btb, why on earth would pgc want to harvest more deer in 2A when the goal was stabilization and the herd is still being reduced? Remember its not an sra like 2b which you lumped together with 2a in your statement where human conflict is supposedly high due to urban areas etc... I guess that means you dont support the goals of stabilization or herd increase where deemed appropriate? That has been the goal, even if pgc hasnt been adhering to it, just like most other wmus where reduction ISNT supposed to be the goal, but is occurring anyway. To support statewide blanket slaughter even where pgc claimed its no longer necessary is a bit of an extremist view isnt it?

Doug says; "I have to laugh when people whine and cry about the lack of deer in 2G."

I have to laugh when a few support anything and everything said by pgc, and claim to love wmus with deer density averages around 10 when it could be and probably should be double that. Kinda speaks to "other" agendas. lol. To love killing doe as much as you to save the hobblebush and trillium would make you a prime candidate to work for whitebuffalo. You share many of the same views.

"Hunters may be accounting for 70% of the mortality in certain areas and in years with good weather."

No...I believe that would be in an AVERAGE year. Meaning with better than average weather MORE would be killed. Also since 70% were spoken of as an average, some areas would be lower as you stated, so others would be HIGHER as well to average it out.

"That doesn't account for the reduced fawn recruitment rate however."

Neither does the pgc annual reports which show deer reproductive herd health among the highest in the state.