Bwana, thats exactly what was in the article.

Here is what the head-cheese over there on hpa, bluetick, had to say about it:

"The GC has concerns going forward with the audit for some of the same reasons.

The first rule of court - never offer what is not asked for. An audit (full and complete compliance) compared to a court proceeding (protection from a court precedent or court order of those not familiar with wildlife practices in this case) are different. The court case could have very dire results for all wildlife management in PA and nationally."