Nope,didn't intentionally call the man slinky.It was a typo and if he want's to call me,my number is in the book.he can even drive out this way and see me for all I care.

I never contacted one person to come on here and support me.

Inever said elk don't browse.in fact,I stated many times that they did.What I said was that they'reprimarily grazers and they don't do the damage to the habitat that the deer do.That is documented by biologists so I stand behind it.Rich,they'll eat red maple but that isn't hurting a thing.The red maple is taking over the entire east coast and it competes directly with the oak.If they're browsing on the red maple,they're not hurting the deer.

Archer 58,The first years we did pellet count and browse impact surveys in Treasure lake,it averaged out to 69.4 dpsm.Last year it went down to an average of 38 dpsm.We use the same transects every year so a good mast crop in one areaor a poor mast crop will concentrate deer in different areas,changing the results significantly.the transect that dave Jackson and I did last year was a good example.I see dozens of deer in that area every day on my way to work but we came up with only 18 dpsm on that transect.A couple flocks of turkeys worked that hillside over last year and it through our numbers way off.the browse impact study told usa different story though.We found no regeneration at all except beech and it was all severly hedged.That area was logged two years ago and there should have been significant growth.I won't say that the population has been cut in half but all the experts involved agree that TREASURE LAKEhad much less deer lastspring than it did four years.Even without hunting,the population crashed because fawn recruitment took a dive after 2004.I have hundreds of trail cam pictures to prove that.Last year we had a mild winter and a great mast crop and fawn recruitment went wayup,putting us in the position that we need to kill alot more deer than we did this year.