Anyone that wants to claim a bias is stepping out on very thin ice and slandering a highly reputable firm.
That is an absolutely ridiculous claim. I did not come close to slandering WMI by pointing out their previous involvement with the PGC and their work that preceded the deer management plan.
t appears to me that the most likely reason some people are so desperate to make it appear there is a conflict of interest would focus on the fact that they know darn well the Game Commission deer management program is scientifically sound and that any credible audit will come to that conclusion
The PGC can't even answer 3 simple questions about their plan raised by just an average hunter, so there is no reason to expect that a truly independent audit would conclude the plan was scientifically sound when the PGC doesn't even know how many deer we have or how many have to be harvested to reach their goals.