ORIGINAL: bluebird2
Classic Bluebird twisting of the facts. One lone paragraph does not give a representation of Penn State Forestry School's position on deer and regeneration and you know better. Their position has been that deer have a very large impact. For all we know, it's probably all through whatever report you clipped this little sound byte from
If that is your position , all you have to do is post a report from the PS School of Forestry that contradicts what I quoted. The only reference to deer in the report was that timbering provided additional food for deer.
What an utterly absurd claim to make!
LOL here you go...
http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/freepubs/pdfs/uh145.pdf
http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/news/resource/res2008/08-1217-naturenotes.aspx
http://www.dnr.cornell.edu/ext/info/pubs/management/PA%20Regenerating%20hardwood%20forests.pdf
http://psuforestmgmt.cas.psu.edu/regeneration.htm
http://aginfo.psu.edu/News/2004/12/forests.html
http://www.extension.org/pages/Young_Penn_State_Researcher_Immersed_in_Pennsylvan ia_Deer_Study
Not all these links are straight to PSU school of forestry but all these links are either to Penn State or someone citing their research and ALL name deer as a significant factor in forest regeneration. It took just a few minutes to find these. There are most likely dozens more at least