Germain, First let me apologize. I completely skipped over your post. Bouncing back and forth btween threads, I apparently passed it by thinking I had read it already.

The idea that Greenpeace could be involved in any way is indeed troubling. The only source where I've seen that fact is from USP releases. I believe you to be a trustworthy guy, have you confirmed this to your own satisfaction from any other source?

I readily admit that my experience in the area where the collared deer are has been limited to a few drive throughs quite a while ago. I beleive guys like you who arent seeing the deer you used to. There are areas I've hunted in the ANF where the deer are way down but it hasn't been hard to adapt where we've hunted. I don't know the answers as to why you are seeing such a difference but we also don't know why hunting is having such a negligible effect on the collared deer.

It's also not likely that the deer are too remote as that would make the study logistically impossible or very difficult to say the least.


Sproul

You asked about the possibility that hunters arent turning in the collared deer. That isnt the way it works. When the deer stops moving for a few hours a mortality signal goes out from the collar. Even if the hunter cut the collar off, the PGc would likely be alerted and would find the collar. I think there are avery few unexplained lost collars but its a negligible amount.

The bottom line is that hunters arent killing the collared deer and these deer arent "way back in". 2G has seen two doe tag reductionsin the last two years. Something else is aleast a significant factor here.