bluebird2

So according to you the main reason for implementing ARs was to keep 1.5 buck from running themselves ragged during the rut? If that is true then the PGC is ven more incompetent than I thought they were.

Why would you say that ,when judges actually trained to read and evaluate what is written , rather than trying to read the mind of whoever wrote what they are reading? More and larger bucks means exactly what it says , no matter how you try to twist it to mean what you want it to mean.

BTBowhunter

You have twisted my point. the point is that high grading is not the problem you claim because 1.5 year old spikes are no necessarily genetically inferior just as 1.5 year old 8 points are not necessarily demonstrating superior genes. The theory of AR's causing high grading isjunk science with only one member of the wildlife biology community giving it any relevance and his research has been proven to be flawed bythe sound principles as publishedby Dr Kroll.

You also have shown no evidence that "there were always enough bucks carried over to breed the few number of fawns that came into strus after thebuck season" Using 2G for your example is especially ludicrous because doe fawns canonly come into estrous in their first year after attaining a bodyweight of approximately 80 pounds. Age in months of a female fawn is not relevant in this issue, body mass is the relevant factor and 2G is the WMU least likely to have doe fawns reach that weight in their first year.

bluebird2

Once again you demonstrate you don't even understand the basic principle behind high grading. high grading does not occur due to a change in the genetics of the herd. High grading occurs because the average 1.5 spike takes longer to develop than a 1.5 ,8 pt. Therefore, the average spike may become a 2.5 , 5 pt. while the 1.5 8 pt. that was harvested as a 1.5 buck ,would have become a 10 pt. Harvesting the best buck in each age class will always result in smaller average rack sizes.
For a change you are correct and you have just proven Alt was full of beans. Now would you like to provide the data that shows the fawn breeding rates increased significantly in 2B or any other WMU?

BTBowhunter

Other than the discredited findings of one Maverick biologist, you have no basis for that statement. Anyone who's ever been anywhere near a courtroom knows that there is always at least one "expert" witness available (read that as quack!) to support anytheory! You have the shaky incomplete results from one flawed study versus the rest of the wildlife management science community. I think you are the one who doesn't understand.

sproulman

I AGREE WITH YOU ALSO.

not to get off the AR, i fish many state bass tournaments.

this year in many of the lakes here in northcentral pa.the bass SPAWNED late.

they were on beds come the first week of bass.

i saw MORE bass females caught and KEPT that were still full of eggs.

word went like wildfire,HEY GUYS, BASS ARE ON BEDS,GO GET UM.

boy did they hurt lakes that took all of us years to build up,they did it in 1 week this year.

the fisherman i saw doing this also ALL looked like greedy a holes with their stringers full of egg laden bass.

every other word out of their mouths was f this,F that etc.

these are same people that will shoot any buck and clean any doe/fawn out of area.

sorry i got off topic.

bluebird2

Dr. Demarais happens to have 12 years of harvest data to support his position, which is more than any other biologist. His position is also supported by Larry Castle , Dr. Williams and Dr. Kroll, even though Dr. Kroll is so biased he doesn't realize it. In fact the entire staff of the Miss. deer management unit supports Dr. Demarais's position ,which is why they changed to spread restrictions in 2007.

sproulman

interesting reading info you all have.

add in myinfo from GROUND LEVEL, we could write book.

BTBowhunter

Now you've entered yet another twist. First, all your posts so far only talk about AR. A spread restriction is still AR. A bettermethod by all credible findings but still AR. The reason a spread restriction was scrapped in favor of a point count in PA wasthat it was decided when facing the challenges of roughly a million hunters having to field judge to comply with any AR, a point count was easier to adjust to. There is almost no disagreement anywhere that a spread restriction is abetter way over a point count to help increase the average age structure. Gary Alt made some missteps in selling the plan, but I distinctly remember him saying that he favored a spread restriction but as a matter of practicality was starting with a point count at the meetings I attended.

bluebird2

Alt did in fact mention using a spread restriction instead of a point restriction. But he also mentioned two other preferred options for increasing the buck age structure and let's see if you remember what they were?

sproulman

gary alt was at lock haven university to explain the AR/HR.

we packed the house.

he said,FOLKS,HERE IS HORNS YOU WILL HAVE IF YOU DO THE HR FOR PGC,he then held up a 8 point rack.

then he said,REMEMBER, ONLY SHOOT OLDER DOE,LEAVE FAWNS GO.

well, i could see those beef jerky looking back strap hunters licking their lips.

they could not wait to shoot a lot of doe and FAWNS .

now, those SAME hunters boo hoo to the SPROUL.
no deer,sproul.

unreal.........