ORIGINAL: bluebird2
I fail to see how trying to make a research project more accurate can be a bad thing unless someone with an agenda has worries as to what the outcome will do to that agenda.
No one said it was a bad thing that they were trying to improve the accuracy of the study. But my question is how the results will be used to improve deer management, when they claim antlerless allocations are based on herd health and forest health rather than the number of deer in each WMU or the number of deer needed to keep the herd stable?
You can't possibly miss the value that comes from this added knowledge.
How can you estimate the number of tags that are required to add to,reduce or maintain the herd with no idea the number of tags that are required to achieve you set goals.?[&:]