Interesting Information

It is quite interesting Brian. I saw a slightly expanded version of these results & commentary on the AZ G&F website. (link --> http://www.gf.state.az.us/nrm/wildlife_news.html#3 ) I'd be curious to see more details on the study. Because the findings appear to challenge some fairly widely accepted biological theories, I'd like to hear some folks in 'the field' comment (Todd Black, etc..).

In the meantime, maybe everyone should take-up varmit calling!!! ;-)

S.

:)
 
I would like to send this study to the DFG here in Cali. I think I will, Dag Nabit!.........
 
Makes sense! I'm glad somebody's willing tell it like it is.

I think way too much emphasis is given to poor habitat in relationship to low deer numbers. Back in the 70's there were deer running all over Utah. Now, just because some cheatgrass is growing in the hills we're stuck with low deer numbers, I say bull! Deer numbers are low because of bad winters and they stay that way because of predators. It's like trying to fill a bucket that has a hole, it's never going to fill up unless you plug the leak.

Then of course there's the elk card, I say, take away the predators first before blaming the elk. Last time I checked, elk don't eat deer. Rant over.
 
Chicken Little, you have way too much practicallity and common sense. You definately don't work for the government. Dittos
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom