Since all the buck in a given area are subject to the same habitat conditions, that is not a factor in high grading and it doesn't matter if a spike is due to being late born .If it takes 3 more years to become a 12 pt., high grading will still occur,because it is likely that the spike will be harvested as a 2.5 ,5-6Pt. rather than a 4.5, 12 pt.

In order to prevent high grading, the point restrictions have to be set to protect around 90% of the 1.5 buck and with a restriction that high it protects too many 2.5+ buck.

I believe we all understand it perfectly although I'm not sure that even you understand your personal version of it

So you are, in effect, saying that what you call high grading will occur with or without our present AR's, meaning that your prior claim that AR causes high grading is therefore false. Once again,You cant have it both ways.

Yep, the Conemaugh and the Kiski both hold trout these days. Truly remarkable when I think back to the days when I was a kid when they bothranfull of water that looked more likeorange juice

If you understood high grading you wouldn't have referenced high grading the gene pool in this post.

No, that is not true at all. Prior to ARs , the buck harvest consisted of a random sample of the entire legal buck population. With ARs we are selectively harvesting the best buck with the highest potential for antler development.

I am not citing my definition of high grading, I am citing Dr. Demarais's definition. You better reread his example of high grading a timber stand and maybe the light will go on.

This takes me back a few weeks. We argued this one as well, did we not?
I'm sure Bluebird will contradict the expert (he sometimes claims to admire when it suits him), in short order.

prior to AR's we were taking almost ALL bucks with 3" spikes or better. Research showed that number to be as high as 85% on a consisitent basis. BTW the old 3" spike rule is AR as well. It simply was a much lower threshold.

Another reason for supporting AR's that won't fit into your CPA methodolgy is that a 1.5 buck has very limited survival skills when it comes to avoiding predators (man) He's equivalent to a young teenagerAllowing them a pass during the first year allows them the opportunity to learn the skills to possibly survive more than that one year it takes to grow a legal rack. The results are still sketchy at this point but the premise that a buck allowed to live beyond opening day and his first deer season is better educated and equipped to survive to maturity and reach that 4 1/2 age class simply makes common sense. The results were never expected to be huge but even a few percent more making it to that age is an improvement

When are you and BT going to accept the fact that high grading is not about genetics. It is simply harvesting the best buck in each age class.

If we were harvesting 85% of our 1.5 bucks , that means very few of the 1.5 buck were protected by the 3" spike rule, so that is not a factor.
Now you are just making things up to support your opinions. The antlered buck study showed that 1.5 buck had a high non-hunting survival rate, while only 20% of the 2.5+ buck survived hunting season and the majority of those buck were 2.5+ buck that weren't AR legal..

Anyone see a problem with this statement?

Obviously, I am simply pointing out that the 1.5 bucks saved by AR don't get a lot smarter as BT claimed and therefore only 20% of the bucks saved by AR , survive to become 3.5 buck.

Do you have a problem with that?