Here are the press releases that a few hunting orgs came out with (people that are actually involved with whats taking place) http://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/May12/0531/0531hrc.pdf http://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/June12/0601/0601wbh.pdf http://unitedsportsmenwi.com/2012/usw-press-release-on-dr-krolls-deer-study/
I think I understand the problem now. It's somewhat difficult for me, as I choose to ignore political BS and do my own thinking, form my own opinions and make my own decisions. Both parties are ignorant and corrupt. I understand that the final report is not yet due. However, if he truly is slacking and plagiarizing, then shame on him. The great state of Ohio would have put him out on his lilly, scientific arse a long time ago. Again, IF the article conatains truth.
Cant say that I know. I do know they issued this press release when Kroll was attacked. http://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/June12/0601/0601wbh.pdf I dont expect any org to share my same views (and I belong to a list of hunting orgs a long as your arm, both WI orgs and national orgs.) I do my own research and information seeking and arrive at conclusions based on the best available information. I would like to think that not only the orgs I belong to but also those that I dont belong to have the smarts to see what was done to Kroll and Walker for what it was.
The final report should be made public in about a week. I think you keep mistakenly commenting on the preliminary document from back in March which was a finding of facts and the formulation of his problem statement. In that document he detailed the history of different efforts to improve Wisconsin’s deer management program and what worked, what did not, what was acted upon and what was not as well as prior reviews and what they said and what was done about them and what was not acted upon. He did a good job of detailing all the prior efforts so perhaps somebody told you he was copying or plagiarizing when in fact he built his problem statement on the many attempts to address WI deer management and how they failed or came short of actually getting something done. You’re not alone. Others that did not pay close attention or misunderstood the purpose of the document arrived at an incorrect assumption about the preliminary report explaining the scope of the problem. Some actually thought it was the final report. D&DH spent considerable time getting it wrong.
Kroll answers the many liberal media outlets and sites like D&DH that seem to have an ax to grind with Kroll and Walker. "I cannot undo this slander, but I can be clear. If you read my words carefully, you should understand where I stand. I STAND WITH THE SPORTSMEN/WOMEN OF WISCONSIN, I STAND WITH THE RURAL LIFESTYLE, I STAND WITH NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS, I STAND WITH HUNTING/FISHING RECREATION, AND I STAND WITH THE WHITE-TAILED DEER! Now, I hope that is clear. WHERE I STAND! DR. JAMES C. KROLL, WISCONSIN WHITE-TAILED DEER TRUSTEE I always have made it my policy not to become involved in political issues; politics often is a dirty game and I have no taste for the rules. My propensity, however, to come to the aid of the underdog has, on occasion put me in a position demanding participation. The white-tailed deer is my life, second only to my family and my God! I owe a great deal to whitetails; and my 40 years of work with these wonderful animals and the great men and women who hunt them, and invest money and sweat in preserving them has been a blessing. My father taught me three rules of life-know your convictions, stand strongly on them and always speak your mind and the truth. These simple rules got him through the 74 years of his life and they have served me well over the last 65 years. He was my hero, coming home from the Pacific theater all shot up and with very little interest in hunting anything. I had to learn to hunt on my own and thankfully under the kind eyes of two mentors, my Uncle Spencer ("Butch") and a high school biology teacher, Mr. Victor Rippy. My family on both sides were small farmers, often harvesting game for the table rather than sport. I tell you this to make clear my feelings about animals and about people of the land. Recently, I have heard about things being said in blogs, presumably to aid in successfully removing Governor Walker. Since I am not politically motivated, did not vote for Governor Walker, will not be able to in the up-coming election, and am neither a Democrat nor Republican, I am concerned and saddened by things being said about me and my positions and values related to white-tailed deer. Although there is no way to combat anonymous postings on Internet blogs about me, I can speak in a straightforward manner about my positions and will continue to do so. Wisconsin is a marvelous place with some of the most beautiful places and friendly people I ever have experienced. I have enjoyed my time with the hunters and landowners of this fine state. It was the highest honor of my career to be asked to be the "Deer Trustee," and I have said so many times. I take this responsibility seriously and view it as an opportunity to end my career by giving something back to the animal and the recreational pursuit that has shaped my life. My career has been full of experiences, involving a diversity of people, places and activities. I made the decision early on NOT to be a typical college professor; instead of the ivory tower existence of publish or perish, I opted for working with people in almost every state and province from Mexico to Canada. It has been my joy to hunt whitetails in every habitat and with every legal weapon. I have hunted on public land and on private land. My passion has been to hunt public Crown land in Alberta and Saskatchewan, where the climate is brutal, the hunting is very difficult and the deer are the most challenging. At the same time, I have worked with both small and large landowners to make their lands better for deer, rather than converting their properties to pastures or shopping malls. As a consequence, it has been amusing and frankly frustrating to read or hear someone pronounce me as favoring one group or interest over another; and especially disconcerting to be portrayed as being motivated by material rewards. Although my deepest feelings are my own, I think this is the time to firmly and completely express what my values and philosophies are. First and foremost, every decision I make regarding deer is based on the answers to three basic questions: 1. Is this good for deer? 2. Is this good for the recreational activity of deer hunting? and 3. Does this save undeveloped land and the rural lifestyle? If the answer is no to any, I turn and walk away. Since I grew up in rural central Texas, I fully understand what being poor is! Hunting was more than recreation, it was a way of life. I am committed to the idea, in order for hunting/fishing to prevail, we have to develop ways to provide outdoor opportunities for all citizens. Public lands should be more than just space where hunters can spend time, they should be managed for quality experiences, especially by young boys and girls who may have grown up like me. Public lands often are the places where Native American hunters have to seek the plants and animals to which they have every right, by law and by what is fair. But providing public hunting and recreational opportunities is a challenge in today's world, and will have to involve partnerships between agencies, landowners and hunters. That is why I asked Drs. David Guynn and Gary Alt to assist in this great venture; a capstone for our careers. They represent not only the breadth of experiences needed to assure we truly do develop a 21st Century model for deer management and hunting, beginning in Wisconsin, but also the integrity and moral character so common to sportsmen and women-a model in which there is a place for everyone wanting to enjoy our passion and lifestyle. There is no place in this model for pitting hunters against each other or hunters against landowners! There only is a place for a brotherhood and sisterhood of outdoors people who truly love the land and our deer. Our report and recommendations will stand on the side of the public (hunters, landowners, and other stakeholders), offering a bottom-up approach to wildlife management; one in which individual hunters and landowners have a say in how resources are managed. Our recommendations will be delivered in June to the Governor's office and will focus on this high ideal; one I never will back away from. My Dad would not be happy if I did. One of the most egregious postings was on a self-proclaimed "liberal" blog. Until now, I never have read either a liberal or a conservative blog; no time for that nonsense. However, I was sent this posting and upset by the lies presented in it! Is this what has led to the contentious times we live in today? The "author" of the blog distorts the truth beyond belief. As a child, we played the game "gossip," in which we got in a circle, whispered something in a friend's ear, then repeated the message on around the circle. By the time the message got back to its source, it did not resemble the original. The blog report is a distorted misrepresentation of a distorted misrepresentation of a conversation more than ten years ago! In other words, it is a poor game of "adult" gossip. The blogger rails on about me hating public lands, hating public land hunters, and most egregiously being disdainful of hunters! All this is "based" on an article published at least 10 years ago by a liberal-leaning state magazine on the controversies between our state agency and private landowners wanting to manage deer. I spent about a day showing the reporter what was involved in deer management and during the tour discussed many issues. The discussions were just between the two of us and many things were discussed. That was 10 years ago and obviously I cannot remember everything discussed, but I certainly can remember the material related to these accusations. When the article came out I was shocked by the things he attributed to me as saying. Among these were that I had a "200 acre spread," was one of a handful of "deer breeders" who artificially inseminated deer, national parks were just "wildlife ghettos," and some individuals in organizations are "cocktail conservationists." Now, let's examine the real content of the conversations I had on that day, and the opinions I hold to this day. continued..........
continued...... "First of all my "200 acre spread" serves as our scientific research area, and is not some high dollar hunting ranch. In fact, my school teacher wife and I paid for the land over about 30 years, had some pretty tough times doing so, and have never made a profit on anything. It supports our research and extension work, has trained several graduate students, and hundreds of hunters and landowners come there each year to learn about the latest discoveries in deer and wildlife habitat management. The cost usually is their lunch. As to being a "deer breeder," a significant part of our research focuses on antler genetics and we have published significant findings on the subject. The only deer that get sold from the facility are to fund our research. As to the part about national parks being wildlife ghettos, I discussed at length how the future of wildlife is not bright, with human population growth and fragmentation of land. I lamented international interests in protecting nature tend to think just setting aside some land as a park is going to solve the problem. It is not! The future of wildlife is to involve all interests, including private landowners in solutions to saving wild and undeveloped land. National parks and wilderness areas often are given over to agencies that lack the funds, expertise and interest in actively managing the land entrusted to them. My comment about "cocktail conservationists" was aimed at well-meaning, wealthy individuals who support establishing a park, kicking the native peoples off their land (or converting their lifestyle to agriculture in an arid land) and then go home thinking they have accomplished something great. In reality, these poor people, now divorced from their lands no longer have a reason to protect the wildlife on it. The much publicized poachers of the world are just poor people willing to risk their lives to feed their families. The real solution to saving the undeveloped land, our rural and hunting lifestyle and the animals living there is to figure out ways to give all people (landowners, hunters, citizens) a proprietary interest in keeping wild places wild. That does not mean just landowners, it means people living on and around the land who do not own land, but depend on nature for a living; people such as Native Americans. The good example I used was what I saw in Africa, where in some countries people are given interest in the land and its wildlife and derive benefits from these lands. This does not have to mean hunting income, it can includes nature tourism, and other non-consumptive activities. I used the CAMPFIRE Program (Communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resources) in Zimbabwe as one such program. It is about keeping wildlife and rural communities in a state of coexistence. It began in 1982, when a rancher (Clive Stockil) came up with the idea that if indigenous people were allowed to use the benefits of wildlife, it would incentivize them to protect the land and game. Residents receive a percentage of meat and revenue from game, and wildlife prospered! The program grew to include non-consumptive recreational interviews. Yet, none of this got into the article! After all, it was a piece about mean old private landowners in Texas; and Wisconsin is NOT Texas. The blog reports of what I said about "communism" is a distortion of my real feelings, as well. We discussed how the top-down approach to game management was the wrong approach (sound familiar in regard to Wisconsin?), and if you give people the incentives and support to manage game animals on private and public lands, as well as a say in how these resources are managed, it is a "win-win" for everyone. The unhappiness with the way whitetails have been managed in Wisconsin came the false idea government always knows best, especially when they have a computer program! The people (hunters, landowners and recreationists) on the land know what is happening there and desperately want to share what they know. These are my heartfelt feelings about the future of wildlife and hunting; and, I do not apologize or retreat from any of them. Not only has this anonymous blog "toxic effluent" been misleading, it was troubling they could not even get my age straight: 65 rather than 55. I have been around and fought many battles for underdogs, so I can handle the criticism; even if it is distorted, but the one thing that upset me the most was the undertone of the writer demeaning hunters (red neck killers), which is strange since the goal obviously was to steal voters from the deer hunting community. I cannot undo this slander, but I can be clear. If you read my words above carefully, you should understand where I stand. I STAND WITH THE SPORTSMEN/WOMEN OF WISCONSIN, I STAND WITH THE RURAL LIFESTYLE, I STAND WITH NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS, I STAND WITH HUNTING/FISHING RECREATION, AND I STAND WITH THE WHITE-TAILED DEER! Now, I hope that is clear."
I love Kroll, being he's a Michigander. In all honesty he is in the top 1% of deer management guys out their. Good luck and I hope it all works out for Wisconsin. In my experience deer management becomes about greed, selfish goals by some, and those who are all about tradition and keeping the status quo.
It will work out. The tantrum throwers and political hacks and all the media outlets like D&DH trying desperately to affect the election went all in and now have egg on their faces for exposing their political bias. Its too bad. D&DH used to be about deer hunting but seems to have gone through some negative changes even before this screw up.
Crabtree, are you on Walker's payroll or just admire him so much that you feel the need to post across the www of your love for the man? He can do no wrong in your eyes, by the way your posts read. Even Pat Durkin has been preaching patience with Kroll and the team and defended Kroll during the recent comments regarding communism, public lands, etc. I agree with DDH and question the value or need for Kroll whose greatest expertise may be in high fences, ranch hunts, selling of straws of sperm to other operations for breeding purposes, leasing, food plots and artificial feeders. Good podcast with Dan Schmidt sheds a lot more light on this: http://foremosthunting.podbean.com/2012/06/01/wisconsin-deer-czar-controversy/
Ah yes.. the looking glass. Turn it.. sway it.. move it around to see what you want to see and not what is really there. I don't have a problem with Kroll but it's clear he has literally hundreds of biologists who do. They see him as a man simply interested in the almighty dollar.. and why shouldn't they.. he's sponsored by companies to sell products so that is what he does. My local biologist isn't backed by a single company and therefore I would listen more intently to him rather than the self-proclaimed "Dr. Deer"... and it is self-proclaimed. Keeping all this in mind.. this article was published 10 years ago and well before the current failures of the Wisconsin government... so they show Kroll's character without current Wisconsin governor Walker even in the moment. This article has nothing to do with Walker. As taken directly from the article.. as is... no gimmicks added as none needed to be. Perhaps Kroll has changed his opinion or perhaps the hundreds of biologists against Kroll and the dudes of D&DH know a "bit" more than you "Reeking Crabtree". From the article.... "GAME MANAGEMENT," SAYS JAMES Kroll, driving to his high-fenced, two-hundred-acre spread near Nacogdoches, "is the last bastion of communism." Kroll, also known as Dr. Deer, is the director of the Forestry Resources Institute of Texas at Stephen F. Austin State University, and the "management" he is referring to is the sort practiced by the State of Texas. The 55-year-old Kroll is the leading light in the field of private deer management as a means to add value to the land. His belief is so absolute that some detractors refer to him as Dr. Dough, implying that his eye is on the bottom line more than on the natural world. Kroll, who has been the foremost proponent of deer ranching in Texas for more than thirty years, doesn't mind the controversy and certainly doesn't fade in the heat. People who call for more public lands are "cocktail conservationists," he says, who are really pining for socialism. He calls national parks "wildlife ghettos" and flatly accuses the government of gross mismanagement. He argues that his relatively tiny acreage, marked by eight-foot fences and posted signs warning off would-be poachers, is a better model for keeping what's natural natural while making money off the land. A trip to South Africa six years ago convinced Kroll that he was on the right track. There he encountered areas of primitive, lush wildlife-rich habitats called game ranches. They were privately owned, privately managed, and enclosed by high fences. He noticed how most of the land outside those fences had been grazed to the nub, used up. "Game ranches there derive their income from these animals—viewing them, hunting them, selling their meat," he says. "There are no losers." At his own ranch Kroll has set up a smaller version of the same thing. His land is indeed lush, verdant, with pine groves, an abundance of undergrowth, wild orchids, New Jersey tea, jack-in-the-pulpits, and other native plants. He has also set up a full-scale breeding research center and is one of twenty Texas deer breeders using artificial insemination to improve his herd. "We balance sex and age ratio," he says. "We manage habitat. We control the population and manage for hunting. I want to leave the deer herd better than it was before we came." When the subject of chronic wasting disease on high-fenced elk ranches in Colorado is raised, he casts a wary eye. "You know where that started? On a state-run research farm." He believes that private landowners would never let that happen. Like Johnston, he argues that the landowner who relies on his land for a living has plenty of motivation to keep diseases at bay. Lately the power has been shifting in Kroll's direction. Last year deer-ranching interests persuaded Parks and Wildlife to alter rules and allow landowners to choose their own biologists in creating wildlife-management plans for their land, rather than have one from Parks and Wildlife. That has given landowners more freedom, says Kroll, but he wants even more. "You still have to let the state on your land to get a wildlife-management permit," he says. THOUGH HIGH FENCES REMAIN the subject of hot controversy, more and more experts seem to be coming to the opinion—however reluctantly—that when used properly they can be good for both hunters and environmentalists. Scot Williamson, the former director of big-game programs for Parks and Wildlife, isn't particularly fond of the concept of high fences, but he condones the practice as long as it's on land that would support the wildlife on it naturally. "If you have a twenty-thousand-acre ranch that is high-fenced, your conditions for managing your deer herd for quality and proper density are much better," he says. "At the end of the day, the ecological health of that ranch is improved. But I don't extend that to a two-hundred-acre place where you have to systematically feed your deer. You're not improving your natural habitat or helping the ecology. All you're doing is making money. If you're going to enclose a deer herd, that herd should be able to survive without supplemental feed. "Even the ultrapurist Boone and Crockett Club has begun to recognize that there may be no turning back. Though the organization still refuses to certify game that has been confined by artificial barriers, it recently formed a committee to set up a separate category in their North American Big Game Records Program for game taken behind high fences. Several other states already have some high fencing, including Michigan and Colorado. I'm not sure it's right for them. But for Texas, it'll do, given the circumstances. Look at it as one of the latest manifestations of our peculiar, long-standing cultural relationship with hoofed creatures—from horses, buffaloes, cows, sheep, and goats to exotics like llamas, zebras, and scimitar-horned oryx. In a strange way, ranching the white-tailed deer brings the relationship full circle, back into the (tamed) wild, back to nature. For those hunters and non-hunters who are still troubled by the ethics of high fences, I offer a quote from Dr. Deer on the subject. "Think of it from an anthropomorphic standpoint," he says. "Cattle, we raise in pens, load them up, and knock them over the head. Deer, we raise and then release them into their native habitat. They're harvested with guns and bows. If you had to be cut down, how would you want to die?"
Actually, no, not on his payroll. I just possess great acuity and high levels of common sense and recognize the good works he is doing for the state and am pleased that the tantrum throwers failed miserably. Likewise, I am pleased that he took the initiative to follow through on his word that he would appoint an independent reviewer. I reread it and I cant find any such claim so I will assume that is just something you manufactured for theatrics. It seems you are afraid of what Kroll might come up with. At the end of this reply, in an effort to educate you about the qualifications of Dr. Kroll, I have supplied some info you will find enlightening. (Your welcome) Then you don’t know about his works. The deer management program and the population estimating suite of tools is flawed and sportsmen have made their points known. The Governor sought an outside team of PhD wildlife biologists to review Wisconsin’s management plan and to offer suggestions and recommendations on how to improve the situation and address the concerns of one half of Wisconsin’s deer management team because the other half of the deer management team has not been responsive to calls to action. As a local game manager, I share the concerns of the hundreds of thousands of WI game managers that have raised the issues and look forward hearing what WI hunters (wildlife managers) have to say when its made public. Dr. James C. Kroll Henry M. Rockwell Chair of Forest Wildlife, Arthur Temple College of Forestry & Agriculture Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, Texas Biographical Sketch Dr. James C. Kroll, known nationally as “Dr. Deer,” is a distinguished graduate of both Baylor and Texas A&M Universities. James has been working professionally with whitetails for 40 years. His depth of knowledge has come from working in almost every state and province from Mexico to Canada. He hunts deer, he studies deer, he lives with deer; and, most importantly he loves deer. Over his career, James has published over 300 technical and popular articles, contributed to 35 magazines, appeared on TV programs on Sportsman Channel and four other outdoor networks, winning two awards. James has monthly columns in North American WHITETAIL Magazine and the Journal of the Texas Trophy Hunters Magazine. He also has published 8 books (two of which are best-sellers), and contributed to two more. Currently, he is completing a new book with his colleague and research partner, Ben Koerth, entitled: Forage Management for Whitetails, The Dr. Deer System. He also co-founded the Texas Deer Association, which is the fastest growing conservation organization in the Lone Star State. His research is far reaching, including behavior, habitat management, deer biology, genetics, hunting economics and tactics. For the last 36 years, he has been director of the Institute for White-tailed Deer Management & Research at Stephen F. Austin State University. Over the last four decades, Dr. Kroll has taught numerous courses in wildlife biology, management, zoology and research methods. His teaching excellence has been acknowledge many times through awards and recognitions. Significant Institute accomplishments have been: First work with infrared-triggered cameras. First research on food plots, including plant protection patents. Development of common use terms: sanctuaries, travel corridors, staging areas, sign posts, funneling features, etc. Landscaping techniques for whitetails. Developed production level semen collection and AI techniques for whitetails used in genetics studies. First development of operational DNA markers for parent certification. Electric fence technologies for whitetails. Intensive management strategies for whitetails. During the last nine seasons, James has been a co-star of the award-winning TV program, North American WHITETAIL Television; where he appears each week in a special segment, “Dr. Deer’s Whitetail World.” James now co-stars with North American Whitetail executive editor Gordon Whittington in a new show, “Winchester presents Dr. Deer” on the Sportsman Channel, now in its second season. Along with Ben Koerth, Kroll is finishing up a 14-year, landmark study on antler development in free-ranging deer, results of which were recently published in the Journal of Wildlife Management. This work also led to a new DVD entitled, Antlers, coproduced by NAWT magazine and Intermedia Outdoors. He is married to Susie, and has two children: Cody, a sculptor in New York and Sydney, a Doctor of Psychology at the Veterans Administration. He is a Distinguished Graduate of Texas A&M University, a distinguished alumnus of Baylor University and Waco Independent School District; was recently elected to the Muy Grande Hall of Fame, Nacogdoches County Agricultural Pioneer and currently occupies the Henry M. Rockwell Chair in Forest Wildlife at Stephen F. Austin State University, Arthur Temple College of Forestry & Agriculture. Academic Summary Ph.D. 1973 Texas A&M University (Distinguished Graduate) M.S. 1970 Baylor University B.S. 1969 Baylor University Professional Experience 2008-Present: Henry M. Rockwell Chair in Forest Wildlife Management 2004-2008: Director, Columbia Regional Geospatial Service Center. 2006-Present Co-Director with Dr. David Creech, Pineywoods Native Plant Center 1997-2008: Director, Forest Resources Institute, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University. 1981-present: Professor of Forest Wildlife and Director, Institute for White-tailed Deer Management and Research, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University. Now teach courses in wildlife habitat management, wildlife management techniques, wildlife ecology, land management planning, white-tailed deer ecology and management, introduction to forestry, and research methods. Also, direct a large on-going research project in whitetailed deer biology. 1975-present: Director, Institute for White-tailed Deer Management and Research, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University. Directs large research and management institute with one million dollar budget. Nationally known for excellence in research in deer biology, management and economics. 1973-1981: Assistant and Associate Professor of Forest Wildlife, School of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University. Taught the following courses: wildlife management techniques, wildlife habitat management, natural history, advanced wildlife ecology and population dynamics, research methods, nongame management and wildlife photography. When I came to SFASU, the wildlife curriculum consisted of two courses taught on a part-time basis by U.S. Forest Service personnel. I developed the curriculum to eight courses relating directly to wildlife, and organized the Student Chapter of the Wildlife Society. 1972 Assistant Professor of Biology, Salem College, West Virginia. Taught undergraduate courses in the following: comparative anatomy, physiology, evolution, physiological ecology, histology and desert ecology. 1971 Laboratory instructor in ecology, herpetology and ichthyology, Texas A&M University. Taught laboratories to undergraduate majors in wildlife and fisheries. Also, worked with students in field ecological studies. Immediate supervisors: Drs. J. R. Dixon, R. J. Baldauf and D. R. Clark Jr. 1970 Instructor in Zoology, McLennan Community College. Taught freshman zoology at junior college level. 1970 Instructor in herpetology and taxidermy, Strecker Museum. Taught introductory courses in herpetology and taxidermy to elementary aged children. Immediate supervisor: Dr. Bryce C. Brown. 1970 Laboratory instructor for anatomy and physiology, Baylor University. Taught human anatomy and physiology to nursing students. Immediate supervisor: Dr. Eugene Crowder. 1968 Laboratory assistant in zoology, Baylor University. Taught laboratories in introductory zoology. Immediate supervisor: Dr. J. F. Watkins II. 1967 Research assistant in predator-prey studies, Baylor University. Conducted research on the predator-prey interactions of blind snakes and army ants. Immediate supervisor: Dr. J. F. Watkins II. continued......
continued............ Awards and Honors 2012 Nacogdoches County Agriculture Pioneer 2011 Muy Grande Hall of Fame 2009 Baylor University Outstanding Alumni Award 2008 Lifetime Achievement Award, Exotic Wildlife Assocation 2007 Whitetail Country, ESPN2: Career Biography 2007 Research Contributions in Deer Management, ANGADI 2004 Golden Moose Award, Outdoor Channel (North American WHITETAILTelevision) 2003 Honors Award, NASA- Shuttle Columbia Disaster 2002 Golden Moose Award, Outdoor Channel, Journal of the Texas Trophy Hunters 2000 Distinguished Alumni – Waco Independent School District 2000 Past-Presidents Award, Texas Deer Association 1997 Teaching Excellence Award 1995 Distinguished Professor Award 1995 Award for Excellence, Texas Outdoor Writers Association: Whitetail Video Management Series; Magazine Articles 1994 Texas Chapter, The Wildlife Society, Publication Award 1993 Educator of the Year, Lone Star Bowhunters 1993 Regents Professor, Research (SFASU 1992 Distinguished Professor Award 1989 Buckhorn Hunting Club's Conservationist of the Year 1985 Texas Forestry Association's Forestry Research Award 1980 Who's Who in the South and Southwest 1978 Best Book Publication, The Wildlife Society, for Role of Insectivorous Birds in the Forest 1977 Appreciation Award, National Rifle Association 1975 Elected to Xi Sigma Pi 1974 Outstanding Educators in America 1973 Distinguished Doctoral Graduate, Texas A&M University. 1971 Environmental Defense Fund 1971 Elected to Phi Sigma Society 1971 President, The Association of Graduate Wildlife and Fisheries Scientists. Organized first graduate organization in wildlife at TAMU. The Association grown to be an integral part of student-faculty relationships. 1971 Editor of ENVIRON 1971 Graduate teaching assistantship, Texas A&M University. 1970 NSF Trainee, Texas A&M University. I was awarded this traineeship based on academic and research record. I conducted research under NSF funding and published a number of papers. 1970 Graduate teaching assistantship, Baylor University. 1970 Elected to Sigma Xi 1969 Featured in Iscani Magazine, acknowledging research in pheromones. 1969 Elected to Beta Beta Beta 1969 NSF graduate research assistant to Drs. Watkins and Gehlbach, Baylor University. Conducted independent research and published papers with senior researchers. Major accomplishments include discovery of repellent compound (3- methyl indole) for ants, termites and snakes. 1968 Vice-president of Lamda Sigma Chi. 1967 NSF undergraduate research assistant to Drs. J. F. Watkins II and F. R. Gehlbach, Baylor University: Predator-prey interactions of army ants and blind snakes. Published as an undergraduate. 1965 Biology Award, Regional Science Fair. Sound communication in honey bees. 1964 President of University High School Science Club
I don’t know who that is but if he is a white-tailed deer biologist, he did not get the job in WI, Dr. Kroll did.
Oh, so not a white-tailed deer biologist or in any way related to the subject matter??? Got it. Thanks for sharing. That is unless you are operating under the misguided notion that every person of citation and award and accomplishment ought to be measured by your Mr. Corzine.
