That is all the PGC supporters have to rely on, mindless accusations with no basis in act. They are really a pathetic bunch of mind numbed robots that can do nothing more than repeat the PGC propaganda.

That is about the finest example of the pot calling the kettle black that I have seen in a long time.

Just because the facts of deer management are too far beyond your level of knowledge and comprehension doesn’t mean they aren’t still the correct facts. The most knowledgeable deer management professionals in the world have reviewed and endorsed the direction of Pennsylvania’s deer management program, so just who are you to be telling people they are wrong and you, a totally untrained and unqualified person, knows more then they do?

Why should people believe anything you have to say over the word of the trained professionals? Why don’t you work on correcting the problems within the medical profession and do something even more useful, like saving lives, since you obviously know so much more then highly educated and trained professionals?

You SIR, in my honest opinion are nothing more then a fraud and a flim-flam artist set on a mission to destroy the deer management program simply because of the misguided agenda of a handful of radicals that formed their own cult because they couldn’t have their way within the sportsmen clubs where their votes couldn’t overcome those votes from more logical and rational people. You and your ilk have caused more harm to hunting in this state then any anti-hunting group ever has. The real problem now is that even though your cult is falling apart you still aren’t wise enough to give up your misguided promotion of their agenda.

Now, I have to ask any logical thinking person just what reason would the Game Commission have for not doing what the professionals are fully convinced to be the best possible direction for the long term management of our deer herds? The answer is very simple they would have nothing to gain and everything to lose, so what makes anyone think they are doing the wrong thing? It is the deer themselves, combined with measuring their food supply, that are providing the direction of the deer management program. Doesn’t it make more sense to put your trust in the deer and the trained professionals that monitor the data the deer provide then to listen to a handful of screw-balls that have absolutely no training in deer management or even any type of wildlife or resource management?

Are there fewer deer? Yes. Are there still good huntable populations of deer in all management units? Yes. Will things improve in the future? Yes, but only if you allow the professionals to fix the real problems instead of listening to the screw-balls trying to tear the deer management program apart because they have no idea what the real deer management problems and issues are.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RSB, you seem to put yourself on the same level as these highly educated and trained professional, but the only thing we know about you is that your a WCO.

Please tell us where your four year degree is from and what you majored in, plus all the additional advanced training and sheepskins you have.

When you started working for the PGC what position did you hold and what year it was, all the advancement you had over the years until you became a WCO and how long you have now held that position. Also how many employees reported to you under each position you held.

At which position did you have to give up your security under the statecontract for workers such asPen DOT and clerical workers.

We know your postition is protecting the over400 speciesthat the PGC is responsible for, it would be nice to see how your expertize ended up being deer rather than bear or Indiana Bats.

Coalcracker,so you are a brain surgeon?? ... a college graduate?? a high school grad?? GED holder??

how about this .. education is great.. but because someone went to school forbusiness and has chosen to self educate through reading and seminars and other sources they are not educated?? I would beg to differ..

I have two masters degrees not in wild life but in business and probability and statistics.. and because of that if I read real college level info referencing a subject and the data is conclusive I am not a river rat specialist.. BS.. with two grad degrees and an under grad I can fully understand info..what bothers me is when I have to debate something with someone who does not get the data and reverts back to BS rather than accept the numeric facts.. Not that you have made reference to anything pro or con but your questioning of anothers education so that you can disspell their conclusion is weak..

We have debated this for too long.. the deer herd is less how much so no one here can tell... bucks are bigger but that does not seem to matter.. but when anyone brings in something like carrying capacity of the land some knuckle head comes back withan arguement that RSB is only telling a half truth or some other halfbaked explanation....there are too many varibles to deduce an outcome... RSB has been trying to stand his ground and there have been a few of us who have heard him loud n clear.. and we agree...

If we are to go along this route of questioning, then we would have to check everyones education level before we discuss things... It scares me that we are all allowed to vote but many of us never check on the person we vote for? Murtha.. ?? OMG.. am I a racist or a redneck he seems to think so but I am probably better educated than he is.. but he is re-elected..

Based on your past history , it appears that it is you who lacks the knowledge and the ability to understand deer management. To prove my point let's compare our records on the subject.

1. You predicted buck harvests would return to normal after the first year of ARs and I predicted they would continue to decrease until the the PGC stopped reducing the herd and I was right.
2. You predicted ARs would double the number of 2.5+ buck and the number of 8 pts. and I predicted it would never happen and I was right.
3. You predicted breeding rates and recruitment would increase and offset the negative effects of herd reduction. I predicted increased breeding rates wouldn't come close to off setting the negative effects of HR and I was right.
4. You claimed there weren't enough bucks to breed the does in a timely manner resulting in too many late born fawns. I said there were enough bucks to breed the doe before AR and Dr. Rosenberry agreed. Once again I was right.
5. You claimed the high antlerless harvests were not responsible for reducing the herd and I provided proof from the PGC that the antlerless harvests did in fact reduce the herd. I also pointed out how you used 5 year averages to mislead and decieve.
6. You claim the plan has been reviewed and endorse by experts when no such review has occurred. I provided quotes that show the experts do not favor ARS as the best method for improving the age structure. So ,once again ,you were wrong and I was right.

So you can call me anything that floats your boat, but you can't refute the facts that my analysis of the plan was right on target, while your analysis was light years away from being accurate

......Hey Coalcracker.....Just what is your inference to Penn DOT and clerical workers??? Are you inferring they are some sort of sub-species in your peckiing order, or what? Are they not able to hold viable opinions also? Comments like that only serve to further alienate people to your "cause". But that's all right...just keep it up......your colors are beginning to show vividly.

It is not me but RSB who keeps talking about educated professionals and if youdon't have a degree in Biologyhe keep throwing insults about beinguneducated. Now if you are a Penn DOT worker or have a clerical position, I'm sure in RSB's eyes you are not versed in wildlife not matter how muchknowledge you have gained over time. I do know that Penn DOT workers, clerical positions and many other jobs are covered by a contract with the state, but not knowing the official name I had to use an example.

My educational background has nothing to do with wildlife management. In fact I'm the first onein my family to go beyond high school. I didn't pick the name coalcracker just for a joke, I'm very proud of where I came from and never look down on people that have to work for a living.

My father ran a drag line on the strip mines, my grandfatheralso ran drag line when he came north from Philly. My grandfather on my mothers side was killed in the mines when she was seven and my great grandfather on that side was a blacksmith in the mines when they used donkies. As I'm 66 years old, most people my fathers age quit school when they were in the fifth or sixth grade to pick the rock out of the coal in the colleries. I also grew up with many people that their parents spoke broken english, but I had no problem understand them and they were intelligent people.

Now you can look down on me if you like, but I'm proud of where I came from and what I have accomplished in my lifetime. If your looking for a snob, you'll have to look elsewhere.

...........The fact of the matter is that once again, you speak without knowledge. You have lumped a group of people together without the first clue of what you are talking about. "One size fits all" ideaology. Talk about "blanket coverage"....Wow. Once again you have opened your mouth and inserted your foot.
I wish for you to tell us at what positions Penn DOT workers, or state workers in general have "contract coverage" with the state as you have stated.
Would you also inform us as to the points in employment with the state in general are covered by protectionism?? If any? Define it for us.
Your empty can rattles continuously once again.

What do you think I am, a contract negotiator, you ask me these stupid question when I already told you that the name of this organization was unknown to me. You should have enough sense to know that if I couldn't know the name, there is no way that I'd know the contents, if I'm rattling a can, then your head is rattling.

On the other hand if you knew what you were talking about, you would know that this organization was not created for protectionism. For your information, there was a time whenever the political party would change, many people would lose their jobs and be replaced by those of the new party. If there was any protectionism, it was to protect qualified people from politicians handing out jobs to those that worked for their election. This ends your lesson of the day. I knew a lot of good people last their jobs by both parties.