I’ve explained that several times and you refuse to accept that there is a difference between individual WMU data and the statewide averages. I already told you I am not going to say or provide anything more on the data at this time.
But you can't explain why statewide breeding rates decreased by 5% , if breeding rates in the majority of the WMU's increased or remained the same. By posting the sample size of doe checked in various WMUs I proved that the decrease was not due to a shift in sample size or location. Furthermore, if the PGC data shows that breeding rates increased in the majority of the WMUs that data would be of no value to the USP since it would show that ARs produced the predicted results. Just like the PGC you are hiding the data because it doesn't support your agenda.
I don't need the data for each WMU to prove that breeding rates declined in the majority of the WMUs because based on the sample sizes in the 2007 AWR, that is the only way that the breeding rates could have declined by 5%.