Mule Deer:"My answer was smart-assed because yours was condescending, both to me and game biologists. In fact it implied that all game biologists are incompetent or mouthpieces for their agency."
First, my reply wasn't condescending to you or game biologists. If you think it was anything other than disagreeing with words and an opinion-and while I do enjoy your work and appreciate your experience and wish to see it often-if you are looking to have your azz kissed, like more than a few on here do and have arrived at the point of thinking any who disagree are being condescending, well that's your problem not mine. I guess I didn't say the right words. "Well MD, while you have a vast amount of experience, I must humbly disagree on a couple points."
Hint: Don't hold your breath.
It was an opinion on what I have observed in prime Deer and Grouse habitat. Which in that type of cover it would take more Deer than I can imagine to have an adverse effect on Grouse numbers. I was throwing that observation out and also mentioned in mature covers it can be a factor.
MD: "Game biologists don’t just work for government agencies or pay-for-results universities. Some work for hunting groups, especially those that advocate for various animals, or private landowners, and are actually looking for reasons and solutions, rather than creating propaganda or covering their employer’s butts."
I have more than a little respect for the Game Biologists. They get it right most of the time. However, lets take the Pa GC for example. They have dedicated people on the whole. They are funded almost entirely by hunters dollars. Yet they have State imposed mandates that force them to study and improve the habitat on not only specific non-game species, but in some cases prey species that are not beneficial to the improvement of game numbers. IE: Eagles, Hawks, Owls. At some point there is an obvious conflict between the goal of one biologist against those of another. Hmmmm and all paid for by hunters dollars. No general fund money, no charge for a non-hunter to roam over a million acres of hunter paid for game lands.
I for one enjoy the Eagle and Peregrine Hawk cams that the GC currently partner with other organizations to not only increase their numbers, but also public awareness of raptors. But I have yet to hear a GW say, Ya I know your dollars are being spent to enhance species that will diminish Grouse, Rabbits, Squirrel hunting opportunities. Forget Songbirds hea!!!! And something is going on, because their numbers have been going down considerably in these parts for years. And again its my opinion the Deer have little to do with it.
No one said you WV friend is FOS. Did say that in prime first rate Grouse cover, Deer numbers have minimal effect on Grouse nesting success. Give him a call and ask him. Would be interested in his reply.
I understood your point that in marginal Grouse cover Deer numbers can have an adverse effect. You missed mine that they have minimal if none in prime covers. Not being condescending, just how it appears on this end.
