Anybody have any idea what Pennsylvania is doing for CWD?

Discussion in 'Whitetail Deer Disease' started by motdean, Aug 14, 2020.

  1. Dish7

    Dish7

    Messages:
    4,959
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Restricted, lol.
     
  2. Dish7

    Dish7

    Messages:
    4,959
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Didn't catch the meeting. Who were these non hunting contingents? I ask because my first thought is that there are more natural resources then game animals. Therefore, shouldn't there be other speakers for other topics?

    BTW, I highly doubt you would get banned for repeating yourself, lol. :D
     

  3. motdean

    motdean

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    8,303
    They were concerned over things like eagles getting lead poisoning, wolf conflicts, and (like you noted) only 11% of Michiganders hunt so there should be more non-hunting representation/topics, etc. I believe that the commissioners tried to address the topics and remind them of what the purpose of the NRC was.

    (It was interesting inasmuch as the NRC actually attempted to answer questions and got into some limited back and forth with them. That is unusual from what I have observed in the last several years.)
     
    Dish7 likes this.
  4. Waif

    Waif

    Messages:
    17,147
    Likes Received:
    20,646
    Location:
    Montcalm Co.
    In my case , one example of skimming is wanting deer in numbers enough to encounter regular.
    Despite my wobbly habitat. In exchange for those I don't kill , I see more.

    It's not so much a cherry picking choice/type of kills by me today , but more what goes on in the bottle neck of winter on those coldest nights. Killing more deer is contrary to my wanting to continue to see a few. Then after trying that theory a season , I tracked a couple around post season and didn't like what I found. Which was pretty much not finding decent browse and wandering around out in cold wind.
    Still with obvious finite number I'm reluctant to be as gung ho again as I've been part of elsewhere.

    Someone refusing to kill deer below only the best specimens can be considered skimming if the remaining deer and hunters don't prosper by the choice.
    Yet at the same time where few deer exist , higher standards can reduce kills , in favor of the herd.
    It really depends on what a given locales herd is like in relation to hunter numbers,and habitat capacity come winter. That's not easy to regulate from the state level beyond providing tag options.

    Disease control changes perspectives. It has mine repeatedly.
    One may argue a slam of indiscriminate reduction is the best choice.
    And a host of other concepts.
    I am leaning towards what's left is what hunters have to hunt after/in the future. A more consistent strategy than any the state has encouraged. With due respect to Chad who early on when pressed about what the state wanted replied , "for hunters to be successful". That was in hindsight without being defined , a great reply.

    My hunting neighbors are the reason the herd is/was what it is.
    Restraint (pre greater A.P.R.) earned them about a one in four chance at an older buck. Not old. But older than yearling. And not a bad sex ratio among the herd.
    Desease has changed the state's , and some hunters goals since amid a reduction and it's following change in herd size and make up.
    Outside of a buck quota along with the A.P.R.. We're not going to be overrun with bucks. Time will tell if we see pre- disease numbers of them , but we shouldn't due to pressure on doe.

    A hunter intent on only taking the best of whats left without consideration of how that best came to be ; or a hunter ignoring an imbalance to stick with only the best or none...I'll call skimming. Something I watch myself for , having done it myself.
    I've doubled on restricted qualifying bucks in a season before.
    Took more doe from that site than bucks , but still felt afterwards one buck would have been enough. Not like other hunters nearby were not looking for one too. Including hunters who put more into the deer than I did.
    I skimmed their /the states best on site that year. At least felt that I did.
    Nothing proved that oldest buck needed to be killed for the herd or it's hunters sake.

    Should my perceived value of recreational kill choice come before an imbalanced or over populated herd's kill choice aimed at better balance?
     
  5. Dish7

    Dish7

    Messages:
    4,959
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    If you are out there hunting and hopefully killing one, then you are doing your part. Reducing the herd by one, is one more then it would be reduced by had you stayed on the couch playing Fortnight.
     
  6. mbrewer

    mbrewer

    Messages:
    6,748
    Likes Received:
    11,625
    Location:
    Halfway to almost there
    The people who're willing to take a young buck in the CWD Zone are being restricted from doing so due to social considerations. Plain, simple and true.
     
    Hunters Edge and motdean like this.
  7. Dish7

    Dish7

    Messages:
    4,959
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Only partially. Just need three on a side, doesn't matter the age. So, in reality a hunter in the CWD zone can legally tag 12 deer in a season. Two bucks and ten doe. Doesn't sound too awfully restrictive.
     
    sniper likes this.
  8. mbrewer

    mbrewer

    Messages:
    6,748
    Likes Received:
    11,625
    Location:
    Halfway to almost there
    Being arbitrary and capricious takes talent but it's still boring.
     
    Hunters Edge likes this.
  9. sniper

    sniper

    Messages:
    8,740
    Likes Received:
    17,446
    Location:
    Livonia-Hillsdale
    I’m almost certain his lips move while he’s reading.


    Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman
     
  10. sniper

    sniper

    Messages:
    8,740
    Likes Received:
    17,446
    Location:
    Livonia-Hillsdale
    I guess I applaud your enthusiasm. Your just gonna have to figure out how to get others on board without yawning.


    Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman
     
  11. sniper

    sniper

    Messages:
    8,740
    Likes Received:
    17,446
    Location:
    Livonia-Hillsdale
    Boring or correct. Same thing.


    Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman
     
  12. Waif

    Waif

    Messages:
    17,147
    Likes Received:
    20,646
    Location:
    Montcalm Co.
    I was under the impression they had to be four on a side in the experimental zone.
    Or a certain broken racked buck nearly in my lap would have got popped for his size/estimated age last year.

    Don't forget 5 private land disease tags on top of the ten doe tags , on top of the "regular" single buck tag or combo tag that (the combo) allowed doe kills with last year.
    Tagging options hanged again this year.(doe on both tags of combo and single tag?) Must have change each year allowing more doe kills being the trend, it seems nearly plausible..

    What kills are allowed with disease tags?
    A.P.R. , with disease tags still allowing any deer taken? That does not support an A.P.R.. Or much management goal beyond kill , and kill indiscriminately.

    So , I can kill seventeen doe this year. Well , I can get tags for that many.
    Or with the same tags kill 7 bucks , and 10 doe.
    Problem being , that many don't exist where I hunt to my knowledge.
    Add the other 10-11 hunters and a single deer a piece would bring any semblance of decent hunting/killing to a screeching halt.
    Kinda like following year two of C.W.D. regs effect did when three (?) doe were the future of fawn production. It made for a better balance of sexes. But few desired targets IF managing a herd for the following years..

    Only restraint of kill participation keeps the few deer around , around. Tag availability is not the problem. Inability to manage a herd for each hunter to be able to expect a decent buck in exchange for their cooperation with state goals is. Even with such an A.P.R. as we have here in the experimental disease zone. We can kill more doe per tag though. Regardless if needed or desired in the local herd. Yet the lowest doe number year , no one killed one on my or adjacent properties. That's not because I'm above taking a doe and was waiting for a buck instead. It was refusal to participate in the removal of the last deer. (Plural.)
     
    Dish7 likes this.
  13. mbrewer

    mbrewer

    Messages:
    6,748
    Likes Received:
    11,625
    Location:
    Halfway to almost there

    There has to be more to you than I can see.
     
  14. motdean

    motdean

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    8,303
    Thanks. But please don’t confuse motivation with enthusiasm.

    As soon as we put that miserable regulation behind us as well as the measures to make sure that it can’t happen again, there will be a lot less focus on counting to 3 or 4 from me.

    I am more concerned with getting the right people on board than everyone.

    When faced with the opportunity to do the right thing, the NRC went deaf on July 16th.

    Can I count you as being on board?
     
  15. sniper

    sniper

    Messages:
    8,740
    Likes Received:
    17,446
    Location:
    Livonia-Hillsdale
    Lol. Sure Deener. Just wake me up when it’s over..


    Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman
     
    motdean likes this.