RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

But really would any of you believe the answers given if they were not what you want to hear? :eek:

I too am not happy with the direction we're heading, but I don't believe the head butt is the weapon of choice in this battle.[:o]

Some of the attacks here are way past passion and more personal, than necessary.[:@]

Information is knowledge, use it wisely.:eek:

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

"But really would any of you believe the answers given if they were not what you want to hear?"

Maybe, maybe not.Im not gonna blindly commit to anything...And anyone who would no matter what, would be a damn fool. It has nothing to do with what I want to or dont want to hear. Only thing I dont want to hear is biased nonsense thats clearly nonsense, or an audit that effectively circumvents the real issues, yet rubber stamps the program.My acceptancewill most definately depend on wether what is stated meshes with whatis definitively already known. But the suggestions are at least something I think should be looked at if they are gonna look at anything and give an opinion, may as well be the important details.

"I too am not happy with the direction we're heading, but I don't believe the head butt is the weapon of choice in this battle.[:o]

Some of the attacks here are way past passion and more personal, than necessary.[:@] "

They werent attacks. they were accurate observations, and while it may not solve anything, neither will those people spoken ofwho are a big part of our problems and have been for years. Also, its not "way past passion". There are big problems in our state, and I dont think we hunters should look kindly upon big contributors to those problems. You can go to the aforementioned "other site" and see similar comments from them directed towards people from our side on basically just about any given day as well....But since you apparently were offended, I'll make the effort to keep personal remarks toonly the necessary bareminimum.:D

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Personally" Bite Me" and by all means please don't take that personal.;)

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Only if you are a hot youngblonde lady going by the name of Jim. I think thats unlikely, so i'll elect to pass.;)

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Well Rsb, you have anything to add to the discussion? Things you'd like to see addressed in an audit?

What important things do you think should be addressed that would equate to an audit that hunters should support if addressed? Do you think Pgc will comply with findings?

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Above all, I want the audit to identify the glaring discrepancies and contradictions, and constantly changing criteria that always results in demanding further HR. Highlight these discrepancies, and find the answers, the driving force behind the program, and expose it for what it is. Show the stark contrast to every other state management plan out there, with the ridiculously low target populations and get us some justice.

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Id also like to see wether or not the cacs accurately represent the majority of the people in each wmu. Imo they dont even come close.

A question I think would be common sense would be, is HUNTING the management tool itself being given high enough consideration when considering the management goals? I REALLY dont think so.

It seems we are supposed to pay for wildlife management game and nongame, do the actual herd managing for everyone,and in return just be happy peasantsto be allowed to hunt regardless of our own satisfaction level. Thats bull****!

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Personally , I think those are the very things the audit will avoid. I have ask PGC supporters repeatedly how herd health and forest health are used to determine antlerless allocations ,since i can see no correlation between the number of tags issued PSM compared to the herd health and forest health in various WMUs with much different deer densities.

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Guys I dont think you will see anything that has to do with how many DPSM an area can support or how many DPSM that area should be managed at etc.
What I think you will see is questions about whether or not our harvest reporting system is accurate etc., If the PGC.'s harvest estimating methods are accurate etc., and things like if the PGC.'s methods for comming up with the amount of doe tags going to be issued that year is suitable for how to keep the herd in check etc.
I doubt you will see any thing that has to do with how many dpsm a certain WMU currently has or how many dpsm that WMU could support and should be managed at. The PGC./DCNR would never permit or pay for a study that did question things like managing our WMU's at under 10 DPSM etc. Pike

RE: PA DEER AUDIT UPDATE.....
 

Jeff, pgc or dcnr aint payin' for this'n. This is courtesy of the tax payers.

Dont know about all, but some of those things are gonna be addressed, according to Stabeck. Just a matter of how they are addressed and how thoroughly. Also would be interesting to see how influential pgc themselves are in the directions of the audit. I dont think wmi is actually gonna rub salt in any wounds or be forceful and firm when it comes to doing things a certain way etc.

I definately have my doubts. But it shouldnt be hard to tell if its a complete sham or legit as soon as the results are given.;)