If you aren’t able to figure out that there are areas of each unit with both high and low deer densities then I am darn sure that is the case.
Of course the DD varies across any WMU just as the habitat varies from poor to good. But they are saying the the habitat on the conservancy is poor, but is still supports 24 DPSM. How can that be if the habitat is controlling the herd?
I don't beleive the average deer density for unit 2G is anywhere close to be as low as only 10 deer per square mile. That is really just more of the nonsense you use to insight discontent.
It really doesn't matter what you believe because the deer have proven every one of your claims and predictions were wrong. Would you like me to list them again?
The very low harvest rate for 2G reflects a herd of less than 10 DPSM and that number is also supported by the PGC AWR. Do you have any data that proves the PGC data is wrong?
Now this is really a hoot.
Obviously if the deer population, within the West Branch link area, is only at twenty deer per square mile while hunters are only harvesting 3.37 deer (2.11 antler less and 1.26 antlered) it is the habitat and environmental conditions controlling their deer numbers. If it weren’t the quality of the habitat controlling the deer numbers there should be at least three or four times that many deer living on that tract of land.
So you are saying that if the habitat was good and not a limiting factor , it could support 60 or 80 DPSM. That is simply amazing because it means you agreeing the southern tier WMUs can support well over 80 DPSM.