ORIGINAL: ddear
we have game and habitat management problems that need solved and USP refuses to listen to any legitimate science.
That simply is not true. The fact is that the PGC has failed to provide the scientific data to support the plan. When they claim that the habitat in 5 C can only support 6 DPSM ,while the overbrowsed habitat in 2 G can support 15 DPSM, it is obvious that the plan is not based on science or modern der management principles. When Alt claimed AR would double the number of 8+ point buck, that was not based on science ,but wishful thinking.
RE: Politics of hunting in PA (in reply to germain)
quote:
we have game and habitat management problems that need solved and USP refuses to listen to any legitimate science.
That simply is not true. The fact is that the PGC has failed to provide the scientific data to support the plan. When they claim that the habitat in 5 C can only support 6 DPSM ,while the overbrowsed habitat in 2 G can support 15 DPSM, it is obvious that the plan is not based on science or modern der management principles. When Alt claimed AR would double the number of 8+ point buck, that was not based on science ,but wishful thinking.
We've been through this before. Pa's plan has been supported my many others state agencies as well as dozens of well respected biologists. It takes more than a fringe group of disgruntled hunters and an obscure outdoor writer to prove the present plan violates good management principles.