[quote=Cornelius08;3584566]Douge, We wouldnt be in the mess we have today if it werent for the wrong people getting stacked onto the board of commissioners and putting all of this into place...

Manufacturing problems even where there were none...
Biodiversity partnerships...
Ridiculous levels of deer reductions....
Different timbering practices.....
Obtuse goals.....
Alliances with hunter unfriendlies and anti-deer orgs....
Contraception pro-use policies....
Constant belittling, ignoring and screwing over the sportsmen...

There absolutely,positively were severe problems with the habitat that are univerally accepted by every expert out there.None of that was manufatured.

Plenty of hunters operate according to the if its brown its down mentality. Plenty of hunters would be all for extending seasons, extending bag limits, opening all public lands to hunting, and allowing everything from traditional bows to Uzi's to hunt deer. So, if they had put the management entirely in the hands of hunters, deer would probably be extinct in PA at this point. Compared to that, the mixed bag of folks with differing agendas currently involved may be far from perfect, but things could be worse.

Be careful of what you wish for....

Quote:

" There absolutely,positively were severe problems with the habitat that are univerally accepted by every expert out there.None of that was manufatured. "

Its also universally accepted that there are other reasons for it, including but not limited to deer.

That also doesnt pertain to statewide conditions by any stretch of the imagination, yet they try to stretch out real problems in some areas to include other areas by pointing out pure nonsense problems such as not enough hobblebush, or trillium existing, regen. stocking not being conducive to completely even age timber stand and other complete nonsense. Problem of being able to see over a hundred yards in MATURE timber because of not having fully stocked shrub layer on every inch of Pa mature timber!...

The changes in already extreme assessment methods that got even moreso, and sent wmus from 60%+ regeneration ratings....Down to 30's with a simple change in the wording... And now according to that data, after 10 long years, and significant reductions....the audit says instead of progressing, we actually REGRESSED a tiny bit!! Due most likely to the change in assment method mentioned above.

Too much complete and utter bs. Maybe if it all werent so ridiculous and the lies so blatant, the exaggerations so hard to believe... Maybe some of what they have to say would actually be believed. Im sure there probably is a smidge of truth here and there that some may pass off as total fallacy simply because of all the things we KNOW are pure garbage that theyve been trying to force feed us.

That's simply not true. When regeneration is limited by factors other than deer, the area can support a lot more deer than 10 DPSM. If that wasn't true the herd would never have increased to 1.6M deer ,because the habitat wouldn't have supported that many deer.

The funny thing is man created the problems with the habitat , not the deer. Man stripped the state of trees which resulted in uncontrolled forest fires,severe erosion and an even aged forest. Man stocked deer and allowed the herd to increase while the carrying capacity was decreasing. Now man wants the forests to stay the same as it was for the last 50 years even though mother nature prefers shade tolerant trees with less commercial value.