Another perspective on Eveland's mismanagement report

All that from someone who still can't stand the fact that she had her opportunity to screw things up and did a very good job at it but now it is someone elses turn. The only skunk is the ex commissioner that is still trying to influence things. Her biggest accomplishment was getting the PGC on the comedy channel with her original approval of spear hunting for deer. Anything to kill as many of the critters as possible aye Roxie.

Palone's perspective is just as biased as Eveland's and the USP.

"Eveland went on the question the goals and research of the deer section of the PGC. Based on the number of embryos per doe, the deer herd is healthy. That’s a good thing. So does Eveland want the PGC to increase the deer herd again so they become “unhealthy”?

If she knew what she was talking about ,she would know that reducing the herd did not improve breeding rates, the number of embryos /Doe or the breeding window,which means the herd was just as healthy with 1.6 M deer as it is now with around 850K deer.

When she is talking about DCNR and advanced regeneration she failed to leave out the fact that the Browse Study failed to report the number of plots that lacked adequate regeneration due to causes other than browsing ,such as "high basal diameter stands",competing vegetation and disease. They also with held the results of the pellet counts so none could determine if the lack of regeneration was due to high deer densities. Furthermore, in the DCNR Review DCNR admitted that they present information in such a way as to support their position and that apparently includes with holding pertinent data.

"DCNR admitted that they present information in such a way as to support their position and that apparently includes with holding pertinent data."

Gee, that's never happened before.