You should do a poll asking peoples' opinion on AR, then have them identify what type of hunter they consider themselves to be. I would assume that the majority of those strongly supporting AR will be the folks who place a high priority on hanging a big rack on the wall at the end of the season. I could be wrong, but i think that there would be such a correlation.

I think you are absolutely right. If everyone was being truly honest, that's what a poll should reveal. I have nothing against those who want to hunt the big bucks, but I really detest being giving false facts that AR's are somehow better for a deer herd. Anyone who really stops to look at it all objectively should clearly see that as far as the deer are concerned there could be NO difference if any buck is allowed to be shot in comparison to AR restrictions given that an equal amount of does are also allowed to be shot under either scenario. The benefit might be to the hunter who values trophies, but there is surely NO benefit to the deer herd.

Kind of like the folks who talk about Quality Deer Management when they are clearly only interested in Quality Antler Management. No big deal to me if that is what they want to do on their own land, but it would be nice if they would just be honest about it.

That is not the way to measure the success or failure of ARs. ARs were not implemented to produce more big buck ,at least according to the PGC. They were implemented to reduce late breeding, improve the breeding rates and improve productivity . Breeding rates and productivity has declined and the breeding period has remained unchanged, so ARs are not working as you claim they are.

It is so painfully obvious that so many have never studied Biology in any form.

Well, this is a discussion board, so feel free to enlighten us.

We ARE open to being dazzled by your brilliance on the subject if you would want to enlighten us?

I live in WV, but I hunt in an AR area in PA. I stopped hunting in PA for a long time because the bucks did not have a chance, now they do.

I realize AR's are tough on the meat hunters. But for years you were only allowed ONE deer in PA for the entire year. Regardless of what weapon you used. Now you can get extra permits, and you can shoot does. So I really do not feel sorry for the meat hunter because he can easily score on a DOE!! Themeat hunters have more options now than what they have had for a long time. So I am not buying the "we can not get a deer" theory.

I have read where some people say the deer herds are down in their areas. I do not know if that is true or not. I do know that in the area I hunt the deer numbers are up, and the quality buck numbers are WAY WAY UP. Tom.

Well the AR rule also allowed shooting more does than ever before which couldn't possibly help deer numbers. I guess lots of hunters took this as killing as many does as you could without too much concern for future years. That was surely their own fault. You can't kill every doe you see and expect ample numbers in future years. But again the problem DID start with AR's when they started giving out doe permits like candy. The idea was to bring down the doe population so that you might have a more even buck/doe ratio. The facts are that you won't have ANY bucks OR does if there are NO does to produce them.

That may be true in some areas , but in many areas of the state it isn't easy to harvest even one doe , no less multiple doe. It took 865,000 doe tags ,plus DMAP to harvest 214K doe , which was the lowest doe harvest since 1999. The statewide herd is down over 40% and in some areas it is down 75% from the 90's. When you consider the multiple deer kills in SRA counties, fewer than 200,000 hunters harvested a doe.