As usual you quote just a part of something and not the whole content. While it's true that that quote, narrowly interpereted and without the rest of Dr Kroll writings, only addresses the culling of first year bucks, the rest of the content of the study and subsequent writings about it supporta spread AR over a point count in all young bucks which he later defines as under 4.5 but Dr Kroll supports AR as a direct conclusion of his research.

As for your suggestion that he promotes the culling of inferior 3.5 bucks, he has clearly stated that the practice is less than ideal. It really doesnt matter with PA because so many bucks die the first season that they are legal.

So what we have from Dr Kroll is that we cant tell the genetic potential from a bucks antlers till he's 4.5. We are therefore not taking out the bucks with the best genes unless a buck manages to get to be 4.5 and still isn't legal (highly unlikely)

It's clear now thatthe only real measurable benefit so far in PA is that more buckssurvive their first season. Hunter experience and taxidermist reports overwhelmingly support the fact that average antlers of the buck harvested are better because average age has risen.

We don't know yet how many more get past 2.5 simply because they didn't get killed while young and inexperienced but it stands to reason that at least a fewbucks benefit from the free pass the first year and grow clever enough to live a bit longer.

Dr Kroll refuted the Mississippi study for several valid reasons. They have been laid out on this forum and supporting links were provided over and over again. Just because you can't abide being proven wrong, doesn't mean that if you repeat your distortion later that we will accept it.


If you ever expect anyone to take your posts seriously, you need to present the entire context when you quote. And once again, quoting a terribly written unsupported anti hunting article from Newsweek was a new low. How can you expect anyone to believe your facts when you cite sourse like that one to support your position?

Until you at least agree that the Newsweek article is bogus the BS flag stays up

That's a fine buck but it proves absolutely nothing. Try again!!

And before you get all giddy about the date on the last picture, every picture that camera took has the same date,the date I turned it on.

and you wonder why people wind up just answering you with blah blah blah and dead horses. You constantly accuse others of not providing a reasonable answer but you simply aren't interested is any point of view or any facts that aren't exactly as you see em so we'l go back to the responses you desreve

As usual , while I provide exact quotes from the study you provide absolutely nothing to support your position. We are not discussing a spread restriction ,we are discussing the effects of PA's ARs.

No , that is not what the study shows. In fact , it shows that we are harvesting the bucks with the best genetics for the rate of antler development in a state where only around one out of 5000 buck live to be 6 years. That means the average buck produced by saving spikes and Y's will be smaller than in a non-AR herd