ORIGINAL: Cornelius08
And what does that tell us Mr. Extremist?Even the antideer faction at PGChas NOT rated the herd health in 2A as poor or the habitat, yet YOU seem very intent on proving that it is, both in 2A and everywhere else, in an effort to kill even MORE deer than pgc deems necessary. Not only having they given passing grades to both herd and habitat health, they also have had the goal of supposed STABILIZATION not reduction. But apparently you cannot seem to stand that.
Perhaps you'd like to try and explain that extremist position? Why is it when EVERYONE states an area DOESNT need fewer deer, even including pgc, YOU seem to believe otherwise...
Just looking out for us hunters and improving our sport I guess.[8D]
No they haven't.They've rated it as satisfactory,not excellent as you a claim.That's also after the herd has been reduced by more than 50% as you claim.
Wow are you now stating that the PGC is not trying top reduce the herd in 2A or are you changing your position to suit your lame argumenet?
2G has the worst habitat in the state do to decades of having too many deer.Interestingly,the 3.5 year old does were slightly more productive that the 3.5 year old does in 2A and the fawn conception rate was just as bad.It looks like the more recentincrease in the deer population was starting to take it's toll on both the habitat and the health of the herd.