Since the same plots are not evaluated every year and only evaluated once in about five years the present yearly changes in the percentage of adequate regeneration is only comparing various areas against one another. The present data can not be used in any way shape or form to determine if the total habitat for a unit, or even an area of a unit, is increasing or decreasing.
That is what you said in a previous post. Note , you said the data on forest health can not be used in any way shape or form , which means in your opinion the data can't be used to manage the herd and determine antlerless allocations, but that is exactly what the PGC claims they are doing. Furthermore, the PGC has stated that the measure of forest health is not a measure of habitat health,so once again you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
The PGC uses herd health as a measure of habitat health and that is why all but WMU is at or above its goal for herd health.