The WMI did a fine job of compiling the data for various WMUs which allows one to make an accurate comparison of how the PGC is managing the herd in 2F compared to 2G. Using the low population estimates for both WMUs, the herd in 2G has been reduced from 22.9 DPSM in 2002 to 10.9 DPSM in 2007. As the herd was reduced in 2G forest health decreased from 45% regeneration in 2005 to 38% in 2008, which is the exact opposite of what all the PGC experts predicted.
Now let's take a look at what happened in 2F. from 2002 to 2007 the PGC reduced the herd from 32.2 DPSM to 15.8 DPSM, while forest regeneration only increased from 36% in 2005 to 39% in 2008. So decreasing the herd in both WMUs resulted in a 7% decrease in regeneration in 2G and only a 3 % increase in 2F and forest health in both WMUs is still rated as poor.
What is amazing is that the PGC has admitted that reducing the herd below 15.8 DPSM , has no beneficial effect on forest regeneration. If that wasn't true the PGC would have reduced the herd in 2F to the same density as in 2G. Instead, the goals for both WMUs were exactly the same from 2003 t0 2008. The goal was to decrease the herd in both WMUs in 2003 and 2004 while keeping the herd stable from 2005 to 2008.
So the PGC has admitted that reducing the herd to 10.9 DPSM in 2G has had no beneficial effect on forest regeneration and that maintaining the herd in 2F at 15.8 DPSM has resulted in regeneration in 2F that is equal to that in 2G. So the PGC has admitted that reducing the herd to less than 15.8 DPSM has no positive effect on regeneration. Simply amazing!!!
__________________ In Miss. ,ARs reduced the average rack size of 2.5+ buck across the entire state
It is nice to see a post that is not strictly bashing the PGC. We all know they're FUBAR, but to keep hearing you bash the PGC is OLD to say the least. This post is informative.
__________________
Obama=The Fourth Reich,
Just look at the parallels of the Nazi regime and the Obama Administration amazingly similar arent' they.
The audit contain lots of comments that were quite critical of the PGC's DMP, but they failed to note that the PGC has decided that reducing the herd even more in 2F and 2G will not solve the problem of poor regeneration.
__________________ In Miss. ,ARs reduced the average rack size of 2.5+ buck across the entire state
You can't make that claim.Remember,the data was seriously flawed.
Yes I can make that claim because the PGC is using that flawed data to manage the herd. Even flawed data should have shown an increase in forest health with a 50% reduction in the herd ,but instead it showed a decrease and the PGC wasn't even smart enough to question that decrease. That is truly pathetic!!
__________________ In Miss. ,ARs reduced the average rack size of 2.5+ buck across the entire state
An Amazing Admission By The PGC
