But does it explain what happened to RSB? Did he get banned like Sproulman?

I'am almost sure I seen his name in the users viewing this topic section over this weekend. Probabaly just sitting back and takingit all in.

Personally I think he just ran out of excuses to defend the current DMP.

HE WELCOMED ME BACK last week,so he is here .i think he is busy with tours,they are having a lot lately .i also have been very busy too and not coming on like i used too.

I think the audit has now become a waste of time. The sportsmen of Pa were for the most part fine with using science and facts to guide deer management, rather then the old way of the squeaky wheel gets the grease. But the PUS (PA. Unified Sportsman) whinned and whinned to the legislature that there was a vast conspiracy, someone cooked the books, yada yada, we want an audit, thinking it would never happen. Then when it did and all the sportsmen and the PGC backed it, they thought great, since they knew their lawsuit was in shambles it would be a way to have someone else do our dirty work for us because we have very little money. Then the out of state firm backed out because of the lawsuit that they didn't want dragged into. So the legislature made the pus sign off that they wouldn't pull this firm into litigation. To save face they had to agree.
Now they are on a mission to badmouth the whole audit. The unbiased audit that they wanted and even their president praised for being the best choice for a fair and un-biased firm to conduct the audit.

So I think it's now a waste of time to validate what most know. Because the naysayers are already set in their conclusion before it even starts. They've even came up with a conspiracy that involves the UN.

What have you seen from the USP where they bad mouthed the audit? How can a firm that supports biodiversity do an unbiased audit, when managing the herd based on biodiversity supports the goals of one group of stake holders while dismissing the goals of the hunters who actually do the work of controlling the herd?

"I think the audit has now become a waste of time. "

I agree, because its being done by a pgc "YES MAN" organization with strong ties to pgc.

"The sportsmen of Pa were for the most part fine with using science and facts to guide deer management, rather then the old way of the squeaky wheel gets the grease."

I think hunters are for "science" but deer are managed using much more than science. Opinions and "values" play a role. Unfortunately those "values" getting the grease are the ecoflakes and their bionut agenda. See audubon website for details.

"But the PUS (PA. Unified Sportsman) whinned and whinned to the legislature that there was a vast conspiracy, someone cooked the books, yada yada, we want an audit, thinking it would never happen. Then when it did and all the sportsmen and the PGC backed it, they thought great, since they knew their lawsuit was in shambles it would be a way to have someone else do our dirty work for us because we have very little money. Then the out of state firm backed out because of the lawsuit that they didn't want dragged into. So the legislature made the pus sign off that they wouldn't pull this firm into litigation. To save face they had to agree. "

The way I heard it, Pgc also played a role in the delay. Apparently they were terrified something would be turned up in an audit that could be expanded upon and then used against them in court. They stated that they "WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO COOPERATE WITH AN AUDIT WITH THE ONGOING LAWSUIT" You also forgot to mention Audubon and pfsc wanted the audit as well. They saw it as a lesser evil than possible legislative intervention that might actually allow a few more reasonable number of trillium gobbling "woods wreckers" to exist! LMAO! Audubon also knew they had an ace in the hole with wmi the probable auditor, they knew they could swing it, thanks to their men on the scene, including Levdansky. Wmi the company their own Bryon Shissler as well as other econuts and other pgc drones have worked for, including...surprise surprise, our newest commissioner would shamelessly wield the rubber stamp!.

"Now they are on a mission to badmouth the whole audit. The unbiased audit that they wanted and even their president praised for being the best choice for a fair and un-biased firm to conduct the audit."

Can you provide a link to USP's position? I wasnt aware that they were against an audit. Thus far Ive only heard hunters in general opposed. Havent heard much from usp lately on the position of the officers of the club. Not doubting it, just havent seen it myself. Last I heard they were a bit misguided and actually supported it.....despite the fact they are basically sticking their necks in the noose by doing so. Maybe they have come to their senses and finally smelled the stink that this crooked farce is putting off?

Actually the USP president has issued a statement expressing confidence in WMI and the audit.

I must admit that I was surprised at firstbut Mr Mohrhas it right this time.

This is a $90,000 contract. The results will invariably be under a microscope. WMI does work for 40 states and 4 provinces. In the big picture, $90 grand for one contract is a drop in the bucket and with their credibility with all their other customerson the line, doing anything less than a fair, impartial, and professional job would be total business suicide.

WMI has already stated that the herd should be managed for the benefit of the other stake holders , rather than for hunters. Therefore there is no way they can provide a fair and unbiased audit when they have already stated their bias against hunters.

More spin from the bird. The correct wording is all stakeholders not other
Hunters do, of course, get input too. The bird simply has a problem allowing for the concerns and interests of the people who feed the deer and provide most of the land they live on. The only way he'll ever besatisfied is to buy some ground and fence in his own deer farm.