|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 24, 2014 6:21:05 GMT -5
Do they still spray the beech to kill it? Yes. Only where they have done timber cuts. It is part of a treatment program to increase regeneration of the forest. |
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Nov 25, 2014 8:15:57 GMT -5
Dutch, you are most welcome to disagree with me  Yer still wrong  |
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Nov 25, 2014 9:13:00 GMT -5
I'm not going to to pretend to know how predators impact all species and I'm not going to guess how many are out there.I do know that nothing is static in nature.Deer and other animals are not spread out evenly accross the landscapeA good spot one week can be a bust the next week,depending o food sources.Good habitat one season will eventually turn into a desert as it evolves into pole timber.Trying to figure all of this out,while frustrating,is also rewarding when it all comes together.I was out scouting this past sunday,not far from my house.The one area was timbered about 10 years ago but near some corn.I killed a pile of deer in there over the years and rarely walked through there without jumping some.I hunted that spot early in the season a few times and got skunked.Never even jumped a deer coming or going.I know that the deer migrated a couple miles away do to the mast crop but there should still be some deer or so I thought.Once I really got to looking,there was really no reason for deer to be there.An area once too thick to walk through opened up quite a bit and was more obvious with no leaves on the trees.The more I looked through this clearcut,the more it became apparent that there was nothing of value really growing.A great spot just turned to crap and it was no fault of the PGC.Time to move on I guess.Less than 1/4 mile away,I checked out a creek bottom that was logged about 6 years ago.I hadn't hunted it in a few years and was surprised how much it was starting to open up.I did see quite a few deer tracks in there and also a bunch of coyote tracks.I may hit that area much harder this rifle season but it will be worthless in a few more years.tHE HABITAT CONSTANTLY CHANGES AND WE HAVE TO CHANGE RIGHT ALONG WITH IT.To me,that just part of the year long journey every year.Sometimes my predictions are off but more often than not,I'm pretty close.This year I was off and it shows.I love taking my son out and pointing this out to him.Understanding how wildlife impacts and relates to the habitat is the basis of being a hunter.Predators obviously impact pray species but I firmly believe it all comes down to habitat.When the habitat is good,impact is less.Not my rule eh Ed lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by fleroo on Nov 25, 2014 10:04:04 GMT -5
Pretty much on board 100% with all of what you said. Avian predators are incredilbly overpopulated. Many have a romantic affinity with Avian predators... I don't. Matter of factly, I may or may not know of a feller that attempted to curb a bit of their enthusiasm in regards to their seemingly insatiable appetite for domestic animals.
Yote's ? Well they are just lousy rediculous in number down here now. It's a fact they are taking an increasing amount of Fawn ever year, not to mention just about every other smallgamme type critter. BUT, we will still hear from the perfessionals that they are simply a mouser or vole taker. Well, yeah, cuz Fawns are only available a brief few week period of the year. But they are smacking them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 25, 2014 10:29:16 GMT -5
Dutch, you are most welcome to disagree with me Yer still wrong Ed, they introduced wolves into Jellystone in order to make a "natural" ecosystem. To kill the elk off that were eating all the trees. Sounds like PA, doesn't it? Anyway, Jellystone, without human predators is an UNATURAL ecosystem, ad man, up until the 1870's, WAS a natural predator there. Today, because of the number of wolves, man is no longer needed inside the borders of Jellystone. I will guarantee you this, and it is backed by science, if you reduce predators, game will begin to flourish. Reduce nest robbers in the potholes of Canada, and duck nesting success is much higher. More ducks for man to shoot. I'm not saying we should eliminate preds, just saying one aspect of an ecosystem cannot have complete protection. |
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Nov 25, 2014 10:55:23 GMT -5
The big question is,how do you get rid of predators?Coyotes are pretty much fair game 24/7.In order to kill more,you need more participation with guys who know how to kill them or trap them.I'm not sure if that's ever gonna happen.I haven't trapped in over 20 years but would like to.Problem is,I don't have the time to devote to a trap line.I do go out on a semi irregular basis and try to call them.We've called them in but calling them in and killing them in Pa is a tough deal.Dogs and trapping are the only real ways to make a dent but few have the time and resources to devote.
Bears would be an easy solution but why kill more of one game animal to save more of another?I guess it depends on where one's interest lies.
Avian predators have no real solution.
|
|
|
|
Post by fleroo on Nov 25, 2014 13:31:57 GMT -5
Well, no solution that isn't controlled by your good Uncle...... Sammy.  |
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Nov 26, 2014 8:29:09 GMT -5
Any of you, by any chance, ever read the fairly (impressively) 'advanced' study/experiment conducted in Louisana back in the mid 60s regarding a (quote/unquote) horrible mis-balance of ground dwelling fur bearing predators' predation on game bird and duck nesting in that area ? The state funded a most generous bounty system, since fur isn't so 'prime' in the then balmy south, which absolutely thrilled the local human population who shot trapped kilt and poisoned to the maximum to 'cash in' on ready..umm, cash. It worked, believe it or not. The raccoon, opossum, fox, cat...well you get the gist, I'm sure, populations were...drastically reduced....and thus, the population of rats, mice, snakes exploded in response. What them folks down souff 'discovered'...was snakes and rats eat just as many eggs and nesting hens as all them furry things do. How about the infamous Kansas study on coyotes. ALL restrictions removed. ALL of them, ten year program to get those pesky yodle dogs eradicated. Permitted: dogs, traps, any guns, airplanes, vehicles, poison, den-digging. Big bounties, state funded. Program results, ten years later; exactly same coyote population densities, only 'ecological change' determinable ?....average litter size had increased from 4+/- to 8 +/-. Only took Kansians 10 years, and 8M$ back when 8M was a LOT of moo-la to figure it out. Oh, and there was one other result. Study showed that fawn and calf predation actually increased, purportedly because hunting parent predators discovered a certain lethal potential in returning to previous kill sites to finish the carcass...and just did another somewhere else. Avian predators?? C'mon. Any of you ever make it a point to increase/extend yer outdoor experiences and go on a hunt with a falconer? (some of whom use 'hawks' instead of falcons The birds cannot, will not risk broken wings, or becoming entangled in vegetation for the sake of a meal. IF there is conducive understory for whatever species, they simply cannot take but about what they need to survive. For what it's worth, success ratio in aerial attacks is about 1 in 20 for hawks/falcons, 19 in 20 for owls. Ironically, about 90 % on an owl's diet..is ground borne predators Sorry folks, I'm a champion of nature, not man, when it comes to 'our' planet. Nature takes the weak out. Humans desire (covet) the Cream. We managed to very rapidly reverse evolution w/ regard to our native Artic Char (brook trout), a process begun as soon a Europeans 'got here'. No limits, no seasons, no reasons. And let's totally destroy the 'habitat' while we're at it. And our water quality as well. Anyone want to ask me what this Loyalsock watershed was like for trout fishing just 20 short years ago? Or what it's like now. How many tribs are now pretty much trout free ? Or why?? We did pretty much the same with deer. There have been very positive changes last fifteen years, but the insatiable urge to go back to a surplus of plenty, no matter the inevitable costs, persists. Not tooting my own horn here, merely stating a fact. I have an almost morbid fascination with researching what the 'other guy' is thinking, why, and how that interplays with what I observe firsthand. Honestly there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the process continuously alters how I think and act...but just as continuously re-affirms what I observe, in Nature...first hand. To wit, I just want to be a modest part of Life on Earth. I have complete and utter Faith in allowing the Forces at play for billions of years to run the show as far as the management of the Plan. I would be forced to believe myself a fool if I thought it would be any other way..any way |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2014 8:59:41 GMT -5
Quit making so much sense, Ed. It is not appreciated. Next you will be coming out in favor of the deer herd being kept at these unacceptable low levels.rant
|
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Nov 27, 2014 7:35:15 GMT -5
yes, my friend...i am so in 'favor' I'd like the ever so slight last three years' upward swing in grouse numbers I'm 'observing' (and rabbits, too!!! to continue...... seems all those fenced clearcuts, fenced because humans WON'T (can't?? control a deer herd ?? are supporting some grouse. Of course it has absolutely nothing to do with the intensely thick cover/habitat...it's because the fences keep out all those predators.............. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 8:37:12 GMT -5
We are pretty much in agreement, Ed, but then that should not be much of a surprise. All wildlife is important, and all species must have good habitat to support them. Many of us lose sight of that when we focus on just one or two species, such as deer or bear. I have come to evaluate the health of an ecosystem by its diversity; particularly by the number of diffferent species of ground and understory nesting birds. Such things as warblers, ovenbirds, wood thrushes, and whipporwills used to be quite common and are not anymore. To me, that is an important measure of forest quality. Having enough deer or bears to make hunting easy and fun for all is not all that important to me. To that end, I support a continued management of the deer herd that keeps it at sustainable levels while preserving and improving overall habitat. I do not see coyotes as being much of an issue. We are already allowed to hunt them nearly every day of the year, and if hunters think they are a problem, they need to get out there and hunt coyotes. I would support a big increase in the length of bear season, particularly earlier in the fall, not later. It does not seem that hunting grouse is much of a limiting factor in their population. Very few of us actually spend much time hunting them when they are at the bottom of a cycle, and not too many more hunt them at the top. I am waiting for the top, and so is Mugs. Actually, I am waiting for the doctor to do something about this knee.  |
|
|
|
Post by GlennD on Nov 27, 2014 9:32:30 GMT -5
Great post Ed.. and yes, I agree with virtually everything.. but it is easy to get sidetracked when trying to analyze what has happened to small game and native bird species, vis-a-vis habitat.. We have been told for years that changed farming practices are the reason. Well, probably has some impact, but PA is not a big farm state. All I can do as a mere mortal is use my own observations over the last 60+ years.. I say 60+ since I probably did not start paying attention until after I fainted holding a ground hog for my Dad to gut.. Two things that stick out in my mind are native birds (disappearing) and the changing habitat. For a large part, I have thought for years too many deer were a major factor in habitat change. I grew up in Washington county. As a kid, the woods were so thick and full of briars, thorns, and crab apples in many areas you could hardly get through. A good pair of small game trousers and coat were a necessity and I still came home bleeding.. I was also schooled as a kid on bird identification. I had a pellet gun. If I had shot a native songbird and my Dad found out my butt was toast! I had to know the birds, and we had them all. Today, it is a rare sight to see a native song bird in western PA. What I can see that changed beginning in the late 1950's was a sudden explosion in the deer population. I could see as far back as the mid 1960's what the deer were doing to the habitat. Those crab apple thickets I could hardly get through were suddenly beginning to open up. The deer trails were like cow paths through the thickets. I also began to see browse lines. I noticed them way back then. Even today, some people still have no clue what a browse line is nor do they recognize them. Now, I am not saying deer are the sole reason the habitat has changed, but they have been a major contributor. I also believe that the explosion in Wild Turkeys also has had an impact on small game populations. Particularly ground nesting birds and mammals. I refer to the Wild Turkey as a modern day Velociraptor! They will peck at anything they encounter while browsing through the woods or fields. Rumor has it they will eat each other given the chance.. And let's not leave out Foxes, Raccoons, Skunks, etc.. The numbers of all those animals probably increased after the anti-fur movement combined with Rabies scares. And I cannot leave out the Coyote infiltration. I saw a report not long ago that during the fawning season, the same time as Coyote pups are typically born, a female Coyote with pups might kill a fawn every other day to feed her litter. Anyhoo, seems to me the causes and solutions are a slippery critter. Lots of really well educated people have been researching the issue for decades.. We could save a lot of grant monies by just sharing these forums with them researchers.. |
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 27, 2014 9:51:13 GMT -5
Why is it ANYONE advocates for a little more, this old saw is brought in?
No one is saying to return to the days of way to many deer, no one, not me anyway, but to ask for a bit more, seems to be sacrilege?
There is no natural ecosystem, when certain parts of it are totally protected, and man is excluded.
BTW, Delta Waterfowl, way back in the 80's did a study and found that when ground predators were controlled, by trapping, waterfowl nesting success increased dramaticly.
Also, if predators aren't all that effective, why does the PGC reduce doe tags, in order to control one predator, to increase the herd?
If habitat is the key, then it matters not how long our seasons are, right? We should be able to go back to the days of year round hunting, right, with no effect on wildlife populations? So, humans further restrict their seasons, to make up for the predation....
We as hunters self regulated in order to bring wildlife back, being we were pretty much the only predators at the time. Now, we share the woods with all kinds of preds, and reduce our bag limits, or accept lower populations.
All I'm asking for is a balance, and not this nonsense that preds are put on a pedestal, and wildlife that hunters pursue must take it on the chin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 10:59:16 GMT -5
It seems like just yesterday that we were fighting the great researcher, J S over this one. That is exactly what the USP and the ACSL are saying. I seem to remember that you were one of the folks who was leading the charge against them.
As to asking for a few more, you may remember that for the past five or so years I have been saying that the habitat has improved in at least the area in which I hunt, and the population of deer should be allowed to increase some, but never again to the levels that brought about the damage that we who actually understand a bit about nature know happened. The problem with the north central part of the state is that the damage went on for a very long time. In some areas of 2G the seed bank in the soil is gone, so recovery will involve more than just the reduction in deer herd that happened, and that reduction will need to be maintained much longer than in other areas where the overpopulation did not go on as long. I can remember seeing browse lines in the 1960s in Potter, Clearfield, and Cameron Counties. They did not just appear then, but had been there for some time.
So, does that mean we just throw the whole thing in the crapper? That certainly is no justification for catering to the whimsey of hunters who want more deer at the expense of the ecosystem that does exist, unnatural though it be. Obviously, since the system is no longer totally natural, it needs management. Also, I do not favor managing our woodlands for the single purpose of producing deer. It does seem, however, that we have substituted one sacred animal for another. Where we once worked endlessly to increase the population of deer, we more recently did much the same with bears. The baby steps we have taken in bear management are not ever going to bring that species into the realm of control. And now we have hunters expecting easy bear hunting. Reminds me of how it was in 2000 with deer, but this time it is bears. As to coyotes, I am not sure what additional steps could be taken. Coyotes are certainly not protected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2014 11:29:02 GMT -5
I know of some areas that never hold deer nor do the deer frequent and these areas are not recovering. Why aren't they? No deer should mean the habitat should be taking off, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Nov 27, 2014 12:05:16 GMT -5
Remember the famous photo of me, on an oak stump sprout that was about 15 feet tall? State Forest, on the southern border of 3A.
Unfenced.
When I was on 3A's CAC, I asked for a 10% increase in the deer herd. Voted down, by the foresters, not the farmers. Since that time, the herd on the public grounds of 3A, has continued to decline.
The PGC has reduced tags in response. Thankfully.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2014 18:52:18 GMT -5
Wentzler why are those Loyalsock tributaries now trout free?
|
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Nov 30, 2014 8:29:46 GMT -5
Which ones, Mess ? There is some modest difference in what/which particular eco-calamity drove the nail in which Trib. Overall, though, ponder and evaluate this first premise, which typical of moi..will be wrapped in a bit of prose I moved 'operations' from the Muncy Valley where I 'grew up" to the Loyalsock valley after the 72 flood (Agnes?) hammered the Muncy Creek drainage. Muncy might well have recovered handsomely, had the Greater Minds at the time not decided a good beginning on channelization might not 'alleviate' their water woes in the future. Enter Army Corps Engineers  GONE, never to return to former (my experience) glory the little Run entering from west at Picture Rocks (can't pull name from memory just now), or the next one same side, above town, Elk Lick run, Rock Run, etc. pretty much all the way to Nordmont. And then I found the Gal I eventually married..up the "Sock' . From 1972 until about 1985 had some of the very best fishing for WILD stream bred trout both Brook and Browns in the main stream itself..and in ALL the tribs not heavily 'stocked' all the way up to where the Sock itself is 'trib' size Even some of the heavily stocked stream would become utopia as the water temps in the Sock began to rise and trout moved into the cold tribs by the thousands. Flood of 85 changed a lot of that. Water came pretty fast in that one as in 2011 and moved vast tonnages of rock around in the stream beds and downstream as well. All freestone stream rely heavily on a long interim of alluvial desposits to seal up the gaps in all those cobbles and goonies..so the stream channel isn't just a giant "French Drain". And the Deltas, present at the mouths of all flowing watercourses were massive. Ensue then the 'dry years' let's use 1993-1994, some of the worst drought ever seen in northern PA. Very few of the trout remaining in these 'damaged' trib waterways survived those two years. And fish died in the main stream by the tens of thousands as extremely low water levels heated to deadly levels. There was no way for fish to get up the cold tribs, even if there had been water in them...they would needed have sprouted legs to get above the delta stone mounds. This condition persists now. On another issue, both the upper Little Loyalsock and Hoagland Branch literally turned to raw sewage/ ag runoff runs by 1995-96 as well. Un-monitored development (recreational cabin properties, campgrounds, etc.) lead to shady at best in runs of raw sewage and nitrates/phosophrus...and at the time I was helping monitor acid levels in the "Sock from Barbours downstream to Montoursville..and the levels were not good at all. The "Sock Drainage has little or no natural 'buffering' capacity left, and also has a fairly high soluble aluminum and sulphate composition to the soils. Dissolved aluminum is quite toxic to trout spawn and fingerlings. So, Bad weather, horrible erosion and land practices, bad chemistry, and a forest(at the time, still, to a large degree...with an almost non-existent understory (see, read...too many deer!) to 'absorb' 'unusual'? rainfall amounts. It's the perfect recipe for a perfect ecological disaster. We had one. I lived it. I live it. I saw it. I welcome any and all inputs, Mess. You and everybody. Please, please...prove me wrong!!! I would much really 'perceive' a much different...reality. ed |
|
|
|
Post by GlennD on Nov 30, 2014 11:02:33 GMT -5
Anyone else hear Crickets chirping? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2014 11:07:31 GMT -5
I'm not trying to prove Wentzler wrong. I'm asking questions to further my own understanding. I'm trying to learn, nothing more or less.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2014 11:19:13 GMT -5
BTW Ed, thank you for answering me. Your post explained so much. I saw all this happen before my very eyes but didn't understand the hows and the whys of it. Once you explained it I could see exactly what you're saying.
|
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Dec 2, 2014 7:19:23 GMT -5
Glenn, I hear crickets and peepers year round now It's not so bad, I like hearing crickets and peepers. Mess, you are more than welcome. And as I said, I invite pleasant & civil discussion of such contemplations, it is how I learn. With regard to our environments I do believe I was given a leg up by my Dad, who placed a copy a Aldo Leopold's "Sand County Almanac in my hands when I was 16 and said "Read this, and then come talk to me." When I had finished the book, and returned it to him, he said, "now go read it once more and we'll have that talk." In my own mind, I believe I've gotten fairly good at deciphering what is going on around me in the outdoors. I only wish (oftener than ya'll might imagine) I had 'plausible' solutions to right or even modestly improve conditions/situations such as degradation of our waterways, but I don't. I firmly believe that to begin a turn-around would require a radical change in the habitats and lifestyles of the entire human species...and I don't see that happening any time soon? I tried my hand at the accepted method here in the good ole US of A..and became 'involved' to the extent possible in our state arena in Harrisburg..but the tide was in every sense...insurmountable. I do try set example on our own two meager acres, here along the 'Sock, and those efforts have changed significantly since the 2011 Flood, to reflect what that flood taught me in error of my ways to that point. I, like everyone else along this watercourse sent WAY too much downstream...albeit, most of it high grade soils and the railroad ties that 'held' it in raised beds. That won't be happening the same way again. We are, as fast as humanly possible, rebuilding the soils, and this time will be holding them in place with the indigenous plants (and trees) that I noticed did not yield at all during that mess, Mess We also now 'manage' primarily for the 'other residents' of our property. We always attempted to do so, but feel we're doing a much better job at it now. No chemical use at all, and if anything the routines of taking 'care' of the place, take far less time, resources, and aggravations. Our strategy, from the inception of our forced rebuild, was zero flood liability, zero downstream on our neighbors (all the way to the Chesapeake), maximum benefit to wildlife, and as close to the way nature would do it as possible. I guess if there is any measure at all to the 'success' of the 'program' so far it would be the frogs and turtles that now call the 'pool' home, and all the crickets living in the mulch? Could also be that last year I counted an all time of nesting bird species on the two acres at 36, previous was 28. (The female chickadee that raised a brood in the poolside bird box systematically removed every single spittle bug larvae from the terminal buds on the 'close to house conifers' and fed them to her brood. The one day I allowed myself an observation 'break' she made over 50 trips in 20 minutes.) The hoard of bluebirds we have around have become so comfortable with our presence they'll go about their constant scouring of the place for insects within feet of us, as if we weren't there. Believe it or not, the local screech owls have taken to sitting on the waste water plumbing under the elevated house...perhaps to snag those few mice and insects which get past the myriad of Garter snakes live in the landscape? In our 'lawn' we do have grass, but now almost as much trefoil, clovers, and wildflowers as well. I 'mowed' perhaps a grand total of four times all this past summer, mostly a third or less at any one time...and only when I needed the 'mulch' or organic material for the soil piles, which are basically compost engines, with a goal of about four to five tons per year. (Figure we lost close to 30 ton in the flood) I've shrunk our garden allotment by 75%, and we still have more than we can possibly use or give away. Anyway, no more deer hunting for me this week, work to do. Friends come for second week, it's something worth working for. Best to all. ed |
|
GONE, never to return to former (my experience) glory the little Run entering from west at Picture Rocks (can't pull name from memory just now), or the next one same side, above town, Elk Lick run, Rock Run, etc. pretty much all the way to Nordmont. And then I found the Gal I eventually married..up the "Sock' .