Did ARs Really Produce bigger 2.5+ Buck?
09-24-2009 | 04:27 PM
#31
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
Alt did not use the wrong grammar as you claim. If he did the PGC would have corrected his grammar in the Hunting Digest which included that quote from 2002 to 2008. The basic reason for implementing ARs was to improve the genetics of the herd as a result of dominant breeding by superior 2.5+ buck. If that was not the case, then there was no reason to implement ARs other than to get hunters to shoot more doe.
And I'll say it again. NO ONE else drew the conclusion you did. Except for your "english teacher" (if she exists) LOL!! You dismiss the research of wildlife professionals like Kroll and ask your english teacher to help interperet a statement about deer management.... Priceless!!
09-24-2009 | 04:34 PM
#32
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
And I will say this once again. Only a buffoon like you would claim to know that no one drew the same conclusion that I drew from Alt's statement. Words have meaning and when they are printed in the Digest year after year it is not a grammatical error. It is a claim that is supported by the PGC.
09-24-2009 | 04:39 PM
#33
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
And I will say this once again. Only a buffoon like you would claim to know that no one drew the same conclusion that I drew from Alt's statement. Words have meaning and when they are printed in the Digest year after year it is not a grammatical error. It is a claim that is supported by the PGC.
Therein lies your problem. You dwell on the miniscule meaningless minutia of some technical point that makes zero practical sense. You had to consult an english teacher for cryin out loud! You know thats not what was meant or said. Once again its the old Bluebird twist at its finest.
09-24-2009 | 04:52 PM
#36
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
Therein lies your problem. You dwell on the miniscule meaningless minutia of some technical point that makes zero practical sense. You had to consult an english teacher for cryin out loud! You know thats not what was meant or said. Once again its the old Bluebird twist at its finest.
09-24-2009 | 05:05 PM
#38
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
Wrong again. Alt lied when he said hunters would see more buck than ever before and he lied when he said those buck would be bigger than ever before and you are lying when you are denying that he said what he said and which the PGC repeated over again and which is still posted on the PGC website.
09-24-2009 | 05:12 PM
#39
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 0
From: SW PA USA
I'll try to stick to one or two syllables when I know you're here LOL
09-24-2009 | 05:14 PM
#40
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
And , as I said before, that means you don't understand the English language ,even though you admitted Alt didn't use the proper grammar. BTW, how do you know whether Alt was lying or if he just lied in the first part of his statement and used improper grammar in the second part?