by Dan Salmon » Sun May 08, 2011 12:26 pm
C'mon Retch, you know that statistics, in this case population estimates, can be moved one way or another by the assumptions that are made. It seems that during the Doyle years that the assumptions were made that the public was stupid and would believe anything that was fed to them.
There is absolutely a way to tweak the SAK model to include assumptions due to EAB and predation and get good statistical models for populations. The audit team said as much, they just didn't know specifically without studying the population dynamics and were smart not to suggest what to do so groups like yours couldn't throw them under the bus if it didn't work the first time around. The studies that are now being done will certainly open biologists to some new insights in these areas, it's too bad that the right here, right now crowd can't let the professionals do their jobs.
Not much of a Hunters or Conservation Group in my mind that pedals to the fast and easy fix for today without looking down the road to see what is best for the resource. There are still plenty of deer in Wisconsin and plenty of Big Bucks, which it seems is all people want to shoot, but still want to look at 100's of deer each day in general.
That, as we have seen, is not sustainable biologically or socially, but it is popular with an increasingly aging and less mobile population of hunters in Wisconsin. Not to mention a group of young hunters that have never had to hunt, they could just go sit anywhere in the woods and shoot a deer. Could be why we are seeing a drop off in hunters in their 30's and 40's. Hunting is now more like work, you actually have to think and work to see a deer and it's no longer fun because of it.