Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
06-07-2009, 09:57 PM
#1
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
Here is is what is going to be included in the Deer Audit, and is expected to be completed by the end of summer. But what should we expect for only $90,000!! As you can see the audit will not even look at current DD. #'s, DD#'s over the last few years, what DD. #'s should be in the future or what DD#'s are currently be managed in other states. Pike
Here is the article.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""http://www.centredaily.com/sports/story/1330969.html]Critics of the Pennsylvania Game Commission have long requested that an outside agency investigate the commission’s deer program. The long-awaited deer audit is about to take place.
The audit’s scope and depth is determined by a Request for Proposals sent out by the Budget and Finance Committee in June 2008. The five-page document, along with the attached resolution, directs would-be applicants to focus their investigation on answering 15 questions dealing with the PGC’s deer population estimates, the size of wildlife management units, the PGC’s use of deer embryo data, deer health, habitat health, forest regeneration, deer/human conflicts and other issues. The RFP also asks that the audit compare Pennsylvania’s deer management practices to those used by other deer states and to determine what, if any, of their best practices should be used in Pennsylvania.
“We are in the final stages of drawing up a request for documentation — a list of information to be supplied by the Game Commission for our audit,” Williamson said. “Some of the information should be easily supplied, while other data will take some time for the agency to assemble.”
According to Williamson, WMI will review the data that is supplied by the commission and then meet with agency personnel during the summer to get any needed clarification or request additional information.
“We need to know enough about their techniques and methods to know what questions to ask,” Williamson said. “We will then use our own experience, published scientific literature and the methods that other states use to evaluate Pennsylvania’s deer program. Every state agency uses the literature to guide their management process. Pennsylvania is unique in that they have been able to do the science within the borders of the commonwealth. During the audit process, we will look at all of their deer studies.”
If some hunters are expecting the institute to provide an exact count of Pennsylvania’s deer, a question long-asked by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, they might be disappointed.
“We are not going out in the field to count deer,” Williamson said. “There will be no independent population survey. We will look at the Commission’s data and the quality of the data and ask if it is defensible and reliable. If their data is up to the task, we will make a population estimate and indicate a level of confidence in the estimate. If the confidence level is too wide, the estimate won’t be worth the paper that it is printed on.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""
Here is the article.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""http://www.centredaily.com/sports/story/1330969.html]Critics of the Pennsylvania Game Commission have long requested that an outside agency investigate the commission’s deer program. The long-awaited deer audit is about to take place.
The audit’s scope and depth is determined by a Request for Proposals sent out by the Budget and Finance Committee in June 2008. The five-page document, along with the attached resolution, directs would-be applicants to focus their investigation on answering 15 questions dealing with the PGC’s deer population estimates, the size of wildlife management units, the PGC’s use of deer embryo data, deer health, habitat health, forest regeneration, deer/human conflicts and other issues. The RFP also asks that the audit compare Pennsylvania’s deer management practices to those used by other deer states and to determine what, if any, of their best practices should be used in Pennsylvania.
“We are in the final stages of drawing up a request for documentation — a list of information to be supplied by the Game Commission for our audit,” Williamson said. “Some of the information should be easily supplied, while other data will take some time for the agency to assemble.”
According to Williamson, WMI will review the data that is supplied by the commission and then meet with agency personnel during the summer to get any needed clarification or request additional information.
“We need to know enough about their techniques and methods to know what questions to ask,” Williamson said. “We will then use our own experience, published scientific literature and the methods that other states use to evaluate Pennsylvania’s deer program. Every state agency uses the literature to guide their management process. Pennsylvania is unique in that they have been able to do the science within the borders of the commonwealth. During the audit process, we will look at all of their deer studies.”
If some hunters are expecting the institute to provide an exact count of Pennsylvania’s deer, a question long-asked by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, they might be disappointed.
“We are not going out in the field to count deer,” Williamson said. “There will be no independent population survey. We will look at the Commission’s data and the quality of the data and ask if it is defensible and reliable. If their data is up to the task, we will make a population estimate and indicate a level of confidence in the estimate. If the confidence level is too wide, the estimate won’t be worth the paper that it is printed on.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""
06-08-2009, 06:04 AM
#2
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
If some hunters are expecting the institute to provide an exact count of Pennsylvania’s deer, a question long-asked by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, they might be disappointed.
“We are not going out in the field to count deer,” Williamson said. “There will be no independent population survey. We will look at the Commission’s data and the quality of the data and ask if it is defensible and reliable. If their data is up to the task, we will make a population estimate and indicate a level of confidence in the estimate. If the confidence level is too wide, the estimate won’t be worth the paper that it is printed on.
And the problem is what, exactly?
Wheredid it ever say that some pointless (and impossible)stab at a state-wide deer estimate was to be attempted, or that it was supposed to beanything other thana professionalcritique of PGC's management programs?
Has not WMI also critiqued the management programs of several other states and made suggestions on how to conduct them differently, or in some cases, found them to be pretty much within the guidelines of accepted management practices?
“We are not going out in the field to count deer,” Williamson said. “There will be no independent population survey. We will look at the Commission’s data and the quality of the data and ask if it is defensible and reliable. If their data is up to the task, we will make a population estimate and indicate a level of confidence in the estimate. If the confidence level is too wide, the estimate won’t be worth the paper that it is printed on.
And the problem is what, exactly?
Wheredid it ever say that some pointless (and impossible)stab at a state-wide deer estimate was to be attempted, or that it was supposed to beanything other thana professionalcritique of PGC's management programs?
Has not WMI also critiqued the management programs of several other states and made suggestions on how to conduct them differently, or in some cases, found them to be pretty much within the guidelines of accepted management practices?
06-08-2009, 08:12 AM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
Denny pointless? OH., IA., IL., TX and other states estimate deer populations do not think its pointless! But those states deer management programs are based on Scientific Deer Management not by what special interest groups want.
The majority of the hunters in PA. wanted an audit because they were not happy with the current deer management program. IE. the DD.'s in past years, the current DD.,what the PGC. is planning on managing the herd in future years and compare the DD.'s that PGC. is managing the herd at to other states. This Audit does nothing to address the # 1 stake holder in PA.'s concerns, only the concerns of the special interest groups like the Audubon Soc., Timber Industry, farm Bureau etc. Pike
The majority of the hunters in PA. wanted an audit because they were not happy with the current deer management program. IE. the DD.'s in past years, the current DD.,what the PGC. is planning on managing the herd in future years and compare the DD.'s that PGC. is managing the herd at to other states. This Audit does nothing to address the # 1 stake holder in PA.'s concerns, only the concerns of the special interest groups like the Audubon Soc., Timber Industry, farm Bureau etc. Pike
06-08-2009, 08:28 AM
#4
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
Where did it ever say that some pointless (and impossible) stab at a state-wide deer estimate was to be attempted, or that it was supposed to be anything other than a professional critique of PGC's management programs?
06-08-2009, 11:11 AM
#5
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
Denny pointless? OH., IA., IL., TX and other states estimate deer populations do not think its pointless!
And onwhatdata do these states base their population estimates?
>From a legislative report on discussion ofthe WMIstudy, 4/28/09:
Rep. Levdansky said it appears as though the staff strongly recommended WMI. Rowe confirmed this is the case saying they scored 10 points higher than anyone else. He added that at different times the Unified Sportsmen and the PA Federation of Sportsmen also supported WMI. This prompted Rep. Levdansky to proclaim that he can't recall any other issue those two groups have agreed upon, which should say something about WMI's competency.
Rep. Godshall recalled how the general consensus of the study was to use an out of state contractor to ascertain an accurate count of the number of deer in PA. Rowe agreed with this statement. Rep. Godshall then expressed concern over the fact that the accuracy of WMI's work would depend upon the data the Game Commission provides them. He worried about prior statements from the Executive Director of the Game Commission where he said the Director admitted to not knowing if the state had ten healthy deer or 100 healthy deer. Rep. Godshall also worried about verbiage from WMI about their conclusions being contingent upon the data they receive from the Commission. He stressed that to accurately conduct this study field work would have to be done.
Rowe said he is not going to argue with the Representative's concern but stressed that field work would be a part of the study. He added that "if possible" verbiage was simply related to WMI not knowing at this point in time about the quality of the data they would receive. Rowe stressed that if it is found that the data quality is poor then WMI will make recommendations on how the Game Commission can change its data collection system.
Rowe then went back to his remarks relating how over the summer, WMI became concerned over whether they might get pulled into a lawsuit filed against the Game Commission by the Unified Sportsmen which resulted in them pulling out of the process in the fall. He related how this problem was later resolved in the beginning of 2009 when the Game Commission, WMI and the Unified Sportsmen were able to enter into a written agreement assuring that WMI would not get pulled into the lawsuit.
************************************************** *******
This is the same report where Godshall expressed disappointmenet that the PGC no longer did aerial surveys of deer (something they never did) and also said he didn't understand what Roe meant when he talked about herd health, because all the deer he sees look healthy to him.
And onwhatdata do these states base their population estimates?
>From a legislative report on discussion ofthe WMIstudy, 4/28/09:
Rep. Levdansky said it appears as though the staff strongly recommended WMI. Rowe confirmed this is the case saying they scored 10 points higher than anyone else. He added that at different times the Unified Sportsmen and the PA Federation of Sportsmen also supported WMI. This prompted Rep. Levdansky to proclaim that he can't recall any other issue those two groups have agreed upon, which should say something about WMI's competency.
Rep. Godshall recalled how the general consensus of the study was to use an out of state contractor to ascertain an accurate count of the number of deer in PA. Rowe agreed with this statement. Rep. Godshall then expressed concern over the fact that the accuracy of WMI's work would depend upon the data the Game Commission provides them. He worried about prior statements from the Executive Director of the Game Commission where he said the Director admitted to not knowing if the state had ten healthy deer or 100 healthy deer. Rep. Godshall also worried about verbiage from WMI about their conclusions being contingent upon the data they receive from the Commission. He stressed that to accurately conduct this study field work would have to be done.
Rowe said he is not going to argue with the Representative's concern but stressed that field work would be a part of the study. He added that "if possible" verbiage was simply related to WMI not knowing at this point in time about the quality of the data they would receive. Rowe stressed that if it is found that the data quality is poor then WMI will make recommendations on how the Game Commission can change its data collection system.
Rowe then went back to his remarks relating how over the summer, WMI became concerned over whether they might get pulled into a lawsuit filed against the Game Commission by the Unified Sportsmen which resulted in them pulling out of the process in the fall. He related how this problem was later resolved in the beginning of 2009 when the Game Commission, WMI and the Unified Sportsmen were able to enter into a written agreement assuring that WMI would not get pulled into the lawsuit.
************************************************** *******
This is the same report where Godshall expressed disappointmenet that the PGC no longer did aerial surveys of deer (something they never did) and also said he didn't understand what Roe meant when he talked about herd health, because all the deer he sees look healthy to him.
06-08-2009, 02:51 PM
#6
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
Denny the reason DD. estimates are important to states like OH. ( which by the way manages their herd at 25 DPSM) and MI. (which manages its herd at 28.9 DPSM) is so they know what the DD was 5 years ago, what is currently and where they want it to be 5 years from now and also know how many deer they need to harvest each and every year to acheive their
management goals!! The only reason manageing a herd at a township level, county level, WMU level or state level would be ""pointless"" (as you claim) to estimate the DD. in any one of those area's mentioned would be if the over harest of the herd in any or all of the area's mentioned was not a concern to the PGC. And if the over harvest of the state's herd isnt a concern to the PGC. that isnt deer management!! That is deer mis-management! The audit was designed to give the hunters of PA. more faith in the deer program etc., but the audit in its current form is just going to cause even more PA. hunters (the hunters currently on the fence who currently are waiting to form their own opinion on the subject) to turn their backs on the PGC as well as the thousands of hunters who currently are not happy with the results of current deer plan but still have faith in the PGC. or still have hope that the PGC. will do the right thing.
The audit in its current form will kill any faith or hope that the hunters of PA. still have for the PGC. and its deer plan. HUNTERS LIKE OUR VERY OWN BT.BOWHUNTER. Pike
management goals!! The only reason manageing a herd at a township level, county level, WMU level or state level would be ""pointless"" (as you claim) to estimate the DD. in any one of those area's mentioned would be if the over harest of the herd in any or all of the area's mentioned was not a concern to the PGC. And if the over harvest of the state's herd isnt a concern to the PGC. that isnt deer management!! That is deer mis-management! The audit was designed to give the hunters of PA. more faith in the deer program etc., but the audit in its current form is just going to cause even more PA. hunters (the hunters currently on the fence who currently are waiting to form their own opinion on the subject) to turn their backs on the PGC as well as the thousands of hunters who currently are not happy with the results of current deer plan but still have faith in the PGC. or still have hope that the PGC. will do the right thing.
The audit in its current form will kill any faith or hope that the hunters of PA. still have for the PGC. and its deer plan. HUNTERS LIKE OUR VERY OWN BT.BOWHUNTER. Pike
06-09-2009, 04:09 AM
#7
Typical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
ORIGINAL: bluebird2
The PGC estimates the population in each WMU every year, so why isn't WMI going to determine if those estimates are accurate?
Wheredid it ever say that some pointless (and impossible)stab at a state-wide deer estimate was to be attempted, or that it was supposed to beanything other thana professionalcritique of PGC's management programs?
06-09-2009, 06:15 AM
#8
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
Who's to say WMI won't dissect whatever method the PGC currently uses to arrive at its estimates and approve or disapprove them, while making suggestions on a better method? I believe that's the stated purpose of the audit, to eithervalidate current methods,or suggest better ways if WMI finds things that need to be changed, in their opinion?
The PGC once released estimates of first day buck killsand quit doing that years ago. Didn't bother me any that they quit offering such figures for public consumption. Those that couldn't find any deer, didn't believesuch estimatesanyway, if those estimates didn't suit their own perceptions of how many deer were killed.
The PGC once released estimates of first day buck killsand quit doing that years ago. Didn't bother me any that they quit offering such figures for public consumption. Those that couldn't find any deer, didn't believesuch estimatesanyway, if those estimates didn't suit their own perceptions of how many deer were killed.
06-09-2009, 08:18 AM
#9
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2G Gaines Pa
Posts: 524
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
And these are the mysterious, confidential estimates that PGC never publishes.???? Perhaps some good would come of the audit, if only these estimates would become public knowledge so everyone who has been duped can see just how far down the crapper we have come.
06-11-2009, 10:03 AM
#10
Spike
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 64
RE: Its Official, The Deer Audit is a Scam!!
Some people just don't get it. If the audit reviews the method used to get the estimates, then the actual estimate is irrelevant. It's the method that is important and has to be correct.
And for some of you to think the PGC doesn't do estimates of the herd shows you have little understanding of the population management process. I mean come on, how do you think they arrive at doe tag allocations? duh Oh wait, let me guess. They make up a number right?????????
The majority of hunters wanted the audit to prove the naysayers wrong and to vindicate the deer mngmt. team. In fact, on a letter to the legislature requesting that this audit be done, was signed by the following groups:
Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs-Melody Zullinger Executive Director
Audubon PA- Timothy D. Schaeffer Executive Director
PA Chapter National Wild Turkey Federation- Don Heckman, Exec. Officer
CNX Land Resources (Consol Energy)- Dennis Fredericks, Manager, Conservation Properties & Activities
United Bowhunters of PA- Wes Waldron, President
Ecosystem Management Project- Bryon Shissler
PA Rifle & Pistol Assoc.- Jack Lee
Chesapeake Bay Foundation- President Matt Ehrhart
PA Sportsmen’s Assoc- Harry Schneider
Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future- Chairman John Hanger, President & CEO
Allegheny Co. Sportsmen’s League- Mike Maranche, President
PA Landscape & Nursery Products- Chad Forcey, Director of Government Relations
Pheasants Forever- Shon Robbins, Wildlife Biologist
Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter- Jeff Schmidt, Director
Ruffed Grouse Society- Mark Banker, Senior Biologist
Pennsylvania Grange- Betsy Huber, Grange Master
PA Chapters (7) of Safari Club International- Craig Kauffman
And for some of you to think the PGC doesn't do estimates of the herd shows you have little understanding of the population management process. I mean come on, how do you think they arrive at doe tag allocations? duh Oh wait, let me guess. They make up a number right?????????
The majority of hunters wanted the audit to prove the naysayers wrong and to vindicate the deer mngmt. team. In fact, on a letter to the legislature requesting that this audit be done, was signed by the following groups:
Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs-Melody Zullinger Executive Director
Audubon PA- Timothy D. Schaeffer Executive Director
PA Chapter National Wild Turkey Federation- Don Heckman, Exec. Officer
CNX Land Resources (Consol Energy)- Dennis Fredericks, Manager, Conservation Properties & Activities
United Bowhunters of PA- Wes Waldron, President
Ecosystem Management Project- Bryon Shissler
PA Rifle & Pistol Assoc.- Jack Lee
Chesapeake Bay Foundation- President Matt Ehrhart
PA Sportsmen’s Assoc- Harry Schneider
Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future- Chairman John Hanger, President & CEO
Allegheny Co. Sportsmen’s League- Mike Maranche, President
PA Landscape & Nursery Products- Chad Forcey, Director of Government Relations
Pheasants Forever- Shon Robbins, Wildlife Biologist
Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter- Jeff Schmidt, Director
Ruffed Grouse Society- Mark Banker, Senior Biologist
Pennsylvania Grange- Betsy Huber, Grange Master
PA Chapters (7) of Safari Club International- Craig Kauffman