painted yourself into a corner so we duck the subject with a little memory challenge eh?

I beleive there were actually more than two rattled off but all were deemed to be not socially feasible. Therefore none were "preferred as you call them" The most effective but also the most socially unworkable one, of course, was to limit buck tags for all weapons and seasons.

Funny, in spite of all the "data" you've provided to claim that AR's promote high grading that the very state you use for your example still has AR. They have simply inproved their method

BTbowhunter,Sorry but I'm used to referring to bluebird as beenthere or BT.

No problem Doug. It's just my bad luck to have initials that match one of old Larry's many aliases

You are correct that they still have ARs and after 12 years of ARs they still had high grading. Which proves even when biologists realize they made a mistake ,it takes a long time for them to correct it. Our ARs were based on Miss. computer models which were proved to be wrong. How long will it take the PGC to admit their mistake and correct it.

Remember that Kroll said he would still favor ARs even it did nothing to improve the herd . That shows the inherent bias of QDM supporters just as Miss shows the same bias..

Now you're showing your true colors. Wildlife management is not an exact science. Expecting immediate black and white results just shows your lack of understanding of the dynamics of deer management. Too many variables exist for the simplistic conclusions you tend to draw.

Managing a deer herd requires a biologist not a CPA.

I challenge your claim as to what Dr Kroll said. It's either a boldface lie or another example of your clever use of two or more unrelated statements taken out of context to produce your desired result.

Here is what kroll said about ARs in his article.

I added the words in parenthesis.

I do not expect immediate black and white results as you claim. But when ARs reduce the average rack size after 4 years and they continue the same failed practice for 12 years with the same result ,something is definitely wrong with APRs.

Just had to enter your own words into his quote didn't you? Why did you feel the need to do that? Could it be because the rest of what he wrote demonstrated that size limits ARE a good management practice?

As for your claim that rack size has deteriorated over the past 4 years.....

I'll let the members of this forum decide on the validity of that one!

BTbowhunter, my question is, does AR stand for antler restriction or Apollo-Ridge. just kidding. im from up near Saltsburg. couldnt resist the temptation. i think this subject has been beat to death.

Because I thought it might help QDM supporters understand what he said and overcome their inherent bias.

What is even more amazing is the reasons Kroll gave for the need for ARs. Here is the first one.
That sounds more like a reason against ARs than a reason to implement them.

You get more desperate with It hasnt been enoughpost taking things more and more out of context. I'm not going to retype the entire article. When given enough material to quote, a good spin doctor can completely turn around the intended message. You are that spin doctor deaddeer.

Now you go one step further possibly because you are running low on quoted statements to spin so now you insert your own words to "help" us understand what YOU think he meant.

Pathetic