|
Post by relic on Aug 15, 2008 15:32:26 GMT -4
That may be true but what about the Rubus on the side of the road? Doug. You want Rubus pictures? Just wait until I show you the patch just to the side of this logging road but just a little further in the thread. What do you think about these 15-20 year old oaks that aren't supposed to be growing anywhere in deer country. Think maybe you've been spoon fed a line of treehugger propaganda maybe? Remember Doug, this kind of growth wasn't supposed to be happening anywhere in the northern tier.
|
|
|
Post by relic on Aug 16, 2008 7:01:12 GMT -4
Relic to Doug. Can you hear me Doug? Relic to Doug.
|
|
|
Post by mrlongbeard on Aug 16, 2008 11:50:11 GMT -4
whats that old saying if you say it's white they will say it's black. the pic's you've been showing happens all the time down here in my area. but the powers that be still killed all the deer. and with six weeks rifle season and 68,000 tags i see on end in sight.
|
|
|
Post by relic on Aug 16, 2008 15:03:41 GMT -4
That may be true but what about the Rubus on the side of the road? The difference Doug, is sunlight. The rubus on the side of the logging road doesn't get full sun all day. Its bretheren just up the trail does, and look at the growth. Same thing with the oaks. Where there's sun, there's oaks. The more sun, the bigger the oaks. What a concept huh? This is an area within the same cut where the oaks are growing that has never regenerated with oaks. Acre upon acre of raspberry growth. Now.....the deer are getting the blame for the lack of much of anything regenerating in Pennswoods, and Doug and Co would have us believe that this failed area is the result of deer densities being to high. Rubus is a top prefered browse of deer. If the deer were the culprits in this cut showing the lack of oak regen, then why the Rubus growth? Anybody want to take a jab at the reason why?
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorservn on Aug 16, 2008 16:16:42 GMT -4
This is very interesting subject matter. Doug uses his contacts in the PGC as well as DCNR, foresters mostly, to get his information. Unfortunately he may well be getting bad information.
Allow me to quote from the August edition of the NRA's "AMERICAN HUNTER."
"A report commissioned by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and conducted by the highly regarded Pinchot Institute that name "Pinchot" should be familiar to some Pennsylvanians[/i]) was released in November 2007. It pointed out that the USFS was not cutting enough trees. The audit states, "In all cases harvests did not reach levels necessary to achieve a future condition reflecting their social, economic and ecological goals."[/color]
"...Also, less game on public lands lessens the experience of hunters who can't afford private land leases: as a result, environmentalists are not just harming wildlife, but are reducing hunter numbers."
In that last sentence I admit the author is referring to environmentalist groups, but the PGC not cutting the timber results in the same detrimental effect.
|
|
|
Post by relic on Aug 16, 2008 16:24:54 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorservn on Aug 16, 2008 17:24:09 GMT -4
Gee, I hope Carl Roe is viewing this thread.
|
|
|
Post by relic on Aug 16, 2008 18:47:26 GMT -4
Gee, I hope Carl Roe is viewing this thread. Probably not. I'd be willing to wager he's either scouting for the upcoming squirrel season, or sending emails to Denny and Dutch asking what's going on with all of this 20 year old oak that wasn't shown on the habitat tours that Gino has told him about.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Aug 18, 2008 9:15:25 GMT -4
I don't see any surprise with any of those pictures.You're showing small amounts of recent regeneration.That was the plan.
|
|
|
Post by relic on Aug 18, 2008 10:24:51 GMT -4
Ignorance is no excuse Doug. Even if you are just pretending.
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorservn on Aug 18, 2008 14:53:59 GMT -4
Doug, are you implying that the USFS doesn't know what they're talking about?
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Aug 18, 2008 14:59:07 GMT -4
In what regard Crazyhorse?
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Aug 18, 2008 17:47:57 GMT -4
C'mon Doug, pay attention. Whatya need, a program to tell the players? ;D
If you or I say we've found lots of deer someplace, it means absolutely nothing to someone who says they can hardly find any deer. Nor, according to them, does it impact how the PGC manages deer.
The standard response it, "SO what, big deal, you've found some deer. What does that have to do with the fact we can't find any?"
Now, if someone finds lots of regenerating oaks, briars and other goodies someplace, apparently that means that those who claim such things were adversely-affected in many areas at by too many deer, were wrong about that, too.
Why localized sightings that contradict the supposed norms mean one thing to some people and something else to others, needs a bit more clarification.
|
|
|
Post by mrlongbeard on Aug 18, 2008 19:46:30 GMT -4
if you own large tract of land it's easy to see lot's of deer behind those yellow signs. is that clear enough. i can show pictures from around here before ar and hr with lot's of growth. no matter what grows in the woods the deer are always going to go to the favorites. when they don't get the acorns they will go for they soybean, Alfa. timothy and the rest of the good stuff. if you have a choice of t-bone or hamburger what are you going to pick.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Aug 19, 2008 16:18:15 GMT -4
You got the idea there LB.Deer are picky eaters and they go for the preferred browse first.Not everything growing out there constitutes good habitat.
|
|