[haibitatwarrior]

Give me one bit of proof that the insurance industry has anything to do with herd reductions.Man,I don't know where you've been the last five years.This has everything to do with allowing the forests to recover and nothing to do with insurance.Go look up all the sponsers for the Audubon's "overabundant deer" seminar in 2003.There's dozens of sponsors from the timber industry and various eco groups but the insurance industry in completely absent.While you're at it,go check the sponsors from Alt's latest round of seminars accross the state.Again,not one rep from the insurance industry.I really hate to be combative on these boards but these ridiculous claims without any facts are nothing short of slander. If you have proof,show it.Otherwise you have no idea what you're talking about.The insurance industry has nothing to do with this.

[buckman]

Your right, he is not in the PGC....BUT, he currently tours the State giving seminars on deer management and as we all know by now he advocates controlling the deer herd by shooting does and allowing more bucks to reach 2 1/2 yrs. of age. Now, if the Insurance Co. was to support someone...wouldn't it be Gary Alt and others who support QDM, where the population of deer is reduced??? I believe so, so why is it then that no one in the Insurance industry has openly supported Gary Alt or any other group that promotes this?? Because the black suits that sit in NYC could really care less about the deer herd in Pa!!! They have bigger fish in the sea to worry about then our deer situation!

[haibitatwarrior]

That's 100% buckman.I never said Gary Alt is or ever was the head of the game commission.However,he publically stated that he was never approached by a member of the insurance industry.Like Buckman stated,he is now doing seminars accross the state talking about deer and the urban problems they create.Again,the insurance industry is not one of the many sponsers.

You guys really need to get your facts strait.If you're of the opinion that there's not enough deer,that's fine.I actually see where you're coming from to a degree.If you want to fight for more deer,that's fine as well.Just know who the opponenets actually are.When you start blaming the wrong people,you end up looking foolish.The stakeholders in this whole fiasco have never been kept secret nor have they been any less than vocal.For the past several years the timber industry and many enviromentalist groups have been screaming for less deer.That no secret but the insurance industry has been silent.Yes,the media does several pieces every fall about the impact of deer collisions.They contact the insurance industry to get statistics but the insurance industry never says we need less deer or gives information on their plan to get that accomplished.The legislature does not set allocations.The commissioners do and never have they admitted the insuranance industry is playing a role.Are these deer collisions an issue?Sure,because peoples lives are at stake and it costs Penn Dot millions of dollars to clean up the dead carcusses. Still,insurance companies do not have a say in game management.They simply measure the risks and adjust the rates accordingly.Deer claims are very predictable and that predictability is the key to making a profit whether 1 deer or 5000 get hit.

This argument gets tiresome after a while because you're barking up the wrong tree.It's actually funny.Last year I must have heard of at least 5 coyotes that were killed with their ears tatooed with different insuranmce company's logo.Funny thing is,I've yet to see one of these bodies produced as evidence.It actually scares me that the average person is that gullible and unable to think rationally on their own.