|
Now he tells us he can do it from his driveway yet he complains often about the lack of deer when he hunts. Actually it's quite obnoxious of you to jump in like you have several times lately. Here is a news flash, scouting does not increase the number of deer. And what is obnoxious is your comment about Maverick jumping in on a thread. Remember , this is a MB where everyone has a right to comment on anything that is posted. If you want a private discussion you should use the PM feature. |
"And what is obnoxious is your comment about Maverick jumping in on a thread. Remember , this is a MB where everyone has a right to comment on anything that is posted. "
Dont know who he thinks he is, but i sense one helluva napolean complex. Been trying to tell me to stop pointing out when he lies, tried to tell me stop using bold type. Whine because i dont use the quote feature and he doesnt approve. Whining because i was using red text. Beeching about Maverick making a post, whining when we point out facts that dont support the failed deer program. Personally attacking everyone who makes a post that he doesnt approve of... Funniest part of all is that i think he actually expects someone to listen to his "orders". lmao. |
Originally Posted by BTBowhunter
(Post 3456589)
Whats yours? What are your others here? Just give me the ones that begin with C
Originally Posted by BTBowhunter
(Post 3456589)
We? just curious, who are you referring to as we?
|
I may have found the answer in this quote in a PGN article on the CAC reports.
Because the habitat allowed,the CAC recommendations to increase deer populations in WMUs 2E,3A and 4A were accepted in developing antlerless allocations. The agency however,could not allow the WMU 1A, CAC's recommendation to increase the deer population,because the unit's forest health there is considered to be only fair. For staff to recommend an increase in a WMU deer population,forest health must meet a SPECIFIC QUANTITATIVE target. If this measure improves -- the deer and forest health are checked annually--then agency staff will consider recommending a herd increase. What is even more interesting is that the percent regeneration in two of the three WMUs where the recommendation was to increase the herd , decreased instead of increasing from 2004 to 2008 and the increase in 4A was only 3%. WMU % regeneration 2004 5% regeneration 2008 1A 62% 51% 2E 60% 47% 3A 59% 55% 4A 60% 63% It should also be noted that the 2009 antlerless allocations remained the same in all 4 WMUs. |
Originally Posted by Maverick 1
(Post 3457053)
My username on this forum is obviously, "Maverick 1". Over on the greeny site its, "The Maverick". I think that should seem fairly straight foward to most. Now, what is your username?
You have already singled out, Bluebird, Cornellius, and myself. I think it should be obvious that we would be referring to the three of us. Who did you think it meant? |
Careful what you wish for Mav. Do you really need to hear more complete bull****, lies and personal attack?:s8:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:45 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.