrong with a guy who consistantly blows his own horn loudly, in search of other projects from which he may eventually profit?"

Blows his horn loudly? lol. All he did was state his credentials. And with nothing to gain, your reaching.... Big time.. lol. But thats nothing new when you have no logical retort. Such is your norm. You are famous for it in fact.

"I know several of the people personally, that he has villified in his "mismanagment" blather. None of the ones I know personally, are capable of the sort of conspiracies and misdeeds of which he accuses them."

Everyone of them where. And its not exactly like he accused them of murder. They are further their agendas and their "misdeeds" are well documented.

" Most of them are far more accomplished deer hunters and outdoorsmen (and women), than I will ever be."

That isnt saying much. But, yeah, they are hunters....just like John Kerry was at election time. ha ha ha. They have but one objective with their deer management involvements and not one lick of it has to do with being "hunters" or in any way hunter friendly. Those poeple are well known antideer malcontents and that was known even before their involvment with the deer plan dictating.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sal ketchem wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Even some of the commissioners at the game commission said they thought that people there should be fired. I would be willing to bet that 85 to 90+ percent of hunters would agree.

A link from the nra---- http://www.nrahuntersrights.org/Article.aspx?id=4416

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Levdansky is and always has been, a weasel, so I don't miss him at all. Neither does anyone else that I know.

The people accused of being involed in the "great conspiracy" aren't phony hunters like that photo op pinhead John Kerry. They are pretty much all very dedicated and successful deer hunters.

As for the choice of WMI, Levdansky didn't have that much clout to "make" the entire Leg. Budget/Finance Comm. handpick them over Eveland.

WMI actually has irrefutable credentials and a long, distinquished track record; Eveland's claims are suspect. Dubrock wasn't even with PGC when Eveland claims he did all his magical works with bear, deer and elk, so how can Dubrock be responsible for anything?

ONE PGC Comm. made public commentaries about firing people and that was Tom Boop, whose term expires this month. I have no animosity towards Boop, have spoken with him on numerous occasions over his 8 year tenure on the BOC. We just agree on little concerning his thoughts on current deer management.

I have spoken with nearly every member of the PGC/BOC over about the previous 12 years. No problems with any of them, as most were easy to talk with and served us well, whether I agreed with 'em, or not. It's not an easy "job", as they are essentially unpaid volunteers and all get their share of grief.

Don't much care if some anonymous, babblin' fool calls me a liar on the internet. Been through about 10 years' worth of this crap already, with assorted other anonymous, babblin' fools, mostly USPee groupies.

They've been on the same idiotic rant for that long, which Eveland's groupies are on now. Same BS accusations and conspiracy theories. They went to court twice with their "deer mismangement" foolishness and lost. Three times, if we count the "do over" that the court gave 'em on their first lawsuit.

Yep, we now have far fewer deer in PA, than we had by the year 2000. That's why it was called Herd Reduction. The majority of the hunters I know, can still find and kill deer each year. They just don't find as many as they once did. Neither do I, but it hasn't prevented me from finding enough to keep me fairly happy each fall. ;O)

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Levdansky is and always has been, a weasel, so I don't miss him at all. Neither does anyone else that I know."

Alot of the antideer types thought he was a hero, and i didnt see you complaining about him on any of the boards before he got chitcanned for his actions.

"The people accused of being involed in the "great conspiracy" aren't phony hunters like that photo op pinhead John Kerry. They are pretty much all very dedicated and successful deer hunters."

Wrong. They ALL have other stronger interests in deer than hunting them, overriding interests that are actually CONFLICTS of interest. And some are known for a fact to be simply license buyers who pretend to be hunters because of political aspirations... Trying to gain seats on the board of commissioners for one example that comes to mind quickly. Know of one person that attempted such (woman) and failed thanks to watchdog hunters that foiled the plan. Didnt matter a whole lot because they cannot police every candidate and the board is all too easily stacked anyway.

As for the choice of WMI, Levdansky didn't have that much clout to "make" the entire Leg. Budget/Finance Comm. handpick them over Eveland."

He made it HIS priority, went public with it as "HIS baby" pushed forward by presenting audubons (Shaeffers) proposal, and he also would not consent to eveland but wanted wmi and strongly... He held the purse stringe as head of the legislative budget and finance commitee and he had EVERYTHING to do with pushing for wmi to get the audit. Its not even debatable, its a written in stone fact.

"WMI actually has irrefutable credentials and a long, distinquished track record;"

Yeah, high ranking officials that were previously fired for payroll altering allegations... Yep. White as snow. lm ao.

"Eveland's claims are suspect. Dubrock wasn't even with PGC when Eveland claims he did all his magical works with bear, deer and elk, so how can Dubrock be responsible for anything?"

What it gods name are you babbling about?? The lying claims that nothing could be found about eveland by pgc werent made 50 years ago, they were made recently. Your logic is mind numbing.

"ONE PGC Comm. made public commentaries about firing people and that was Tom Boop,"

And there were support by others. They did not say so publicly because they had nothing to gain by doing so, since the stacked board would not support their actions anyway. Boop, being the champion for Pa hunters that he is, just didnt care and "put it out there. You can take my word for it or not. Doesnt matter either way, i have nothing to gain by lying, as its totally meaningless without majority support anyway.

"Don't much care if some anonymous, babblin' fool calls me a liar on the internet. Been through about 10 years' worth of this crap already, with assorted other anonymous, babblin' fools, mostly USPee groupies."

Respectfully sir, you bring alot of it upon yourself.

"Same BS accusations and conspiracy theories."

They are fact, and reason this still goes on is because the facts havent changed one bit.

" They went to court twice with their "deer mismangement" foolishness and lost. Three times, if we count the "do over" that the court gave 'em on their first lawsuit."

Yet they never had their day in court. However i agree, it was buffoonery. They could have spent their money much more wisely then a sure to fail lawsuit against the state agency. The biggest blunder of all was signing off on the audit so that pgc would no longer be afraid that wmi employees could be called to testify against them, while pgc was sure to use the info. SO they couldnt call wmi and it also permitted a fraud audit to be carried out by known highly biased questionable outfit. PURE unadulterated buffoonery. I think usp's heart is in the absolute right place and that is with hunting, but i think they lack really good leadership guidance. Though i wish them well.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

You write much and in reality, have little useful to "say" here?

These claims, from ACSL's puffery on Eveland, which come directly from Eveland's resume:

As a University Research Scientist

Black Bear Research. [As a BIOLOGIST at The Pennsylvania State University]*, John conducted the first statewide scientific bear research program ever in Pennsylvania. The study included live-trapping, tagging, and radio-telemetry tracking of bears in order to scientifically determine the status of the statewide bear population, and to answer critical ecological questions.

He determined that there were less than 2,000 black bears in the entire state, and that the population was declining. [As a result, John wrote the first statewide bear management plan for the Pennsylvania Game Commission]*, which was immediately implemented in 1970 by the closing of the state bear hunting season in two separate years, subsequent reductions in the length of the season from one week (with interim one-day and, then, two-day seasons) to a maximum three-day season, the issuance of bear licenses for hunters, the classification of state bear management zones, and the statewide system of bear check stations during hunting seasons.

[To accurately age bears, he developed the Pennsylvania microscopic method of annular (tooth-ring) analysis]* using premolar teeth from living bears.

Okay for starters, the ones with the brackets/asterisks that I added, are NOT supported by the facts.

>He was not a BIOLOGIST at PSU. He was actually an undergratuate student helping to do field research, at that time. PSU has provided no validation for his claim. Why would PSU "lie"?

>PGC has no record of Eveland ever "writing the management plan for bears", as he claims to have done. Eveland's time frame for his claim far predates Dubrock's arrival at PGC. Dubrock's reponse to the claim, results from no one at PGC being able to find any record of Eveland's ever having done anything for PGC.

>Annular tooth ring dating of black bear teeth, far predates anyone ever having heard of Eveland.

But please continue to amuse yourslef with further blather on something which you obviously know little (to nothing), about. ;O)

It all goes back to the perceptions of many hunters, that since the implementation of Herd Reduction, PA now has "no deer". Serious claims have been made that conspiracies exist which were aimed at "exterminating" our deer herd, for anything from forest certification, to the eventual usurption of private land in the northern tier counties.

Our deer haven't been "exterminated". There are far fewer of them in many areas that once had far more deer, due to HR.

There are still many areas that have plenty of deer.

There are still some areas that have too many deer for their habitats and/or for human conflicts, primarily in areas of high human populations, where deer find easy sanctuary and it's hard to get hunting access.

We have plenty of deer in PA. Since HR, it's a tad more difficult for some to find them, that once found them in greater abundance and those folks are still pizzed over it and demand to have 20 or 30 running past 'em again on opening days, like they once had.

That's really about the bottom line, in all this hubbub over "no deer".

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Oops, left out one other addition to this'un here:

Our deer haven't been "exterminated". There are far fewer of them in many areas that once had far more deer, due to HR.

There are still many areas that have plenty of deer.

There are still some areas that have too many deer for their habitats and/or for human conflicts, primarily in areas of high human populations, where deer find easy sanctuary and it's hard to get hunting access.

>I've been hunting deer in PA for over 50 years. There has never been a time in those 50 years, when there were "enough" deer in each and every part of PA to make everyone happy. Hunters went where the deer were.

As before, people need to find deer to successfully KILL them. Just because an area once had far too many deer, doesn't mean those who hunted there, are eternally entitled to have them back again, in numbers that are far too high.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I agree with Denny. well said. It is hard for me to speak about the PA deer herd as a whole, because i hunt them only in one area. That said, i am always grateful when i see a deer in the woods hunting so i don't have to admit getting "skunked". I do see quite a few carcasses on the road to and fro camp, which to me is an indication of plenty of deer.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Denny every single statement you make about eveland is a twist of the facts and taken purposely out of context. Eveland never made the exact claims some of you environmentalist extremists like to counter, and the slander attempts are flat out comical.

JUst about everything you mentioned has been gone over a hundreds times on other discussion here, as well as other sites, and you guys dont have a leg to stand on. If anyone wants to see who it is that hates anyone anti deer plan, unified sportsmen and anyone else against the deer sham plan, do a search for aubuon + Pa deer management . Or audubon + unified sportsmen. Pretty clear where some of these supposed "hunters" on some of these boards are coming from. lol

I also see no reason to acknowledge your eveland slander on every post, since Pee wee herman could have made his claims and as long as they are verifiable...as they are, then i dont see where it would matter much. Eveland is also beyond your reach. Its clearly your pathetic attempt to take the attention off of that which it belongs. Pgcs shoulders and their failing deer plan. Want to see malcontents who deserve to be fired? Look no further than there.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Undeniable facts presented by eveland:

A very few environmentalist stakeholders, known antideer factions spearheaded the construction and implementation of the plan. Its all documented who "started" all this. The names are available on the eveland report.

The audubon deer report, the one that had pgc employees both take part and sign off on, also had suport from antideer commissioners, shows us how much inappropriate involvement audubon had.

The plan was in no way "necessary" as was claimed, but was value based. Even the "opposition" at audubon had stated on their report that forest based management is NOT NECESSARY biologically but is a VALUES based decision to make.

Alot of evelands other statements showing pgc nonsense etc. only sweeten the pot. The statements above cover quite a bit, and even they alone show the deciet occurring at pgc.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Imo there is alot of space between the current results of our no-deer plan and the deer densities of yesterday in some areas.In my area the deer herd has been devastated. On spotlighting routes where over the course of many miles you would have seen 150 to 200 deer you now are lucky to see 10 or 12. I am talking many miles, at night, with lots of fields where they should be visible and always were before. Not speaking of just one or two years but from many years both before reductions and since.Our groups days afield seeing zero deer have probably quadrupled. Rosenberry and others have also been proven to have lied many many times.

What has also been failed to mention here is that the deer plan results have also not been what was predicted. Even though the herd reductions were basically across the board and for over a decade now, the average regeneration rates had declined across the state according to the audit. And that is thanks to the analyzing procedures that change regularly making good habitat poor with nothing more than a change in measuring. Its an attempt to continuously raise the bar to achieve completely unnatural extreme audubons idea of heaven type results.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from punkinhead wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

ALL I CAN SAY IS WOW! THANKS ALOT FOR THE INFO. I DID NOT KNOW THAT THIS STUFF WAS GOING ON. I NEW HUNTING WAS GETTING BAD AND THE PGC PUT OUT TOO MANY TAGS BUT DIDNT KNOW WHY. STILL DID NOT READ ALL OF THE INFERMATION BUT WHAT I READ SOFAR EXPLANED ALOT.

PETE TRAVERS

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Eveland never made the exact claims some of you environmentalist extremists like to counter, and the slander attempts are flat out comical."

Really? What I noted above is directly quoted from ACSL's glowing testimonials on Eveland's "qualifications" and from his own resumes. Those claims have not been supported by anyone else.

How can quoting something that has been stated, be classified as comical slander attempts??? It is an interation of the man's own claims.

"Alot of evelands other statements showing pgc nonsense etc. only sweeten the pot. The statements above cover quite a bit, and even they alone show the deciet occurring at pgc."

How does it "sweeten the pot" if none of the statements (accusations) can be substantiated by qualified third parties?

Might as well face facts: Those who refuse to believe HR was necessary and continue to whine about "no deer", are still grasping at straws and continually looking for new heroes to believe in. First, it was USPee and their mouthpiece and that got them nowhwere. Now it is ACSL and Eveland picking up the issue and making the same accusations that USPee ran with for the past 10 years.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"Really? What I noted above is directly quoted from ACSL's glowing testimonials on Eveland's "qualifications" and from his own resumes. Those claims have not been supported by anyone else."

Sure they have. The man had to provide his information to the judge if he was to testify with the claimed credentials, And some of the legislators have looked into. You also dont gain the support of a 200,000 member organization by being some bum off the street claiming whatever you like. Despite audubon/enviromaniacs out there who look to slander ANYONE and EVERYONE that is against pgc and their failed deer plan saying otherwise.

"How does it "sweeten the pot" if none of the statements (accusations) can be substantiated by qualified third parties?"

They have been. Other than a couple of you extremists doing damage control intentionally trying to twist actually what was said, and purposely taking things out of context to slander on a couple of boards...and noone taking you seriously.... If Jesus Christ Came down from the sky and said something about the failed deer plan, he would get the EXACT same treatment from you few. Everyone else always has, and always will.

"Might as well face facts: Those who refuse to believe HR was necessary and continue to whine about "no deer", are still grasping at straws and continually looking for new heroes to believe in."

Not hardly. I realize how politics work. But the facts speak for themselves regardless of whether they are pointed out by a biologist like eveland or a shoe salesman. It doesnt take a genius to point out inappropriate collusions, and glaring conflicts in data. The fact eveland also is credentialed is just icing. Though with all the dirty politics, ive never been deluded enough to believe it was really likely to make a difference anyway.

As for usp making the claims for a decade, they sure as hell werent the only ones, and they were all right smack dab on the money.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Thank you Denny Fillmore for presenting the truth in this debate.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Lets see the truth according to denny... The states 2 largest sportsmen groups along with the majority of other sportsmen in the state, along with the 30,000 plus that quit his little "club" just within the last few years, all, who do not support the failed plan are all just greedy jokers who want to see a deer behind every tree. All claims against pgc are false. Even though noone else in the nation has a similar plan and there is so much documented inappropriate invovlements....all wrongdoing is just conspiracy theory. Dr. Rosenberry is the saviour of our souls and our forests, audubon is our saving grace along with the now strongly enviro-extreme group PennFed is saving us all from ourselves despite the fact they have lost a big chunk of membership and even much of staff due to their bizarre views. Eveland, is nothing more than a shoe salesmen who was willing to lie about his credentials publicly even though he knew he would be the victim of environmentalist hatred and have a target on him....but he chose to lie anyway publicly as well as to legislators and was even willing to do so in court! lm ao.

Thats the truth according to Denny.

I think you fellas definition of "truth" is just a little different than everyone elses.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

http://www.nrahuntersrights.org/Article.aspx?id=4416

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_XWCtL3EEc

Particularly like this one, catchy name to it.

http://pgchallofshame.com/news/main.htm

Pretty bad when even the womens groups are speaking out and getting involved in the controversial subject!!

http://www.womenhunters.com/dirty-secret-judy-derrickson.html

+12 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

and there's deerz1... and immediately +8, everyone else, -8.

no point in discussing with deerz1... if you don't agree with him, you are wrong.

don't you get it, deerz1, taterd? you may have valid points, but you can't come on here and ram it down people's throats. can't even read your 6 paragraph rants! the same thing over and over and over... enough is enough bro!

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

hey sandman81: thanks for re-posting the same links deerz1 did... I mean, man, I really needed to see the ACSL/Eveland link for the 40th time!

anti-PGC folk just regurgitating the same things up over and over...

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

you guys get yer antler-less tag apps in? I did.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

So sayeth the guy that lied about being a hunter. The guy with the po rno dude from the movies name. The guy who admitted he just likes to stir pots.

Clear someone just wants to be a malcontent.

I also dont see anyone here getting plusses or minusses for agreeing or disagreeing. Apparently some are completely lying 100% to support their failed positions, and thats generally frowned upon in most circles. Lying goes above and beyond just not agreeing with someone. And there is enough environmentalist maure here to fertilize quite a few tomato plants.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Sure you did Jackie. Now all of a sudden you are a hunter. Yep. Avid hunter jackie. Said he didnt even own a gun less than a year ago.

Go back to audubon kid.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

And for the record, yes i did. Doe tags make rather handy fire place starter for those cold december evenings.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Oh stop. that was last year. we all have to start at some point. this is season 2 for me... and so what if I now buy my own firearms now that I am able to. doesn't mean I didn't use other peoples' guns or do small game hunting before. stop making this personal jagoffs. I am here to learn. come up with something new, Regurgitator...

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

go back and look at any of posts, douchenozzle. read them and find where I am an environmentalist, or from audubon.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

at least I think for myself and don't gang up on people in here or elsewhere. do you have a confidence problem?

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Why add anything else? What has been stated thusfar is more than sufficient already. You clearly are an environmentalist, and you didnt have to tell anyone. Your obtuse theatrics and quirky maneurisms, your support of a failed plan that very few others support, Your willingness to lie in defense. The fact you hold strong interest in the topic despite not even being a hunter. The fact you clearly have no girlfriend. lol... The fact you ardently defend other KNOWN environmentalist.

Yep. Environmentalist. No doubt about it.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

I dont tell other people what to think. They are free to make up their own minds. And in this case, its not very hard to figure out who is in the right.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

find anything on me yet, sandman/deerz1? I bet you are gaining a lot of clout on here acting like this...

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

your position is weak, so attack others to confuse and make it personal. I have not defended anyone.

your anti-PGC mentality is the minority, like it or not. I can't wait to see what the next move is by your "team." more lawsuits? more pissing and moaning on message boards ad nauseum? what? what is the Great ACSL or Whatever Anti-PGC Group going to do next?

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"And in this case, its not very hard to figure out who is in the right."

and there lies the crux of the problem, Smarty Pants. You think there's a "right" answer to this "problem." And worse, you think you have the "right" answer. You don't get it.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

You are right sand. Truth eludes these folks. And here is another prime example: (your anti-PGC mentality is the minority)Noone. And i mean NOONE around here supports the asnine deer decimation plan. NOONE. And from all that i know and correspondence with state reps and senators its very clear that most other folks do not support the charade either.

My advice, ignore these meaningless guys yapping on message boards and keep up the pressure on our legislators.

And yes Jackie crookedstik liljohn- There is a right-ER answer to the deer management debacle than we have now which is about as wrong as it gets.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Treehorn, i dont belong to ANY groups. So i dont have a clue what their next move will be if any.

You also mention possibility you having borrowed a gun, but didnt not go as far as to say that was the case. You also never bothered to mention it as even a possibility on other threads where the same topic was discussed and it was pointed out that you were not a hunter several times over a period of several weeks.... Now why even bother to speak of it other than for the intent to decieve people??

You enviro types are a riot.

The answer to our problems is really quite simple. Responsible cuts to the doe allocations. PERIOD.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Also they might consider treating the management tool itself (we hunters), the bill payers that also pay their wages (we hunters), and a significant faction of stakeholders with strong interest in deer management(we hunters) with a little more respect, such as other states do. They could learn alot from normal states as opposed to trying their hardest to be the next nonhunterfriendly New Jersey or California, which at this point they have basically surpassed.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Like Jackie, weeks ago I started watching this topic with an open mind, wanting to learn both sides of the issue. I looked at the provided links and independently researched for more information. The links I posted were from that research.

I, for one, support the PGC plan and the necessary herd reduction. It has been reviewed multiple times and has been proven to be based upon sound principles. In my judgement, without a doubt, the anti PGC person with all the accounts has been exposed and has lost this debate.

Jackie, I think you have presented yourself very well, good job! And good luck in your hunting.

Denny Fillmore, thanks again for taking the time to present the truth in this matter. It was good to get the straight story. I hope you have a great season too.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

So jackie morphs into his other id...pats himself of the back even though all he did was personally attack others and bring a bit of obtuse humor into play, then pat fellow known extreme environmentalist denny on the back, and claim others are the ones using other id's...

Talk about desperation! Gotta admit, its hilarious.

Anything to take the attention away from the actual issues. Sorry but all that treachery deserves a minus. You whine about getting all those minuses but, If that doesnt deserve it, what in the world does?

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"And good luck in your hunting."

Ha ha ha ha ha. Good one.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Here are some links showing anyone who doesnt already know, exactly what type we have here in jackie/crooked stick/biguy shows you their reason for interest here even though its not hunting, and shows their crazy mindset;

http://www.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite0507.html

http://www.audubonmagazine.org/letter/soundoff.html

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Face it, you have lost the debate. Anyone can tell by writing styles that Jackie and I are not the same person.

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"It was good to get the straight story. I hope you have a great season too."

Thanks, same to you on a good season. I've had over 50 "good seasons" thus far, hope to have quite a few more yet.

Even the ones back in the 60s, when deer were very scarce where I started and still hunt now, were good ones. Got to spend time deer hunting with dad and my Potter/Tioga uncles during deer seasons, which was something I could barely wait to do, when growing up.

We eventually had more deer around there and still have enough to keep me grinnin' come fall. By my estimates, we have roughly similar numbers of deer around there now, that we had there by the early to mid 80s? Sugar maple (and other) regen in my woods has rebounded pretty well, since the huge numbers of deer we had by 2000, have been reduced.

Far nicer bucks, too, than at any time during the 50+ seasons I've spent hunting up there. Haven't shot a buck since about 2000, but have passed on some nicer bucks since, than any I'd killed previously. Lots of big ones around now, hopefully my time will come someday soon? Several 18" plus bucks killed near me in the past few years, including the 22" 11 pointer that a neighboring farmer killed in the second week last year. That one was just down the ridge my camp is on, within a half mile of me.

Cousin's son that lives near my camp, had that same buck on his trailcams last fall, sometimes within a hundred yards of where I often start off on opening day of firearms deer season. Still several around almost as dandy as that one.

One advantage of getting older, is that another year rolls around PDQ these days. Be fall again before we know it. ;O)

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from punkinhead wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Debate? Where? I dont see any debate. I see several hunters speaking out against the nations worst deer management plan, and stating the facts.

Aside from that i see only see one guy with 3 id's calling hunters names and trolling for arguments.

And then there is Denny Fillmore. Who just rambles to hear himself ramble. Hes well known environmentalist among these particular discussions on several other boards and no comments about him are even necessary. Maybe if he says hes a hunter of 50 years enough times anyone not knowing him will think he is our friend. Those of us that have known him for over a decade know better.
...Hunter or not, an environmental extremist is an environmental extremist. And denny is 110%.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"you have lost the debate"

You can kick and scream all you like, but nothing said here by the "HUNTERS" side here was ever in question. All documented nondebateable facts. The ecopeople were done before they ever started.

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

sandman81: thanks for re-posting ACSL/Eveland for the 41st time. We get it. Yer man is freakin' brilliant and has no equals. You are right, the other side is wrong. The answer is with you if only people would listen! Oh, why won't they listen?! Oh WHY?!

Here's why: You act as if you are right and everyone else is wrong. You (and the others like you) are a bully sitting behind a computer screen. You cannot discuss, only shove. You waste your time on message boards because you are on the outside looking in.

Say it again; tell me I have multiple IDs on here. I do not. I am one man with no affiliation coming into this learning that the anti-PGC folk are grasping at straws. Tell you what, get out there and do something.

I was going to retire this "handle" before, but now I'm not. I won't be bullied out of here, whether or not you think I'm experienced hunting or not. We all start at different times for different reasons. You want young hunters following in your footsteps? Great start. NOT.

-12 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Wow! A guy doesn't log on here for a while because it's summer and there's a lot do do out there...

Anyhow, time to get out there and scout for what deer there are. Also, your (first of several rounds of) anterless applications were due to a County Treasurer Monday. Whether you use it or burn it is up to you... chance to make a real statement one way or the other.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

None of the guys here said you didnt own a gun several months ago. YOU DID. None of them then tried to lie about how great their hunting was. YOU DID. You lied. You got caught. Now you are lying again to cover previous lies. With you its a never ending cycle, yet you still want respect to be given to you. Im sorry but respect is earned, and you blew it far too many times.

You arent very popular because you refuse to tell the truth and intentionally distort the facts, and have made it very clear you are nothing more than an environmentalist as others pointed out, with an agenda.

And noone is bullying anyone here. I have not seen one person threatened in any way shape or form. Lies are being pointed out and noone seems to agree with you and your other identity other than one fellow environmentalist. So sorry about your luck. Noone forced you to take part in a highly controversial topic and take positions at odds with the sportsmen and women of Pennsylvania.

As for young hunters, hopefully young hunters will be just fine in Pa. The only thing detrimental to them currently is a failing deer plan that is eroding out sport.

But you are right. Pgc has the hunters of this state "on the outside looking in". But that is hardly our fault. Its the result of dirty politics.

I will not address you again, not only did I cover everything once, which is enough, your clownish antics have grown tiresome.

Allegnmtn, Agreed.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

sandman:

huh? yer nuts bro. I didn't lie. just because you say something doesn't make it true.

keep shouting over everyone else. A hunter comes on here with 50 years experience (fillmore), uses his real name, and you all just call him a "rambler" and tell him he hasn't a clue. so don't make this about me, don't call me an environmentalist or whatever you think I am.

how about instead of not only NOT addressing me anymore, you don't address any of us about this issue. You have just as much clout as me here at this point.

ok email, call yer buddies or log into your 10 accounts to give me -1s now. go! wah wah wah....

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

10AM on the third day of doe tag sales and WMU 2G, which many claim is now devoid of deer, has already sold about 2/3s of the 23,000 tags allocated for that WMU.

Yeah, I know: "They're just buying them to save the deer".

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

it is interesting:

https://www2.pa.wildlifelicense.com/deeravail.php

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Jackie you did lie. You said your hunting was good. And were not even a hunter. Thats a lie. Not because sandman said so. But because by definition its a lie. And believe me. Not many people who follow this stuff dont know Mr. 50 year hunter.

So what 23000 tags sold in a unit. We have 900,000+ hunters. Less than half could buy every doe tag in the state since in some units they can easily get more than one. And less than half is still more than most states total hunter numbers. It also shouldnt be up to 900,000 hunters to police themselves and restrict their harvests. The day we must rely completely on hunters to make all the right decisions is the day we no longer need the game commission. And they no longer have a need of our funding.

You want it. You got it. One -1 for the environmentalists. +1 for the hunters.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

1 positive feedback for the hunters. One negative for each of the odd- a-bon characters.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

News flash. Just read on another thread that Bioguy got banned for using multiple id's and spamming. He has now created another identity and said he used another email address and added a number at the end of his original name to circumvent the ban. Talk about deciet filled individuals!

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Here's a fresh tidbit for whomever it was that listed the "PGC hall of shame" address here, which by the way is owned by one of the deer management plan's most notable critics and who is essentially a "professional" PGC hater:

USP's current prez and former PGC Commissioner, Steve Mohr, has pleaded guilty to two counts of importing "exotics" into PA, minus the required permits. The relevant section of the Game Code cited in the document refers to all exotics, not just birds, as in the first sentence of that section cited on the court docket itself.

Mr. Mohr wanted some wolves brought into PA and got caught. I expect the PA outdoor press will eventually give it some coverage, as word gets out?

http://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/MDJReport.aspx?district=MDJ-02...

If anyone ever starts a relevant "wall of shame", this'un might be a good start?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

So. Who cares? If i recall correctly the dude runs some kind of canned hunt operation? Deals with exotics all the time. If he didnt cross the i's and dot the t's then he will pay for it, as he should. I am sure pgc is salivating over getting their licks in, since Mohr has been a thorn in the environmentalist sides, which is one thing i will give him credit for. Other than that, couldnt care less one way or the other. Do the crime no matter how petty, pay the dime. The only one immune to paying for their actions is the pgc.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

http://www.fieldandstream.com/forums/hunting/deer-hunting/where-did-all-...

Looks pretty relevant to me. Some very interesting information in there.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Whoops. Wrong address here go.

http://pgchallofshame.com/news/main.htm

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"Looks pretty relevant to me. Some very interesting information in there."

Information, on that "wall of shame" site? More like a ton of propaganda, bluster and BS, stuffed into a five pound sack.

Relevant? Sure, if one skips the lack of accuracy and bias of the "reporting" on that waste of bandwidth? Is the Nutkin yarn still featured prominently on there? That as one of their first features, years ago.

Not surprised in a lack of interest in Mohr's shenanigans. Most of his disciples are excited by his usual approach to things, which is to ignore that which he doesn't feel obligated to follow.

He and his group seem to enjoy flaunting that which the rest of us generally try to abide by? Then accuse everyone else of being the "outlaws".

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"propaganda, bluster and BS, stuffed into a five pound sack."

Ask and ye shall recieve see link below.

http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/pgc/9106

As for mohr, i dont know what to tell you. You seem to overestimate his relevance. I sincerely couldnt care less if they end up giving him an apology, or if they threw him in the pokey for 20 years for his wolves. To me, Its neither here nor there, and I'll shed nary a tear either way.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from ethan_3 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

this has been going on for 29 weeks, and is stupid, just drop it, some people like the PA deer hunting and some dont, i dont hunt PA so idk, but lets stop the arguing like kids, i dont mind a little arguing but 29 weeks worth is too much somebody needs to be the bigger person, -1 me or +1 me idrc, and have a good day

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from october31 wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

I see far fewer deer but the quality has gone way up, I have taken some of the best bucks of my life in the last 6 years but its a lot harder to find them, alot more scouting than years past but it pays off big

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

Quality here has declined to its worst in my 30 year hunting career. Makes sense i suppose, you cant cut the herd in half and not expect to have fewer bucks born in the first place. And more pressure is put on the many fewer that actually exist.

Some big bucks in areas like urban areas where they always have been.

Being ranked 21 in boone and crockett pretty much speaks for itself.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from october31 wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

Sorry to here that tyty, I know that most parts of the state have been hit hard by the doe tag situation, I know its not the way it should work but for the last 3 years I have been buyng as many doe tas as I can and dont use them but 2 or 3 dont make much of a differance, I guess I am lucky that I hunt a private farm with only two other guys in bow season but come rifle the farmer wants the doe gone so he lets anyone hunt as long as they take only does, could argue with him it is his property but there are some good bucks and I dont want to loose my spot

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from mgw403 wrote 2 years 31 weeks ago

I have been hunting in PA for the last 14 years. and each year is different in the number of deer I see. I love deer hunting and I think I love scouting more. I put months and months into scouting before and after the seasons. When I started hunting at age 12 there was the 3 day doe season and two week buck. However all that has changed as most of you know. The worst years of hunting for me would have to be the 3 or 4 years following the antler restrictions. I couldnt buy a buck let alone see one. I blamed it on the Game commission and what not. Although I am still not fully convinced the antler regulations are the working in all areas, I do believe they are helping. The GC gives too many doe permits and it is hurting the population in my area for does. On my trail cam this year I have about 17 different bucks but only a handfull of does. The problem is the unethical hunters. These are the people who buy doe tags for everyone in the family (even if they do not hunt) get 20-30 guys together and push every piece of land they can walk on killing anything that is brown. I believe that deer drives should be illegal. what happened to doing your homework and some scouting to harvest a deer. In my opinion driving deer is not hunting its killing.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from flathead71 wrote 2 years 30 weeks ago

Nearly a million doe tags ever year is just outrageous. They need to get the new-age environmentalists out of the game commission.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 2 years 25 weeks ago

So, watching the news and the "Occupy Wallstreet" thing: A lot of the politics of the protestors is probably considerably to the left of mine but you have to think for a minute. If 99% of PA hunters want the deer population managed for the benefit of hunters, who does the current deer management policies of the Game Commission represent?

This whole thing seems tied more and more to an overall bigger problem of a government that no longer represents "us" or cares what "we" have to say. Our current representatives in Harrisburg don't seem to care. Maybe it's time for people who do care about what's important to the average hunter. Tea Party or Occupy Wallstreet, maybe we're all trying to solve the same issue.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 2 years 25 weeks ago

So, watching the news and the "Occupy Wallstreet" thing: A lot of the politics of the protestors is probably considerably to the left of mine but you have to think for a minute. If 99% of PA hunters want the deer population managed for the benefit of hunters, who does the current deer management policies of the Game Commission represent?

This whole thing seems tied more and more to an overall bigger problem of a government that no longer represents "us" or cares what "we" have to say. Our current representatives in Harrisburg don't seem to care. Maybe it's time for people who do care about what's important to the average hunter. Tea Party or Occupy Wallstreet, maybe we're all trying to solve the same issue.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ED Anthony wrote 2 years 25 weeks ago

I think they should go back down for 3 days for does, cause from the 1's day of bow hunting I saw 4 small does one m. they should do something about it for the years to come thank you.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from BringEmNorth wrote 2 years 24 weeks ago

So I've read through this entire thread now. I'm not going to pretend that I know all the facts for both sides or tell you I'm up on the latest news or political wars over this issue. Being a native to PA and an avid whitetail hunter all my life I would just like to offer my personal observations and opinion. I was raised in 3b and have hunted it all my life. I worked on farms all over the area growing up since I was 11 years old. I always took notice to the wildlife that surrounded me. It was abundant in my home of Bradford county and the surrounding counties. When I was 18 I moved to Southern PA, Lancaster county. I still have a hunting camp in Bradford and spend as much time as possible there. Over the past 16 yrs that I have been traveling back and forth between northern and southern PA I have noticed a dramatic decrease in deer sightings both while traveling and when I'm in the woods. I remember the days of seeing large amounts of deer on a daily basis in Northern PA. Now when I'm up there I'm lucky to see 5 in a week either traveling or in the woods. In my opinion not being bias to either side of the argument and just stating what I have observed all my life in PA there is a huge decline in the deer population of PA and it is very disturbing to me. I am a private land owner and myself and my family have taken steps with surrounding land owners to make sure there are still deer in PA for our children and grandchildren to hunt and enjoy watching. I hope that others will follow suit to preserve PA's deer population.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dantheeman wrote 2 years 22 weeks ago

I was just looking around on the net the other day and found something that made my eyes nearly pop out of my skull! I had a length discussion with my local legislator about the issue and he too seemed to be shocked! I found this link posted on another hunting site.

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 21 weeks ago

Hmm, lets see if we can clear up this huge mystery. Where did all the Pa deer go?

Lets see in the last 10 or 12 years what all has occurred?

Added early muzzleloader for antlerless deer.
Added early sr. Jr rifle season for antlerless.
Made antlerless season two weeks long. Some instances a week including 2 saturdays instead of two or three days total it was previously.
Added a TON of tags. Almost and some years even over a MILLION!
Added DMAP to kill more antlerless deer.
Legalized Crossbows.
Made it legal for anyone straight from the womb to be able to shoot deer. Previous age was 12.

Now the pgc and enviromaniacs are pushing for sunday hunting to top all this off. Would have been a great thing, if not for the antideer agenda that is in place currently.

Add all that up and i think its pretty clear where the deer are "going".

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

It is great to see many that care making themselves educated on the issues here in Pa.

I hope that you all have voiced your views to the state legislators & governor and will continue to do so.

While getting the bums and dirty politics out of our sports is a dauting task here in Pa, please dont give up, the fight is just.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

southern PA has a great deer population. I hunt in MD each year just below the mason dixon and see great numbers of deer. I drive up to Gettysburg each trip and on the way to and around the battlefield the deer are numerous. I have seen some of the biggest bucks in my life in PA.

I have family scattered throughout PA from Hanover to Reading and always see plenty of deer on the way to visit.

They are still there. keep hunting hard, you'll find them again.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

southern PA has a great deer population. I hunt in MD each year just below the mason dixon and see great numbers of deer. I drive up to Gettysburg each trip and on the way to and around the battlefield the deer are numerous. I have seen some of the biggest bucks in my life in PA.

I have family scattered throughout PA from Hanover to Reading and always see plenty of deer on the way to visit.

They are still there. keep hunting hard, you'll find them again.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

The southern Pa deer herd is far from great. Yes, it once was. Now it might still be on restricted access lands. In most areas from southcentral to southwestern, its a pathetic shadow of what it was. The goof troop at the game commission really fixed us up.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

But I agree deer30, losts of deer in Maryland where I have hunted too.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sneaky wrote 1 year 38 weeks ago

I don't know what it was like before, but I was up there last year for work, and I saw deer all over the place. Even saw a couple decent bucks.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 37 weeks ago

I agree Dwyeru. That seems to the the consensus among pretty much everyone in the area. Of course you have "pockets" of posted lands where there might be a few more deer. Overall, though, the trend is one largely of a much declined herd.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

This subject came up on another hunting forum on which I participate and those PA hunters are also excited about the numbers of deer they have been seeing and sing the praises for PA's DNR.

I think it boils down to the fact that PA is a big state. Some local areas may have great deer populations and others may be in decline.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

Majority of the state has taken a big hit to the herd as was intended. The huge majority are not "excited" although there are a handful of idiots from the management agency itself that go around to many of the boards singing praises.

A poll done recently by the game commission showed very high level of dis-satisfaction pretty much statewide. Though Im sure there are some decent areas of population they are MUCH fewer and much further between than they used to be.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

And for deer management here, there is no dnr. Its the Pa game commission which most call the game less commission.

They have no credibility with the huge majority of hunting public of pennsylvania.

This from an independant biologist backed by the states largest sportsmen organization:

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

htt p://ww w.acsl-pa.or g

Remove spaces and type in browser to get to work. Site wont let me post a link here.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from sambo wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

The only thing that would make me excited about Pa is to hear that a few of the greed commission employees were fired I now do all my hunting in Ohio. The quality of hunting in the places in P.A. I used to go is not worth the effort or money. I do not want to support the greed commission extreme agenda by buying a license there either. Which is ashame because i have a lot of family in Pa.

When I come home on vacations, there is not a lot of love in Pennsylvania for the Penna. Game Commission.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

Well this deer that my uncle killed in PA last year gets me excited about the deer hunting up there.

www.deer30outdoors.com/hunting/deer/trophy-room/uncle-billy-deer-2011/

and from the trail cam pix I have seen on other forums, there are still huge bucks in PA. I am not saying that YOUR hunting is great, from your comments I'm guessing its not, but that doesn't mean that there are not others in PA whose hunting is. It can't be bad everywhere.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Josh Giannino wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

DEER30 I agree with you on pa deer, friends of mine hunt down there and shoot alot of does, and get nice bucks, and one friend hunts in central pa and seen 45 does in one week.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 35 weeks ago

Majority of places...

Nobody said a word about "everywhere".

As for 45 deer, I hardly see that as some fantastic number for hunting hard in a WEEK, although most hunters seem to be seeing far fewer than that anyway and pobably would be happy with that.

Localized acceptable deer numbers do not make pa deer management any less ofa big time failure.

and the gentlemen posting complaints are far more representative of the states overall reality since the environmentalist derived deer plan went into place.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 35 weeks ago

To all of you haters, there are still plenty of deer in PA. Like others have said, you need to do your homework, be willing to pursue them and accept that the days of herds of inferior deer roaming the northern forests are over. Like it or not, you're not the only ones with an interest in the forested lands. The timber industry is huge money, both for private landowners and for the state. The deer herd is about where it should be in most places now.

Man up and hunt for them, don't expect them to come to you.

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 1 year 30 weeks ago

I agree with the educated majority here. What is going on in Pennsylvania is not right. Its dirty politics at play.

Chris, I understand that "the deer herd is about where it should be in most places now" is just your opinion. But I think you opinion stinks.

But I also understand that the only few that generally hold that opinion here are pgc employees friends and family or few off limits land hunters hunting in their little houses built overlooking their little beet patches, sealed off from reality or actually any semblance of "hunting" whatsoever.

Anyway, thats MY opinion.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 1 year 30 weeks ago

I agree with the educated majority here. What is going on in Pennsylvania is not right. Its dirty politics at play.

Chris, I understand that "the deer herd is about where it should be in most places now" is just your opinion. But I think you opinion stinks.

But I also understand that the only few that generally hold that opinion here are pgc employees friends and family or few off limits land hunters hunting in their little houses built overlooking their little beet patches, sealed off from reality or actually any semblance of "hunting" whatsoever.

Anyway, thats MY opinion.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 1 year 30 weeks ago

Not worth my time...

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Well Kyle, I am not a PGC employee, a family member, a landowner or a lessee. I hunt hard and successfully, knowing my quarry and knowing it's place in an ecosystem that isn't just for deer hunters. My opinion is scientifically and socially sound, yours is just jaded.

If you want to see 50 deer a day, go to the zoo.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

And for the record I am a graduate of Penn State's Wildlife Fisheries Science program and likely more "educated" than the folks that spend their time b*tching about the state's resource
management decisions.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from ggrey wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Sorry, but Eveland has proven that science is not on your side friend.

Pa deer management is nothing but a documented scam.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Eveland's "science" is opinionated and questionable at best. That's like watching Stephanopolous interview Obama and believing you're getting objective coverage.

Thanks for all the thumbs down's by the way... it REALLY hurts. It's actually kind of funny.

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

I'd say the PGC does a pretty good job of rebuking Mr. Eveland's flawed arguments: skunkinthewoodpile.com/?p=3456

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Good point Ggrey. Sorry Chris, but all you do is highlight your ignorance of the situation. Pgc didnt address 1/10 of the information that Eveland compiled, much of which is documented fact and irrefutable.

As for the "errors" pgc tried to claim, funny you seem to left out Evelands rebuttle. Pointed out how pgc did nothing but try to twist up what he had said.

Btw, the site you got that information from was from former pgc commission Roxanne Pallones website. If you know anything at all about this former commissioners enviroextreme views and voting history, I dont think much more explanation is necessary.

Anyway, good to see you finally came back with yet another id biguy. ha ha.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sam06 wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

I read the Everland website, and he sure did do an incredible job to expose the Pa gameless commission. I also agree that the game less commission intentionally ignored 99% of the findings because there is nothing that they could say. I saw where he is supported by Pennsylvanias 2 largest sportsmen groups. That says alot. I also read the sourgrapes slander piece on the skunkpile site, that is run by one of the most famous deer haters of our time.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 28 weeks ago

Whatever buddy... I'll just continue to hunt hard, consistently fill my tags on public land and not give a flying rats arse about you guys crying that there are no deer (because you're wrong).

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 27 weeks ago

It seems to me alot of folks here made some very accurate observations about hunting in Pa, and made some really good points. And not once did I see mention of "no deer".

Guess you just want to be argumentative. Some people will say or do anything to get attention.

Enjoy your consistent success on public land bullshooter.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from walter18966 wrote 1 year 25 weeks ago

most of the posts on here are from intelligent, seasoned hunters. some are from complete morons. youcant say there are no deer in a state anymore accurately than you can say all democrats are on wellfare. its simply not true. ive hunted north central pa and southeastern for 25 yrs. im blessed to have harvested many deer, some 120-150 class bucks. the deer are here. but 5% of the hunters will always kill 95% of the deer (in any state). you have to be smart, hunt the wind, be agressive. use hunting pressure to your benefit. does the pgc suck? you betcha..but unless you can afford 5,000.00 hunts we're kinda stuck!

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 1 year 24 weeks ago

So, another PA deer season has begun. Are you SW and SE archery hunters still seeing 20 deer a day? The population crash continues here in NC PA. I'm still seeing more bucks than does on trail cameras....still looks like that population densities are 2-3 deer per mile in the prime habitat areas...basically zero in most areas. (The game commission disagrees but then again, they aren't out scouting. Their statisticians aren't either. A software program can't actually see deer.)

So with election season also upon us, what do we do? The Republicans back the industry interests that back the "if its brown shoot it down" management philosophy. The Democrats are pro-gun control and have a history of not supporting the rights of hunters. Neither party supports you as a hunter. If you don't believe me, ask your representative to tell you specifically what they are doing to change Game Comission deer management policies to increase deer numbers. Push them for the specifics and you'll find that the answer is "absolutely nothing". We are being played as fools by the Republicans who know we'll continue to give them our vote if the wave the gun control flag. The Democrats see us as an ever shrinking, irrelelevent reminant of a bygone era.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 1 year 24 weeks ago

2-3 per sq. mile? that's innaccurrate. More like 20-30.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 23 weeks ago

You wont see 20 deer a day archery hunting in this part of southwestern Pa unless you are hunting highly off limits lands over food plots. Those days most places in this area at least are long gone. There are probably deer numbers here now in most areas that should be the case in the northwoods, and the northwoods are just a flat out joke.

You are a funny guy steve. Even pgcs own annual reports data as well as the fraudit shows far less than a 20 or 30 dpsm AVERAGE for the north.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Reply

from Huntingpaul wrote 3 years 1 week ago

FIRE ROSENBERRY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!

+12 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR
THE DEER REDUCTION PROGRAM
In 1996, the deer reduction process was begun in Pennsylvania by Bryon Shissler (an
independent natural resources consultant) and Dan Devlin and James Grace of DCNR. As
described previously in this website, by the year 2000 DCNR had enrolled in Shissler's Green
Certification program (a process that demanded deer reduction), and Gary Alt had been assigned
to implement deer reduction.
Witnessing the imminent decline of the deer herd in 1999, Audubon Pennsylvania (Cindy Dunn
and Timothy Schaeffer, each successive Executive Directors of Audubon who now are employed
as executives in DCNR and the Fish and Boat Commission, respectively) assumed an
opportunistic role and began a series of aggressive actions to exacerbate herd reduction and
advance Audubon's biodiversity agenda. By 2000, Audubon was joined by the few individuals
in PGC and DCNR who were the original designers and who remain active proponents of the
deer reduction program.
Following are those few original designers of DCNR's Green Certification process and the
associated deer reduction program.
Bryon P. Shissler
On or about 1995, Scientific Certification Systems, Inc. (SCS) of Oakland, California was
approved to represent the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) of Bonn, Germany toward
advancing FSC's "Green Certification" program. By 1996, Bryon Shissler had been certified to
represent SCS in the Green Certification process as its Appalachian regional auditor. As such,
Mr. Shissler proposed a pilot-year study to DCNR's Bureau of Forestry to determine if DCNR
should become America's first enrollee in FSC's Green Certification program. At a 1996
workshop in Harrisburg, although other states chose not to participate in the Green Certification
program because they claimed that it was a subjective process that was not based on sound forest
ecology, DCNR chose to enroll. At that time, Mr. Shissler selected deer reduction as the
criterion for which DCNR would be judged in achieving Green Certification, and assumed the role
of auditor. Thus, Mr. Shissler was the original designer and founder of the deer reduction
program. To date, Bryon Shissler has continued to be a dominant proponent of the deer
reduction program.
Dan Devlin
In 1996, DCNR's James Grace and Dan Devlin approved of DCNR's enrollment into the Green
Certification program, and worked with Bryon Shissler in adapting the program to meet DCNR's
needs. Along with Bryon Shissler, Dan Devlin has continued to date to be a dominant proponent
of the deer reduction program as well as Audubon's ecosystem management philosophy.
Calvin DuBrock
Ultimate approval for the deer reduction program was granted in 1998 by Calvin DuBrock and
Vernon Ross of the PGC. At that time, Calvin DuBrock created the Deer Management Section
and assigned Gary Alt as the Section's supervisor. In 1998, he was instrumental in creating the
Deer Management Working Group, and in selecting Scot Williamson of the Wildlife Management
Institute as its chairman. Scot Williamson and other members of the Group (including Bryon
Shissler, Susan Stout, Cindy Dunn, and Ben Moyer) worked with DuBrock and Gary Alt from
1998-2000 in designing the new deer reduction program. In 1999, Mr. DuBrock was a main
speaker at the Audubon-sponsored reduce-the-deer-herd conference in Harrisburg.
Gary Alt
By 1999, Gary Alt had become the PGC's voice for their new deer-reduction program. He was
the principal PGC implementer of the program, and along with Bryon Shissler and Timothy
Schaeffer, remains as a dominant proponent of the deer reduction program.
Scot Williamson
As previously described, in 1998 Scot Williamson was selected to serve as Chairman of the Deer
Management Working Group, and as such, was the responsible party who designed the deer
reduction components of PGC's new deer management program. He recommended deer reduction
through increased antlerless allocations, the concurrent buck/doe season, DMAP, and the change
from the county-based management system to Wildlife Management Units. In 1999, Williamson
was a main speaker at the Audubon-sponsored reduce-the-deer-herd conference where he
advocated deer reduction. In 1999, former PA Representative David Levdansky awarded Scot
Williamson $95,000 to conduct an audit of the PGC's deer reduction program. In so doing, Rep
Levdansky had selected the designer of the deer reduction program as its auditor – a blatant
conflict of interest and possible violation of state ethics law. This audit has proven to be a
fraudulent, and therefore irrelevant, process, and a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Including the above founders of the deer reduction program, key participants, as acknowledged
by Audubon and DCNR, who were instrumental in accomplishing the statewide reduction of the
deer herd toward achieving DCNR's Green Certification and Audubon's ecosystem management
plan are listed in the following table. In addition, a second table lists those 13 individuals who are
considered to be the principal architects of the plan according to the degree of their involvement
in the Audubon/DCNR/PGC deer-reduction process.
ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT / DEER REDUCTION TEAM
KEY PARTICIPANTS
AS ACKNOWLEDGED BY AUDUBON AND DCNR
AUDUBON-RELATED PRINCIPALS
• Roger Earl Latham, Project Leader • Mary Ann Fajvan
• Bryon P. Shissler, Co-Leader • Ronald R. Freed
• Marrett D. Grund, Co-Leader • Jan Beyea
• Timothy D. Schaeffer, Co-Leader (Now PFBC) • Stephen B. Horsley
• Cindy Adams Dunn (Now DCNR) • Ann Fowler Rhoads
• Scot Williamson (WMI) • Ben Moyer
FROM DCNR
• Dan Devlin, Forum Sponsor • James Bailey
• Roy Brubaker, Forum Organizer • E. Michael Blumenthal
• Sara Nicholas, Forum Co-Organizer • Mark W. Diebler
• Merlin Benner • James R. Grace
• Paul Troutman • Thomas J. Hall
PGC STAFF ACKNOWLEDGED BY AUDUBON
• Gary Alt • Vernon R. Ross
• Calvin W. DuBrock • Robert C. Boyd
• Christopher S. Rosenberry • Benjamin C. Jones
LEGISLATIVE AGENT
• PA State Rep. David K. Levdansky, D-39, Elizabeth
OTHER SELECT AUDUBON FORUM PARTICIPANTS
• Susan L. Stout (USFS) • Patrick H. Brose (USFS)
• Kip P. Adams (QDMA) • Todd Ristau (USFS)
PRINCIPAL ARCHITECTS OF THE ECOSYSTEM
MANAGEMENT / DEER REDUCTION PROGRAM
From the previous table which lists the key participants of the ecosystem management/deer
reduction program (as acknowledged by Audubon, DCNR, and related documents), only thirteen
(13) people emerge as the principal architects of this agenda – those people whose names have
been repeatedly documented as promoting a reduction in the state's deer herd. According to
documentation, therefore, it is these 13 people who have been the principal architects in the
design and orchestration of the PGC's deer management program, and who, along with other key
participants, are responsible for the demise of Pennsylvania's deer herd during the past decade.
Again, based on Audubon-related documentation, the names of the principal architects include:
(1) Audubon-Related Principal Architects
• Roger Earl Latham: principal author of Audubon's 2005 362-page ecosystem
management/reduce-the-deer master plan; and co-organizer and report editor of DCNR's
2009 49-page ecosystem management/deer reduction plan.
• Bryon P. Shissler: member of the pre-2000 Deer Management Working Group; a main
speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer herd; member of
Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and co-author of Audubon's 362-page
ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; co-organizer of DCNR's
2009ecosystem management/deer reduction forum; and co-author of the Pinchot
Institute's2009 report toward certifying the PGC's deer management program.
• Marrett D. Grund: member of Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and co-author of
Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; reviewer and
conferee of DCNR's 2009 ecosystem management/deer reduction plan and forum; and
co-author (with Bryon Shissler) of the Pinchot Institute's 2009 report toward certifying
the PGC's deer management program.
• Timothy D. Schaeffer: former Audubon Pennsylvania Executive Director who, along with
Rep. David Levdansky, proposed the perceived-to-be-fraudulent 2007 deer audit to Rep.
Ed Staback; reviewer of Audubon's 2005 362-page ecosystem management/deer
reduction master plan. He is now an executive in the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat
Commission.
• Cindy Adams Dunn: member of the pre-2000 Deer Management Working Group; a main
speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer herd; former
Audubon Pennsylvania Executive Director; member of Audubon's 2005 Deer
Management Forum and co-author of Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer
reduction master plan. She is now an executive in DCNR.
• Scot Williamson, Wildlife Management Institute: member of the pre-2000 Deer
Management Working Group and 1998 speaker to the PGC's BOC regarding deer herd
reduction; a key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer
herd whose speech was entitled What can be Done? What is being Done?; 2009 WMI
auditor of the Levdansky deer audit.
• Susan L. Stout, U.S. Forest Service: member of the pre-2000 Deer Management Working
Group; key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the deer herd;
member of Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and reviewer of Audubon's 362-
page ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; participant in 2-hour television
panel discussion promoting PGC's deer reduction program.
• Ben Moyer, Outdoor Writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: member of the pre-2000 Deer
Management Working Group; key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to
reduce the deer herd; member of Audubon's 2005 Deer Management Forum and
reviewer of Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan;
frequent newspaper columnist supporting PGC's deer reduction program.
(2) DCNR Principal Architect
• Dan Devlin: co-author (along with three employees of The Nature Conservancy) 2004
publication entitled "System Design and Management for Restoring Penn's Woods" – a
state master plan for creating a centuries-long-old-growth forest on over 500,000 acres of
Pennsylvania state forests through the drastic and permanent reduction of the deer herd;
the sponsor of DCNR's 2009 ecosystem management/DMAP deer reduction forum and
corresponding 49-page report.
(3) PGC Principal Architects
• Calvin W. DuBrock: key speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the
deer herd; acknowledged by Audubon as a participant of Audubon's 2005 Deer
Management Forum and in Audubon's 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction
master plan; Gary Alt's direct supervisor; Christopher Rosenberry's direct supervisor;
Chief of the Game Commission's Wildlife Research and Management Division who is
responsible for the PGC's deer reduction program.
• Gary Alt: keynote (dinner) speaker at Audubon's 1999 Harrisburg conference to reduce the
deer herd; principal designer and public promoter of the PGC's deer reduction program;
acknowledged in Audubon's 2005 362-page ecosystem management/deer reduction
strategic plan as key to the success of their deer reduction agenda.
• Christopher S. Rosenberry: acknowledged as a participant of Audubon's 2005 Deer
Management Forum and acknowledged as a participant in Audubon's 362-page
ecosystem management/deer reduction master plan; principal member of DCNR's 2009
ecosystem management/deer reduction forum and co-author of the associated 49-page
report; current director of the PGC deer reduction program.
(4) Legislative Facilitator/Audubon Agent
• Rep. David K. Levdansky (D-39), Elizabeth: co-sponsor with Timothy Schaeffer, former
Audubon Pennsylvania Executive Director, of the perceived-fraudulent 2007 deer audit;
responsible for awarding this predesigned audit to Scot Williamson of WMI; advocate of
the elimination of the PGC's Board of Commissioners.

Btw, nice of you to speak of "ROUND 2". But i believe you were already down and out k-oed in about 30 seconds of ROUND 1. ;.)

+12 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

http://www.nrahuntersrights.org/Article.aspx?id=4416

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_XWCtL3EEc

Particularly like this one, catchy name to it.

http://pgchallofshame.com/news/main.htm

Pretty bad when even the womens groups are speaking out and getting involved in the controversial subject!!

http://www.womenhunters.com/dirty-secret-judy-derrickson.html

+12 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

PGHUNTER SAYS: ""Ignore the -1's with this bunch. F&S points are meaningless anyway. It's obvious the tactic is to flood discussions about PA deer management with multiple accounts, either with multiple people or many accounts belonging to the same person."

I SAY: It seems to me it was you and your other alias that made the thread asking people to inundate denny with plusses and minusses because you were losing sadly in the debate? Now you are whining because it backfired and people have seen the truth thanks to Denny and others pointing it out.

Pig says: Make a statement against the current game commission and/or note the lower deer population and you get 'rewarded' with 6 to 7 +1's.

I say: So? If people dont agree thats fine and their perogative. The ones i see arent loaded with minuses just for mentioning lower deer populations. The ones i see loaded are the ones with 1) lies told by "known" liars, characters making strong untrue statements. 2) same type as 1, but with personal attacks and false allegations levied against other posters.

Pig says: Defend the game commission or give an opinion that there are plenty of deer and you will get 'punished' with 6 to 7 -1's.

So? People strongly disagree. If you lived here you would know this. Tell me the game commission is doing a good job and i'll minus you all day long. Its a ridiculous statement to make unless you are an audubon nitwit or forester.

As far as being plenty of deer, the facts speak for themselves. Buck harvest was 200,000 plus. Last few years its been in the 109 to 122,000 range. And more reductions are on the way. And the harvest total is with the ridiculous reporting percentage applied to bloat the numbers. The actual harvest reported is usually like 40,000 bucks!--- In a state with 900,000 hunters!

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"1) Since neither of us knows the answer to how those numbers were derived,"

No my friend....YOU dont know how they were derived. ON the audit the data was stated as UNIT DATA that went back prior to formation of the units I happen to know how, its no puzzling riddle but quite simple. In fact it has been explained to you before, so i can only assume you want to intentionally be misleading. They used the per square mile data and also the township data.

'the best data set to analyze is the one from 2004-2010 because those numbers were calculated in a consistent manner in accordance with the PGC. I'm not debating that a decline in harvest occurred in that time frame, because it did, but the numbers from those years look pretty stable on a year to year basis."

Who cares about year to year when there is a significant CUMULATIVE effect. And the data is also assessed every 5 years, so the trends would have been quite clear.

" To get a more accurate representation of the herd size and its impacts on society and other wildlife, all of the sources of mortality need to be monitored, as well as relative abundance of food sources, fecundity, and social acceptance (usually monitored in the form of nuisance complaints)."

Its really not necessary to do guesswork for us, because THE FRIGGIN HERD ESTIMATES ARE GIVEN IN THE AUDIT! BOTH NUMBERSWISE AND PER SQ MILE! lol

And human conflict was measured at the onset of the program, when we had MUCH higher deer numbers and in most units it was rated low or moderate. With only the urban special regulation units having desire for less overall.

" The bottom line is that the herd has been reduced (fact), and neither of us agrees on what the new population should be."

Dont need to. Im open to suggestion to a level between "now" and "then". There is no acceptable excuse to stay as is or worse...go lower. which appears to be the direction headed.

"2) Documented facts? Are you sure of that? "

Absolutely. FACT. I dont just take peoples word for things. Have looked into myself, and the facts are what they are.

"So basically what you're saying is that browsing occurs at levels that the forest cannot support because acid rain affects the plant growth...I'll buy that. What's your alternative to reducing the herd so that regeneration can occur at normal levels? Lime all of the forest land in the state?"

No. Though on limited scale would be a reasonable part of proper forestry. Id say larger cuts that would take pressure off of the cuts and more... But not going to go into a total 300 page booklet of my forestry plan here. lol. Forestry practices both past and present are largely to blame for our situation as well as some other factors.

"Yup, they sure do...still care to explain how the outside of the fence is just ferns and the inside of the fence is a jungle,"

I just did, in my last statements which you said you agreed with. Try and pay closer attention please. Are you really that friggin slow that you cannot remember from one sentence to the next?

"4) Where are the areas where it has been "PROVEN" that the carrying capacity is double what it is now?"

Look at the 2000 level herd size and look at now. Nuff said.

"If it was "PROVEN" then there should be some scientific documentation out there stating so"

There is. Every bit of pgc data shows it. Deer herd health was NEVER rated as poor in the huge majority of the wmus on the annual reports....including during our highest herd years and after the herd had been high for many years in some cases. What does that tell you?

"5) Oh yes we did! You don't live in the Northern part of the state..."

Oh no we didnt. The pgc winter mortality studies are available on the website on the anual reports of the years they were conducted.

"winter kills were a common observation in this area this year."

Um. No they werent. And that makes sense because there would be no reasonable expectation for it in an areas of barely double digit deer densities. Please show the data for this "kill"(LOL) It didnt happen period. If you found a roadkill or coyote kill, a diseased deer whatever, im sorry for your loss. Btw, Pgc doesnt agree with you that overwinter mortalis a real factor in Pa in fact i believe they quit monitoring it, at least to the extent they were, because after decades it was proven to be a nonfactor.

"I googled "Eveland QDMA" and "Eveland PGC" and clicked on the first links because both searches pulled up the articles I was looking for. Google it yourself if you don't believe me."

Believe you about what? lol. I believe it was already addressed Pa Qdma is a joke. Ask the policital lobbyist Ms Davis. WHo is a nonhunting environmentalist lobbyist, a license buyer, hates deer, loves pgc & audubon and is an officer there.

"7) It's that kind of thinking that separates the "complainers" from the "do-ers".

The doers keep applying pressure to the legislators as they should.

"Average hunters have weekends off and can absolutely influence their hunting experience if they put in the effort."

Dont wanna influence my hunting. I wanna see beneficial changes to statewide management. Thats my #1 concern. If that effects me in some way, great. If it doesnt great. If i want to be a "better" hunter i'll ask for advice. And if i did, you would be the last person i would ask.

8"you didn't address any of my numbers, nor did you attack my population model."

"YOUR' population model is a joke and not even worthy of consideration. It has no basis in reality and you have no ability for fashion one. If you would like to discuss fantasy land please do it with someone else. I dwell in the world of reality.

" All of that stuff was attacked on the PA Outdoor News website,"

Gee i wonder why? ha ha.

Eveland contributed greatly to the Pa elk and bear programs. Thats already been established and you can kick and whine all you like. The guy is above your grubby reach. All you do is raise eyebrows of anyone legitimate and rationale by your clear slander attempts. Makes one wonder what is your motivation...

But i already know that dont i GTF? ;.)

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Good article:

“Ayuh” by John C. Street

Up in the New England states there is an old-time colloquial utterance that sounds something like "Ayuh" which means, "I hear what you are saying but I don't agree with you."

For going on ten years, Pennsylvania deer hunters have been questioning the “science” driving the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer management program. “Ayuh,” they kept telling each other, “we hear what you’re saying but we don’t agree with you.”

Now, thanks to the hard work and diligence (and, although most people aren’t aware of it, the courage) of John Eveland and the support (and an equal dose of courage) provided by the Allegheny County Sportsmen’s League, the full extent of the “mismanagement of Pennsylvania’s deer herd” has come to light.

But even though (to paraphrase the former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives) Pennsylvania’s deer hunters have now lived through ten years of this abomination to find out what’s in it, there is no consensus on how to proceed.

Some deer hunters – by all indications a vast majority – want to throw it out (repeal it) entirely while others argue for tweaking it around the edges to make it better. But what is it they’d like to tweak?

As John Eveland’s report (“The mismanagement of Pennsylvania’s deer herd” available at www.acsl-pa.org) reveals, both the “objectives” of the program and the “science” driving it are more than just flawed, they are irreconcilably wrong.

Neither Pennsylvania’s forest nor its deer herd (as evidenced by research documents prepared by the PGC and the DCNR and referenced in John Eveland’s report) are unhealthy.

How, therefore, does one go about “tweaking” a management program that was designed to produce “A healthy deer herd and a healthy forest?”

Reportedly, at least four members of the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s sitting Board of Commissioners have decided the program is too flawed to be tweaked and, consequently, believe it’s time for a fresh start.

There have even been rumors (reported in the January 7 edition of PENNSYLVANIA OUTDOOR NEWS) that these four Commissioners are considering “terminating the ‘science personnel’ employed by the Pennsylvania Game Commission to conduct the deer management program.”

Despite the persuasive evidence provided by John Eveland, however, not all the Commissioners seem convinced that starting over is the best idea. In response to written questions, Commissioner Ralph Martone (northwest region) opined that “It is difficult to reduce a deer herd statewide without causing too few deer in some areas.”

And then he explained that “The Board of Commissioners recently began addressing these problems but it is a difficult process and requires some patience.”

Still, despite the difficulty, Commissioner Martone made it clear he is not one of the board members calling for the termination of the agency’s science personnel.

“Personnel matters are operational and under the jurisdiction of the Executive Director,” the commissioner explained and he has “complete confidence in Executive Director Roe and the agency staff to effectively carry out the policies of the Board.

”All my decisions,” Commissioner Martone concluded, “are based on the resource and the recreation.Unfortunately, it is difficult to balance what is best for the resource and the needs of the hunters of Pennsylvania but I assure you - the Board is trying.”

Research documents referenced in John Eveland’s report reveal that both Pennsylvania’s forests and its deer herd are healthy. Importantly, though, this is not just John Eveland’s opinion.

These conclusions are drawn from the research reports prepared by the Pennsylvania Game Commission and the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

But rather than addressing these inconsistencies, the “science personnel” of the Pennsylvania Game Commission chose instead to impugn (in the pages of the January 21 edition of PENNSYLVANIA OUTDOOR NEWS) the character of the person who exposed them.

So, “Ayuh,” Commissioner Martone, we heard what you said about “what happened and why it happened [not being] as important as how we proceed from here.”

But we’ve read the Eveland report. And we know “what happened and why it happened.”

And, frankly, Mr. Commissioner, after ten years of this program, we don't need to pass any more of it to find out what's in it.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Undeniable facts presented by eveland:

A very few environmentalist stakeholders, known antideer factions spearheaded the construction and implementation of the plan. Its all documented who "started" all this. The names are available on the eveland report.

The audubon deer report, the one that had pgc employees both take part and sign off on, also had suport from antideer commissioners, shows us how much inappropriate involvement audubon had.

The plan was in no way "necessary" as was claimed, but was value based. Even the "opposition" at audubon had stated on their report that forest based management is NOT NECESSARY biologically but is a VALUES based decision to make.

Alot of evelands other statements showing pgc nonsense etc. only sweeten the pot. The statements above cover quite a bit, and even they alone show the deciet occurring at pgc.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Lets see the truth according to denny... The states 2 largest sportsmen groups along with the majority of other sportsmen in the state, along with the 30,000 plus that quit his little "club" just within the last few years, all, who do not support the failed plan are all just greedy jokers who want to see a deer behind every tree. All claims against pgc are false. Even though noone else in the nation has a similar plan and there is so much documented inappropriate invovlements....all wrongdoing is just conspiracy theory. Dr. Rosenberry is the saviour of our souls and our forests, audubon is our saving grace along with the now strongly enviro-extreme group PennFed is saving us all from ourselves despite the fact they have lost a big chunk of membership and even much of staff due to their bizarre views. Eveland, is nothing more than a shoe salesmen who was willing to lie about his credentials publicly even though he knew he would be the victim of environmentalist hatred and have a target on him....but he chose to lie anyway publicly as well as to legislators and was even willing to do so in court! lm ao.

Thats the truth according to Denny.

I think you fellas definition of "truth" is just a little different than everyone elses.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

I dont tell other people what to think. They are free to make up their own minds. And in this case, its not very hard to figure out who is in the right.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"you have lost the debate"

You can kick and scream all you like, but nothing said here by the "HUNTERS" side here was ever in question. All documented nondebateable facts. The ecopeople were done before they ever started.

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

None of the guys here said you didnt own a gun several months ago. YOU DID. None of them then tried to lie about how great their hunting was. YOU DID. You lied. You got caught. Now you are lying again to cover previous lies. With you its a never ending cycle, yet you still want respect to be given to you. Im sorry but respect is earned, and you blew it far too many times.

You arent very popular because you refuse to tell the truth and intentionally distort the facts, and have made it very clear you are nothing more than an environmentalist as others pointed out, with an agenda.

And noone is bullying anyone here. I have not seen one person threatened in any way shape or form. Lies are being pointed out and noone seems to agree with you and your other identity other than one fellow environmentalist. So sorry about your luck. Noone forced you to take part in a highly controversial topic and take positions at odds with the sportsmen and women of Pennsylvania.

As for young hunters, hopefully young hunters will be just fine in Pa. The only thing detrimental to them currently is a failing deer plan that is eroding out sport.

But you are right. Pgc has the hunters of this state "on the outside looking in". But that is hardly our fault. Its the result of dirty politics.

I will not address you again, not only did I cover everything once, which is enough, your clownish antics have grown tiresome.

Allegnmtn, Agreed.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 1 year 30 weeks ago

I agree with the educated majority here. What is going on in Pennsylvania is not right. Its dirty politics at play.

Chris, I understand that "the deer herd is about where it should be in most places now" is just your opinion. But I think you opinion stinks.

But I also understand that the only few that generally hold that opinion here are pgc employees friends and family or few off limits land hunters hunting in their little houses built overlooking their little beet patches, sealed off from reality or actually any semblance of "hunting" whatsoever.

Anyway, thats MY opinion.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from ggrey wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Sorry, but Eveland has proven that science is not on your side friend.

Pa deer management is nothing but a documented scam.

+11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pat Simpson wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

They really screwed up the deer herd in Pa. Ive never heard so much complaining. And its coming from all corners of the state. 2G, 2F, 2C, 2A, are some that i hear the most complaints about as well as others.

I think the agency needs to be held responsible for their actions. Firings are in order and some have been calling for just that. There are some environmental extremists apparently within the agency it has been found, and some others were involved as well when it came to putting the plan into place. I saw an extensive report that was posted that came from the largest sportsmen group in pa. ACSL. And it is very eye opening. Absolutely incredible that this could actually be permitted to go on.

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Jackietreehornliljohnbioguycrookedsticks said: "deerz1, you write the same (especially the quoting) in every post under every username you have. You are seriously the dumbest person to try and defend and convince others of your ideas I have ever seen! and on a national website! jackwagon!"

You mean like you and liljohn using the word 'SICKO' many many times on a couple of different threads including this one. Or you and every id you have posting the exact same quotes word for word from the deer audit? It sounds like someone is trying to take the attention from theirself.

Then as someone else mentioned, how you got caught lying flat out about being a hunter, and you want to call anyone else dumb, or a jackwagon?

I think the jackwagon is in your mirror! Hows that foot taste?

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Btw, Mr. eveland doesnt need the money, and the only reason he was involved was because he was sought out as an independent source which was hard to come by. Unlike the handpicked wmi by audubon and the legislative money man Levdansky that got him voted out of office for picking a company with ex high ranking fired pgc employees running it.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

If you legitimately want to learn something this is a good place to start. From a biologist/ecologist/forester that is supported by the states largest sportsment organization. (unless you think the states largest sportsmen organziation is corrupt and the audubon/environmentalist extremist riddled pgc are "the good guys" l mao.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Imo there is alot of space between the current results of our no-deer plan and the deer densities of yesterday in some areas.In my area the deer herd has been devastated. On spotlighting routes where over the course of many miles you would have seen 150 to 200 deer you now are lucky to see 10 or 12. I am talking many miles, at night, with lots of fields where they should be visible and always were before. Not speaking of just one or two years but from many years both before reductions and since.Our groups days afield seeing zero deer have probably quadrupled. Rosenberry and others have also been proven to have lied many many times.

What has also been failed to mention here is that the deer plan results have also not been what was predicted. Even though the herd reductions were basically across the board and for over a decade now, the average regeneration rates had declined across the state according to the audit. And that is thanks to the analyzing procedures that change regularly making good habitat poor with nothing more than a change in measuring. Its an attempt to continuously raise the bar to achieve completely unnatural extreme audubons idea of heaven type results.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

So sayeth the guy that lied about being a hunter. The guy with the po rno dude from the movies name. The guy who admitted he just likes to stir pots.

Clear someone just wants to be a malcontent.

I also dont see anyone here getting plusses or minusses for agreeing or disagreeing. Apparently some are completely lying 100% to support their failed positions, and thats generally frowned upon in most circles. Lying goes above and beyond just not agreeing with someone. And there is enough environmentalist maure here to fertilize quite a few tomato plants.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

And for the record, yes i did. Doe tags make rather handy fire place starter for those cold december evenings.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Why add anything else? What has been stated thusfar is more than sufficient already. You clearly are an environmentalist, and you didnt have to tell anyone. Your obtuse theatrics and quirky maneurisms, your support of a failed plan that very few others support, Your willingness to lie in defense. The fact you hold strong interest in the topic despite not even being a hunter. The fact you clearly have no girlfriend. lol... The fact you ardently defend other KNOWN environmentalist.

Yep. Environmentalist. No doubt about it.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Also they might consider treating the management tool itself (we hunters), the bill payers that also pay their wages (we hunters), and a significant faction of stakeholders with strong interest in deer management(we hunters) with a little more respect, such as other states do. They could learn alot from normal states as opposed to trying their hardest to be the next nonhunterfriendly New Jersey or California, which at this point they have basically surpassed.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"And good luck in your hunting."

Ha ha ha ha ha. Good one.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Here are some links showing anyone who doesnt already know, exactly what type we have here in jackie/crooked stick/biguy shows you their reason for interest here even though its not hunting, and shows their crazy mindset;

http://www.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite0507.html

http://www.audubonmagazine.org/letter/soundoff.html

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from punkinhead wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Debate? Where? I dont see any debate. I see several hunters speaking out against the nations worst deer management plan, and stating the facts.

Aside from that i see only see one guy with 3 id's calling hunters names and trolling for arguments.

And then there is Denny Fillmore. Who just rambles to hear himself ramble. Hes well known environmentalist among these particular discussions on several other boards and no comments about him are even necessary. Maybe if he says hes a hunter of 50 years enough times anyone not knowing him will think he is our friend. Those of us that have known him for over a decade know better.
...Hunter or not, an environmental extremist is an environmental extremist. And denny is 110%.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Jackie you did lie. You said your hunting was good. And were not even a hunter. Thats a lie. Not because sandman said so. But because by definition its a lie. And believe me. Not many people who follow this stuff dont know Mr. 50 year hunter.

So what 23000 tags sold in a unit. We have 900,000+ hunters. Less than half could buy every doe tag in the state since in some units they can easily get more than one. And less than half is still more than most states total hunter numbers. It also shouldnt be up to 900,000 hunters to police themselves and restrict their harvests. The day we must rely completely on hunters to make all the right decisions is the day we no longer need the game commission. And they no longer have a need of our funding.

You want it. You got it. One -1 for the environmentalists. +1 for the hunters.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

1 positive feedback for the hunters. One negative for each of the odd- a-bon characters.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 35 weeks ago

Majority of places...

Nobody said a word about "everywhere".

As for 45 deer, I hardly see that as some fantastic number for hunting hard in a WEEK, although most hunters seem to be seeing far fewer than that anyway and pobably would be happy with that.

Localized acceptable deer numbers do not make pa deer management any less ofa big time failure.

and the gentlemen posting complaints are far more representative of the states overall reality since the environmentalist derived deer plan went into place.

+10 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

"Being so bold as to state your contrary opinion will earn you personal attacks. They will research your earlier posts to try and find weaknesses"

TO make a long story short about pighunters very selective memory, someone said their hunting was fine... But less than a year ago made a post, still in place on this site, saying they didnt even own a gun and had never hunted!!! Am i lying about that too pig hunter?? You are getting to sound just like another id of one irrational antideer environmentalist.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Pighunter says: As for me, I don't hunt in PA and couldn't care less about the deer population there. Not my problem...

I say: Way to support your fellow hunters.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

The largest sportsmen group in the state backs Mr. Eveland and does not support pgc at all.

The second largest has taken legal actions against pgc.

Those things alone should point any reasonable person to the fact there are severe problems.

All those people are not unskilled, clueless louts wanting a deer behind every tree.

The hunters in my area belong to none of those groups, and noone i know would take a leak on the game commission if they were on fire.

I know this sounds harsh to outsiders or those not overly familiar with our situation. But there is no longer nice ways to address the game commission. Most here wish they did not even exist.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Unit 2a has been reduced severely and what you are seeing tyty is exactly what the pgc data tells us. The buck harvest is the determining factor used to guage herd size trends growing stable or reducing.

Here are the buck harvests for last several years as compiled by the audit:

2000--13700
2001--11600
2002--9900
2003--7500
2004--7800
2005--8500
2006--8100
2007--6600
2008--6700
2009--6800
2010--5800

Hardly stable. lm-a-o. Rosenberry himself even finally admitted at the April pgc meeting that the herd in 2a has been reduced even more over the last several years that STABIZATION was supposed to have been the case. Apparently some of the commissioners where wisened up to the fact and put him on the spot about further reductions despite claims of stabilization. He had no choice but to acknowledge,since the data spoke for itself. This was also the summary of the antlerless allocation recommendation report and also can be seen on the recorded april meeting on the pgc website.

The audit conclusions & opinions were nothing more than a fraud and it had been pointed out on here many times that the audit was a hand picked audit actually dont by a company whose chairman and other high ranking employee were previous PGC executive director and deputy exec. director that was fired for payroll manipulation allegations.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

If they are copied and pasted then they arent MY rants are they boy? lma o.

Thats the same article that you and your other alias biguy have posted a hundred times. Only thing funny it that Doyle dietz is a joker than noone takes seriously. A pgc apologist and one of the reasons why Pa qdma has no credibility as well.

If you cannot see that the article is completely factless and nothing more than emotion filled drivel, then youre about as wise as he is. lol

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I have followed this nonsense for some time now off and on, and cannot believe how little life some of you must have. Especially the biodude = little john + Jackie treehorn guy.

Making one post here and done. Will not be drug in by the infantile screamers and lying. Just had to clear up some of the lying and water muddying.

1. Denny F is a pen fed moutpiece. An environemental group with more than its share of extremists. Hes also a proven liar and one of pgcs unofficial internet mascots. About 95% of his last post are lies.

2. Bioguy has several other ids, not guessing its a fact. Have seen them in action on other posts. He also has been known to lie like crazy and get mad when caught over on Pa outdoor news. He also made a ridiculous post asking for help from friends on this site because he could not carry his end of the conversation intellectually. He asked for them to attack other users that were giving him the 'what for'. He also asked that they minus the other users... Guess it backfired.

3.Evelands credentials are all fact, and all the distortions and lies in the world cant change that. It has been looked into by those that matter and confirmed. The man was instrumental in early studies in this state and he has the documentation to prove it. But a couple of jagoffs on a website can say anything they like in their smear campaign.

4. Jackie has lied in this argument on another thread, and got caught. The foul mouthed greenie isnt even a hunter, yet pretended to be and forgot he made an earlier post saying he was not only last fall. What a tool...

Done.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

" He was rejected by that Committee,"

Because DaVe Levdansky was the head of budget and finance committee. The environmentalists politician/hero who frequently did their bidding. Anyone wanting to can do an internet search. He was voted out after decades in office due to his role. He was also branded an antigun legislator by the nra. Great friend for pgc to have had. lol. But they dont have to worry about that any more do they? ha ha ha ha.

" in favor of WMI,"

Because as was already pointed out, they were run by two previous high ranking pgc employees. The ex-executive director of pgc and ex duputy exec director of pgc. Fired for payroll manipulation charges years ago.

" WMI regularly does similar audits for many other state wildlife agencies and have long had a stellar reputation among wildlife management professionals."

Wrong. They are also trying to screw over the hunters of Wisconsin. They are pushing for herd annihilatin there, though with limited success thusfar.

"Eveland has made numerous claims in his resume, as to his wildlife research experience (claimed to have occured while at PSU), including taking credit for early bear studies in PA and doing work for the PGC. Thus far, no one at PSU can validate any of his claims, instead noting that he once did some research work as an undergraduate student in a group project overseen by their professor. The PGC has no record of him ever having done any sort of "research" for them. Ever."

Thats cal dubrocks attempt to discredit the man who is attacking "his" deer plan. Nothing more. There are too many twists and turns by you to even bother addressing in detail. But that statement was in regard to pgc saying he didnt actually WORK FOR THEM, which he didnt, and never said that he did. The work he had done was picked up on by them but he was never a pgc employee or claimed to be.

"Eveland has numerous commercial irons in the fire, including several focusing on wildlife photography and land projects. Google him, for a complete list of his assorted endeavors."

SO? The man works Denny. You should try it sometime. I dont see him gaining millions by getting involved in the deer wars to further a photography career, something done as more of a recreational hobby than anything the way i understand.

"Some may find something wrong with a guy who consistantly blows his own horn loudly, in search of other projects from which he may eventually profit?"

Blows his horn loudly? lol. All he did was state his credentials. And with nothing to gain, your reaching.... Big time.. lol. But thats nothing new when you have no logical retort. Such is your norm. You are famous for it in fact.

"I know several of the people personally, that he has villified in his "mismanagment" blather. None of the ones I know personally, are capable of the sort of conspiracies and misdeeds of which he accuses them."

Everyone of them where. And its not exactly like he accused them of murder. They are further their agendas and their "misdeeds" are well documented.

" Most of them are far more accomplished deer hunters and outdoorsmen (and women), than I will ever be."

That isnt saying much. But, yeah, they are hunters....just like John Kerry was at election time. ha ha ha. They have but one objective with their deer management involvements and not one lick of it has to do with being "hunters" or in any way hunter friendly. Those poeple are well known antideer malcontents and that was known even before their involvment with the deer plan dictating.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sal ketchem wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Even some of the commissioners at the game commission said they thought that people there should be fired. I would be willing to bet that 85 to 90+ percent of hunters would agree.

A link from the nra---- http://www.nrahuntersrights.org/Article.aspx?id=4416

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from punkinhead wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

ALL I CAN SAY IS WOW! THANKS ALOT FOR THE INFO. I DID NOT KNOW THAT THIS STUFF WAS GOING ON. I NEW HUNTING WAS GETTING BAD AND THE PGC PUT OUT TOO MANY TAGS BUT DIDNT KNOW WHY. STILL DID NOT READ ALL OF THE INFERMATION BUT WHAT I READ SOFAR EXPLANED ALOT.

PETE TRAVERS

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Sure you did Jackie. Now all of a sudden you are a hunter. Yep. Avid hunter jackie. Said he didnt even own a gun less than a year ago.

Go back to audubon kid.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

You are right sand. Truth eludes these folks. And here is another prime example: (your anti-PGC mentality is the minority)Noone. And i mean NOONE around here supports the asnine deer decimation plan. NOONE. And from all that i know and correspondence with state reps and senators its very clear that most other folks do not support the charade either.

My advice, ignore these meaningless guys yapping on message boards and keep up the pressure on our legislators.

And yes Jackie crookedstik liljohn- There is a right-ER answer to the deer management debacle than we have now which is about as wrong as it gets.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Treehorn, i dont belong to ANY groups. So i dont have a clue what their next move will be if any.

You also mention possibility you having borrowed a gun, but didnt not go as far as to say that was the case. You also never bothered to mention it as even a possibility on other threads where the same topic was discussed and it was pointed out that you were not a hunter several times over a period of several weeks.... Now why even bother to speak of it other than for the intent to decieve people??

You enviro types are a riot.

The answer to our problems is really quite simple. Responsible cuts to the doe allocations. PERIOD.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

So jackie morphs into his other id...pats himself of the back even though all he did was personally attack others and bring a bit of obtuse humor into play, then pat fellow known extreme environmentalist denny on the back, and claim others are the ones using other id's...

Talk about desperation! Gotta admit, its hilarious.

Anything to take the attention away from the actual issues. Sorry but all that treachery deserves a minus. You whine about getting all those minuses but, If that doesnt deserve it, what in the world does?

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

News flash. Just read on another thread that Bioguy got banned for using multiple id's and spamming. He has now created another identity and said he used another email address and added a number at the end of his original name to circumvent the ban. Talk about deciet filled individuals!

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

http://www.fieldandstream.com/forums/hunting/deer-hunting/where-did-all-...

Looks pretty relevant to me. Some very interesting information in there.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"propaganda, bluster and BS, stuffed into a five pound sack."

Ask and ye shall recieve see link below.

http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/pgc/9106

As for mohr, i dont know what to tell you. You seem to overestimate his relevance. I sincerely couldnt care less if they end up giving him an apology, or if they threw him in the pokey for 20 years for his wolves. To me, Its neither here nor there, and I'll shed nary a tear either way.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

Majority of the state has taken a big hit to the herd as was intended. The huge majority are not "excited" although there are a handful of idiots from the management agency itself that go around to many of the boards singing praises.

A poll done recently by the game commission showed very high level of dis-satisfaction pretty much statewide. Though Im sure there are some decent areas of population they are MUCH fewer and much further between than they used to be.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

And for deer management here, there is no dnr. Its the Pa game commission which most call the game less commission.

They have no credibility with the huge majority of hunting public of pennsylvania.

This from an independant biologist backed by the states largest sportsmen organization:

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 1 year 30 weeks ago

I agree with the educated majority here. What is going on in Pennsylvania is not right. Its dirty politics at play.

Chris, I understand that "the deer herd is about where it should be in most places now" is just your opinion. But I think you opinion stinks.

But I also understand that the only few that generally hold that opinion here are pgc employees friends and family or few off limits land hunters hunting in their little houses built overlooking their little beet patches, sealed off from reality or actually any semblance of "hunting" whatsoever.

Anyway, thats MY opinion.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Good point Ggrey. Sorry Chris, but all you do is highlight your ignorance of the situation. Pgc didnt address 1/10 of the information that Eveland compiled, much of which is documented fact and irrefutable.

As for the "errors" pgc tried to claim, funny you seem to left out Evelands rebuttle. Pointed out how pgc did nothing but try to twist up what he had said.

Btw, the site you got that information from was from former pgc commission Roxanne Pallones website. If you know anything at all about this former commissioners enviroextreme views and voting history, I dont think much more explanation is necessary.

Anyway, good to see you finally came back with yet another id biguy. ha ha.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Btw, noone flooding anything with posts or minuses except you biguy, but failing miserably. Hunter of Pa are VERY passionate and usually dont put up with lies and bs being posted on the topic. Sorry about your luck.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kevin Ortz wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

I have been looking into the Pa Audubon society. I never realized how radical they were.

I read one article from a Ted Williams asking that fellow environmentalists take officer positions in sportsmen groups, post as hunters on some of the message boards and other things... So that their political voice could be magnified. That guy had 2 or 3 similar articles, i believe one was titled GUNS & GREENS or something like that.

I read anothe audubon article that basically proves what everland has been saying. And i found it right on Audubons websight. From Audabahns website;

***Alt had been on the job only two years when Audubon Pennsylvania and a coalition of environmentalists and sportsmen called the Pennsylvania Habitat Alliance hired 10 eminent scientists to prescribe ecosystem-based deer management for the East, with Pennsylvania the case study.****

Seems to parellell everlands claims.

Here is the link to that one.

http://www.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite0507.html

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I have been following this. By my count Bioguy/crookedstick/liljohn/treehorn have all used alot of the same phrases and arguments, posted shortly after each other, including in the middle of the night minutes apart! lol. Also always attacking the same users. Funny thing is all of his aliasses arent doing him any good other than make him look even more foolish.

Moderators really need to can this clown and his pgc luvin' aliases.

Just an observers 2 cents.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

bio-crooked-treehorn.... That statement was made by a pgc insider and by someone that didnt even know eveland. The writer was a highly biased one and the magazine took alot of heat for the slander attempt and misinformation.

another good link from the states largest sportsmen organization of 200,000 strong.

http://www.acslpa.org/html/is_the_deer_audit_a_con.html

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Pa qdma is a complete joke and part of the pgc support system. A bunch of real characters running that show. Environmentalists that got on board to help a struggling fledgling organization and in return gave themselves legitimacy and magnify their voice. In the mean time the only other sportsmen group that supported pgc was pennsylvania fed. sportsmen, and it lost them over 30,000 members.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

We have several hunters who actually hunt Pa and know what is going on that do not support the bullcrap.

Then we have you Jackie, a guy with umpteen identities, one of which(jackie treehorn) is a por nographer form a movie!!! And have been caught on another thread actually LYING about being a hunter when you admitted a few months previously in another discussion that you WERE NOT and didnt even own a gun!!!!

Now just based upon that, what in gods name would make anyone think you have any credibility here whatsoever????

You have none.

And i DIDNT say qdma was a joke. I think their practices are just fine for anyone who wants to implement them or whatever.

I said the PA branch of qdma is a joke, and stand by it. It is largely run by some politically motivated buffoons.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I have dug into his claims and who the guy is. I have also spoken to legislators on the issue. Unlike you i dont just believe anything just written on the internet. lol.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://www.outdoortalknetwork.com/art353.html

Commissioners, others, decry Game Commission deer policies

February 11, 2011

By JIM RUNKLE - jrunkle@lockhavencom

Save | Post a comment |

LOCK HAVEN - Is there any other state agency less responsive to the concerns of its constituents than the Pennsylvania Game Commission?

For attendees at Thursday's meeting of the Clinton County commissioners, the answer to that question was a nearly universal and unequivocal "no."

Local residents joined the commissioners in decrying ongoing policies they say have damaged the state's hunting quality, specifically when it comes to the white-tailed deer.

The conversation was sparked by Timothy L. Havener, local president of a group called Firearms Owners Against Crime, who has been at odds with some local governments concerning his support of the right to bear arms and his opposition to local restrictions on weaponry.

However, this is a big hunting area, and Commissioners Tom Bossert, Adam Coleman and Joel Long are among those who count themselves friends of the hunting tradition.

The commissioners say hunters are paying more in license fees each year, but are seeing fewer and deer "because of deliberately misleading and deceptive Game Commission policies that call for management of wildlife while actually promoting lumbering interests over hunters."

The criticism also arrives on the heels of a recent Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruling dismissing the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania's legal challenge to the state Game Commission's deer management program

Senior Judge Barry Feudale's summary judgment against The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania was made public Wednesday.

In his opinion, Feudale said the group offered no evidence that the commission's management of the state's deer herd is based on fraud or any abuse of its discretion. He said its arguments reflect "merely a disagreement" with the commission's philosophy.

The group, a longtime critic of the PGC, claimed agency's policies are based on inadequate data and allow overhunting of does that will hurt deer-hunting opportunities in the long run.

Coleman, an avid hunter, has a different story.

"We were driving ... and saw a herd of five deer and we stopped for 15 minutes because you never see five deer in one place in Clinton County anymore," he charged.

Coleman said studies based upon the more populated areas of the state might show deer in abundance, but an infrared scan of actual numbers in central Pennsylvania will show a different story, a dwindling of the herd that's hurting hunting, tradition, tourism and the forest itself.

Havener pointed to a study that counters the PGC's claims, one that was conducted by wildlife biologist John Eveland.

The Game Commission, in 2000, began a deer-reduction campaign that has collapsed the herd in many parts of the state "with no intention of returning the deer population to a respectably huntable status," Eveland concludes. "The PGC chose to unilaterally decimate the dominant herbivore from the Commonwealth's natural ecosystem and to destroy one of the nation's top deer hunting programs - setting in motion great and increasing impacts to Pennsylvania's hunting tradition and socioeconomy."

"I'm 100 percent with you on this," Coleman told Havener. "It's pretty clear to me that somebody doesn't want any deer in Pennsylvania."

Bossert, also a long-time hunter, said he believes the Game Commission should be stripped of all authority and its duties should be turned over to the state Legislature for the creation of a "more responsive" organization.

Long said he was not a hunter, but he believes in wildlife management and in balancing varied interests within the environment. He said he does not believe PGC is living up to its mission.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Denny every single statement you make about eveland is a twist of the facts and taken purposely out of context. Eveland never made the exact claims some of you environmentalist extremists like to counter, and the slander attempts are flat out comical.

JUst about everything you mentioned has been gone over a hundreds times on other discussion here, as well as other sites, and you guys dont have a leg to stand on. If anyone wants to see who it is that hates anyone anti deer plan, unified sportsmen and anyone else against the deer sham plan, do a search for aubuon + Pa deer management . Or audubon + unified sportsmen. Pretty clear where some of these supposed "hunters" on some of these boards are coming from. lol

I also see no reason to acknowledge your eveland slander on every post, since Pee wee herman could have made his claims and as long as they are verifiable...as they are, then i dont see where it would matter much. Eveland is also beyond your reach. Its clearly your pathetic attempt to take the attention off of that which it belongs. Pgcs shoulders and their failing deer plan. Want to see malcontents who deserve to be fired? Look no further than there.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"Really? What I noted above is directly quoted from ACSL's glowing testimonials on Eveland's "qualifications" and from his own resumes. Those claims have not been supported by anyone else."

Sure they have. The man had to provide his information to the judge if he was to testify with the claimed credentials, And some of the legislators have looked into. You also dont gain the support of a 200,000 member organization by being some bum off the street claiming whatever you like. Despite audubon/enviromaniacs out there who look to slander ANYONE and EVERYONE that is against pgc and their failed deer plan saying otherwise.

"How does it "sweeten the pot" if none of the statements (accusations) can be substantiated by qualified third parties?"

They have been. Other than a couple of you extremists doing damage control intentionally trying to twist actually what was said, and purposely taking things out of context to slander on a couple of boards...and noone taking you seriously.... If Jesus Christ Came down from the sky and said something about the failed deer plan, he would get the EXACT same treatment from you few. Everyone else always has, and always will.

"Might as well face facts: Those who refuse to believe HR was necessary and continue to whine about "no deer", are still grasping at straws and continually looking for new heroes to believe in."

Not hardly. I realize how politics work. But the facts speak for themselves regardless of whether they are pointed out by a biologist like eveland or a shoe salesman. It doesnt take a genius to point out inappropriate collusions, and glaring conflicts in data. The fact eveland also is credentialed is just icing. Though with all the dirty politics, ive never been deluded enough to believe it was really likely to make a difference anyway.

As for usp making the claims for a decade, they sure as hell werent the only ones, and they were all right smack dab on the money.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Whoops. Wrong address here go.

http://pgchallofshame.com/news/main.htm

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from sambo wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

The only thing that would make me excited about Pa is to hear that a few of the greed commission employees were fired I now do all my hunting in Ohio. The quality of hunting in the places in P.A. I used to go is not worth the effort or money. I do not want to support the greed commission extreme agenda by buying a license there either. Which is ashame because i have a lot of family in Pa.

When I come home on vacations, there is not a lot of love in Pennsylvania for the Penna. Game Commission.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Deer numbers suck here in this part of 2a. 55,000 tags obliterated them. Maybe some off limits not hunting highly posted lands like parts of all units have lots of deer... But not here.

Its a joke. The tags need slashed.

There are less in areas like 2g and there should be. The mature woods and all the other things effecting those forests there....you cant hold nearly as many deer as the better areas of the state.

So man up, learn to hunt, or quit trying to throw "the other guy" under the bus while you try to lobby for "your little area".

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Huntingpaul wrote 3 years 1 week ago

Pahollowhunter, you are a joke. This is one of the enviromentalist nuts that doesnt even hunt but is trying to do damage control. He posts on about 5 other boards under various handles. Reason i know this, is because he has said the exact same thing, and hes been tracked to other sites under one of those aliases talking badly about hunters and promoting a "hands off" ecosystem.

Real Nut this'n.

Btw, you cant read, Pat didnt say one word about the gameless commission doing a good job.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from quinton44 wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

"Southern PA has a great deer population."

Southern Pa HAD a great deer population.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

"As for me, I don't hunt in PA and couldn't care less about the deer population there. Not my problem..."

Then i guess you have no reason to post in these threads unless you are lonely or simply looking to stir the pot and argue.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Some good links that might enlighten our friends.

http://foac-pac.org/dmdocuments/DVD-DeerMismanagemntOverView-Final.pdf

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kevin Ortz wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Ready to see some -1's to fly in folks? I have been putting off commenting on anything related to PA deer management for about 2 weeks now, but I'm getting to the point where I can't hold out any longer."

Wow. No self control as well as a liar.

" 1. First off, lets look at the data presented by deerz1. It covers only 1 WMU in the entire state and shows a steady decline in buck harvests."

We could just as easily point to just about every single unit in the state which have also been reduced according to the annual reports data.

"because in 2004 the PGC switched from using county based management units to habitat based management units. In other words, you're not comparing "apples to apples" throughout your data set."

WRONG> The data was compiled in the SAME format in the AUDIT. IF you had any clue what you were talking about, youd have known this.

" This being the case, lets look at 2004 forward and only look at the does (since its the doe harvest that needs to remain stable, not the bucks):"

You dont look at the DOES! lmao. The allocations control doe harvests. Also the doe harvests DECREASED even though the allocations INCREASED! lma o.

Roseberry himself said the herd had been further reduced, there is no conspiracy theory or big secret...at least not any more. All along he claimed stabilization until the lies were pointed out. See the recorded video of the April pgc meeting on the pgc website. Going off half cocked again biguy/extremist.

"2. After sifting through all of the conspiracy theories that Eveland writes about,"

Documented facts that even a kid can crosscheck for themselves if they care to put forth the efforts.

"3. The lack of regeneration in PA is NOT caused by acid deposition. If it were, then you would see the exact same lack of regeneration INSIDE of deer exclosures that you see outside of them. Instead, what you see is a jungle inside a deer exclosure, and nothing but ferns outside."

Acid rain effects growth and effects plant abilities to recover from browsing or outgrow the browsing pressure. And invasive species, timbering practices etc. are all well known and proven contributors that effect regeneration and magnify effects of normal deer browsing.

"5. PA's deer herd is most limited by the abundance (or lack-there-of) of winter food sources."

Wrong. The carrying capacy overwinter has been PROVEN in many areas to be double what it is no. Its only limited by nearly 2 million total deer tags! Unreal. lol

"6. This year we had WINTERKILL!"

HA Ha Ha! ....No we didnt. No significant winterkill. Nada. Nyet. Even through our all time high density years winter kill was a nonissue and very insignificant according to Pa records, no more significant than any other similar northern retion of the nation. Also with high harvests and 1.6 million deer, Seems we had plenty surviviing! lma o.

"Winter kill should not happen in PA. The winters here, even in the northern parts of the state, are mild in comparison to the ADKs of NY and throughout New England."

Wrong. We should and we will, at minimal numbers, and especially in harsh years. The ADK's speak for themselves. High winter kill due to harsh winters will not ALLOW the herd to grow. Ours has been proven to grow and flourish at FAR higher densities, thereby alleviating your cockandbull story.

A". If you want to read more on what I'm talking about, check this out: http://huntamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?3990-Evelands-claims-shot-do... and http://skunkinthewoodpile.com/?p=3456"

That says heaps about you. Frequenting the site of the antideer queen herself. The commissioner responsible for putting together the deer plan. the most environmentally extreme commissioner of our 100 year history.

"8) You have the power to influence your local deer herd. Statewide management changes do not need to take place when you could be putting in effort to manipulate your own hunting experience. "

The average guys do not. If you dont own land, and the HUGE percentage do not, whether you like it or not. Not a reasonable or rational solution to anything other than taking the blame from where it belongs.

"Alright...I'm done...let the -1s roll in!"

You expect it, because you realize completely that what you said there is complete bunk and aside from your other aliases everyone else knows it.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://www.acsl-pa.org/pdf/eveland_makes_population_progress_crunch2.pdf

Thanks for the article. Now those are the fact.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Its not a matter of what i think of your experience. You flat out lied. Deer hunting was discussed... You said your hunting was just fine... Then someone pointed out you never even owned a friggin gun a few months earler! you werent trying to learn anything, you just lied to make a point in the discussion and got caught... You also dont "try to learn something" by using several id's and hurling personal attacks with each one and little else.

Now all the antipgc posters are cumulatively Mr. Eveland? HA he he he HA.AH HA HA HA! HE HA UH, LOL SNORT HEE HAW!

And his science has been exposed? he he he ha ha ha ho ho ho! lolol

Brilliant deductions there Inspector Cousteau/liljohn/jackietreehorn/biguy.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Did i mention... HA HA HA HA HA HA!

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Well lets analyze this. We have statements from pgc whom are the ones accused. And we have a statement from the site of a ex pgc commissioner Pallone, one of the most hunter hated commissioners of all time, who spearheaded the deer plan and helped put this all together in the first place.

Yeah. Thats really worth alot.

Keep diggin' boyz, but the opposition has been over evelands claims with a fine tooth comb and have yet to come up with anything of substance.

Maybe a few more unbiased roxanne pallone skunk in the woodpile or Doyle Dietz articles will do the trick. (laugh)

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

~John Eveland Answers PA Game Commission Claims ~

On May 11, 2011, the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) released a rebuttal to my independent investigation of the agency's deer management program. In the first paragraph of PGC's rebuttal, the agency stated that "...there have been many mistakes and errors on the part of Mr. Eveland, as well as completely false allegations." I will, herein, respond to PGC's rebuttal, as well as reaffirm my investigative conclusions regarding the PGC's management of the Commonwealth's deer herd.

http://blogs.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/sports/rod-a-gun-club/2740...

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerz1 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Levdansky is and always has been, a weasel, so I don't miss him at all. Neither does anyone else that I know."

Alot of the antideer types thought he was a hero, and i didnt see you complaining about him on any of the boards before he got chitcanned for his actions.

"The people accused of being involed in the "great conspiracy" aren't phony hunters like that photo op pinhead John Kerry. They are pretty much all very dedicated and successful deer hunters."

Wrong. They ALL have other stronger interests in deer than hunting them, overriding interests that are actually CONFLICTS of interest. And some are known for a fact to be simply license buyers who pretend to be hunters because of political aspirations... Trying to gain seats on the board of commissioners for one example that comes to mind quickly. Know of one person that attempted such (woman) and failed thanks to watchdog hunters that foiled the plan. Didnt matter a whole lot because they cannot police every candidate and the board is all too easily stacked anyway.

As for the choice of WMI, Levdansky didn't have that much clout to "make" the entire Leg. Budget/Finance Comm. handpick them over Eveland."

He made it HIS priority, went public with it as "HIS baby" pushed forward by presenting audubons (Shaeffers) proposal, and he also would not consent to eveland but wanted wmi and strongly... He held the purse stringe as head of the legislative budget and finance commitee and he had EVERYTHING to do with pushing for wmi to get the audit. Its not even debatable, its a written in stone fact.

"WMI actually has irrefutable credentials and a long, distinquished track record;"

Yeah, high ranking officials that were previously fired for payroll altering allegations... Yep. White as snow. lm ao.

"Eveland's claims are suspect. Dubrock wasn't even with PGC when Eveland claims he did all his magical works with bear, deer and elk, so how can Dubrock be responsible for anything?"

What it gods name are you babbling about?? The lying claims that nothing could be found about eveland by pgc werent made 50 years ago, they were made recently. Your logic is mind numbing.

"ONE PGC Comm. made public commentaries about firing people and that was Tom Boop,"

And there were support by others. They did not say so publicly because they had nothing to gain by doing so, since the stacked board would not support their actions anyway. Boop, being the champion for Pa hunters that he is, just didnt care and "put it out there. You can take my word for it or not. Doesnt matter either way, i have nothing to gain by lying, as its totally meaningless without majority support anyway.

"Don't much care if some anonymous, babblin' fool calls me a liar on the internet. Been through about 10 years' worth of this crap already, with assorted other anonymous, babblin' fools, mostly USPee groupies."

Respectfully sir, you bring alot of it upon yourself.

"Same BS accusations and conspiracy theories."

They are fact, and reason this still goes on is because the facts havent changed one bit.

" They went to court twice with their "deer mismangement" foolishness and lost. Three times, if we count the "do over" that the court gave 'em on their first lawsuit."

Yet they never had their day in court. However i agree, it was buffoonery. They could have spent their money much more wisely then a sure to fail lawsuit against the state agency. The biggest blunder of all was signing off on the audit so that pgc would no longer be afraid that wmi employees could be called to testify against them, while pgc was sure to use the info. SO they couldnt call wmi and it also permitted a fraud audit to be carried out by known highly biased questionable outfit. PURE unadulterated buffoonery. I think usp's heart is in the absolute right place and that is with hunting, but i think they lack really good leadership guidance. Though i wish them well.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from sandman81 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

So. Who cares? If i recall correctly the dude runs some kind of canned hunt operation? Deals with exotics all the time. If he didnt cross the i's and dot the t's then he will pay for it, as he should. I am sure pgc is salivating over getting their licks in, since Mohr has been a thorn in the environmentalist sides, which is one thing i will give him credit for. Other than that, couldnt care less one way or the other. Do the crime no matter how petty, pay the dime. The only one immune to paying for their actions is the pgc.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sam06 wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

I read the Everland website, and he sure did do an incredible job to expose the Pa gameless commission. I also agree that the game less commission intentionally ignored 99% of the findings because there is nothing that they could say. I saw where he is supported by Pennsylvanias 2 largest sportsmen groups. That says alot. I also read the sourgrapes slander piece on the skunkpile site, that is run by one of the most famous deer haters of our time.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pat Simpson wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

"Sorry Pat. As of early this month, the Game Commission has permission to continue business as usual. The Unified Sportsmen lawsuit challenging the Game Commission's deer management practices has been dismissed"

Sorry Pat? I didnt say anything at all about Unified sportsmen or a lawsuit. Ive heard about it, but it doesnt have anything at all to do with anything ive said.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Pighunter, it appears yo are simply doing damage control to help out your "friend". The persons gender was questioned because some comments "he/she" made, were WORD FOR WORD the exact same posts made on another popular hunting message board.

I am not surprised that the plusses and minusses are flying, due to the fact that your "FRIEND" made a post asking that some of you pile them up on other users, including me. Guess that plan backfired, because people can see right through the lame arguments and personal attacks....then whine when they get the exact same in return.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I dont see a tenth of the deer from the roads we used to see here in unit 2-A.

The herd is being smashed by sixty thousand doe tags.

That is where the deer went.

I also think some people should be fired at the commission.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kyle Trey wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Bioguy, as i see it, your problem is you are not well educated on these issues and you also state completely untrue proven false statements and push them as fact. I will not even try to figure out if it is intentional or just due to lack of knowledge on the topic. But either way, you then turn 'round and whine that your *opinions* arent accepted by others. I dont think anyone has a problem with another person giving *opinions* no matter what they are. But pushing complete mistruths on an already controversial topic is not the way to make many friends.

Those are just my thoughts on the matter.

Since you want it so bad -1 for you on the way.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

The southern Pa deer herd is far from great. Yes, it once was. Now it might still be on restricted access lands. In most areas from southcentral to southwestern, its a pathetic shadow of what it was. The goof troop at the game commission really fixed us up.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwyeru wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

But I agree deer30, losts of deer in Maryland where I have hunted too.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 37 weeks ago

I agree Dwyeru. That seems to the the consensus among pretty much everyone in the area. Of course you have "pockets" of posted lands where there might be a few more deer. Overall, though, the trend is one largely of a much declined herd.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

htt p://ww w.acsl-pa.or g

Remove spaces and type in browser to get to work. Site wont let me post a link here.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 27 weeks ago

It seems to me alot of folks here made some very accurate observations about hunting in Pa, and made some really good points. And not once did I see mention of "no deer".

Guess you just want to be argumentative. Some people will say or do anything to get attention.

Enjoy your consistent success on public land bullshooter.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 2 years 45 weeks ago

Perhaps your a blowhard.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from ED Anthony wrote 2 years 25 weeks ago

I think they should go back down for 3 days for does, cause from the 1's day of bow hunting I saw 4 small does one m. they should do something about it for the years to come thank you.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from BringEmNorth wrote 2 years 24 weeks ago

So I've read through this entire thread now. I'm not going to pretend that I know all the facts for both sides or tell you I'm up on the latest news or political wars over this issue. Being a native to PA and an avid whitetail hunter all my life I would just like to offer my personal observations and opinion. I was raised in 3b and have hunted it all my life. I worked on farms all over the area growing up since I was 11 years old. I always took notice to the wildlife that surrounded me. It was abundant in my home of Bradford county and the surrounding counties. When I was 18 I moved to Southern PA, Lancaster county. I still have a hunting camp in Bradford and spend as much time as possible there. Over the past 16 yrs that I have been traveling back and forth between northern and southern PA I have noticed a dramatic decrease in deer sightings both while traveling and when I'm in the woods. I remember the days of seeing large amounts of deer on a daily basis in Northern PA. Now when I'm up there I'm lucky to see 5 in a week either traveling or in the woods. In my opinion not being bias to either side of the argument and just stating what I have observed all my life in PA there is a huge decline in the deer population of PA and it is very disturbing to me. I am a private land owner and myself and my family have taken steps with surrounding land owners to make sure there are still deer in PA for our children and grandchildren to hunt and enjoy watching. I hope that others will follow suit to preserve PA's deer population.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 21 weeks ago

Hmm, lets see if we can clear up this huge mystery. Where did all the Pa deer go?

Lets see in the last 10 or 12 years what all has occurred?

Added early muzzleloader for antlerless deer.
Added early sr. Jr rifle season for antlerless.
Made antlerless season two weeks long. Some instances a week including 2 saturdays instead of two or three days total it was previously.
Added a TON of tags. Almost and some years even over a MILLION!
Added DMAP to kill more antlerless deer.
Legalized Crossbows.
Made it legal for anyone straight from the womb to be able to shoot deer. Previous age was 12.

Now the pgc and enviromaniacs are pushing for sunday hunting to top all this off. Would have been a great thing, if not for the antideer agenda that is in place currently.

Add all that up and i think its pretty clear where the deer are "going".

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

It is great to see many that care making themselves educated on the issues here in Pa.

I hope that you all have voiced your views to the state legislators & governor and will continue to do so.

While getting the bums and dirty politics out of our sports is a dauting task here in Pa, please dont give up, the fight is just.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from flathead71 wrote 2 years 30 weeks ago

Nearly a million doe tags ever year is just outrageous. They need to get the new-age environmentalists out of the game commission.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dantheeman wrote 2 years 22 weeks ago

I was just looking around on the net the other day and found something that made my eyes nearly pop out of my skull! I had a length discussion with my local legislator about the issue and he too seemed to be shocked! I found this link posted on another hunting site.

http://www.acsl-pa.org/

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntinhuntinhuntin wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I see tons of deer at my property in PA. I manage it very well and I have strict policies with my neighbours with how many deer we take a year. Management is a huge key to having succesful deer herds.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from tyty wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

Quality here has declined to its worst in my 30 year hunting career. Makes sense i suppose, you cant cut the herd in half and not expect to have fewer bucks born in the first place. And more pressure is put on the many fewer that actually exist.

Some big bucks in areas like urban areas where they always have been.

Being ranked 21 in boone and crockett pretty much speaks for itself.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from DennyF wrote 1 year 23 weeks ago

You wont see 20 deer a day archery hunting in this part of southwestern Pa unless you are hunting highly off limits lands over food plots. Those days most places in this area at least are long gone. There are probably deer numbers here now in most areas that should be the case in the northwoods, and the northwoods are just a flat out joke.

You are a funny guy steve. Even pgcs own annual reports data as well as the fraudit shows far less than a 20 or 30 dpsm AVERAGE for the north.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 3 years 16 weeks ago

I grew up hunting in Central PA in the mid-70's and 80's. It wasn't uncommon to see a dozen deer a day. Getting a doe during the two day doe season wasn't a great feat but I was sixteen before I got a buck. I was estatic because it was a "huge" 6 point.

Those days are gone. I live in North Central PA now. Most hunters here won't see a dozen deer in 5 years of hunting. Deer numbers are definitely way down. The number of hunters are also way down. Deer have become even more nocturnal than ever, especially during the rifle season.

But...buck numbers and big buck numbers are way up. With the antler restrictions, I've seen and taken beautiful bucks each year but one for the last 5 years. (8+ points). The key is scouting and being able to spend a lot of time in the woods. You need to know where the deer are and aren't. (They aren't everywhere anymore.) It may take me six weeks of archery hunting and/or two weeks of rifle hunting to see a dozen deer but chances are several of these will be nice bucks. ("Seeing" and "bagging" are different things.)

I share your concerns though. Can you hunt 20 days a year for deer? Because deer numbers are way down and hunting for days at a time without seeing deer can often be the norm, I know a lot of people have quit the sport. I don't see many young hunters in the woods. I think a balance has to be struck between the demands of the car insurance and timber companies who would like to see every deer dead and interests of sportsmen. I love the antler restrictions but think we've gone too far with the "if it's brown shoot it down, philosophy" pushed onto the Game Commission by special interests. (Yes, I've found those spike bucks that some slob shot and left dead in the woods because he took a shot at the first deer that walked by.)

But I think if you wait it out, as hunter numbers continue to drop, you will see more deer. I've seen an increase in deer numbers over the past 3 years after a very dramatic drop from 2000 to 2007. Fewer hunters equals more deer. But...what does that mean for the longterm future of hunting in Pennsylvania? Apparently, the anti-hunters are looking at mandatory deer birth control .

Anyhow...that's my thoughts.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 3 years 13 weeks ago

.300winmag, I guess I'd suggest hunting pockets where you'd be lucky to see a deer at 50 yards. You'll need to scout out these places and find areas that are being used as bedding and hiding areas, the thicker the better.

As for what seems like an invitation for all the Northern PA hunters to come south and help all of you with your massive deer herd, be careful what you wish for. We got the deer under control here. Do you want more hunters down there on what little public land there is? Or, are you inviting us on to some of the private-posted land?

Actually, even with few deer, I'm not trading a hunting experience for me that begins when I walk out the back door and ends when I get tired of wandering. A 3 hour drive for hunting in the suburbs isn't for me. "God's Country" means wide open spaces, no posted land, and certainly more than ever, no other hunters. Life is about tradeoffs I guess.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Sorry Pat. As of early this month, the Game Commission has permission to continue business as usual. The Unified Sportsmen lawsuit challenging the Game Commission's deer management practices has been dismissed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20110209/pl_usnw/DC45396

The management plan will continue to focus on a major reduction in deer numbers statewide with the particular emphasis on applying practices that have worked in the north central part of the state toward the rest of the state.

There's no arguing that the Game Commission has been effective so far. Look at management area 2G for example where doe numbers have fallen so much that there are more bucks than does in the overall population. Now that the tipping point has been reached in 2G, a continued focus on anterless harvests there will all but eliminate deer as a threat to the timber industry within 3 or 4 years in that particular WMU.

So all of you down-state, grab up all the doe tags, bonus tags, and DMAP tags you can...and if you have some private land, take down your posted signs while your at it (or at least invite me down to hunt) I've changed my mind about the 3 hour drive. Let's see if we can all bag 4 or 5 deer in 2011 in your neck of the woods!

In the meantime, the real forest issues in Pennsylvania - acid rain, climate change, and non native insects are being ignored in terms of the quick fix of all but eliminating the whitetailed deer because they browse on hardwood seedlings.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from mdpaulus wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Denny,
Obviously carrying capacity has everything to do with it. From everything I have read they did this because the forest production was falling and could not maintain itself, which is first sign of over population. Second it says that they were concerned with deer herd health with would be a concern with a large deer herd. So you can bash them and they might be as you say they are but from the true scientific papers they had their reasons and rightfully so. Now to take it to the extreme they did that might not be necessary but I do no live/ or work there so I don't know what the land can handle. Here in the good grazing land we can have 1-2 deer per acre. But in a good mature forest it is not that high. I wish all you PA hunters luck and hopefully it all works out for you in the end.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Wow! A guy doesn't log on here for a while because it's summer and there's a lot do do out there...

Anyhow, time to get out there and scout for what deer there are. Also, your (first of several rounds of) anterless applications were due to a County Treasurer Monday. Whether you use it or burn it is up to you... chance to make a real statement one way or the other.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from mgw403 wrote 2 years 31 weeks ago

I have been hunting in PA for the last 14 years. and each year is different in the number of deer I see. I love deer hunting and I think I love scouting more. I put months and months into scouting before and after the seasons. When I started hunting at age 12 there was the 3 day doe season and two week buck. However all that has changed as most of you know. The worst years of hunting for me would have to be the 3 or 4 years following the antler restrictions. I couldnt buy a buck let alone see one. I blamed it on the Game commission and what not. Although I am still not fully convinced the antler regulations are the working in all areas, I do believe they are helping. The GC gives too many doe permits and it is hurting the population in my area for does. On my trail cam this year I have about 17 different bucks but only a handfull of does. The problem is the unethical hunters. These are the people who buy doe tags for everyone in the family (even if they do not hunt) get 20-30 guys together and push every piece of land they can walk on killing anything that is brown. I believe that deer drives should be illegal. what happened to doing your homework and some scouting to harvest a deer. In my opinion driving deer is not hunting its killing.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 2 years 25 weeks ago

So, watching the news and the "Occupy Wallstreet" thing: A lot of the politics of the protestors is probably considerably to the left of mine but you have to think for a minute. If 99% of PA hunters want the deer population managed for the benefit of hunters, who does the current deer management policies of the Game Commission represent?

This whole thing seems tied more and more to an overall bigger problem of a government that no longer represents "us" or cares what "we" have to say. Our current representatives in Harrisburg don't seem to care. Maybe it's time for people who do care about what's important to the average hunter. Tea Party or Occupy Wallstreet, maybe we're all trying to solve the same issue.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 2 years 25 weeks ago

So, watching the news and the "Occupy Wallstreet" thing: A lot of the politics of the protestors is probably considerably to the left of mine but you have to think for a minute. If 99% of PA hunters want the deer population managed for the benefit of hunters, who does the current deer management policies of the Game Commission represent?

This whole thing seems tied more and more to an overall bigger problem of a government that no longer represents "us" or cares what "we" have to say. Our current representatives in Harrisburg don't seem to care. Maybe it's time for people who do care about what's important to the average hunter. Tea Party or Occupy Wallstreet, maybe we're all trying to solve the same issue.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from allegnmtn wrote 1 year 24 weeks ago

So, another PA deer season has begun. Are you SW and SE archery hunters still seeing 20 deer a day? The population crash continues here in NC PA. I'm still seeing more bucks than does on trail cameras....still looks like that population densities are 2-3 deer per mile in the prime habitat areas...basically zero in most areas. (The game commission disagrees but then again, they aren't out scouting. Their statisticians aren't either. A software program can't actually see deer.)

So with election season also upon us, what do we do? The Republicans back the industry interests that back the "if its brown shoot it down" management philosophy. The Democrats are pro-gun control and have a history of not supporting the rights of hunters. Neither party supports you as a hunter. If you don't believe me, ask your representative to tell you specifically what they are doing to change Game Comission deer management policies to increase deer numbers. Push them for the specifics and you'll find that the answer is "absolutely nothing". We are being played as fools by the Republicans who know we'll continue to give them our vote if the wave the gun control flag. The Democrats see us as an ever shrinking, irrelelevent reminant of a bygone era.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from october31 wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

Sorry to here that tyty, I know that most parts of the state have been hit hard by the doe tag situation, I know its not the way it should work but for the last 3 years I have been buyng as many doe tas as I can and dont use them but 2 or 3 dont make much of a differance, I guess I am lucky that I hunt a private farm with only two other guys in bow season but come rifle the farmer wants the doe gone so he lets anyone hunt as long as they take only does, could argue with him it is his property but there are some good bucks and I dont want to loose my spot

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahunter30 wrote 3 years 14 weeks ago

Just as an example, I was out this past Saturday till about 1pm with the bow (on public land) and filled my last doe tag. I saw 9 deer in 6 hours. I didn't see one other hunter. I guess nobody really wants to shoot a deer?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from .300winmag wrote 3 years 13 weeks ago

About 8 years ago when I was seven was the last of the good deer years up at my grandfathers camp. They built it in 1953, and about 30 years ago seems like the golden age of deer herds in pa, where story goes that you could empty your quiver or your box of muzzleloader balls in a day. Last year walked for seven miles in 8 hours and saw two deer running 500 yds away. To many people and too long a doe season. People are seeing less deer and not coming back up so the heard is starting to make a comeback

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Here's a fresh tidbit for whomever it was that listed the "PGC hall of shame" address here, which by the way is owned by one of the deer management plan's most notable critics and who is essentially a "professional" PGC hater:

USP's current prez and former PGC Commissioner, Steve Mohr, has pleaded guilty to two counts of importing "exotics" into PA, minus the required permits. The relevant section of the Game Code cited in the document refers to all exotics, not just birds, as in the first sentence of that section cited on the court docket itself.

Mr. Mohr wanted some wolves brought into PA and got caught. I expect the PA outdoor press will eventually give it some coverage, as word gets out?

http://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/MDJReport.aspx?district=MDJ-02...

If anyone ever starts a relevant "wall of shame", this'un might be a good start?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahunter30 wrote 3 years 15 weeks ago

I hunt deer all seasons in PA (exclusively on public land) and see deer consistently. I frequently speak to other public land hunters who say that they don't see anything. When I ask where they hunt, they usually tell me about some spot 50 yards off the road where they hang a stand and sit from 6 to 11 and 2 to 6. The fact of the matter is that if you want to see deer, you have to go where others aren't willing to go, and stay in the woods when everyone else goes out for lunch and heat. That usually means long hilly walks, thick brush, prickers, burrs, numb fingers and toes, ect. If your lucky, it will also mean a long painful drag out. For some reason it also seems to me that the guys who come out empty handed look like they won the lottery and emptied out a Cabelas with the proceeds. Hunting hard has been the difference for me year after year. Not sweet private land or mountains of gear. Take it from someone who lives and hunts here. There are lots of deer if your willing to study a bit and work harder than the next guy. There's my 2 cents.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Last weekend in 2G i saw a good number of bucks, does and fawns, although this is the time of year they like to show themselves so i know it means little. I'm fairly confident come hunting season i'll be able to find a few of them.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from october31 wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

I see far fewer deer but the quality has gone way up, I have taken some of the best bucks of my life in the last 6 years but its a lot harder to find them, alot more scouting than years past but it pays off big

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from walter18966 wrote 1 year 25 weeks ago

most of the posts on here are from intelligent, seasoned hunters. some are from complete morons. youcant say there are no deer in a state anymore accurately than you can say all democrats are on wellfare. its simply not true. ive hunted north central pa and southeastern for 25 yrs. im blessed to have harvested many deer, some 120-150 class bucks. the deer are here. but 5% of the hunters will always kill 95% of the deer (in any state). you have to be smart, hunt the wind, be agressive. use hunting pressure to your benefit. does the pgc suck? you betcha..but unless you can afford 5,000.00 hunts we're kinda stuck!

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 3 years 16 weeks ago

The scaling back of the 2 week doe season to a week or whatever it is now in 2g where i hunt will definitely help bring deer numbers back up a bit. The days of seeing 30 deer a day in the penn woods are certainly long gone(at least in the North), but i have had very few days afield in recent memory where i failed to see a deer. In pa that is. In NJ it happens daily.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from scratchgolf72 wrote 3 years 14 weeks ago

i hunt in 2A and have never had a problem seeing deer, i hunt public lands in Greene County. Im a Michigan resident so i typically only drive out and hunt opening day there. past 2 opening days ive hunted ive seen a 4,6, 8, 8, and 10 point bucks (i shot the two 8 points). and ill usually see 5-6 does a day. all i can say is south western deer numbers are great. My dad is from Pittsburgh and has hunted there all his life, and if there is one thing ive learned from him its go where the people arent, and those words of wisdom have seemed to help me alot when hunting PA's public lands.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahollowhunter wrote 3 years 1 week ago

Nope. For real. Live in South PA. Lots of deer to shoot here. And like our game warden says if we don't kill about half of them soon there going to come in like they are around Philly and shoot them for us. I say get out and get a few deer. Don't need the government doing it.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from mdpaulus wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

I have never hunted hunted PA so I do not know the situation. However I am with the game and parks in south dakota and will start by saying the commission has reasons for every move they make. It sounds to me like there is a concern because there is less deer than in the past. This could be a good thing because there is a "carrying capacity" for the deer population and to maintain a healthy deer population, the total deer per acre better be less than the carrying capacity. I would imagine there are plenty of deer around it just a matter of finding land with higher carrying capacities. From reading all the post it seems that southern PA has higher carrying capacity than does northern PA. My guess is that before the deer herd was over the carrying capacity and that raised concern within the game commission and they are trying to get the herd back into check with what the land can handle before something bad happens and the deer herd kills itself off.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Boy, i'm taking a beating here.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I'm not worried about it at all, just making fun.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"Looks pretty relevant to me. Some very interesting information in there."

Information, on that "wall of shame" site? More like a ton of propaganda, bluster and BS, stuffed into a five pound sack.

Relevant? Sure, if one skips the lack of accuracy and bias of the "reporting" on that waste of bandwidth? Is the Nutkin yarn still featured prominently on there? That as one of their first features, years ago.

Not surprised in a lack of interest in Mohr's shenanigans. Most of his disciples are excited by his usual approach to things, which is to ignore that which he doesn't feel obligated to follow.

He and his group seem to enjoy flaunting that which the rest of us generally try to abide by? Then accuse everyone else of being the "outlaws".

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

Well this deer that my uncle killed in PA last year gets me excited about the deer hunting up there.

www.deer30outdoors.com/hunting/deer/trophy-room/uncle-billy-deer-2011/

and from the trail cam pix I have seen on other forums, there are still huge bucks in PA. I am not saying that YOUR hunting is great, from your comments I'm guessing its not, but that doesn't mean that there are not others in PA whose hunting is. It can't be bad everywhere.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 1 year 24 weeks ago

2-3 per sq. mile? that's innaccurrate. More like 20-30.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from deerhunterrick wrote 3 years 15 weeks ago

Way to go pahunter30. You have to be willing to work for your deer. if you want to see deer 50 yards off the road go to a deer park or zoo. The deer have not moved out of state, nor have they all gone nocturnal. Fact of the matter is that too many deer hunters are not hunters at all. Deer are not stupid animals, you get a bunch of beer drinking fools with guns smelling up the woods and they go where they can fell safe. Amazed that anyone would even put beer drinking in with deer hunting. To all you beer drinking, smoking, non scouting, weekend shooting, wanna be deer hunters.Deer hunting is not something you can just shoot a few arrows or bullets a year sport and walk into a Walmart parking lot and see a deer sport. It's a knowledge based sport that requires skills and time.Favre didn't take off practices and just show up one day to throw the football around, did he? No. You don't perform brain surgery with a filet knife and a popular mechanic either.Starting by reading everything you can about whitetails. Then spend countless hours learning how they survive. Don't skim and there are no short cuts. The deer are alive and well in Pa. They got smarter by learning just how dumb humans are.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from PigHunter wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

Ignore the -1's with this bunch. F&S points are meaningless anyway. It's obvious the tactic is to flood discussions about PA deer management with multiple accounts, either with multiple people or many accounts belonging to the same person. It doesn't matter which, the results are the same. This is an attempt to shut down reasonable discussion.

Make a statement against the current game commission and/or note the lower deer population and you get 'rewarded' with 6 to 7 +1's. Defend the game commission or give an opinion that there are plenty of deer and you will get 'punished' with 6 to 7 -1's. One 'person' states his opinion about how bad the game commission is or how 'stupid' another poster is and very quickly one of the 'buddy' accounts will agree.

Being so bold as to state your contrary opinion will earn you personal attacks. They will research your earlier posts to try and find weaknesses. The 'friends' of this person will join in with such childishness as questioning someone's gender, accuse them of being a poster from another site, and try and portray them as being 'environmentalist' and not really hunters.

If you are secure in your opinion/gender/hunting ability/etc. then just ignore these 'people'. As for me, I don't hunt in PA and couldn't care less about the deer population there. Not my problem...

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from ethan_3 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

this has been going on for 29 weeks, and is stupid, just drop it, some people like the PA deer hunting and some dont, i dont hunt PA so idk, but lets stop the arguing like kids, i dont mind a little arguing but 29 weeks worth is too much somebody needs to be the bigger person, -1 me or +1 me idrc, and have a good day

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

southern PA has a great deer population. I hunt in MD each year just below the mason dixon and see great numbers of deer. I drive up to Gettysburg each trip and on the way to and around the battlefield the deer are numerous. I have seen some of the biggest bucks in my life in PA.

I have family scattered throughout PA from Hanover to Reading and always see plenty of deer on the way to visit.

They are still there. keep hunting hard, you'll find them again.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sneaky wrote 1 year 38 weeks ago

I don't know what it was like before, but I was up there last year for work, and I saw deer all over the place. Even saw a couple decent bucks.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from bobbyirwin81 wrote 3 years 15 weeks ago

The deer in northern PA have declined drastically over the past 25 years because of overhunting. They are few and far between, but there are some monster bucks in the Alegheny Forest and surrounding areas. If you want to see many deer in PA , go south. The numbers of deer in the SW portion of the state are impressive.
The archery hunting is great , and many nice bucks are taken every year.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

allegnmtn, I bowhunted 2G four days this year, saw about 18 deer (while hunting) and about 2/3 of them were bucks. My uncle a mile away saw 6 or 7 bucks chasing a single doe. Most of my camp saw more bucks than doe that week. I agree they went to far with the doe kill the past several years, but they have started to level off on that. I'm willing to take a wait and see attitude. A level buck to doe ratio can create some really good hunting. It is a little harder on the kids who want to see 20 deer a day though.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from PigHunter wrote 2 years 43 weeks ago

LOL, you proved my point ;-)

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

IF YOU SEE PLENTY OF DEER IN PA YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY AN IDIOT AND WILL HAVE YOUR PRECIOUS POINTS TAKEN!!!

Hmm. Who looks stupid here? Those seeing deer and saying so, or those that are whining and giving out dings?

If you drink a bunch of beer the night before and smell like it, then go sit on the same stump you've always sat on for years, you won't see deer. Period.

Hunting involves scouting and using your brain. The deer aren't obligated to show up within range. You have to find them.

As to where all the deer in PA are? ALL OVER THE DAD-GUM ROADS! I drive across both northern, central and southern PA yearly and see PLENTY. I have to watch out for them.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 39 weeks ago

southern PA has a great deer population. I hunt in MD each year just below the mason dixon and see great numbers of deer. I drive up to Gettysburg each trip and on the way to and around the battlefield the deer are numerous. I have seen some of the biggest bucks in my life in PA.

I have family scattered throughout PA from Hanover to Reading and always see plenty of deer on the way to visit.

They are still there. keep hunting hard, you'll find them again.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from DEER30 wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

This subject came up on another hunting forum on which I participate and those PA hunters are also excited about the numbers of deer they have been seeing and sing the praises for PA's DNR.

I think it boils down to the fact that PA is a big state. Some local areas may have great deer populations and others may be in decline.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 3 years 16 weeks ago

Like you i grew up seeing herds of deer in the Northern Pa. deer woods. Rarely a buck though. Today i see fewer deer but still see plenty. This year i hunted 4 full days in Archery season and saw multiple bucks every day. I did see more bucks than does but that was coincidental i believe. During rifle, which i couldn't make, our camp saw many does and few bucks. There're still plenty of deer in the penn woods. Hope your luck changes.

-6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Oops, left out one other addition to this'un here:

Our deer haven't been "exterminated". There are far fewer of them in many areas that once had far more deer, due to HR.

There are still many areas that have plenty of deer.

There are still some areas that have too many deer for their habitats and/or for human conflicts, primarily in areas of high human populations, where deer find easy sanctuary and it's hard to get hunting access.

>I've been hunting deer in PA for over 50 years. There has never been a time in those 50 years, when there were "enough" deer in each and every part of PA to make everyone happy. Hunters went where the deer were.

As before, people need to find deer to successfully KILL them. Just because an area once had far too many deer, doesn't mean those who hunted there, are eternally entitled to have them back again, in numbers that are far too high.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I agree with Denny. well said. It is hard for me to speak about the PA deer herd as a whole, because i hunt them only in one area. That said, i am always grateful when i see a deer in the woods hunting so i don't have to admit getting "skunked". I do see quite a few carcasses on the road to and fro camp, which to me is an indication of plenty of deer.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Eveland never made the exact claims some of you environmentalist extremists like to counter, and the slander attempts are flat out comical."

Really? What I noted above is directly quoted from ACSL's glowing testimonials on Eveland's "qualifications" and from his own resumes. Those claims have not been supported by anyone else.

How can quoting something that has been stated, be classified as comical slander attempts??? It is an interation of the man's own claims.

"Alot of evelands other statements showing pgc nonsense etc. only sweeten the pot. The statements above cover quite a bit, and even they alone show the deciet occurring at pgc."

How does it "sweeten the pot" if none of the statements (accusations) can be substantiated by qualified third parties?

Might as well face facts: Those who refuse to believe HR was necessary and continue to whine about "no deer", are still grasping at straws and continually looking for new heroes to believe in. First, it was USPee and their mouthpiece and that got them nowhwere. Now it is ACSL and Eveland picking up the issue and making the same accusations that USPee ran with for the past 10 years.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

you guys get yer antler-less tag apps in? I did.

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 1 year 30 weeks ago

Not worth my time...

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 28 weeks ago

Whatever buddy... I'll just continue to hunt hard, consistently fill my tags on public land and not give a flying rats arse about you guys crying that there are no deer (because you're wrong).

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from scrawford8872 wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Southern PA has a great deer population.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from pahollowhunter wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Pat Simpson is right. These guys need to get out and kill some deer. Me and my dad and my brother got 8 last year. We're going to get 12 this year. The game commission is doing a good job. I love hunting deer in PA

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 2 years 45 weeks ago

I'm ok with the negatives by those who disagree with me as i'm not always right. I've found personally that there are plenty of deer still in the Penn woods. Perhaps hunting skills are waning.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

QDMA and others dispute part-time biologist's claims (Mr. John Eveland's claims)
http://www.pabucks.com/deer-hunting-forum/viewtopic.php?p=47530

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

you have an answer for everything! only you are right! wah wah wah.

how do you know Eveland "doesn't need the money" from a couple of your posts back? that sounds like something only someone close to him would say? are you his financial adviser? seems shady to me...

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I spent lunch watching the 8 part video of Eveland's presentation and I think it was better to hear it directly from the man than through all of this message board BS. He clearly has some experience with bear & elk and was working with the PGC a while back. He is also clearly passionate about what he does.

I was turned off by the conspiracy theories about state congressmen and a perceived lack of fairness in this process. it's politics. it's the way it is. that's life.

on the other hand, there's always some truth in there... I don't like how this is such a political issue. also, I feel he's reaching when he mentions 2nd amendment ramifications. let's not go there. no one is taking our guns because of PA whitetail deer.

I think Part 6 of presentation was the most worthwhile part to watch. I agree, the suggestion of merging the PGC with the DCNR is a scary proposition, and a conflict of interest (ironically, since deer need the forests).

Maximum Sustained Yield vs. Ecosystem Management is where we are at.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Fillmore:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_XWCtL3EEc

Eveland states he was involved at Penn State and did the PGC's bear management plan in the 70s. He said he did it for elk as well, but it was shut down at some point. He did this starting a presentation to the ACSL.

Is this a straight up lie? Jesus, what a bunch of BS... all these anti-PGC guys beating down reasonable discussion here and elsewhere are nuts.

I don't even know who to believe. I'm out of this. Thanks for the exposure. I have better stuff to do...

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Levdansky is and always has been, a weasel, so I don't miss him at all. Neither does anyone else that I know.

The people accused of being involed in the "great conspiracy" aren't phony hunters like that photo op pinhead John Kerry. They are pretty much all very dedicated and successful deer hunters.

As for the choice of WMI, Levdansky didn't have that much clout to "make" the entire Leg. Budget/Finance Comm. handpick them over Eveland.

WMI actually has irrefutable credentials and a long, distinquished track record; Eveland's claims are suspect. Dubrock wasn't even with PGC when Eveland claims he did all his magical works with bear, deer and elk, so how can Dubrock be responsible for anything?

ONE PGC Comm. made public commentaries about firing people and that was Tom Boop, whose term expires this month. I have no animosity towards Boop, have spoken with him on numerous occasions over his 8 year tenure on the BOC. We just agree on little concerning his thoughts on current deer management.

I have spoken with nearly every member of the PGC/BOC over about the previous 12 years. No problems with any of them, as most were easy to talk with and served us well, whether I agreed with 'em, or not. It's not an easy "job", as they are essentially unpaid volunteers and all get their share of grief.

Don't much care if some anonymous, babblin' fool calls me a liar on the internet. Been through about 10 years' worth of this crap already, with assorted other anonymous, babblin' fools, mostly USPee groupies.

They've been on the same idiotic rant for that long, which Eveland's groupies are on now. Same BS accusations and conspiracy theories. They went to court twice with their "deer mismangement" foolishness and lost. Three times, if we count the "do over" that the court gave 'em on their first lawsuit.

Yep, we now have far fewer deer in PA, than we had by the year 2000. That's why it was called Herd Reduction. The majority of the hunters I know, can still find and kill deer each year. They just don't find as many as they once did. Neither do I, but it hasn't prevented me from finding enough to keep me fairly happy each fall. ;O)

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

You write much and in reality, have little useful to "say" here?

These claims, from ACSL's puffery on Eveland, which come directly from Eveland's resume:

As a University Research Scientist

Black Bear Research. [As a BIOLOGIST at The Pennsylvania State University]*, John conducted the first statewide scientific bear research program ever in Pennsylvania. The study included live-trapping, tagging, and radio-telemetry tracking of bears in order to scientifically determine the status of the statewide bear population, and to answer critical ecological questions.

He determined that there were less than 2,000 black bears in the entire state, and that the population was declining. [As a result, John wrote the first statewide bear management plan for the Pennsylvania Game Commission]*, which was immediately implemented in 1970 by the closing of the state bear hunting season in two separate years, subsequent reductions in the length of the season from one week (with interim one-day and, then, two-day seasons) to a maximum three-day season, the issuance of bear licenses for hunters, the classification of state bear management zones, and the statewide system of bear check stations during hunting seasons.

[To accurately age bears, he developed the Pennsylvania microscopic method of annular (tooth-ring) analysis]* using premolar teeth from living bears.

Okay for starters, the ones with the brackets/asterisks that I added, are NOT supported by the facts.

>He was not a BIOLOGIST at PSU. He was actually an undergratuate student helping to do field research, at that time. PSU has provided no validation for his claim. Why would PSU "lie"?

>PGC has no record of Eveland ever "writing the management plan for bears", as he claims to have done. Eveland's time frame for his claim far predates Dubrock's arrival at PGC. Dubrock's reponse to the claim, results from no one at PGC being able to find any record of Eveland's ever having done anything for PGC.

>Annular tooth ring dating of black bear teeth, far predates anyone ever having heard of Eveland.

But please continue to amuse yourslef with further blather on something which you obviously know little (to nothing), about. ;O)

It all goes back to the perceptions of many hunters, that since the implementation of Herd Reduction, PA now has "no deer". Serious claims have been made that conspiracies exist which were aimed at "exterminating" our deer herd, for anything from forest certification, to the eventual usurption of private land in the northern tier counties.

Our deer haven't been "exterminated". There are far fewer of them in many areas that once had far more deer, due to HR.

There are still many areas that have plenty of deer.

There are still some areas that have too many deer for their habitats and/or for human conflicts, primarily in areas of high human populations, where deer find easy sanctuary and it's hard to get hunting access.

We have plenty of deer in PA. Since HR, it's a tad more difficult for some to find them, that once found them in greater abundance and those folks are still pizzed over it and demand to have 20 or 30 running past 'em again on opening days, like they once had.

That's really about the bottom line, in all this hubbub over "no deer".

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Thank you Denny Fillmore for presenting the truth in this debate.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Like Jackie, weeks ago I started watching this topic with an open mind, wanting to learn both sides of the issue. I looked at the provided links and independently researched for more information. The links I posted were from that research.

I, for one, support the PGC plan and the necessary herd reduction. It has been reviewed multiple times and has been proven to be based upon sound principles. In my judgement, without a doubt, the anti PGC person with all the accounts has been exposed and has lost this debate.

Jackie, I think you have presented yourself very well, good job! And good luck in your hunting.

Denny Fillmore, thanks again for taking the time to present the truth in this matter. It was good to get the straight story. I hope you have a great season too.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Josh Giannino wrote 1 year 36 weeks ago

DEER30 I agree with you on pa deer, friends of mine hunt down there and shoot alot of does, and get nice bucks, and one friend hunts in central pa and seen 45 does in one week.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Well Kyle, I am not a PGC employee, a family member, a landowner or a lessee. I hunt hard and successfully, knowing my quarry and knowing it's place in an ecosystem that isn't just for deer hunters. My opinion is scientifically and socially sound, yours is just jaded.

If you want to see 50 deer a day, go to the zoo.

-8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

10 Modern Myths about Hunting in PA.
http://www.pabucks.com/10Modern.html

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

PA: Eveland, his critical report create buzz
http://outdoornews.com/pennsylvania/news/article_5c60e12c-2295-11e0-ac4f...

Described by some as given to extremes and self-aggrandizement, Eveland has allied himself with the Allegheny County Sportsmen's League in the state's deer wars, laying blame for "the disappearance" of the commonwealth's flagship species on politics, "a green certification scam," and the Pennsylvania Game Commission's kowtowing to a non-hunting agenda."

Eveland's qualifications have been debated on hunting-related websites, and a former Eveland colleague who spoke on condition of anonymity described him as smart, "but not always able to process information properly."

He said Eveland "likes to blow his own horn." His motivation for jumping into deer wars, the source said, may in part be "sour grapes."

Eveland lost a bid in 2009 to conduct an audit of the Game Commission's deer program, which state legislators instead awarded to the nonprofit Wildlife Management Institute of Virginia.

Although WMI came in with a much lower bid, Eveland claims WMI got the contract because the institute's vice president Scot Williamson had been part of the Game Commission working group that in 1998 helped craft the current deer-management plan.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

of course QDMA is a joke, Kyle, deerz1, taterd, dexy, dennyf, whoever you are! it isn't what you want or beleive in! duh! you have all the answers! you are right, everyone else is wrong.

i tell you what; you and the other 230,000 hunters who are soooo aginst the PGC's method, and also don't report your harvests to help assist in the process by the way, DON'T HUNT deer this year! that would fall in line with your problem with the issue at hand, right?

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

dude, who can even read your copy & paste rants?!

"Now, it seems only fitting that Eveland, who has thrust himself into the public spotlight, eat some crow with those grapes, or at the very least, a large serving of humble pie. Like so many selfish sportsmen who equate the worth of the overall hunting experience to filled tags, he has allowed neither facts nor research in preventing him from making many allegations that, at best, are erroneous and others that are - knowingly or unknowingly - completely false."

http://republicanherald.com/study-disproves-deer-allegations-1.1148288?l...

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

http://skunkinthewoodpile.com/?p=3456
PA Game Commission answers John Eveland, Wednesday, May 11th, 2011

'Based on his miscalculations, Mr. Eveland then concludes that “a dire circumstance likely exists – the deer herd is being grossly overharvested and is collapsing.” There is no evidence to support his conclusion.'

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

"Mr. Eveland’s finger-pointing, erroneous calculations, and inaccurate reporting mislead the public. None of his claims promote a constructive discussion on deer management, nor do they do anything to improve deer management for Pennsylvania’s citizens, wildlife or habitats."

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

The Game Commission employs an objective and open process to manage Pennsylvania’s white-tailed deer. The Game Commission has engaged the public to identify deer management goals. It also has completed citizens advisory committees in each of the state’s wildlife management units. These committees provided deer population recommendations that were considered along with deer and forest habitat health. In most cases, the Game Commission followed the citizens advisory committees’ recommendations.

The Game Commission’s deer program has been reviewed by professional wildlife biologists, investigated under a legislatively-sponsored audit, and challenged in court by lawsuits brought by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania. None of these reviews or investigations has identified deceptive practices or agenda-driven recommendations. The reason for this is simple: the Game Commission’s deer management program is an objective and scientific program that strives to meet our state constitutional obligation to manage wildlife and habitats for current and future generations.

The deer program routinely has solicited constructive criticism and uses the best available science to improve management decisions. Game Commission staff continually scrutinizes the deer program and strengthens it through field research, evaluations, and external reviews from wildlife professionals throughout the country. For information on all aspects of the Game Commission’s deer management program, please visit the Game Commission’s website, www.pgc.state.pa.us, and click on “White-tailed deer.”

In closing, as hunting and deer inspire deep and personal passions, I am under no delusion that this reply will end the debate. On the contrary, democracies are kept alive by thorough and rigorous debate. What I certainly do hope can be put aside are the outlandish conspiracy theories and claims that the Game Commission is attempting to “exterminate” the state’s deer. No one who works for the state’s wildlife management agency at any level would sit still or quiet if that were the goal, and such claims do nothing to move the discussion forward.

Jerry Feaser

Press Secretary

PA Game Commission

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

oh, and before taterd and deerz1 and the other clowns start pissing and moaning, I tend to believe the guy on here using his real name; Denny Fillmore. before any of you other sick f**ks.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

hey sandman81: thanks for re-posting the same links deerz1 did... I mean, man, I really needed to see the ACSL/Eveland link for the 40th time!

anti-PGC folk just regurgitating the same things up over and over...

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Oh stop. that was last year. we all have to start at some point. this is season 2 for me... and so what if I now buy my own firearms now that I am able to. doesn't mean I didn't use other peoples' guns or do small game hunting before. stop making this personal jagoffs. I am here to learn. come up with something new, Regurgitator...

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

go back and look at any of posts, douchenozzle. read them and find where I am an environmentalist, or from audubon.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

your position is weak, so attack others to confuse and make it personal. I have not defended anyone.

your anti-PGC mentality is the minority, like it or not. I can't wait to see what the next move is by your "team." more lawsuits? more pissing and moaning on message boards ad nauseum? what? what is the Great ACSL or Whatever Anti-PGC Group going to do next?

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"And in this case, its not very hard to figure out who is in the right."

and there lies the crux of the problem, Smarty Pants. You think there's a "right" answer to this "problem." And worse, you think you have the "right" answer. You don't get it.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

10AM on the third day of doe tag sales and WMU 2G, which many claim is now devoid of deer, has already sold about 2/3s of the 23,000 tags allocated for that WMU.

Yeah, I know: "They're just buying them to save the deer".

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

And for the record I am a graduate of Penn State's Wildlife Fisheries Science program and likely more "educated" than the folks that spend their time b*tching about the state's resource
management decisions.

-9 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

All well and good to quote Eveland, if his musings support your position, but understand a few "minor" details about his involvement in this haggle.

He is the one that approached ACSL with his "expose" on deer management, not the other way around. They have happily picked up his campaign and are now championing his views. While I've had regular contact over the years with ACSL/FOAC folks working on behalf of Second Amendment and other sportsmen's issues, their campaign to support Eveland, is not one that I support.

IIRC, Eveland initiated the first submition to the Legislative Budget/Finance Committee to do the proposed deer management audit. He was rejected by that Committee, in favor of WMI, which did the audit for far less money and oddly enough, actually has far better credentials than Eveland has. WMI regularly does similar audits for many other state wildlife agencies and have long had a stellar reputation among wildlife management professionals.

Eveland has made numerous claims in his resume, as to his wildlife research experience (claimed to have occured while at PSU), including taking credit for early bear studies in PA and doing work for the PGC. Thus far, no one at PSU can validate any of his claims, instead noting that he once did some research work as an undergraduate student in a group project overseen by their professor. The PGC has no record of him ever having done any sort of "research" for them. Ever.

Eveland has numerous commercial irons in the fire, including several focusing on wildlife photography and land projects. Google him, for a complete list of his assorted endeavors.

Nothing wrong with commerce, since we live in a capitalistic society, where doing well and making money, are both applauded.

Some may find something wrong with a guy who consistantly blows his own horn loudly, in search of other projects from which he may eventually profit?

I know several of the people personally, that he has villified in his "mismanagment" blather. None of the ones I know personally, are capable of the sort of conspiracies and misdeeds of which he accuses them. Most of them are far more accomplished deer hunters and outdoorsmen (and women), than I will ever be.

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

and there's deerz1... and immediately +8, everyone else, -8.

no point in discussing with deerz1... if you don't agree with him, you are wrong.

don't you get it, deerz1, taterd? you may have valid points, but you can't come on here and ram it down people's throats. can't even read your 6 paragraph rants! the same thing over and over and over... enough is enough bro!

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

at least I think for myself and don't gang up on people in here or elsewhere. do you have a confidence problem?

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 35 weeks ago

To all of you haters, there are still plenty of deer in PA. Like others have said, you need to do your homework, be willing to pursue them and accept that the days of herds of inferior deer roaming the northern forests are over. Like it or not, you're not the only ones with an interest in the forested lands. The timber industry is huge money, both for private landowners and for the state. The deer herd is about where it should be in most places now.

Man up and hunt for them, don't expect them to come to you.

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

I'd say the PGC does a pretty good job of rebuking Mr. Eveland's flawed arguments: skunkinthewoodpile.com/?p=3456

-10 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

my foot is yummy! seriously, if you go back and read my inquiries you'll see that I was only trying to learn. I have one handle. I hadn't had opportunity to go after a deer (large game), yet. that was last year. I don't care what you think about my experience, and you'll never get the satisfaction of more detail about me than that. I'm young. Isn't that something you anti-PGC deer hunters want? young hunters drinking your flavor of kool-aid? you've failed!

I agree... I really do suspect all of these anti-PGC posters are Eveland being a baby and pissed he was exposed as not being thorough with his "deer science."! go cry into your pillow...

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

find anything on me yet, sandman/deerz1? I bet you are gaining a lot of clout on here acting like this...

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Crooked_Stick wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Face it, you have lost the debate. Anyone can tell by writing styles that Jackie and I are not the same person.

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from Denny Fillmore wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

"It was good to get the straight story. I hope you have a great season too."

Thanks, same to you on a good season. I've had over 50 "good seasons" thus far, hope to have quite a few more yet.

Even the ones back in the 60s, when deer were very scarce where I started and still hunt now, were good ones. Got to spend time deer hunting with dad and my Potter/Tioga uncles during deer seasons, which was something I could barely wait to do, when growing up.

We eventually had more deer around there and still have enough to keep me grinnin' come fall. By my estimates, we have roughly similar numbers of deer around there now, that we had there by the early to mid 80s? Sugar maple (and other) regen in my woods has rebounded pretty well, since the huge numbers of deer we had by 2000, have been reduced.

Far nicer bucks, too, than at any time during the 50+ seasons I've spent hunting up there. Haven't shot a buck since about 2000, but have passed on some nicer bucks since, than any I'd killed previously. Lots of big ones around now, hopefully my time will come someday soon? Several 18" plus bucks killed near me in the past few years, including the 22" 11 pointer that a neighboring farmer killed in the second week last year. That one was just down the ridge my camp is on, within a half mile of me.

Cousin's son that lives near my camp, had that same buck on his trailcams last fall, sometimes within a hundred yards of where I often start off on opening day of firearms deer season. Still several around almost as dandy as that one.

One advantage of getting older, is that another year rolls around PDQ these days. Be fall again before we know it. ;O)

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

sandman:

huh? yer nuts bro. I didn't lie. just because you say something doesn't make it true.

keep shouting over everyone else. A hunter comes on here with 50 years experience (fillmore), uses his real name, and you all just call him a "rambler" and tell him he hasn't a clue. so don't make this about me, don't call me an environmentalist or whatever you think I am.

how about instead of not only NOT addressing me anymore, you don't address any of us about this issue. You have just as much clout as me here at this point.

ok email, call yer buddies or log into your 10 accounts to give me -1s now. go! wah wah wah....

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

it is interesting:

https://www2.pa.wildlifelicense.com/deeravail.php

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from ChrisUng wrote 1 year 29 weeks ago

Eveland's "science" is opinionated and questionable at best. That's like watching Stephanopolous interview Obama and believing you're getting objective coverage.

Thanks for all the thumbs down's by the way... it REALLY hurts. It's actually kind of funny.

-11 Good Comment? | | Report
from jackie_treehorn wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

sandman81: thanks for re-posting ACSL/Eveland for the 41st time. We get it. Yer man is freakin' brilliant and has no equals. You are right, the other side is wrong. The answer is with you if only people would listen! Oh, why won't they listen?! Oh WHY?!

Here's why: You act as if you are right and everyone else is wrong. You (and the others like you) are a bully sitting behind a computer screen. You cannot discuss, only shove. You waste your time on message boards because you are on the outside looking in.

Say it again; tell me I have multiple IDs on here. I do not. I am one man with no affiliation coming into this learning that the anti-PGC folk are grasping at straws. Tell you what, get out there and do something.

I was going to retire this "handle" before, but now I'm not. I won't be bullied out of here, whether or not you think I'm experienced hunting or not. We all start at different times for different reasons. You want young hunters following in your footsteps? Great start. NOT.

-12 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Reply

bmxbiz-fs