I have challenged the science on which the PGC based the current plan and refuted it with science that is more valid than the science the PGC used. The PGC science said breeding rates and herd health would improve as the herd was reduced and my science proved they were wrong. Their science said there was problem with late breeding and my science proved they were wrong and the deer proved I was right from day one. The PGC science says they are keeping the herd stable and my science proves it is still decreasing.
Wrong again. Your science is flimsy and you have chosen to dwell on a few items derived from small samples that, if they had come from better sample size, might help your agenda. At the same time you have dismissed other variables that may or may not have had an effect on those small samples.
Good solid science by professionals would not reach the conclusions you've reached without far more information. You grab a small bit here and there and assemble those bits into your own personal truth because it's the "truth" you wish to find. Now that an independent audit is about to take place, you are circling your wagons because you are concerend that your flimsy arguements will be blown away like the house of cards that they are.
The science of deer management is by its very nature a subjective science, since it is based on the desires of those that are managing the herd. A herd can be managed at the biodiversity carrying capacity to satisfy the Audbon ,but a slightly higher density may satisfy DCNR. Or the herd can be managed at the MSY carrying capacity which would satisfy a lot of hunters and with supplemental feeding and intense management the herd on private property can be managed above the MSY carrying capacity of the natural habitat.
Yes, deer management is somewhat subjective. Obviously your agenda is to manage at MSY or abovewithout regard for the habitat, other wildlife, or the interest of the owners of the resources that feed the deer.And again, Your
SUBJECTIVE agendaof maintaing a statewide "deer farm" is quite possibly not going to be the recommended course when the audit comes out.That's you're obviously starting yourattack on the audit results before it even gets started. You are simply incapable of being objective.