Originally Posted by Cornelius08

"Funny how you try to say your 1% is the farmers only but that wasnt what was said."

If you go back and look you'll see it was in reply to lanses "farmer brown" scenario. I think it was made pretty clear. You had your sources provided very quickly after you questioned the stat.

"The continued existence of hunting as we know it depends on our value to the nonhunting public. "

Yes. Majority of which do not demand current deer levels PERIOD. So why use that as an excuse? Especially when its definately not beneficial to the sport itself, which some do find important!

"No, of course we dont "bend over" but too many hunters have forgotten that it's the timber companies who have been the single largest block of private landowners who have always welcomed ud with open arms on their ground. Now guys like you, the bird and the USP types continue to bash and demonize our hosts because they expect a decent return on their investment."

I dont mean to bash timber companies. they are simply looking out for themselves. For that I dont blame them. I blame pgc 100%. Not the timber companies. Timber companies arent responsible for managing the deer herd.

"Oh, and your "vast majority" has been disproven by every credible poll done to date. No the tainted ones done here don't count. Sooooorrrrrry "

Every poll here has had UNFAVORABLE results to say the least, even the one you got caught voting multiple times on. As have polls on about 5 other sites that i posted several times in the past from Pa outdoors, Grizzly gary message board, Pa outdoor times, Pa outdoor news, Pa sportsmen portal etc. etc. All showing 80+ % disapproval of pgc reduction policy and other pgc "deer" issues. Though that hardly tells the tale of course since we have guys like good ol rsb and other pgc employees, at least one usfws employee, and god knows who the hell else (LOL) all within those various polls with limited number of votes.... and the results STILL were against.

Realistically in the real world I wouldnt be surprise if 90-95% of those asked would be 100% against the excessive slaughter. Ive seen enough to know it. Dont really need much more confirmation. Facts are facts.