ORIGINAL: bluebird2
they simply didn’t get them scored and entered yet or there is also the slight possibility that there are fewer book bucks available.
Here's a newsflash . After the statewide buck harvest dropped from 203K in 2001 to 109 K in 2007, it finally dawned on RSB that there is "A SLIGHT POSSIBILITY" there are fewer book buck available.
And here is a news flash for you too.
The units that make up those four counties have had the highest buck harvests per square mile in the state over the past years when the number of record book entries declined in those counties. Therefore, the decline in book entries obviously isn’t from a lack of bucks being available. Since we have already seen that statewide the book entries are higher since 2001 then ever before in the history of deer harvests the decline in record book bucks being entered from those four counties can only mean that fewer of the bucks being harvested in those counties is book worthy or that people simply aren’t getting the smaller book bucks scored, which is what I suspect to the be the biggest factor.
Remember, as shown in my comments within your own post, I said fewer book bucks available. That is a long stretch from me saying there were fewer bucks available. Especially since, like I already said, those counties have had the highest buck harvests per square mile in the state for a long time.
You need to look at more of the facts and then take a few minutes to think things through toward a logical conclusion before you post your spinning yarns and posting nonsense that isn’t supported with any facts.
R.S. Bodenhorn