Cornelius08

"Kind of a Catch-22 situation fellas."

Naaa. Not so much.

"someone who looks at it from an objective perspective"

And who would that be?? YOU? lmao. The man who loves to post for controversy only? The guy who said hes interested in "practicing" in our forum, so you can handle supporting extreme deer reduction in your own area when it comes, as you stated its so direly needed? The guy who said his dad was senile because he didnt buy into your beliefs?

Yeah. Real objective. I seem to also remember you being not exactly against personal attacks. Ive seen more than one instance where youve lacked restraint. Usually when your arguments arent cutting the mustard, such as in discussion about states you dont live in or hunt.

So much for our out of state judge and jury.

"Factor in things such as the most recent studies which show that Pennsylvania is still in the top 5 in the nation for deer-auto collisions (albeit down from #1 prior to full implementation of herd reduction) and plenty of ordinary citizens just don't see what all the fuss is about in terms of lowering the deer population."

It doesnt have to be factored in. We had human conflict assessed, but unfortunately that didnt include them asking YOUR thoughts i guess. The assessment in many areas was low, even prior to reduction. They also had cac (stakeholder) meetings including all those effected by deer and the results were NOT requests for further decreases anywhere other than sras. Therefore in many area the reduction was not due to that factor. That didnt stop the widescale blanket reduction. You ignore many other real goals, especially the ones tht make no sense, the ones that required the BLANKET approach. We dont manage for zero car collisions. More populated areas + lots of roads are gonna have more collissions. Ridiculous excessive Biodiversity on the other hand is a stated goal of dcnr, audubon AND pgc.

" and consider compromise"

Pgc doing abolutely nothing is no compromise. I propose 20% herd increase to start with, across the board instead of the 50-100% increases some would like to see. Thats an example of an actual, real compromise and one pgc wants no part of.