Jim, imho thats not the answer. Every time someone buys up a piece of ground and posts it up its one less place everyone has to hunt, and the situation is even worse for everyone else. I do agree though, it seems that is getting to be about the only option for decent hunting in the future of Pa.

RSB: "I support the present scientific approach to managing deer based on the information the deer and the habitat provide. In some areas that will mean fewer deer but I think those areas in need of even just slightly fewer deer are very few. In most areas if they allowed this management program to work it would mean more deer for the future then we have now, instead of fewer. "

NOt gonna happen. Under current guidelines more deer will NEVER be a possibility. They simply do not allow for it. Also while you say "some areas" need fewer deer, and on a wmu-wide basis, I disagree completely, thats not whats happening anyway... MOST are being further reduced according to the annual report despite claims of stabilization. and the doom and gloom predicted by well known nutjob pgc extremist employees of the past never came to pass even with at times some rediculous deer densities, and theyve been predicting such for nearly a century!

"I want the professionals to use that scientific information to make the best informed decisions in the total deer management program instead of having public and political demands forcing even more areas into the poor management, destroyed habitat and crashed deer numbers some areas have today."

Well I guess that just toobad because WE want reasonable herdand habitat goals that don't include word for word guidelines that econutcases at audubon and others have set forth. Then have it shoved into our faces as being "absolutely necessary" when its clear it is not, atleast notfor any realistic rational goals. There also is no reason to believe the entire state needs to be as low as it is and lower when most other states are NOT, yet they too have "biologists" on their management agencies!!

"The professional deer managers can get it right if people just allow them to do it."

"There is no conspiracy to harm the deer herd or hurt the future of hunting. Nor, is anyone in bed with an enemy of the hunters."

There is no conspiracy to hurt the deer. The deer are just a side effect victim of the plan for extremist biodiverse agenda.Pgc is also "IN BED" with enemy of the hunters. That enemy being audubon and other orgs. The fact you wont admit that they are is why you can make that statement. Many of us know better. They are nofriend the deer hunter. Their goals are 100% counter andas extreme as they come. Anyone needing to know why pgc is so extreme with this plan only need see the audubon site. And they have alot of input into this plan. Along with dcnr.

" just who’s opinion should they use, yours, mine, the anti-hunter or just who’s? "

The majority of those who wish to voice and opinion... The same ones that have thus far gone completely ignored. Its called compromise. The econuts and others effected by deer got SIGNIFICANT herd cuts ALREADY. Time to meet other "opinions" halfway.