"Given the unproven nature of these drugs to control or manage a free-ranging deer population, any Game Commission guidelines for their use will be designed to rigorously test this drug in real world circumstances."

PGc themselves are not the ones that would be doing the testing. And the granting of permission was what was spoken of in the Shissler study. Permission granted for further testing was not something most states were planning on doing or permitting according to his findings. However pgcs position above speaks for itself.

"As for guys like me not helping, maybe if you concentrated on the things that really need fixed instead of "creating" more issues, you might have more effect for the things that really matter to you. Not trying to start a pissing match either but you're on very thin ice with this one."

Im not concerned about the thickness of the ice and never have been, as you should know of me by now. If you decide you wish to personally attack someone or argue, thats YOUR decision to make. Not mine. But as for your statement of concentrating on things that need fixed, thats exactly what im doing. The number one problem is our current crew at pgc is VERY hunter nonfriendly VERY being key word. Everything from the borderline antihunter comments about us being "headaches" on their website and whining about us continually, to having been called names by previous commissioner, to supporting birth control, to their close knit relations to very nonhunter friendly organizations, to remaining steadfast to a miserably failed deer program all the while ignoring anything and everything we say. The problem is the commission itself.

You can come up with smaller wmus and a whole host of other suggestions, but you know as well as I what will be reality next season...and the one after that and into the foreseeable future.