I don’t think some of y’all understand the foundation of surveys or “simple random sampling”. That’s not meant as an insult……It’s just that sampling of this nature is not really a WAG….It’s more like a math formula…. We were required to take classes in forestry called Measurements I and II……We spent half the semester of MI studying nothing but simple random sampling, how it worked, and the math behind why it worked. They wanted us to understand it because it’s the foundation for doing a timber cruise. You sample a small portion of the whole…….you don’t measure the entire timber stand. Do you guys who don’t believe the deer survey was accurate also believe that foresters are just taking wild arse guesses at timber cruises? They are using the same concepts……..
I don't know myself. But you and PCP say it's accurate, that's good enough for me. I'll go with it. But the problem is the trust level of them making up numbers that weren't the sampling numbers. BhamFred said they asked them for estimates once. Did they take the GWs numbers and present them as the random survey? The trust, or lack of, is not necessarily random surveying but rather the numbers being manipulated to meet and agenda. That is just MY opinion on the problem with THIS random survey.
