Is that an indication of your IQ?

Like every thing else this mental midget post ,this is cut & pasted select part of the tale he wants you to believe. The rest of the story has a different ending which of course isn't posted, smoke and mirriors,half truths and bald face lies are the tools dumbdear uses to futher is unfounded critisems of a program he is unable to comperhend.

In most cases hunters prefer to harvest large
[/align]artiodactyls, and horn or antler size is generally cor-
[/align]related with male fitness. However, it does not fol-
[/align]low that hunting removes relatively more fit indi-
[/align]viduals in all cases. Artiodactyl males begin with
[/align]small horns or antlers that become progressively
[/align]larger with age. Hunters selecting for individuals
[/align]with the largest horns or antlers remove primarily
[/align]old individuals, not necessarily those with genomes
[/align]conducive to producing large secondary sexual
[/align]characteristics. Changes in allele frequencies
[/align]caused by selective hunting of large males may be
[/align]buffered by the genetic contributions of females,
[/align]which will have most of the same alleles as males
[/align]but are likely to be subject to differing selective
[/align]pressures. Finally, other factors may affect vulnera-
[/align]bility to hunting independent of hunter selectivity.
[/align]For example, DuFour et al. (1993) found that mal-
[/align]lards in poorer body condition were more vulnera-
[/align]ble to hunting than those in better condition.
[/align]Given these complexities and ambiguities, we
[/align]believe the simulation model constructed by
[/align]Thelen (1991; see also Hundertmark et al. 1993,
[/align]1998) currently provides the best indication of
[/align]how selective hunting might unintentionally alter
[/align]the genetic constitution of big game populations.
[/align]

[hr]

[/align]

[quote]ORIGINAL: bluebird2

Now that the children on the MB have had their name calling , insulting and claiming the article was biased and not based valid scientific study. Here is a giant, STUFF IT, to all you know-it-alls.


looks like your doing the insulting

Are you offended because you think you are one of the children?

no blue you did the insult i pointed out

This is the conclusion reached by the Authors of the article. The part that you weren't supposed to read.

We began by expressing concern about the long-
[/align]term genetic consequences of hunting, but our
[/align]review of the literature suggested little empirical
[/align]evidence of such consequences. We have hypothe-
[/align]sized a number of characteristics of hunting and
[/align]hunted species that may act to mitigate expected
[/align]negative effects. However, we found no grounds for
[/align]complacency; studies designed to quantify genetic
[/align]effects have been rare, and the effects eliciting our
[/align]greatest level of concern are subtle and difficult to
[/align]detect without long-term monitoring.
[/align]

So you expect me to sit back and be called a Bluejob, Blueboy , Little Blue without giving you clowns a dose of your own medicine. Dream on, I am not a wimp ,but I do have higher standards than some of the low life that post here.

LMBO you do?

The results from Miss. show a decline in rack sizes across the state after 12 years of ARs. Now ,can you produce a study that shows rack sizes increased after 12 years of ARs? Can you produce a study that shows the average rack sizes of 2.5+ buck increased after 12 years of ARs anywhere in the world?

mississippi= Pa who is the one with a low IQ
and that miss thing is b/s for the 101 time