Didn't the USP request that the courts order that doe season be closed?


Yes, but that requestwas the end result of their other contentions, such as the one about the PGC having never sat down with them to explain how they arrive atestimates. After their littany of complaints pertaining to how the game commission manages deer, they demanded the court call a halt to further doe seasons, until the other complaints were answered. But you already knew that to be the case.

I would agree that there could be better uses for the money, but there is no guarantee that the money would be used for projects that promote hunting , rather than bat studies or introducing fishers.

The game commission is not required to spend all of its money, or any specificportion of it, inpromoting hunting. It is required to spend money on managing bats, as well as any other species under its control. Much of the non-game species work has been funded by wildlife grants from other sources, funneled through the PGC in implementation of funded studies and programs.

They've successly-reintroduced (or aided the propagation of) otters, elk,eagles, peregrine falcons, ospreys and apparently, fishers. Bear numbershave greatly increased in the past 30 years. Deer were essentially re-introduced, afternumbers had become scarce several generations ago.

Has anyone heard anything about the status of the proposed audit? Have the RFP's been finalized and released?

Last I'd read, only one entity had submitted a proposal to facilitate an audit. If it's another case of the low bidder getting the prize, might it turn out like the automated licensing system fiasco?