Antlerless allocation allotment methodology aside... Im still waiting for the answer as to why harvest goals are higher NOW that stabilization is supposedly the goal.... Yet a lower harvest reduced a larger herd previously???

Btb, you seem to believe that the antlerless allocation system isnt what is our problem, but its the goals themselves. And I partially agree. I do think the biggest problem is the goals themselves.

Having said that, perhaps you could explain why a wmu had an antlerless deer harvest of 16,500 animals... which supposedly reduced the herd by 7% according to PGC annual report.

Then the following year the goal became stabilization.... Yet the stated harvest goals for the wmu was 18,000 antlerless deer.

And still to this day the allocation hadnt dropped to even the level where the last "supposed" year of reduction took place at 45k. It has been 55 to 60k ever since.

anyone care to take a poke at that riddle and straighten out one of the disillusioned armchair biologists? lol
.........................