Eliminate use of rifles?

What kind of impact do you think it would have if we followed suit of neighboring states. And only allowed muzzle loaders and shotguns. Do you think it would help the deer herd?

total harvest this year is up a dismal 2%. must be because of rifles.

I actually believe rifle hunting is more ethical. I've never lost a deer with my rifle and I'm only shootin a 270. They have much more velocity and send a shockwave into the deer I believe. I have lost numerous deer with the slug gun including a very nice buck that will haunt me rest of my life. I dnt know how but deer have a way of taking those slugs. Tough animals.

the best thing to help the heard is to stop issuing extra tags and stop selling bonus tags. it has nothing to do with the firearm. I can show you some great spots that have a lot of deer and are in rifle country. not all places have a depleted heard.

no tiddies, I feel I am too young to hunt out of a box blind. I brave the elements. yes, it would change things. it would mean people wouldn't be using rifles is all. it won't change the deer harvest. you talk about compromise, but it seems like you only want it your way. why do you think eliminating rifles would change anything. give me proof and not just your opinion. this is my first year using a rifle. I let every doe I saw walk so far. seems like you blame the gun "object" and not the people behind the trigger. I bet in your opinion, that people would be thinner if the government banned larger sized spoons and forks. bahahahahaha. I have enough rules and laws to follow in my life. I don't need the government to step in and tell me I can't use a rifle to kill deer in order to provide food for myself and my family.

That's the best one I've heard yet. Hunters are too stupid to shoot anything besides 1 1/2 old deer and fawns. Better yet. Put trigger locks on guns that work like ignition locks the drunks have to get in their cars. Lots of deer walk.

Cause it would change things. I personally find it funny how people complain about not seeing deer. Lack of deer ect.... but when you ask them to compromise to make things better, god for bid they do that. This is all they know.

Fish fillet must of posted from heated box blind in middle of corn field. Again this is not about " the bucks " but deer in general

the reasons why people are not shooting older class bucks is simple. first, once a deer gets to 3 1/2, he will now be more picky about where he beds. a lot of the 2 1/2 years olds that were living on many people's land, will vacate and find better suitable bedding. second, most people are not good enough hunters to kill them when they are on the land in which they hunt. there are a lot more mature deer out there than people are aware of. they just don't see them. take some time shining at night. you'll see all sorts of bucks you never laid eyes on while in your stand. rifles don't change a thing.

eliminating rifles wouldn't change a thing because of our landscape. there really isn't many places a rifle will do better than what a rifle barreled shot gun or modern muzzleloader can do. most deer are not in the fields when shot. they are in the woods. it's not like hunting out west. I bet the average shots on deer are less than 75 yards and very few past 150 yards. 150 is easy for a modern muzzleloader and a rifle barreled shot gun. too many people like to find something to whine about. go hunt and be happy.

"Yes it doubled the number of adult bucks (1.5-2.5) but I read a study that said it only raised the bar so far. Now instead of shooting them at 1.5 they are just shooting the 2.5. So the structure just moved up a notch with the end result that there are not any more mature deer (3-7) than there was before the restrictions." That's all the rule was designed to do, and it was successful in that. I would argue that it would have increased mature deer(3-7), but likely a minor or negligible increase. Any time you get deer 1 year closer, you'll have a few more in the upper rungs as well. Young bucks are stupid and easy to shoot. Anything you can do to give them an extra year or two will help educate them a little more and make them a more wary target as they age.

Cold Front...Never did I once say we needed no rules. Every man for himself...meaning...You like big bucks..sit and wait for that buck. I like to eat deer. I might take something smaller. We both follow the rules that ensure that we do not eradicate the population.

Just reading the gun season setups forum. After reading that and seeing guys shooting out 300 yards or more. I think shotgun gun or muzzleloader only would in fact help the deer herd. Nothing about trophy buck . But " deer herd " . Anyone that says anything different bull poop. You are ignorant. On your way up north this weekend take a look on the fields and notice the box blinds setup in the middle of a field. Closest field edge. 400 yards. Now that's hunting if you ask me.

GO, Yes it doubled the number of adult bucks (1.5-2.5) but I read a study that said it only raised the bar so far. Now instead of shooting them at 1.5 they are just shooting the 2.5. So the structure just moved up a notch with the end result that there are not any more mature deer (3-7) than there was before the restrictions. Many western states had AR's also and dropped them because it did not have the result they were looking for.

I don't see any problems with the number of older bucks, there are plenty of them in the central part of the state. Over the last 10-20 a lot more people just sit in a stand and complain there are no big deer. Big deer DON'T move during daylight hours very often. If you are going to sit there for a week and wait for a big one you probable won't see one even if there is one in the area. I hunt public land and we move a handful of big bucks every year doing drives or stalking. They are very smart when it comes to avoiding standers and drivers. We "HUNT" them. Sitting in a tree is not hunting, it is sitting in a tree. Big bucks are lazy and will lay all day if nothing bothers them.

"PA did the antler point restriction correct? From what I read it had the reverse effect for getting older bucks?" http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/hunting-fishing/2012/11/25/Antler-restrictions-Some-hunters-like-them-and-some-don-t-but-biologists-find-them-successful/stories/201211250221 The linked article has quotes form PA's head deer biologist claiming that the program has double the number of adult bucks. I would be surprised to see buck harvest restrictions fail in getting older bucks. All over this state and country you have private individuals and landowners leading the way with this newer management and by and large they have been successful even when having to deal with those who can't hold back from dusting a spike. So, I can't see a mandated management program failing for that reason. I could see it not working real well in heavy wolf country up north or areas with poor soils or habitats, where those factors are going to limit the effect age can have and where mortality would be unacceptably high.