"Farmers pay in crop damage"

Its factored in "managementwise" when human conflict is addressed. IF its LOW then its not a factor in the management scheme of the overall wmu and they then address it as should be done, on a localized level with the multitude of available tools for that purpose. They also have more tools to address it than most states and more than any time in Pa history. Red tag, dmap, shoot'em up 24/7 laws recently implemented... Noones saying they should be ignored, and they certainly havent been. But they along with timber & econutz shouldnt be dictating EVERYTHING statewide either. Judging by the many thousands upon thousands of landowners in the state and the VERY low by comparison number who have chosen to implement these "tools" of dmap & redtag etc. would suggest that the landowners arent exactly as deer hating and wanting them all dead as some would like us to believe?

"Timber and paper companies pay in lost regeneration, fencing costs etc etc"

Again. See above. Also our states deer herd shouldnt be forced to extremes because of the profit margin of the few. There is reasonable room for compromise. That is hardly being utilized currently.

"We all pay (not the insurance companies) for auto claims with deer through our comprehensive premiums."

And millions of people, hunters, as well as their families and supportive friends ALSO pay those costs. Pretty much accepted as the norm and only to be expected with reasonable deer numbers anywhere. Not an excuse for decimated deer herd when it wasnt an excuse prior to it.

"Your attitude that the land can support more deer without considering the landowners interests is as silly as your belief that you understand deer management better than the professionals. "

I dont see that as what was said Nor even close by bb. But the sentiment you point out there is no less "silly" than ignoreing a billion dollar hunting industry and those who not only pay for all wildlife management, but also are the management tool