Which conflicts with the great folks involved , and the info they share. Happens in other organizations too. It is what it is ... Co-ops make sense. If only for the networking. And deer health awareness is always good. When deer are running optimally healthy , and habitat is not declining from too many , I've little to say to a landowner trying to be justifiable about their target selections or desires. As ever with me since owning a hunt site , if it's contentious about my choices , it ends at my borders. Healthy balance first is not a bad goal.. Then hunter desires can follow in cherry picking. Balance is not a one time (year) swipe at a solution though. Many years of high pressured (participated in by many hunters) public land hunting has made controlling hunter density on a hunt site (with some deer in the area) my main goal. It works. But those public land days are not forgotten. Especially the lack of control over the herd , or it's hunters. IF what I do (or anyone does) is duplicatable by everyone else as far as the playing field and hunter density on it , then it can be fairly promoted. If everyone does not want to participate and cooperate though , or duplication is not realistic , it's pushing a rope. Not a wetted and then frozen rope either.... I'm not looking for a rope to push. Or for you to push.