Why would he disparage the few poor, ignorant hunters who support the PGC's ridiculous HR plan?

"Just imagine though,posting on here from where he sits? "

I honestly dont know how he does it without being able to see. Cant see with your head up your...

Hes an extremist and more a friend of the loony ecofruits than hes ever been or ever will be to the hunter.

Michigan is significantly larger in land mass then Pennsylvania, 56,803.82 square miles to 44,816.61 in Penna, yet Michigan has few people requiring infrastructure such as homes, roads, shopping centers, etc. Pennsylvania has about 268 people per square mile compared to Michigan having only about 175 people per square mile.

Every person living in any state or area requires a certain amount of infrastructure to meet their needs. More people, with more infrastructure equates to less habitat that is available for wildlife. With less habitat and more infrastructure there will generally be less wildlife available per individual living in the more populated states.

That is probably the reason Michigan has a better hunter success rate. They have fewer people and fewer hunter yet more habitat to support deer.

R.S. Bodenhorn

OF course it has NOTHING to do with the fact their wildlife management isnt dictated by treehuggers and a rediculous deer slaughter campaign.[8D]

More opinion with no supporting facts!

R.S. Bodenhorn

You constantly refer to the high harvest rates in 2b and 5C, yet now you claim that infra structure reduces the carrying capacity when the exact opposite is true You claim the habitat in 2G is controlling the herd with only 12 PS DPSM , but in developed areas like 2B it takes a harvest of 12 DPSM just to keep the herd stable.