Not really. The audit doesnt have to go out in the field and count deer or count embryos again. They just have to evaluate PA's practices against known, accepted and reliable scientific practices. Peer review is the term often used to describe the practice.
The PGCs's methods for estimating harvests and population estimates have already been peer reviewed so the audit will just duplicate those reports. The PGC has provided the studies they use to justify using embryos/adult doe for determining herd health along with reference for using forest health. Therefore, the audit only needs to look at whether the PGC applied those results in an appropriate manner and that is strictly a subjective decision.