[/size]I see you are continuing with your deceptive methods and ways of using out of context snippets selected from various reports and articles in your attempt to deceive people into supporting your misguided agenda.[/size]
I will help point out of the ways you do that.
You claim that Alsheimer said this:
Alsheimers article recommended a doe harvest of 29 DPSM while in the same article stating that most habitats can support 35-40 DPSM.
That really is not what he said at all. Even though you wish his comments supported your goofy agenda it just isn’t being truthful with the factual context of what he was saying.
Here is what he really said and where you pulled your deceptive snippet:
“The proper number of deer per square mile of deer habitat will vary by region.
In our farm rich area of New York State ,biologists would like to see no more than 35-40 deer per square mile.”
[/size]
As everyone can see he most certainly never said that most habitat can support the number of deer you want believe to believe he said. In fact when using the entire context of the article what he said does not support your conjectures in the least.
Then you post this comment:
[/color]
Kroll also claimed PA had shown,"some amazing results" which is also laughable when you consider their is no data that shows ARs increased the rack sizes of 2.5+ buck
Certainly no data shows that the rack size didn’t increase for 2 ½ year old bucks. No one ever said the rack size would increase for the same age bucks. The rack size for any particular age class is based on three factors. Those three factors are age, but since we are talking about bucks of the same age that is a mute factor. Then comes nutrition and that will affect the rack size of bucks of the same age from one year to the next, especially in the 1 ½ and 2 ½ year old age classes. Genetics is the third factor to affect the antlers and that will have little bearing on the antlers of 1 ½ and 2 ½ year old bucks unless they can be compared to bucks of the same age within about a week and living in the same habitats.
The fact is I never heard any of the professional deer managers claim there would be any difference in the antler development of bucks of the same age. If you have anything that suggest otherwise such please provide a link to it so we can see it.
You also made this comment which I beleive needs some further clarificationbefore it would be anything other then another misleading misrepresentaiton of the truth.
[color=#0000ff]and that we are harvesting fewer 2.5+ buck than we did in 2002.
Though that particular comment is true for last year, and onlythat one year, it is still very deceptivein that itdoesn’t really tell the whole truth of the historical facts.
Since Doctor Alt had been advocating the need of protecting more of the 1 ½ year old bucks since 2000 it appears that the state had started to experience some voluntary movement in that direction from the hunters.
I will post the number of 2 ½ year old bucks in the Pennsylvania deer harvests for the past fifteen years to show that point. Remember while viewing this that many people were pushing the QDMA message in the mid 1990’s, Doctor Alt started advocating the protection of younger bucks in 2000 and antler restrictions did not begin until 2002.
Years……………….2 ½ and older bucks harvests
1993.……………………….34442
1994.……………………….27460
1995.……………………….31732
1996.……………………….24883
1997.……………………….32836
1998.……………………….34749
1999.……………………….38942
2000.……………………….37261
2001.……………………….43855
2002.……………………….52607
2003.……………………….61994
2004.……………………….62399
2005.……………………….57961
2006.……………………….59528
2007.……………………….48048
Now to help even more people see the way the number of 2 ½ and older bucks in five year averages over the past twenty-five years. This data is in harvests per square mile of land mass.
Years……………….2 ½ and older bucks harvests
83-87.…………………….0.65
88-92.…………………….0.68
93-97.…………………….0.68
98-02.…………………….1.07
03-07.…………………….1.29
I think it might also be of some interest to point out that many of the bucks that should have been available for harvest since 2005 died within days of being born following the harsh winters that limited the survival rate of fawns born in the spring of 2003 and 2004.
[size=2]R.S.Bodenhorn