And that's where I think some of the discussion in this thread gets muddled. Most of the proposals are people management with little goal of modifying the herd numbers or structure. But APR is both a people management strategy and one that modifies herd numbers and structure. And again and again, the result is not what APR advocates claim the goal that is supposed to be attained.
No long term improvement in buck ratios, either no long term improvement in "mature" buck ratios or decreases with greater than it equal to 4pts in ID being the exception (full disclosure I haven't dug into ID and what's behind the table here, but not tracking compliance raises more than a few questions). But get this: decrease in total harvest but no total population increase from APRs...
Those certainly seem like negative biological outcomes.
View attachment 162144