ORIGINAL: bluebird2
You keep wanting to use, argue and hang you hat on those old deer per square mile estimates. They are no longer used because they have no value, relationship to reality or reliability. Deer management is now based on the facts the deer provide because deer have no ability toward providing false information about when there are too many, just enough or capable of having more in the population.
That simply is not true. If you will take the time to read the Annual Wildlife reports you will see that the PGC still estimates populations in each WMU based on DPSM and allocates antlerless tags based on the percent increase or decrease in deer density.
If the herd was being managed based on the facts that the deer provide, then we would still have 1.5M PS deer since breeding rates,productivity and recruitment were higher when we had over 1.5M PS deer than they are now with less than 1M PS deer. For over 35 years the habitat supported a herd that produced a buck harvest that was higher than the 2007 harvest ,so the deer have proven beyond a doubt that the habitat can support a lot more deer than the PGC will allow.
First of all the herd and habitat are not healthy. Even though the deer herd indices indicate the deer herd is presently healthy the habitat is poor in many if not most of the northern tier traditional deer range areas
Once again that simply is not true. The breeding rates and productivity have not improved in 2f or 2G. The PGC simply accepted the fact that reducing the herd did not increase breeding rates and productivity because the herd was already below the MSY carrying capacity in 2000 before the current herd reduction plan.
Nope, that is just your goofy and twisted USP view, which has nothing to do with reality as provided by the real deer or their habitats.
All you are doing is trying to get me to post the real numbers so you can try twisting theminto some sort of evidencefor your misguided law suit.
It isn’t going to work. We will let the courts decide who’s numbers and management objectives make sense and who’s don’t.
R.S. Bodenhorn