If I am lucky ,I may have five good years but that depends how fast the cataracts develop and if the surgery is successful. There is also other major surgery that will be inevitable at some point, and it only takes one blood clot to change everything ,so i take one season at a time and hope for the best.
Are you saying that Alt is correct when the deer are eating your stuff, but he is wrong when the foresters need relief? Remember that one of your complaints not long ago was that Alt was wrong in HR and was only doing it because he was on the take to lumber interests.
No, I agree with rational herd reduction whether it is in farmland or forestland. but, I do not think the herd in 5C should be reduced to 6 DPSM ,nor do I think the herd in 2G should be reduced to 10 DPSM ,or less., when research by the PGC says 2 G can support 15 DPSM. If the PGC isn't going to manage the herd based on their own goals, why should hunters believe that additional herd reduction is necessary in 2 G.
Ok, Do you think HR without AR would be better for buck hunting?
There is no question that for the average hunter, buck hunting with HR would be better without AR, since AR reduces the number of legal buck available to be harvested. That is why I said from day one that it was a mistake to implement AR while attempting to reduce the herd by 50%. the fact that the buck harvest declined by 23 k in 2003 , proves that AR doesn't increase the number of legal buck even in a herd that is increasing. Imagine what the effects will be in a decreasing herd!