Considering the strong econut influence on our completely unsupported by data deer plan and extremes that have been gone to, as well as the lies told, I think it very reasonable and only understandable many of us are going to be skeptical. I think I accurately addressed Jims question when I said

"Maybe, maybe not.Im not gonna blindly commit to anything...And anyone who would no matter what, would be a damn fool. It has nothing to do with what I want to or dont want to hear. Only thing I dont want to hear is biased nonsense thats clearly nonsense, or an audit that effectively circumvents the real issues, yet rubber stamps the program.My acceptancewill most definately depend on wether what is stated meshes with whatis definitively already known. But the suggestions are at least something I think should be looked at if they are gonna look at anything and give an opinion, may as well be the important details."

I see that as being open to the results yet notblindly accepting anything and everything that may be said. If some things dont make sense, its not as if WMIhasnt been assocated with Pgc. Having worked with themon more than one occassion as well as having a pgc commissionernominee that worked for them. SOme of the important issues are opinion issues as well. Opinions can vary with very little supporting one opinion over another, just a judgement call.... For example should hunter opinion be givenmore weight then currently? How is a "expert" to answer that in any other way than simply their opinionif its not a matter of biological or other concern. If anyone sees my cautious approach asclose minded, so be it. But that isnt how I am looking at it. Im prepared to hear any good or bad, and no matter the outcome,nothing at all is gonna surprise me.

As for the percieved pessimism, we need to keep things in the proper context. The audit wasnt brought about because everyone sees pgc doing such a fine job.