---

The time scale is one reason that most wildlife departments managing hunting harvests simply count the heads each year and decide how many to let hunters bag without thinking about genes. The most popular method of regulating hunting—restricting legal game to males with a minimum antler size—results in populations overrun with females and inferior males, which is ultimately no service to hunters. "The hunters wish for animals with large antlers and large horns, and yet their actions are making that harder to achieve," says Richard Harris, a conservation biologist in Montana. As a hunter, Harris knows that the outcome of this trend will satisfy no one, the Teddy Roosevelts of the next generation least of all.

---

---

ORIGINAL: bowtruck

so let me see if i understand you
if we kill them when there young 1.5 we are going to have larger horns but if we let them go till
there 2.5 + it will make horns smaller is that what your saying bluebird or am i misunderstanding
you
that link went on about elphants and such

---

---

ORIGINAL: crokit

bluebird2=BS. No offense meant, but that falls under the category of don't believe everything you read. The only way that theory could be true is if the majority of buck allowed to reach 2.5 and older are inferior to begin with. THAT is not believable.

---

---

The only way that theory could be true is if the majority of buck allowed to reach 2.5 and older are inferior to begin with.

---