No , I am not busted. I already had those articles on fencing bookmarked on my computer. I simply posted the quote to show the apparent effects of deer on regeneration varies depending on the author of the report.. The report I referenced didn't even mention over browsing, while the reports you listed were intended to emphasize the impact of deer on regeneration. Different authors with different agendas.
Exactly. Greatpoint. Samecould be said of biologists as well. You can take one who has hunting as an interest and loves whitetail deer, and take another who is a treehugger and abhors deer, have themboth constructtheir owndeer programs within thehabitats cc,and Id lay odds that one would have deer densities double the other, even though both resultscould be said tobe "scientifically" acceptable.
On the topic of deer impact on regeneration, deer arent the only factor, and its debatable wether or not there are more significant factors that magnify deer damage.
Furthermore, despite all the doom and gloom claims about overbrowsing the article I referenced shows that the amount of forested acres is still increasing. How is that possible when we had a record number of deer in 2001?
Very good question. One which deserves an answer, yet will most likely conveniently go ignored! (LOL)
