Once again you are dead wrong!!I provided two separate quotes where Alt predicted hunters would be seeing bigger buck than before ARs. He did not say hunters would see more big buck,he said hunters would see more and bigger buck. The only logical meaning of that statement is that the 2.5+ buck would be bigger than before ARs.

Here is the final nail in your coffin.

"
Since ARs do not increase the size of 1.5 buck , he was clearly referring to the 2.5+ bucks when he said ARs would increase the number and size of of bucks in the herd.

BTBowhunter explain 1 thing to me. Why, when G.Alt was down in the Connellsville High School was he waving 2 different racks around. I was there were you, I know what he said.

"You kind of remind me of Barack Obama. Very free and easy with criticisms of the satus quo but very short on constructive ideas going forward."

Then I guess that would make PGC Barack Obama? Lots of unsubstantiated claims, promises with no intent to fulfill, and we havent moved forward... Just losing hunters, slaughtering the herd widescale statewidefor little apparent reason other than audubonwants it that way...

Want us to move forward? Put more deer where they can be and should be within the acceptable habitat limits, with REASONABLE and APPROPRIATE antlerless allocations...Thats not being done. Quit catering to extremeists just because a few of the boc share their views. Quit seeking like minded anti-deer replacements. GO to smaller wmus, Quit making so many contradictory claims and false promises, and work ALOT on PR.

VERY easy. VERY common sense. Moving forward by leaps and bounds. But never gonna happen willinglyif we must rely on current BOC and PGC higher ups.

Only thing that will moveus forward will be legislators continuing to "stay the course"continuing to keepmoremoney out ofPgcs hands.

As I've said before, Alt said some of it wrong. The infamous more and bigger bucks is a clear example of that. We have bigger but not more. Plain and simple.

That being said, your claim that he said that buck antler size would change within a given age group is 100% fantasy on your part. You cant prove it because he did'nt say it so now you've shifted to a strategy of concluding that it just has to be what he meant! Pathetic!

I wasn't at Connelsville but I was at Murrysville. I don't dispute that he held up those two racks or that he said more and bigger bucks or even that he was partly wrong. What I'm disputing is Bluebirds insisitent fantasy that Alt promised that buck of the same age would be bigger somehow as a result of AR's. He did'nt say it at the meetings I attended nor was that ever in print.

As I've said before, Alt said some of it wrong. The infamous more and bigger bucks is a clear example of that. We have bigger but not more. Plain and simple.
Are you now claiming the 2.5+ buck are bigger than they were before ARs?

Apparently you have a problem understanding the english language. In 3 different quotes Alt said that the bucks would be bigger, larger or increase in size. It should be obvious to everyone that he was referring to the 2.5+ buck produced by ARs.

What do you think Alt meant when he said the bucks would be bigger than ever before?

No, it makes the PGC more like the current administration. Having to make difficult choices. The PGC is Putting up with distortions from the USP types like the Bush administration puts up with media distortions.

Obama comes up with this "feel good" simplisitic demand for change and sings the same old tax and spend song. Bluebird and the USP sing the same old no deer for me song while failing to provide evn one solution of substance.

Obama appeals to the lower IQ crowd with the tax only the rich chant while Bluebird appeals to the lower IQ crowd by chanting over and over that the habitata can support more deer

I could make these comparisons all night but these'll do for now.


There it is! the real reason for your tantrums. "More deer for me. There used to be more where I hunt and I want em back no matter what. Listen to me not thescientists about how many deer there should be"
Well you can whine cry scream and kick but it aint gonna happen.

This one is the most naive statement of all. Continuing to starve the PGC out financially simply increases the chance of a PGC PFBC and DCNR merger. You think you have no voice now? Just wait till the DCNR calls all the shots and we'll have the likes of you and Bluebird to thank for it.

Do you mean the lower IQ crowd like Alsheimer who manages his 200 acres at a density so high he can harvest 8-10 doe /year?

Only a moron could get that from what I said.


I'll try again once. Now read this R E A L slow.... 2.5 bucks are bigger on average than 1.5 bucks... still with me? Go back and read it again and repeat the process till you understand part 1. Now lets try a little more for today... ready? If more of the bucks we harvest are 2.5+, our average buck size will be B I G G E R. I know it's a lot for one day but sleep on it and read it again tomorrow. If you still don't understand after that, you willhave officially passed the USP life member IQ test.

"As I've said before, Alt said some of it wrong. The infamous more and bigger bucks is a clear example of that. We have bigger but not more. Plain and simple. "

We dont have bigger either. The largest bucks are no larger than they were previously. There also arent more big bucks. Extreme hr didnt allow for it.

"No, it makes the PGC more like the current administration. Having to make difficult choices."

and like current administration, a lotta wrong ones, guess we could also compare the current economy to Pgc making themselves go broke?

"The PGC is Putting up with distortions from the USP types like the Bush administration puts up with media distortions."

Im pure Republican, and will definately vote Mcain. But Bush isnt exactly our finest example.

"Bluebird and the USP sing the same old no deer for me song while failing to provide evn one solution of substance."

Im not speaking for Bluebird or USP, but I think they would agree, and or maybe have other ideas as well, but as a HUUUUGE starting point...What part of less doe tags dont you understand?

"Obama appeals to the lower IQ crowd with the tax only the rich chant while Bluebird appeals to the lower IQ crowd by chanting over and over that the habitata can support more deer"

While the higher IQ crowd sits back and laughs at your denying it as if it were notfact, and chuckling at your desparation tactics of constant namecalling of some of the posters here, as well as laughing at your analogies.[8D]


"There it is! the real reason for your tantrums. "More deer for me. There used to be more where I hunt and I want em back no matter what. Listen to me not thescientists about how many deer there should be""

I didnt say Me or I. I said the sport of hunting and hunters.And Im darn well gonna stick up for "us" and makeZERO appologies fordoing so,when ecoclowns are dictating our deer herd management and they are looking out for their own interests.You say "scientists" I say highly biased. Audubon has biologists, antihunting groups have theirs...That doesnt mean they would manage our deer herd in a responsible manner.

It Can be easily seen that OUR scientists are "special" and the "appropriate" minded individuals were hired to fulfill the extreme duties that were to come. Also,no other states would actin such extreme unbased manners, and certainly not stick with a proven failed plan.

"Well you can whine cry scream and kick but it aint gonna happen."

Just like Carl Roe and that fee increase if the hunters and legislators of our fine state continue to have anything to say about it.


"You think you have no voice now? Just wait till the DCNR calls all the shots and we'll have the likes of you and Bluebird to thank for it."

That system you fear works better than ours in most of thestates of the nation. Most dont have rogue special interest catering"independent"unanswering wildlife mangement agencies. Look around at the other posts in this thread,from other states...See any "deer wars" going on anywhere else? I dont.