Im gonna tell you up front as if you didnt know "professional wildlife management" in this state is not looked upon highly by myself currently and even less so now, and I feel just about anything thrown their way right now is more than justified by all evidence Ive seen. I dont know why you feel you must take that personally though. An attack, and in my opinion well deserved, on the current managementis not an attack on you personally. As for the other things you mention, the bickering etc, I can agree with that.

One thing though, i havent stated much problem with "what the report is showing" I believe I understand much of what it shows, although with my first post that was not the case as I scanned the report quickly, then later went back and read thoroughly. My problem is with what pgc has done with the regeneration study. It is clear that these new guidelines of habitat health has thrown our ranking from respectable to "poor". Without added degradation due to deer or anything else, but with a simple change of policy. This is HORRIBLE for the wmu and others in the same boat because of this change imho, and doesnt bode well for other wmusin the future. Pgc could "up the ante" as often as they like anywhere they like for no good reason, and thats just unacceptable.

Im fairly certain Im not gonna agree with your input, but as long as both of our facts stay facts and our opinions stay opinions, It might be overly optimistic, but I dont see any reason why some of us cannot have a reasonable exchange on the subject.

Good luck in court. If its a poaching case I hope you bust their arse! LOL.