I agree lanse. More votes are needed. Hard to make any comparisons when so many states are unaccounted for, and some are only represented by 1 vote or 2. Hard to say that is directly representative. But as for Pa that you mentioned, it is interesting that Pa has more unsatisfied votes than any other.
As for assessing votes/commentary, You also need to READ the posts. Some of the votes were not happy with management policy, but said they had great deer herds despite the things they didnt agree with. Those chose to address the politics of management moreso than the current actual quality of hunting, and thats fine. I asked their opinions of both/either and they stated what they felt wasnt up to par. I had already asked for "worst hunting state' opinions and Pa got the knod on that one, though a couple of others were in the running and a good argument could probably be made for any of the bottom few.
There most definately is a difference between satisfaction with a states hunting and its policy making. I was interested in both actually, but am quite content to accept either, providing explanations are given. And for the most part they have been. Most have stated exactly what they are or arent happy with, and alot of "guesswork" isnt necessary.
What can be determined by this "voting" now or if even more votes are taken? For me, not a whole lot, just interesting is all, but I guess thats up to each individual reading.
BTW, Lanse, I dont know why you bothered to reply if you werent even gonna vote! Which do you hunt more Ohio or Illinois, and what do YOU think of the hunting & management there (combine the two and average out a number for us?)
Last edited by Cornelius08; 10-20-2009 at 11:02 AM.