# NY'ers for antler restrictions



## spoco57

No comment. :thumbs_do


----------



## VTdeerslayer

spoco57 said:


> No comment. :thumbs_do


Some one doesn't kill very many deer!!!


----------



## spoco57

VTdeerslayer said:


> Some one doesn't kill very many deer!!!


Yep, and which one of us is it? 

The guy who says "Leave it alone, I like it the way it is?" or the guy who says "We need to tamper with the system, I can't find any mature bucks?"


----------



## Matt Musto

spoco57 said:


> Yep, and which one of us is it?
> 
> The guy who says "Leave it alone, I like it the way it is?" or the guy who says "We need to tamper with the system, I can't find any mature bucks?"


The guy from PA who has killed bucks and does, before and after restrictions, and only has seen improvement in rack size and quality of hunting:wink:

It will be awesome in NY!


----------



## eyedoc

spoco57 said:


> Yep, and which one of us is it?
> 
> The guy who says "Leave it alone, I like it the way it is?" or the guy who says "We need to tamper with the system, I can't find any mature bucks?"


Very good point. I say leave it how it is right now.


----------



## wrp

*Love the idea*

I AGREE AS WELL NY HAS TO DO SOMETHING, ITS NOT THAT WE DONT HAVE WORLD CLASS PIECES OF PROPERTY AROUND. THE PROBLEM IS YOU CAN GET A FEW LAND OWNERS TO DO QDM BUT THE OTHERS DONT WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH IT SO YOUR KINDA DEFEATING THE PURPOSE OF YOU DOING THAT THE OTHER PROBLEM IS YOU CANT MANAGE DEER ON 100 ACRES LET ALONE 300 DONT HAPPEN ITS DIFFERENT IF YOU HAVE 5000 ACRES THEN U COULD DO SOME QDM. :thumbs_up LOVE TO HAVE A STATE WIDE ANTLER RESTRICTION 120 MIN.


----------



## cityhunter346

At the very least we should have a 1 buck rule....especially in counties where the guys from the city hunt. The western counties produce big bucks every year without antler restrictions. I honestly believe that the guys who hunt 1 weekend a year and just want to fill their tags with anything are the real problem in NY.


----------



## nyupstate518

Signed and in the mail.


----------



## ArcheryPlus

*Shoot does*

The area in NY I hunt is overloaded with does.We see tons of yearling bucks because they are not passed up.If people would shoot more does and not young bucks we could get the herd back in check.Its very rare to see a "nice buck" on our properties.If its only for the freezer , shoot a doe.I would love to see an antler restriction in the whole state.From what I hear it has produced good results in Pa.They seem to be shooting some real nice animals.


----------



## VTdeerslayer

spoco57 said:


> Yep, and which one of us is it?
> 
> The guy who says "Leave it alone, I like it the way it is?" or the guy who says "We need to tamper with the system, I can't find any mature bucks?"


I shoot all kinds of deer. I just like to see more rut sign and a better quality deer herd. In Vermont we passed the spike horn law. We saw a huge increase in buck size and we now actually have a rut. A lot of the anti's that apposed the law in Vermont are for it now.


----------



## phade

cityhunter346 said:


> At the very least we should have a 1 buck rule....especially in counties where the guys from the city hunt. The western counties produce big bucks every year without antler restrictions. *I honestly believe that the guys who hunt 1 weekend a year and just want to fill their tags with anything are the real problem in NY.*


WHAT?!?!?!?

That's so messed up it's bordering Rich (Doctari)-level ridiculousness on the opposite end of the spectrum.

A hunter that goes out one weekend a year is as much a hunter as any of us are. You are no better, or worse, as am I. 

Personally, I have a co-worker who can really only get out for opening day due to family obligations most weekends...he put in a couple afternoons helping with stands over the summer and heck, he even just came over to my desk asking how archery season is going and went over some of the observations I've had and relating them to gun opening day possibilities. He'd hunt everyday if he could...but life being what it is, he can only get out one day during gun season. You bet he's going to shoot anything, and I don't care - it's on my family property and I'd be jumping for joy if he got anything. He's no less a hunter than you or I. There are thousands of hunters like this in NY and across the country. You cannot bash a hunter for only being able to get out one weekend a year, that's downright sad. 

I'm not sold on AR on a state level, especially three to a side. Needs to be much mroe micro managed. You need to clarify this petition...you ask for NYer's signatures but then say in the document for "this area"....one AR rule does not fit all, even though IMO, it should not be implemented in any case.


----------



## JB800

I'm for it 100% :thumbs_up


----------



## nyupstate518

I have been doing this exact same thing on my 150 acres in E. upstate NY. Even on our small chunk it has made a difference.


----------



## WNYBowhunter

I oppose for the simple reason that we have enough rules already.
I am sick and tired of people dictating how we should live our lives.
The day my fun activity has even MORE restrictions, it loses it's luster.

No to AR, let people do what they want.
If you want AR, practice them on your own property.
Don't impose your views on others who don't care what you think.


----------



## doctariAFC

I don't know how many of you actually attended the state of the deer herd meetings, and if you did, whether or not you know how to listen to what the Dept is telling us all, so I'll fill you in. The information is contained in the presentation that was given across the state, and is available here.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/deerupdate09.pdf

May I draw your attention to slide 19.

We all know how our sports are under assault from the anti's, which make up @ 10%-15% of the people in the USA (higher in NYS, BTW). As a group, hunters makeup 1% of the people. 

Hunting enjoys incredible support when we it is used to secure meat, control populations, protect people from harm, manage wildlife. In fact, the vast majority of people, primarily non-hunters, see our ranks as a valuable asset when our activities are perceived to be primarily driven by the elements above.

However, when the perception heads towards "for a trophy", the 85% who support us becomes just 28%.

I hope you all can comprehend this. Probably not, as why would any facts get in your way, right?

There is no biological need for mandated AR, and you can already voluntarily limit yourself and encourage others to do the same. But make no mistake about this FACT, folks, a mandated AR to the non-hunting public at large, is perceived to be for trophy hunting, and only trophy hunting, especially in NYS. You may not like that fact, but your displeasure about this fact doesn't change the ugly truth, and in absence of a biological need (such as a herd reduction program), it becomes a purely social concern, one that is proven to decimate our support with the non-hunting public.

Further, antler size is mainly a function of nutrition. Antler beam diameter shows best in areas with good, healthy habitat. Read slide 17. If you do not have good habitat, you have what you have, and that, again is a truth you can ignore, but the truth doesn't go away.

No one will ever argue that if a deer gets older, it gets bigger, in terms of body mass and antler mass. That's kind of a no chit, Sherlock, isn't it? But, simply because you pass on that deer, even if mandated, does not guarantee that animal will be there next year, does it? Lead and arrows are not the only hazards a deer must survive, folks. NY is #3 in the Nation for deer-car collisions, with an estimated 65,000 killed on the roads each year. We have periodically bad winters and low food, coupled with increased competition for food puts many animals in the winter mortality category. Predation and disease also add to the challenges that oftemtimes results in that deer you passed in HOPES of it getting bigger, never coming back, and the natural blame is the kid down the street shooting it, which you really don't know, but sure makes you feel that reason is accurate, doesn't it? 

And that is pretty darned laughable.

Further, nature has a prescription already for proper species interaction, and every predator, including us, fills the natural role, as we must do, naturally, as to maintain balance and assure perpetuation of the species. I have never heard of a predator checking out the rack on a deer and saying, nope, that one isn't old enough, or large enough, have you? That's pretty laughable, too. Balance in nature is not about size of antlers or age of animals, folks. Its about (for us), responsible predation and seizing an opportunity. Meaning, take the chance you get, if you want, and USE the animal, not simply for a wall decoration. 

Without a biological need, or benefit (and there exists NONE) it becomes one person's desire over another. You can already limit yourself, so, please do so. But if you are thinking you will get mandated AR passed in NYS, let me be the first one to tell you that you will have a very, very long wait.

It will not happen. The AR pilot program is still being evaluated, and the DEC's position is no more expansion of AR until the pilot program is fully evaluated and concluded. Only then will we have real solid scientific and factual information as to make any decisions.

Make believe and campfire stories fueled by cable TV hunting programs where a successful hunt (on a preserve or game farm) takes 30 minutes in the woods is not a solid foundation by which to operate.

And you can trust me that the expansion or mandating of AR will NOT happen as long as I am around. That one you can take to the bank. Educate and encourage voluntary harvest standards, and I am with you 10,000%. Force a mandated AR and limit the hunters in NYS further, to satisfy your own personal desires, and you will not get anywhere, I guarantee it. And the hunters of region 9 guarantee it, too, and considering we are 25% of all hunters in NYS, perhaps higher now in light of the fee increases (and trust me, I know the trends by county better than any of you, even better than teh DEC themselves), you'll have a long, cold and very disappointing effort in forcing it down the throats of the vast majority of hunters in NYS.

You can choose to believe me, or you can choose to make me the devil. I really don't care. But do not doubt what I am telling you all, and be very careful what you wish for.

Now, resume the tired drumbeat of AR in NY. You may love it personally, God Bless you. But it will not ever happen as long as I am around.... 

And that you can take to the bank.


----------



## bigrackHack

doctariAFC said:


> I don't know how many of you actually attended the state of the deer herd meetings, and if you did, whether or not you know how to listen to what the Dept is telling us all, so I'll fill you in. The information is contained in the presentation that was given across the state, and is available here.


I don't really have any input on the AR debate in NY. I just wanted to say, that's a heck of a fish.


----------



## phade

At least you're good for something Rich:darkbeer:

AR is not needed.



doctariAFC said:


> I don't know how many of you actually attended the state of the deer herd meetings, and if you did, whether or not you know how to listen to what the Dept is telling us all, so I'll fill you in. The information is contained in the presentation that was given across the state, and is available here.
> 
> http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/deerupdate09.pdf
> 
> May I draw your attention to slide 19.
> 
> We all know how our sports are under assault from the anti's, which make up @ 10%-15% of the people in the USA (higher in NYS, BTW). As a group, hunters makeup 1% of the people.
> 
> Hunting enjoys incredible support when we it is used to secure meat, control populations, protect people from harm, manage wildlife. In fact, the vast majority of people, primarily non-hunters, see our ranks as a valuable asset when our activities are perceived to be primarily driven by the elements above.
> 
> However, when the perception heads towards "for a trophy", the 85% who support us becomes just 28%.
> 
> I hope you all can comprehend this. Probably not, as why would any facts get in your way, right?
> 
> There is no biological need for mandated AR, and you can already voluntarily limit yourself and encourage others to do the same. But make no mistake about this FACT, folks, a mandated AR to the non-hunting public at large, is perceived to be for trophy hunting, and only trophy hunting, especially in NYS. You may not like that fact, but your displeasure about this fact doesn't change the ugly truth, and in absence of a biological need (such as a herd reduction program), it becomes a purely social concern, one that is proven to decimate our support with the non-hunting public.
> 
> Further, antler size is mainly a function of nutrition. Antler beam diameter shows best in areas with good, healthy habitat. Read slide 17. If you do not have good habitat, you have what you have, and that, again is a truth you can ignore, but the truth doesn't go away.
> 
> No one will ever argue that if a deer gets older, it gets bigger, in terms of body mass and antler mass. That's kind of a no chit, Sherlock, isn't it? But, simply because you pass on that deer, even if mandated, does not guarantee that animal will be there next year, does it? Lead and arrows are not the only hazards a deer must survive, folks. NY is #3 in the Nation for deer-car collisions, with an estimated 65,000 killed on the roads each year. We have periodically bad winters and low food, coupled with increased competition for food puts many animals in the winter mortality category. Predation and disease also add to the challenges that oftemtimes results in that deer you passed in HOPES of it getting bigger, never coming back, and the natural blame is the kid down the street shooting it, which you really don't know, but sure makes you feel that reason is accurate, doesn't it?
> 
> And that is pretty darned laughable.
> 
> Further, nature has a prescription already for proper species interaction, and every predator, including us, fills the natural role, as we must do, naturally, as to maintain balance and assure perpetuation of the species. I have never heard of a predator checking out the rack on a deer and saying, nope, that one isn't old enough, or large enough, have you? That's pretty laughable, too. Balance in nature is not about size of antlers or age of animals, folks. Its about (for us), responsible predation and seizing an opportunity. Meaning, take the chance you get, if you want, and USE the animal, not simply for a wall decoration.
> 
> Without a biological need, or benefit (and there exists NONE) it becomes one person's desire over another. You can already limit yourself, so, please do so. But if you are thinking you will get mandated AR passed in NYS, let me be the first one to tell you that you will have a very, very long wait.
> 
> It will not happen. The AR pilot program is still being evaluated, and the DEC's position is no more expansion of AR until the pilot program is fully evaluated and concluded. Only then will we have real solid scientific and factual information as to make any decisions.
> 
> Make believe and campfire stories fueled by cable TV hunting programs where a successful hunt (on a preserve or game farm) takes 30 minutes in the woods is not a solid foundation by which to operate.
> 
> And you can trust me that the expansion or mandating of AR will NOT happen as long as I am around. That one you can take to the bank. Educate and encourage voluntary harvest standards, and I am with you 10,000%. Force a mandated AR and limit the hunters in NYS further, to satisfy your own personal desires, and you will not get anywhere, I guarantee it. And the hunters of region 9 guarantee it, too, and considering we are 25% of all hunters in NYS, perhaps higher now in light of the fee increases (and trust me, I know the trends by county better than any of you, even better than teh DEC themselves), you'll have a long, cold and very disappointing effort in forcing it down the throats of the vast majority of hunters in NYS.
> 
> You can choose to believe me, or you can choose to make me the devil. I really don't care. But do not doubt what I am telling you all, and be very careful what you wish for.
> 
> Now, resume the tired drumbeat of AR in NY. You may love it personally, God Bless you. But it will not ever happen as long as I am around....
> 
> And that you can take to the bank.


----------



## doctariAFC

phade said:


> At least you're good for something Rich:darkbeer:
> 
> AR is not needed.


Thanks my friend :darkbeer:


----------



## lastbreath

JPN800 said:


> Please have everyone you know sign this form and send it in. This can be the first step in getting this passed. People who are not for antler restrictions Please do not comment. I'm not here to start a conflict.


I support any effort that will increase the doe harvest and will increase the buck age structure......although OBR would be a better solution IMHO...:wink:


----------



## nyupstate518

phade said:


> At least you're good for something Rich:darkbeer:
> 
> AR is not needed.


This argument makes sense but you are leaving out one thing. We still harvest does. We are not saying " DO NOT SHOOT ANY DEER EXCEPT HUGE 12 POINTERS". 

We are saying, a deer herd consisting of aged, quality bucks can be managed the same as the herd is now. The same number of deer will be taken, but they will be of better quality. Last time I checked I didn't hear anyone complain that there were too many big buck. But I have heard people complain that there aren't enough...


----------



## JPN800

nyupstate518 said:


> This argument makes sense but you are leaving out one thing. We still harvest does. We are not saying " DO NOT SHOOT ANY DEER EXCEPT HUGE 12 POINTERS".
> 
> We are saying, a deer herd consisting of aged, quality bucks can be managed the same as the herd is now. The same number of deer will be taken, but they will be of better quality. Last time I checked I didn't hear anyone complain that there were too many big buck. But I have heard people complain that there aren't enough...


Well said, Most of the states that produce consistent big bucks have some kind of management in place. Earn a buck, antler restriction whatever but something.


----------



## doctariAFC

nyupstate518 said:


> This argument makes sense but you are leaving out one thing. We still harvest does. We are not saying " DO NOT SHOOT ANY DEER EXCEPT HUGE 12 POINTERS".
> 
> We are saying, a deer herd consisting of aged, quality bucks can be managed the same as the herd is now. The same number of deer will be taken, but they will be of better quality. Last time I checked I didn't hear anyone complain that there were too many big buck. But I have heard people complain that there aren't enough...


The herd make up will be directly related to habitat quality. That does not change when you tell hunters they are limited even more.

Also, the preliminary data from the test areas indicate that deer harvest is way down, and the expected increase in older animals has NOT happened.

It falt out doesn't work, unless you have a contained area you are managing on a small scale. 

I know what you're saying, but, again, there is no biological need to do so, no benefit to the already very healthy herds we have in NYS. If you want to improve deer hunting, we have to improve habitat.

Gaining more access would also go a long way, and perhaps we should start examining the practice of food plots, as that practice is affecting deer movements and densities within WMUs. 

None of this gets addressed by limiting another hunter to what YOU think THEY should shoot.

And I have never, ever, in my entire 41 years of life on this planet, seen how implementing a NEGATIVE results in a POSITIVE for many. A few, certainly, but at the expense of the many.

Promote and educate. Steer clear of the legislate.


----------



## doctariAFC

JPN800 said:


> Well said, Most of the states that produce consistent big bucks have some kind of management in place. Earn a buck, antler restriction whatever but something.


Why not habitat work? That is the only realsolution, yet not too many are pushing for what would benefit all wildlife, including deer?

Is it too much work? Are we too lazy? Do we believe the "magic pen" will make everything all good?


----------



## phade

nyupstate518 said:


> This argument makes sense but you are leaving out one thing. We still harvest does. We are not saying " DO NOT SHOOT ANY DEER EXCEPT HUGE 12 POINTERS".
> 
> We are saying, a deer herd consisting of aged, quality bucks can be managed the same as the herd is now. The same number of deer will be taken, but they will be of better quality. Last time I checked I didn't hear anyone complain that there were too many big buck. But I have heard people complain that there aren't enough...


And how may WMU's do not get DMPs or get VERY few? The "don't shoot a young buck, shoot a doe" thing does not equate to legislating AR. Educate. Not legislate...

Also forgot. In 2006, I shot a 1.5 year-old. 12 points. AR wouldn't help. 2007 1.5 y/o 8 points - AR wouldn't help 2005...5 point - AR wouldn't help (3 to a side). Point is...don't tell others what they can shoot. It's unbecoming and unsportsman-like. NY herd is fairly healthy statewide and the DEC is doing what they do (could always be better) to manage good number balances.But health-wise...AR does not a thing to improve herd health. 

Hunter sentiment...goes both ways some want big antlers...some want meat, experience, etc. in addition to the chance at big antlers. Can't cut off the arm to save the head.


----------



## phade

JPN800 said:


> Well said, Most of the states that produce consistent big bucks have some kind of management in place. Earn a buck, antler restriction whatever but something.


Earn a buck worked well for WI right?...

Almost all science for antler production (since that is what you are after - see upstate's post above clearly indicates it by saying "quality" and "big bucks"), is not just habitat as Doc mentioned, but rather, soil. That's right soil. Dirt. The quality of soil is now showing directly relationed to ability to grow big antlers...it's part of that myriad of age, nutrition, and genetics. I think the real comparisons have been via Kentucky and Tennesee - I think Bryan Kinkel has done some of that research.

A mature buck does grow bigger antlers, but where in god's green earth is the herd "unhealthy" in NY?


----------



## cityhunter346

phade said:


> WHAT?!?!?!?
> 
> That's so messed up it's bordering Rich (Doctari)-level ridiculousness on the opposite end of the spectrum.
> 
> A hunter that goes out one weekend a year is as much a hunter as any of us are. You are no better, or worse, as am I.
> 
> Personally, I have a co-worker who can really only get out for opening day due to family obligations most weekends...he put in a couple afternoons helping with stands over the summer and heck, he even just came over to my desk asking how archery season is going and went over some of the observations I've had and relating them to gun opening day possibilities. He'd hunt everyday if he could...but life being what it is, he can only get out one day during gun season. You bet he's going to shoot anything, and I don't care - it's on my family property and I'd be jumping for joy if he got anything. He's no less a hunter than you or I. There are thousands of hunters like this in NY and across the country. *You cannot bash a hunter for only being able to get out one weekend a year, that's downright sad. *I'm not sold on AR on a state level, especially three to a side. Needs to be much mroe micro managed. You need to clarify this petition...you ask for NYer's signatures but then say in the document for "this area"....one AR rule does not fit all, even though IMO, it should not be implemented in any case.


I'm not bashing anyone....I'm stating a simple fact. The WMU's closest and most accessible to the city have the worst hunting in terms of trophies being taken. The only exception to this would be zone 3S and 1C where access is an issue. Why would you suggest that is?


----------



## One eye

phade said:


> Earn a buck worked well for WI right?...
> 
> Almost all science for antler production (since that is what you are after - see upstate's post above clearly indicates it by saying "quality" and "big bucks"), is not just habitat as Doc mentioned, but rather, soil. That's right soil. Dirt. The quality of soil is now showing directly relationed to ability to grow big antlers...it's part of that myriad of age, nutrition, and genetics. A mature buck does grow bigger antlers, but where in god's green earth is the herd "unhealthy" in NY?


LOL! You gotta love it.

Why don't you just fence in a chunk of land and GROW the buck you want and leave others alone? How about banning the shooting of all bucks until you can get the trophy you NEED?
Dan


----------



## nyupstate518

Alright well you can argue words all day but you can't argue results. 

Myself and my father bought a 150 acre parcel in eastern upstate NY. In the beginning there was a mass quantity of does and small bucks. Nothing over 80 inches. The herd was way out of wack, and our neighbors were shooting everything that moved. 

We almost immediately implemented a QDM program. AR of 6 points and management does only. Within 2 years we noticed a difference. Within 10 years we have a consistent herd with buck ranging from 120-140. This is a HUGE improvement over what was there. 

I have to agree on one aspect as well. We have managed food plots and the natural cover of our property. This keeps these deer "resident" and very rarely do they wander off onto our neighbors property. But they do, and will. It happens.


----------



## kodym

NY needs to head in PAs tracks you got my vote.


----------



## Meleagris1

I only support AR's in the event the state decides that it will do nothing else, and even then I think they are mainly an option for eastern NY. My opinion is that NY needs to implement a buck tag quota with WMU specific tags as is done in many other states. The DEC should limit buck tags in individual WMU's until bucks in the 3.5-6.5 year old age classes start showing up in the harvest and road kills etc. If a particular WMU is allowing bucks to reach these age classes, tags numbers can be held steady or increased. If bucks are not reaching these age classes then tags can be cut back. This would truly address the issue at hand, hunting pressure. It is without a doubt a 100% biologically sound way to manage hunting pressure, and it is a balanced and responsible way to manage the many hunters utilizing a limited resource. If your area has plenty of bucks reaching upper age classes now, then little would change. If few or no bucks reach upper age classes then tags would be cut back. This would also allow those who acquire buck tags to shoot any buck they want, a major point of contention with AR's. To balance out opportunity, DMP's preference points should be given to those who don't draw a buck tag. I have been suggesting this to the DEC for several years and I've noticed that recently they have including buck tag quotas as a discussion point on their deer management material, which is good to see.


----------



## phade

cityhunter346 said:


> I'm not bashing anyone....I'm stating a simple fact. The WMU's closest and most accessible to the city have the worst hunting in terms of trophies being taken. The only exception to this would be zone 3S and 1C where access is an issue. Why would you suggest that is?


You have your pants in a wad about NYC. It's not the city hunters, it's not their skills, dedication...etc. It's hunter pressure. Period. That's regardless of locale. NYC and NYC hunters have nothing to do with your excuse for hunting CT. It's hunter pressure as a whole. Other cities in NY have similar impacts. It's just pressure any way you slice it.


----------



## lastbreath

nyupstate518 said:


> Alright well you can argue words all day but you can't argue results.
> 
> Myself and my father bought a 150 acre parcel in eastern upstate NY. In the beginning there was a mass quantity of does and small bucks. Nothing over 80 inches. The herd was way out of wack, and our neighbors were shooting everything that moved.
> 
> We almost immediately implemented a QDM program. AR of 6 points and management does only. Within 2 years we noticed a difference. Within 10 years we have a consistent herd with buck ranging from 120-140. This is a HUGE improvement over what was there.
> 
> I have to agree on one aspect as well. We have managed food plots and the natural cover of our property. This keeps these deer "resident" and very rarely do they wander off onto our neighbors property. But they do, and will. It happens.


I agree about habitat also........Its 1 of the 4 cornerstones of QDM..Habitat Management.....


----------



## phade

nyupstate518 said:


> Alright well you can argue words all day but you can't argue results.
> 
> Myself and my father bought a 150 acre parcel in eastern upstate NY. In the beginning there was a mass quantity of does and small bucks. Nothing over 80 inches. The herd was way out of wack, and our neighbors were shooting everything that moved.
> 
> We almost immediately implemented a QDM program. AR of 6 points and management does only. Within 2 years we noticed a difference. Within 10 years we have a consistent herd with buck ranging from 120-140. This is a HUGE improvement over what was there.
> 
> I have to agree on one aspect as well. We have managed food plots and the natural cover of our property. This keeps these deer "resident" and very rarely do they wander off onto our neighbors property. But they do, and will. It happens.



I'm don't tip my hat much as being an expert, but MY QDM background is very far-reaching. Likely above any others in this thread.

QDM on that small of a parcel is very difficult - and you acknowledge the habitat factor. You really need a minimum of 500 acres for impact of a traditional program. You can certainly do it for less, but you're not necessarily implementing a trad program. You're actually doing far more by making the property more attractive to deer during the hunting season than you are by implementing AR, and harvest management aspects.

You're really only controlling about one mature buck. That's it. You can lay "claim" to about one mature buck every 140 acres of a QDM program. All other bucks are on and off your property (although the one is too, it's just a general measurement that's been extracted from QDM data)...and you have no control over that. 

Your success as a small land manager without neighbor interaction is hinging not on your harvest goals/limits, but rather your habitat improvement and making that land attractive to deer during the hunting season. AR is a minimal, if any, factor on your land.


----------



## cityhunter346

phade said:


> You have your pants in a wad about NYC. It's not the city hunters, it's not their skills, dedication...etc. It's hunter pressure. Period. That's regardless of locale. NYC and NYC hunters have nothing to do with your excuse for hunting CT. It's hunter pressure as a whole. Other cities in NY have similar impacts. *It's just pressure any way you slice it.*




I own property in zone 4O and am basing my opinion on the fact that the guys who come up from the city are the most inclined to shoot small bucks. Why? - most of them only hunt opening weekend. I don't care when they hunt or why they hunt 1 weekend BUT the facts are the facts. Maybe Rich could help me out with the facts on this or tell me where to get them. What % of bucks taken within 3 hrs of NYC are 1 1/2 years old as opposed to the age class of the bucks taken in the rest of NYS?


----------



## doctariAFC

Meleagris1 said:


> I only support AR's in the event the state decides that it will do nothing else, and even then I think they are mainly an option for eastern NY. My opinion is that NY needs to implement a buck tag quota with WMU specific tags as is done in many other states. The DEC should limit buck tags in individual WMU's until bucks in the 3.5-6.5 year old age classes start showing up in the harvest and road kills etc. If a particular WMU is allowing bucks to reach these age classes, tags numbers can be held steady or increased. If bucks are not reaching these age classes then tags can be cut back. This would truly address the issue at hand, hunting pressure. It is without a doubt a 100% biologically sound way to manage hunting pressure, and it is a balanced and responsible way to manage the many hunters utilizing a limited resource. If your area has plenty of bucks reaching upper age classes now, then little would change. If few or no bucks reach upper age classes then tags would be cut back. This would also allow those who acquire buck tags to shoot any buck they want, a major point of contention with AR's. To balance out opportunity, DMP's preference points should be given to those who don't draw a buck tag. I have been suggesting this to the DEC for several years and I've noticed that recently they have including tag quotas as a discussion point on their deer management material, which is good to see.


Interesting. Yes, this is more of an eastern NY issue than anything else. Central and WNY do not have the issues at all.

I have to commend you on your honest and candid summation of what AR really does.... It manages HUNTING PRESSURE (limits hunters), and does little to truly manage deer. You nailed it.

There are some WMUs where objectives may either be overly unrealistic, and need CTF updates, too. Seems like 4P is doing well, and a few in R4 are in need of additional management as the take is higher than objective. In other areas of R3, the 2.5-3.5 Bucks/ SQ MI may not be very realistic due to habitat conditions? But that is on the CTF in those areas, not on the DEC. They are charged to meet the recommendations of each CTF, by law.

ENY certainly has some challenges that CNY and WNY do not have. Habitat quality, access to hunting grounds, etc. These are where we should really work together with unity to correct and address. Managing hunting pressure (to lower it) translates to reducing hunters. There are some WMUs that are way over objective in ENY and need hunters to hunt in those places.

Very good post Mel.....

How's the season treating you thus far?


----------



## phade

cityhunter346 said:


> [/U][/B]
> 
> I own property in zone 4O and am basing my opinion on the fact that the guys who come up from the city are the most inclined to shoot small bucks. Why? - most of them only hunt opening weekend. I don't care when they hunt or why they hunt 1 weekend BUT the facts are the facts. Maybe Rich could help me out with the facts on this or tell me where to get them. What % of bucks taken within 3 hrs of NYC are 1 1/2 years old as opposed to the age class of the bucks taken in the rest of NYS?


So, AR does nothing then...all you are doing is plugging a low hole and still having water run out right above it in another hole. If they shoot the smallest ones now, they're going to do the same post-AR. Shooting the smallest bucks legal..and you'll still be complaining becuase there's no legal bucks because they're still shooting the barely legals.

One buck rule...has a somewhat nice idea, but I doubt you'll get hunters in bulk to go along with it. espcially multi-season hunters. Plus, only a very select (read: small percentage) of hunters get two bucks a year in NYS. You're talking in the 5k mark statewide I think Doc can verify that.


----------



## doctariAFC

cityhunter346 said:


> [/U][/B]
> 
> I own property in zone 4O and am basing my opinion on the fact that the guys who come up from the city are the most inclined to shoot small bucks. Why? - most of them only hunt opening weekend. I don't care when they hunt or why they hunt 1 weekend BUT the facts are the facts. Maybe Rich could help me out with the facts on this or tell me where to get them. What % of bucks taken within 3 hrs of NYC are 1 1/2 years old as opposed to the age class of the bucks taken in the rest of NYS?


I'll see what I can get. It probably won't happen until after the big game seasons conclude this year, as you can probably imagine the dept has their hands full at the moment. But that is a great request. I'll get that information so we can get a better picture. 

From the minutes of the Big Game committee meeting in April 2009, DEC indicated they estimate the statewide yearling buck take in 2008 to be 63%. In 2005 that % came in at 78%. In 2005 BB take was estimated at 27%, in 2008 it was 15%. These are statewide numbers. We need some granularity to find out what the % are by region, and maybe by WMU, if possible.

I will make that request. It is a good one for certain. I don't believe I'll get anything back before end of Big Game Season, but I will get the info.

Thanks my friend, and will do!


----------



## doctariAFC

phade said:


> So, AR does nothing then...all you are doing is plugging a low hole and still having water run out right above it in another hole. If they shoot the smallest ones now, they're going to do the same post-AR. Shooting the smallest bucks legal..and you'll still be complaining becuase there's no legal bucks because they're still shooting the barely legals.
> 
> One buck rule...has a somewhat nice idea, but I doubt you'll get hunters in bulk to go along with it. espcially multi-season hunters. Plus, only a very select (read: small percentage) of hunters get two bucks a year in NYS. You're talking in the 5k mark statewide I think Doc can verify that.


That is correct. Approx. 7% of the hunters that harvest one buck get a second. It is a small number, right around 5,000 animals statewide (all zones combined).


----------



## Joe W.

JPN800 said:


> Please have everyone you know sign this form and send it in. This can be the first step in getting this passed. People who are not for antler restrictions Please do not comment. I'm not here to start a conflict.


That is like saying: "Here is a match and here is some gasoline, but by no means do I want to start a fire." 

What did you think was gonna happen?


----------



## JPN800

doctariAFC said:


> I'll see what I can get. It probably won't happen until after the big game seasons conclude this year, as you can probably imagine the dept has their hands full at the moment. But that is a great request. I'll get that information so we can get a better picture.
> 
> From the minutes of the Big Game committee meeting in April 2009, DEC indicated they estimate the statewide yearling buck take in 2008 to be 63%. In 2005 that % came in at 78%. In 2005 BB take was estimated at 27%, in 2008 it was 15%. These are statewide numbers. We need some granularity to find out what the % are by region, and maybe by WMU, if possible.
> 
> I will make that request. It is a good one for certain. I don't believe I'll get anything back before end of Big Game Season, but I will get the info.
> 
> Thanks my friend, and will do!


If The numbers do show that it is a eastern NY problem, Then only imply the restriction in the DMU's that need it. I think that would be fair and not piss off the western guys? I feel something needs to be done in eastern NY wheather it be restrict the antlers or the hunters. We need a deer heard that is more in balance.


----------



## phade

JPN800 said:


> If The numbers do show that it is a eastern NY problem, Then only imply the restriction in the DMU's that need it. I think that would be fair and not piss off the western guys? I feel something needs to be done in eastern NY wheather it be restrict the antlers or the hunters. We need a deer heard that is more in balance.


Define balance.


----------



## cityhunter346

phade said:


> Define balance.


I'm assuming he means a fairly equal number of bucks that are 1 1/2, 2 1/2, 3 1/2...so on and so forth. I would venture a guess and say that in the zones within 3 hrs of NYC that over 90% of the bucks out there are yearlings or 1 1/2 years old.


----------



## JPN800

cityhunter346 said:


> I'm assuming he means a fairly equal number of bucks that are 1 1/2, 2 1/2, 3 1/2...so on and so forth. I would venture a guess and say that in the zones within 3 hrs of NYC that over 90% of the bucks out there are yearlings or 1 1/2 years old.


I couldn't have put it into better words.


----------



## VA2

:thumbs_up


----------



## Joe W.

My .02.

I am all for AR in NY. I have seen it work in PA. I hunt both states and have seen bigger antlered deer in PA every year for the last 5 years. I see my share in NY as well....please don't assume that I am a NYC hunter that couldn't find a buck if it were in his wallet....I just see more in areas where restrictions have been in place for a few years.

I also understand that bigger antlers and trophies are not what everybody is after....to each his own. I just think the buck/doe ratio in NY is really out of whack and something should be done to rectify it.....allowing a few more bucks to reach maturity seems to be a step in that direction.


----------



## Matt Musto

doctariAFC said:


> I don't know how many of you actually attended the state of the deer herd meetings, and if you did, whether or not you know how to listen to what the Dept is telling us all, so I'll fill you in. The information is contained in the presentation that was given across the state, and is available here.
> 
> http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/deerupdate09.pdf
> 
> May I draw your attention to slide 19.
> 
> We all know how our sports are under assault from the anti's, which make up @ 10%-15% of the people in the USA (higher in NYS, BTW). As a group, hunters makeup 1% of the people.
> 
> Hunting enjoys incredible support when we it is used to secure meat, control populations, protect people from harm, manage wildlife. In fact, the vast majority of people, primarily non-hunters, see our ranks as a valuable asset when our activities are perceived to be primarily driven by the elements above.
> 
> However, when the perception heads towards "for a trophy", the 85% who support us becomes just 28%.
> 
> I hope you all can comprehend this. Probably not, as why would any facts get in your way, right?
> 
> There is no biological need for mandated AR, and you can already voluntarily limit yourself and encourage others to do the same. But make no mistake about this FACT, folks, a mandated AR to the non-hunting public at large, is perceived to be for trophy hunting, and only trophy hunting, especially in NYS. You may not like that fact, but your displeasure about this fact doesn't change the ugly truth, and in absence of a biological need (such as a herd reduction program), it becomes a purely social concern, one that is proven to decimate our support with the non-hunting public.
> 
> Further, antler size is mainly a function of nutrition. Antler beam diameter shows best in areas with good, healthy habitat. Read slide 17. If you do not have good habitat, you have what you have, and that, again is a truth you can ignore, but the truth doesn't go away.
> 
> No one will ever argue that if a deer gets older, it gets bigger, in terms of body mass and antler mass. That's kind of a no chit, Sherlock, isn't it? But, simply because you pass on that deer, even if mandated, does not guarantee that animal will be there next year, does it? Lead and arrows are not the only hazards a deer must survive, folks. NY is #3 in the Nation for deer-car collisions, with an estimated 65,000 killed on the roads each year. We have periodically bad winters and low food, coupled with increased competition for food puts many animals in the winter mortality category. Predation and disease also add to the challenges that oftemtimes results in that deer you passed in HOPES of it getting bigger, never coming back, and the natural blame is the kid down the street shooting it, which you really don't know, but sure makes you feel that reason is accurate, doesn't it?
> 
> And that is pretty darned laughable.
> 
> Further, nature has a prescription already for proper species interaction, and every predator, including us, fills the natural role, as we must do, naturally, as to maintain balance and assure perpetuation of the species. I have never heard of a predator checking out the rack on a deer and saying, nope, that one isn't old enough, or large enough, have you? That's pretty laughable, too. Balance in nature is not about size of antlers or age of animals, folks. Its about (for us), responsible predation and seizing an opportunity. Meaning, take the chance you get, if you want, and USE the animal, not simply for a wall decoration.
> 
> Without a biological need, or benefit (and there exists NONE) it becomes one person's desire over another. You can already limit yourself, so, please do so. But if you are thinking you will get mandated AR passed in NYS, let me be the first one to tell you that you will have a very, very long wait.
> 
> It will not happen. The AR pilot program is still being evaluated, and the DEC's position is no more expansion of AR until the pilot program is fully evaluated and concluded. Only then will we have real solid scientific and factual information as to make any decisions.
> 
> Make believe and campfire stories fueled by cable TV hunting programs where a successful hunt (on a preserve or game farm) takes 30 minutes in the woods is not a solid foundation by which to operate.
> 
> And you can trust me that the expansion or mandating of AR will NOT happen as long as I am around. That one you can take to the bank. Educate and encourage voluntary harvest standards, and I am with you 10,000%. Force a mandated AR and limit the hunters in NYS further, to satisfy your own personal desires, and you will not get anywhere, I guarantee it. And the hunters of region 9 guarantee it, too, and considering we are 25% of all hunters in NYS, perhaps higher now in light of the fee increases (and trust me, I know the trends by county better than any of you, even better than teh DEC themselves), you'll have a long, cold and very disappointing effort in forcing it down the throats of the vast majority of hunters in NYS.
> 
> You can choose to believe me, or you can choose to make me the devil. I really don't care. But do not doubt what I am telling you all, and be very careful what you wish for.
> 
> Now, resume the tired drumbeat of AR in NY. You may love it personally, God Bless you. But it will not ever happen as long as I am around....
> 
> And that you can take to the bank.


I don't know your background but you seem VERY informed. I think you are against AR? And It seems this is because a fear of antis using it as ammo against hunters in general? This is a lame reason however, and by resigning for fear of losing, is a losers mentalitiy. There are many biological reasons to install AR into a deer heard, for the health and balance of a herd. Gary Alt argued it well enough to the PGC for them to implement it and the results are hard to deny. The other issues that alot of PA hunters argue, concerning the doe population, is another issue entirely, but seems to get lumped in with AR, unfairly. It's a shame that you have "banked" your personal beliefs, and are forcing them down everyones throat, because of fear of "Perception".


----------



## doctariAFC

Joe W. said:


> My .02.
> 
> I am all for AR in NY. I have seen it work in PA. I hunt both states and have seen bigger antlered deer in PA every year for the last 5 years. I see my share in NY as well....please don't assume that I am a NYC hunter that couldn't find a buck if it were in his wallet....I just see more in areas where restrictions have been in place for a few years.
> 
> I also understand that bigger antlers and trophies are not what everybody is after....to each his own. I just think the buck/doe ratio in NY is really out of whack and something should be done to rectify it.....allowing a few more bucks to reach maturity seems to be a step in that direction.


http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/deerupdate09.pdf

The Buck Doe ratios are not out of whack. Certainly in some pockets we are seeing some concerns, but these are small pockets compared to the whole.

And breeding success is pretty darned good.


----------



## Matt Musto

phade said:


> Define balance.


Buck to doe ratio, and more mature bucks in the herd that are 3-1/2 to 4-1/2


----------



## phade

cityhunter346 said:


> I'm assuming he means a fairly equal number of bucks that are 1 1/2, 2 1/2, 3 1/2...so on and so forth. I would venture a guess and say that in the zones within 3 hrs of NYC that over 90% of the bucks out there are yearlings or 1 1/2 years old.


Where in this world are there bucks with equal % of age classes? That's insane. Heck, we don't even have that in human population...


----------



## phade

Matt Musto said:


> Buck to doe ratio, and more mature bucks in the herd that are 3-1/2 to 4-1/2


Big difference between buck to doe ratio and age class structure...balance can be applied to one, the other, or both. If you pitch an idea, you need to be clear the intended outcome:thumbs_do


----------



## phade

Per the DEC, what is the NY buck to do ratio doc? I think most people will be suprised it's better than we think. It seems like most people are eager to apply a statewise ordeal on a local observation basis. We need to think before acting and come up with a better, more defined pitch.


----------



## Darien Outdoors

*Antler Rest.*

I wouldent mind here in NY...... Look at PA..... I been seeing some REAL nice bucks taken the past few years since they did that at 3 or 4 points on one side rule. Deer around here normally dont make it past milking stage. I would much rather take a few adult doe then a smaller buck anyhow, and as for a OLD buck and shoe leather meat...


----------



## phade

doctariAFC said:


> http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/deerupdate09.pdf
> 
> The Buck Doe ratios are not out of whack. Certainly in some pockets we are seeing some concerns, but these are small pockets compared to the whole.
> 
> And breeding success is pretty darned good.


Ha...I knew you were going to do that. Before I got to post.

*Southeastern NY: 2.3:1
Central-Western: 2.0:1
NZ:1.2:1*

Wow, we're so off-balance, my oh my, how are we ever going to get a better balance (minus age class)? Where's Toto? Don't tell me the witch got him! Apparently we are not in NY anymore...because they're talking about some other state having those wayyyy off balance buck:doe ratios.


----------



## Tax Lawyer

Meleagris1 said:


> I only support AR's in the event the state decides that it will do nothing else, and even then I think they are mainly an option for eastern NY. My opinion is that NY needs to implement a buck tag quota with WMU specific tags as is done in many other states. The DEC should limit buck tags in individual WMU's until bucks in the 3.5-6.5 year old age classes start showing up in the harvest and road kills etc. If a particular WMU is allowing bucks to reach these age classes, tags numbers can be held steady or increased. If bucks are not reaching these age classes then tags can be cut back. This would truly address the issue at hand, hunting pressure. It is without a doubt a 100% biologically sound way to manage hunting pressure, and it is a balanced and responsible way to manage the many hunters utilizing a limited resource. If your area has plenty of bucks reaching upper age classes now, then little would change. If few or no bucks reach upper age classes then tags would be cut back. This would also allow those who acquire buck tags to shoot any buck they want, a major point of contention with AR's. To balance out opportunity, DMP's preference points should be given to those who don't draw a buck tag. I have been suggesting this to the DEC for several years and I've noticed that recently they have including buck tag quotas as a discussion point on their deer management material, which is good to see.


Yeah.....what he said. :clap:


----------



## doctariAFC

Matt Musto said:


> I don't know your background but you seem VERY informed. I think you are against AR? And It seems this is because a fear of antis using it as ammo against hunters in general? This is a lame reason however, and by resigning for fear of losing, is a losers mentalitiy. There are many biological reasons to install AR into a deer heard, for the health and balance of a herd. Gary Alt argued it well enough to the PGC for them to implement it and the results are hard to deny. The other issues that alot of PA hunters argue, concerning the doe population, is another issue entirely, but seems to get lumped in with AR, unfairly. It's a shame that you have "banked" your personal beliefs, and are forcing them down everyones throat, because of fear of "Perception".


I am the Region 9 Rep for the Big Game Hunters here in my region to the State Big Game Committee...

It is only one portion of the issues with implementing AR. This is information the DEC brought to us, not me saying it. The DEC is giving us BIG WARNINGS through their research and their outreach on the support the general public has, or doesn't have. And their influence (the antis) in Albany is what it is.

These are not personal beliefs, either. I am a rep, and these are the beliefs of approx. 25% of the big game hunters in NYS. That carries quite a significant punch in Albany.

The larger issue is whether mandated AR is a biological need/ benefit, or is it purely the desire of some hunters. The DEC has already stated the scientific facts, so this is really a desire of some hunters, devoid of any tangible benefits to the herds, habitats and the hunters as a whole. Just because you may want something doesn't make it the right thing to do, and the facts are there, you may choose to ignore or you may choose to think on them. Your choice.

As far as PA is concerned, they had a far different condition to contend with than we do. PA implemented a HERD REDUCTION plan propelled by the timber industry and serious concerns over forest regeneration, which has big impacts on the PA timber industry. They hit PGC over the head with an economic silver hammer, and herd reduction was deemed necessary. As part of a herd reduction program, AR can work. That is biological need. Is it ignorance of this fact that you left it out, or is it ignoring this fact because its too damaging to your opinion? And in order to reduce a herd, you have to take out at LEAST 50% of the does each year to make a dent. Hence the reason for AR.

NYS has no such program being considered at this time. The numbers are healthy and we are in population control mode, not population reduction mode. 

Also, pertaining to PA, have you seen their license sales numbers since AR was implemented? Have you seen the non-res license trends in NYS since 2002, when PA implemented herd reduction and AR? NYS has benefitted fairly well from that move, while PA has not. If you would like the facts and the numbes/ trends, feel free to visit the USF&W website and download the state specific reports on hunting and fishing for both PA and NYS, 2001 and 2006.

I don't "feel my way" on anything. I research every piece of information I can possibly get, the cold hard facts, and present those as part of my case. 

I suggest we all do more of that. You'd be very surprised at how much progress can actually be made. All too often we hunters operate with campfire stories and feeling our way. Put 20 hunters in a room and you get 21 ideas on how to do something. Do you think that helps us or hurts us?

Some have asked for additional FACTS. That is what we all need to do. GET THE FACTS. I will secure the harvest data, but it will not be until after the 2009 big game seasons are concluded. Then we can have logical, thoughtful and educated debate, rather than arguing feelings.

Does that make any sense?


----------



## Matt Musto

phade said:


> Big difference between buck to doe ratio and age class structure...balance can be applied to one, the other, or both. If you pitch an idea, you need to be clear the intended outcome:thumbs_do


Phade Failed. But at least you cleared up your own misunderstanding:thumbs_up


----------



## doctariAFC

Darien Outdoors said:


> I wouldent mind here in NY...... Look at PA..... I been seeing some REAL nice bucks taken the past few years since they did that at 3 or 4 points on one side rule. Deer around here normally dont make it past milking stage. I would much rather take a few adult doe then a smaller buck anyhow, and as for a OLD buck and shoe leather meat...


yes, look at PA. All of it, not just what you want to look at.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, isn't it? :doh:


----------



## VTdeerslayer

The purpose of QDM is a healthier deer herd and that's it. Large antlers come along with healthy deer herd. Sorry for wanting a healthy deer herd.


----------



## Matt Musto

doctariAFC said:


> I am the Region 9 Rep for the Big Game Hunters here in my region to the State Big Game Committee...
> 
> It is only one portion of the issues with implementing AR. This is information the DEC brought to us, not me saying it. The DEC is giving us BIG WARNINGS through their research and their outreach on the support the general public has, or doesn't have. And their influence (the antis) in Albany is what it is.*Of course there is going to be more opposition in a strong Liberal state*
> 
> These are not personal beliefs, either. I am a rep, and these are the beliefs of approx. 25% of the big game hunters in NYS. That carries quite a significant punch in Albany. *PA had more of an opposition than this and although I don't know actual percentagesyou don't hear many complaints anymore throught the ranks of hunter, regarding AR*
> 
> The larger issue is whether mandated AR is a biological need/ benefit, or is it purely the desire of some hunters. The DEC has already stated the scientific facts, so this is really a desire of some hunters, devoid of any tangible benefits to the herds, habitats and the hunters as a whole. Just because you may want something doesn't make it the right thing to do, and the facts are there, you may choose to ignore or you may choose to think on them. Your choice.*Since DEC is already running scared of the antis, this is an easy excuse. It is absolutely wrong stating there are no benefits and that is driven by desire. What scientific studies were they looking at????*
> 
> As far as PA is concerned, they had a far different condition to contend with than we do. PA implemented a HERD REDUCTION plan propelled by the timber industry and serious concerns over forest regeneration, which has big impacts on the PA timber industry. They hit PGC over the head with an economic silver hammer, and herd reduction was deemed necessary. As part of a herd reduction program, AR can work. That is biological need. Is it ignorance of this fact that you left it out, or is it ignoring this fact because its too damaging to your opinion? And in order to reduce a herd, you have to take out at LEAST 50% of the does each year to make a dent. Hence the reason for AR.*If there is no biological benefit to having more mature deer handleing the majority of the breeding, then there are alot of deer biologists lying. Herd reduction probably also helps, but as you, I am no Biologist so I don't have proof in my own studies*
> 
> NYS has no such program being considered at this time. The numbers are healthy and we are in population control mode, not population reduction mode.
> 
> Also, pertaining to PA, have you seen their license sales numbers since AR was implemented? Have you seen the non-res license trends in NYS since 2002, when PA implemented herd reduction and AR? NYS has benefitted fairly well from that move, while PA has not. If you would like the facts and the numbes/ trends, feel free to visit the USF&W website and download the state specific reports on hunting and fishing for both PA and NYS, 2001 and 2006.*What is up with raking non-residents over the coals for a hunt in NY state??? That drop in sales in PA was from all non-resident hunter who come to PA because of cheap non-resident fees. The increase in NY is gaining back the hunters who like brown and down hunting. Heck I go to NY so I can shoot a yearling buck and add meat to the freezer. Althought the biggest buck I have ever laid eyes on was in NY state.*
> 
> I don't "feel my way" on anything. I research every piece of information I can possibly get, the cold hard facts, and present those as part of my case.
> 
> I suggest we all do more of that. You'd be very surprised at how much progress can actually be made. All too often we hunters operate with campfire stories and feeling our way. Put 20 hunters in a room and you get 21 ideas on how to do something. Do you think that helps us or hurts us?
> 
> Some have asked for additional FACTS. That is what we all need to do. GET THE FACTS. I will secure the harvest data, but it will not be until after the 2009 big game seasons are concluded. Then we can have logical, thoughtful and educated debate, rather than arguing feelings.
> 
> Does that make any sense?


Listen, my wife is from the Finger Lakes region and I hunt occasionally in NY, if I feel like breaking the bank. I could really careless about having AR or not. I happen to live in a state that does and it is working, biologically, well. I hunt in a populated area outside of Philadelphia where the herd is healthy. It's just so much better as a hunter to see more big bucks and harder rutting activity. I pass a ton of yearlings every season and go years without taking a buck, but I don't get all bent out of shape over it. If the heard is so healthy in NY then the only reason not to implement it is for selfih reasons by people who don't want it. So I guess which ever side people fall on, has a selfish reason behind it.

Good luck to all on both side of the debate:darkbeer:


----------



## DeerSlayer26

*Preach it brother!*



VTdeerslayer said:


> The purpose of QDM is a healthier deer herd and that's it. Large antlers come along with healthy deer herd. Sorry for wanting a healthy deer herd.


+1..... A healthier herd means bigger deer.(Buck and Doe) This has been proven time and time again by the experts.

Where I own 93ac. in region 8 we consistently see 4 doe to 1 buck. Where I now live in region 3 we see 8-9 doe to 1 buck. I'll give you 1 guess where we see and shoot bigger deer(buck and doe).


----------



## phade

Matt Musto said:


> Phade Failed. But at least you cleared up your own misunderstanding:thumbs_up


There is no misunderstanding and I did not fail...where did I fail something? 

The thread poster's use of "balance" was not clear from the start. As I said, balance can mean more than one thing. You should look at the mirror before casting stones. Seem like you omitted things that Doc corrected you on. PA does not equal NY, esp. in regard to AR.


----------



## phade

VTdeerslayer said:


> The purpose of QDM is a healthier deer herd and that's it. Large antlers come along with healthy deer herd. Sorry for wanting a healthy deer herd.


AR does not equal QDM.  So how in your mind does AR equal a healthier herd? Who fed you that line? QDM has cornerstones for a reason. 

Just like TDM does not equal QDM.


----------



## phade

Matt Musto said:


> Listen, my wife is from the Finger Lakes region and I hunt occasionally in NY, if I feel like breaking the bank. I could really careless about having AR or not. I happen to live in a state that does and it is working, biologically, well. I hunt in a populated area outside of Philadelphia where the herd is healthy. It's just so much better as a hunter to see more big bucks and harder rutting activity. I pass a ton of yearlings every season and go years without taking a buck, but I don't get all bent out of shape over it. *If the heard is so healthy in NY then the only reason not to implement it is for selfih reasons by people who don't want it. So I guess which ever side people fall on, has a selfish reason behind it.*
> 
> Good luck to all on both side of the debate:darkbeer:


If the herd is so healthy in NY, then the only reason to implement it is for selfish reasons by people who want it. It's not always selfish...everyone comes from a point/belief, but it's not always selfish, on either side.


----------



## VA2

IMO…………………you can have all the signatures in NY and have the majority of hunters in favor of AR’s in NY and nothing will come of it………………Take a look at the AR program in region 3 I believe…………….68% in favor and they did not expand the program………….IMO if NY wants license sales to increase along with non-resident sales to increase, AR’s are a step in the right direction……………….


----------



## Matt Musto

phade said:


> There is no misunderstanding and I did not fail...where did I fail something?
> 
> The thread poster's use of "balance" was not clear from the start. As I said, balance can mean more than one thing. You should look at the mirror before casting stones. Seem like you omitted things that Doc corrected you on. PA does not equal NY, esp. in regard to AR.


bal·ance (blns)
n.
1. A weighing device, especially one consisting of a rigid beam horizontally suspended by a low-friction support at its center, with identical weighing pans hung at either end, one of which holds an unknown weight while the effective weight in the other is increased by known amounts until the beam is level and motionless.
2. A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces.
3. The power or means to decide.
4. 
a. A state of bodily equilibrium: thrown off balance by a gust of wind.
b. The ability to maintain bodily equilibrium: Gymnasts must have good balance.
5. A stable mental or psychological state; emotional stability.
6. A harmonious or satisfying arrangement or proportion of parts or elements, as in a design. See Synonyms at proportion.
7. An influence or force tending to produce equilibrium; counterpoise.
8. The difference in magnitude between opposing forces or influences.
9. Accounting 
a. Equality of totals in the debit and credit sides of an account.
b. The difference between such totals, either on the credit or the debit side.
10. Something that is left over; a remainder.
11. Chemistry Equality of mass and net electric charge of reacting species on each side of an equation.
12. Mathematics Equality with respect to the net number of reduced symbolic quantities on each side of an equation.
13. A balance wheel.


----------



## primal-bow

i live in pa and we have antler restriction and i hate .too many poeple shoot first and ask did it have 4 point on side. i think you should vote NO on this matter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:angry::thumbs_do


----------



## phade

Matt Musto said:


> bal·ance (blns)
> n.
> 1. A weighing device, especially one consisting of a rigid beam horizontally suspended by a low-friction support at its center, with identical weighing pans hung at either end, one of which holds an unknown weight while the effective weight in the other is increased by known amounts until the beam is level and motionless.
> 2. A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces.
> 3. The power or means to decide.
> 4.
> a. A state of bodily equilibrium: thrown off balance by a gust of wind.
> b. The ability to maintain bodily equilibrium: Gymnasts must have good balance.
> 5. A stable mental or psychological state; emotional stability.
> 6. A harmonious or satisfying arrangement or proportion of parts or elements, as in a design. See Synonyms at proportion.
> 7. An influence or force tending to produce equilibrium; counterpoise.
> 8. The difference in magnitude between opposing forces or influences.
> 9. Accounting
> a. Equality of totals in the debit and credit sides of an account.
> b. The difference between such totals, either on the credit or the debit side.
> 10. Something that is left over; a remainder.
> 11. Chemistry Equality of mass and net electric charge of reacting species on each side of an equation.
> 12. Mathematics Equality with respect to the net number of reduced symbolic quantities on each side of an equation.
> 13. A balance wheel.


Wow. Someone when back to the third grade. Balance in regards to the proposal maybe?

What a great EEEnnnterrrneeetttt reply!


----------



## phade

VA2 said:


> IMO…………………you can have all the signature in NY and have the majority of hunters in favor of AR’s in NY and nothing will come of it………………Take a look at the AR program in region 3 I believe…………….68% in favor and they did not expand the program………….IMO if NY wants license sales to increase along with non-resident sales to increase, AR’s are a step in the right direction……………….


Although I think the DEC tossed out some % numbers like 80 for or 20 strongly against to move on AR in an area, they want to wait until the science has been done from the ones in place. 

I don't think that's a bad thing to do. Wouldn't you agree?


----------



## doctariAFC

DeerSlayer26 said:


> +1..... A healthier herd means bigger deer.(Buck and Doe) This has been proven time and time again by the experts.
> 
> Where I own 93ac. in region 8 we consistently see 4 doe to 1 buck. Where I now live in region 3 we see 8-9 doe to 1 buck. I'll give you 1 guess where we see and shoot bigger deer(buck and doe).


QDM, straight from QDMA, does not necessarily mean Antler Restrictions.

Their program is more about habitat and herds to habitat.

And I don't have to guess - I know where the bigger bucks and does are.

In REGION 9!

Why?

Because we have the bomb habitat. DEC has conducted antler beam width studies, its in the report I posted a link to. What you SEE is not necessarily what it is. Kind of like deer density estimates per WMU. For instance, I'll use WMU 9H as the example. Deer densities desired in 9H, set by the CTF, is 3.5-4.5 Bucks per sq. mi. The harvest objective is within 10% of this objective. This means, when projecting a population density for that WMU, and the reliable factor the DEC has determined through science is a factor of 7. This means, when we are harvesting 3.5-4.5 bucks per sq mi, that deer densities in this WMU run between 24.5 and 31.5 deer per sq mi.

Does this mean EVERY SQ MI of this WMU holds between 24 and 31 deer? NO. But when we tally the square miles up and run the math the overall population density in that WMU is right there.

Where deer will be encountered and what is encountered depends on food and cover, not to mention time of day (sometimes them animals move during the wee small hours of the morning). Food concentrations will vary season to season. About the only thing "consistent" are farms, but crop rotation being what it is, even hunting a farm may not deliver, and, when the Wildlife Techs tell us that the deer know where the food is, we do have to believe them. 

Certainly maintaining journals and observations can be very useful to make one a better hunter, but in terms of determining a sex ratio afield, those things are sort of like teats on a bull, unless you understand how to use the scientific metrics and factor in changing habitat conditions into the formula.

Again, campfire stories ain't gonna cut it.


----------



## Matt Musto

phade said:


> If the herd is so healthy in NY, then the only reason to implement it is for selfish reasons by people who want it. It's not always selfish...everyone comes from a point/belief, but it's not always selfish, on either side.


So what are your reasons for not wanting to pass up a yearling buck with three points? If you are a good hunter with ample time to fill a buck tag You would be a fan of AR. If you only get one or two days of hunting a year and only see one three pointer, I could see resenting the fact that you don't have any meat in the freezer. 

You two (doc) surely have some underlying reasons for your great disdain with AR. Possibly selfish, possibly afraid of change, why don't you tell us?

And again, I could care less what NY state does with regards to AR, I just wish they would stop bending out of state hunters over for a license:angry:


----------



## Matt Musto

phade said:


> Although I think the DEC tossed out some % numbers like 80 for or 20 strongly against to move on AR in an area, they want to wait until the science has been done from the ones in place.
> 
> I don't think that's a bad thing to do. Wouldn't you agree?


I wish PA would have used the same approach when they forced crossbows into the archery season, with the sole purpose of making more money.


----------



## VA2

Sorry Doc……………….I have said this before and I will say it again…………..Numbers that are but out by the DEC IMO do not hold water!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I totally disagree with their 2-1 doe to buck ratio that they stated in the PPP……….:thumbs_do


----------



## Matt Musto

kgtech said:


> i live in pa and we have antler restriction and i hate .too many poeple shoot first and ask did it have 4 point on side. i think you should vote NO on this matter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:angry::thumbs_do


Those people would be poachers not hunters


----------



## doctariAFC

phade said:


> Although I think the DEC tossed out some % numbers like 80 for or 20 strongly against to move on AR in an area, they want to wait until the science has been done from the ones in place.
> 
> I don't think that's a bad thing to do. Wouldn't you agree?


Yes, the criteria was strong support, over 67%, WITHOUT 20% or more strong opposition.

Yes, they want to wait for the science before moving forward. That's the responsible thing to do. 

R9 hold 25% of the big game hunters, and this region is darned near 100% opposed from an individual sportsmen perspective, and 100% opposed from the organized sportsmen perspective. This was again confirmed by the DEC at the Randolph meeting when one guy, who is not involved in the process, spoke up, and Spierto corrected him when he claimed the "majority" are for AR. Spierto informed him, no, quite the opposite. Every single county in R9, all 6 of 'em are 100% opposed to mandated AR. We favor voluntary, self-imposed limits/ choices and educating to encourage being a selective hunter.

And these 6 counties sell 25% of the big game licenses. So, in a way, VA2 is correct. 

Now, if the facts concerning the biological need changes, our position could change, too. But as it stands today, there exists no biological need to restrict hunters and regulate hunting pressure in NYS. Quite the opposite. We need more hunters and more opportunity.

Gotta love the campfire stories....


----------



## RonnieB54

In western part of NY this will work because there is more open land and not as many roads. Where I live this will not work because there are more deer killed by vehicles and not enough open land. In the past 10 years farmers have sold out to home builders and made big profits on this. When I put my house up on 25 acres there were only 5 houses on my road now there are over 30 new houses and has cut our hunting land in half. I have been to many meetings on this topic and people in my area are against this 100% because it is tough enough to get a shot at a buck during the gun season. Out west like Kansas i can see this working with all the open land and huge wheat fields or corn fields it is like having a big food plot in these places. Try telling someone that they can't shoot a spike up North like Wells Ny where they might be lucky to see a doe not alone a buck you will get the 3rd degree. There is not enough food for deer to get that big in parts of NY period. In the western part of NY if these guys want AR they can have it but where I live leave us be.


----------



## doctariAFC

VA2 said:


> Sorry Doc……………….I have said this before and I will say it again…………..Numbers that are but out by the DEC IMO do not hold water!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> I totally disagree with their 2-1 doe to buck ratio that they stated in the PPP……….:thumbs_do


Depends. The buck to doe ratio mentioned is 

ADULT BUCKS to ADULT DOES

and this is pre-season, and each season the ratio is fairly consistent.

Does not include yearlings or fawns.

You can discount the numbers till the cows come home, that is your perrogative. I wonder if the report stated the the ratio was 6:1, would you still make that claim? Something tells me you would be holding it up high.... But I am a cynic...

With 94% of the adult does being bred, the age structure is pretty solid. With 86% of the yearling does being bred, that means we do have pretty healthy buck numbers indeed. The 7% of the fawns being bred indicate early birth patterns and yearling bucks breeding, which is also pretty healthy.

How much healthier do you want it? Because it ain't gonna get much better. Hence, the reason why there is no biological BENEFIT to AR. Since we're in population control, not population reduction mode, there also exists no biological NEED.


----------



## VA2

This is a through the grapevine but what the He!!
I was told that the only reason that the AR program did not expand was…………………….a brother of a powerful person in NY and a group of friends did not want AR’s……………….So the program did not develop!!!!!!!
Like I said this was through the grapevine but to tell you the truth I believe it………


----------



## doctariAFC

RonnieB54 said:


> In western part of NY this will work because there is more open land and not as many roads. Where I live this will not work because there are more deer killed by vehicles and not enough open land. In the past 10 years farmers have sold out to home builders and made big profits on this. When I put my house up on 25 acres there were only 5 houses on my road now there are over 30 new houses and has cut our hunting land in half. I have been to many meetings on this topic and people in my area are against this 100% because it is tough enough to get a shot at a buck during the gun season. Out west like Kansas i can see this working with all the open land and huge wheat fields or corn fields it is like having a big food plot in these places. Try telling someone that they can't shoot a spike up North like Wells Ny where they might be lucky to see a doe not alone a buck you will get the 3rd degree. There is not enough food for deer to get that big in parts of NY period. In the western part of NY if these guys want AR they can have it but where I live leave us be.


WNY, especially R9, wants nothing to do with mandated AR. No worries.


----------



## doctariAFC

VA2 said:


> This is a through the grapevine but what the He!!
> I was told that the only reason that the AR program did not expand was…………………….a brother of a powerful person in NY and a group of friends did not want AR’s……………….So the program did not develop!!!!!!!
> Like I said this was through the grapevine but to tell you the truth I believe it………


I'll PM you why AR wasn't expanded.


----------



## DeerSlayer26

*?*



doctariAFC said:


> QDM, straight from QDMA, does not necessarily mean Antler Restrictions.
> Their program is more about habitat and herds to habitat.
> 
> And I don't have to guess - I know where the bigger bucks and does are.
> 
> In REGION 9!
> 
> Why?
> 
> Because we have the bomb habitat. DEC has conducted antler beam width studies, its in the report I posted a link to. What you SEE is not necessarily what it is. Kind of like deer density estimates per WMU. For instance, I'll use WMU 9H as the example. Deer densities desired in 9H, set by the CTF, is 3.5-4.5 Bucks per sq. mi. The harvest objective is within 10% of this objective. This means, when projecting a population density for that WMU, and the reliable factor the DEC has determined through science is a factor of 7. This means, when we are harvesting 3.5-4.5 bucks per sq mi, that deer densities in this WMU run between 24.5 and 31.5 deer per sq mi.
> 
> Does this mean EVERY SQ MI of this WMU holds between 24 and 31 deer? NO. But when we tally the square miles up and run the math the overall population density in that WMU is right there.
> 
> Where deer will be encountered and what is encountered depends on food and cover, not to mention time of day (sometimes them animals move during the wee small hours of the morning). Food concentrations will vary season to season. About the only thing "consistent" are farms, but crop rotation being what it is, even hunting a farm may not deliver, and, when the Wildlife Techs tell us that the deer know where the food is, we do have to believe them.
> 
> Certainly maintaining journals and observations can be very useful to make one a better hunter, but in terms of determining a sex ratio afield, those things are sort of like teats on a bull, unless you understand how to use the scientific metrics and factor in changing habitat conditions into the formula.
> 
> Again, campfire stories ain't gonna cut it.


I never said that QDM means antler restrictions! And I know what QDMA says,I'm a member.I said that QDM means a healthier herd and a healthier herd means bigger deer. Who doesn't want bigger deer? Body and antlers.


----------



## VA2

It's been withdrawn in its entirety," Major said of the plan that would have created three-points-a-side buck-hunting regulations in WMUs 3A, 4G, 40, 4P, 4R, 4S, 4W and 4X.


----------



## Matt Musto

VA2 said:


> Sorry Doc……………….I have said this before and I will say it again…………..Numbers that are but out by the DEC IMO do not hold water!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> I totally disagree with their 2-1 doe to buck ratio that they stated in the PPP……….:thumbs_do


+1 this is spot on


----------



## VA2

Support for antler restrictions was strongest (69.8 percent) in WMUs 3A and 4X. But that unit also saw 20.3 percent of hunters "strongly opposed" to the regulations.

WMUs 4O, 4P and 4W were also above the two-thirds yardstick at 67.5 percent, but hunters in those units also showed 22.1 percent were strongly opposed.


----------



## VA2

Come on you all………… we can sit and argue about this all day and nothing will come out of it…….Face it we have some individuals at upper-levels that are holding this thing back and there is nothing we can do about it………….


----------



## SticksandString

sounds like a lack of scouting and quality deer managment to me.


----------



## hyj

I am for it although I doubt we will ever see it widescale:thumbs_up
exempt the youth hunters
3 points on one side, that leaves PLENTY of opportunity, although it would force hunters to be quite shure of thier target. oops, thats a good thing as well.:thumbs_up
There are already some PUBLIC lands with this regulation, I spend 40 plus hours a week on one of them, and I believe it is showing good results. 
While i would support it, i would not cram it down anyones throat, there is enough of that going on. to each his own, but soap boxes are for politicians, and that i am not.


----------



## VA2

doctariAFC said:


> Why not habitat work? That is the only realsolution, yet not too many are pushing for what would benefit all wildlife, including deer?
> 
> Is it too much work? Are we too lazy? Do we believe the "magic pen" will make everything all good?


Habitat work will be too expensive and will only consist in some part of the state……….:thumbs_do


----------



## WNY Bowhunter

> QDM, straight from QDMA, does not necessarily mean Antler Restrictions.
> 
> Their program is more about habitat and herds to habitat.


Correct. QDM stands for Quality DEER Management, not trophy buck management. They're all about improving the entire deer herd, not just the antlered half of it. Bigger, older bucks are just a byproduct of a healthier, more balanced/natural herd. For the life of me, I can't think of a single reason why people would be against a program with these intentions?



> And I don't have to guess - I know where the bigger bucks and does are.
> 
> In REGION 9!


That is also correct. There aren't any big deer here in Region 8 (particularly in Steuben County). These are the two biggest bucks that I've seen all year. That monster six is going down if I get the chance to take him...:wink:. I sure hope that these two bruisers don't get in fight and wind up locked together...


----------



## vtec1

4 point per side would be nice:darkbeer:


----------



## vtec1

WNY Bowhunter said:


> Correct. QDM stands for Quality DEER Management, not trophy buck management. They're all about improving the entire deer herd, not just the antlered half of it. Bigger, older bucks are just a byproduct of a healthier, more balanced/natural herd. For the life of me, I can't think of a single reason why people would be against a program with these intentions?
> 
> 
> 
> That is also correct. There aren't any big deer here in Region 8 (particularly in Steuben County). These are the two biggest bucks that I've seen all year. That monster six is going down if I get the chance to take him...:wink:. I sure hope that these two bruisers don't get in fight and wind up locked together...


Great looking basket racks, impressive:wink:


----------



## DeerSlayer26

hey WNY why don't you post some pic's that will show R9 what a BIG deer is.LOL


----------



## doctariAFC

Matt Musto said:


> So what are your reasons for not wanting to pass up a yearling buck with three points? If you are a good hunter with ample time to fill a buck tag You would be a fan of AR. If you only get one or two days of hunting a year and only see one three pointer, I could see resenting the fact that you don't have any meat in the freezer.
> 
> You two (doc) surely have some underlying reasons for your great disdain with AR. Possibly selfish, possibly afraid of change, why don't you tell us?
> 
> And again, I could care less what NY state does with regards to AR, I just wish they would stop bending out of state hunters over for a license:angry:


My "underlying reason", as if its siome insideous conspiracy theory against you, is plain and simple

THE DESIRES AND POSITIONS OF THE HUNTERS IN REGION 9.

I have already told you why. If you cannot comprehend what it is that I have written, that isn't my problem. If you do not like what you're reading, and you do not accept it, that's on you. Do not sit there claiming I haven't answered the Q fully, because I have, as has the DEC biologists.

Perhaps you should learn the North American Wildlife Conservation Model?

http://www.rmef.org/Hunting/HuntersConservation/

This is the code we are all bound by, including the DEC. I suggest you study it. Its only worked for the last 110 years+, and has resulted in the greatest wildlife conservation model the world knows, to this very day.

And you may find it interesting to know a few things about me, since you think this is something personal.

1 - I self-limit my harvest. I have not ever harvest a bcuk that wasn't a 5 point. And I have many, mainly 8's.

2 - I am a very "traditional" hunter. This year I am splitting my bowhunting between my comound and a 75# draw Long Bow. During regular season I use a single shot, model 1885 45-70 with blackpowder loads, and I use a 54 cal sidelock percussion Hawken with hand-measured loads and round, patched ball. Open sights, no scopes.

3 - I could fart or blow a tin whistle as to what another hunter chooses to do, so long as it is legal. Doesn't affect me or my hunting and enjoyment thereof.

4 - I serve the sportsmen and women of Erie County (largest license selling county in NYS) and Region 9 (25% of hunters, 22% of freshwater anglers) at MY OWN EXPENSE. I serve as an elected officer in Erie County Federation, WNY Environmental Federation, I was appointed to Erie County Fisheries Advisory Board by County Exec Chris Collins, unanimously confirmed by EC Legislature, I was confirmed by the region as the R9 Rep to the NYSCC Big Game Committee, and most recently was asked by the DEC Director if I would let her submit my name for CFAB membership.

This stuff isn't about me. If it was, I wouldn't be involved as I am. I have lots of better things to do with my time, like hunt and fish, rather than contend with campfire stories, conspiracy theories, and tall tales all day long.

But this, again, isn't about me. Its about the kids not yet born and assuring the brightest future for our wildlife and hunting and fishing heritage for the next handful of decades.

You wanna demonize me? Go ahead. But I sure as heckfire don't see too many of you all stepping up and serving. Lots of whine, but the second you are needed to get involved, its crickets. Been there, done that, seen it time and time again. Did you attend one of your regional deer meetings? Do you purchase a habitat access stamp voluntarily??

Or do just like to gripe and whine because it makes you feel better?


----------



## doctariAFC

DeerSlayer26 said:


> hey WNY why don't you post some pic's that will show R9 what a BIG deer is.LOL


I've already posted a ton of monsters that came from R9 over the past few seasons. Like the LeVick ML record buck taken in 2007 in WMU 9A.

And one taken by Fran Gallagher in same WMU in 2006, which green scored 196 and is the second largest ever taken from that county.

And the 172" beast taken in 2007 out of 9H, Zoar Valley Public lands.

Or the 8 1/2 YO 12 point taken from 9R in 2007

I've got tons of pics. Take your pic. They're already posted in this forum, so I cannot put up reminders, but it is what it is.


----------



## doctariAFC

WNY Bowhunter said:


> Correct. QDM stands for Quality DEER Management, not trophy buck management. They're all about improving the entire deer herd, not just the antlered half of it. Bigger, older bucks are just a byproduct of a healthier, more balanced/natural herd. *For the life of me, I can't think of a single reason why people would be against a program with these intentions?*
> 
> 
> 
> That is also correct. There aren't any big deer here in Region 8 (particularly in Steuben County). These are the two biggest bucks that I've seen all year. That monster six is going down if I get the chance to take him...:wink:. I sure hope that these two bruisers don't get in fight and wind up locked together...


I ain't interested in intentions. I am interested in results and reality. The road to hades is paved with good intentions.

The nation elected Obama with "good intentions"

The anti's wanting chemical birth control, to them, are based on "good intentions".

The WHA and their darting deer for dollars notion was based on "good intentions"

I don't care about intentions, I care about results, positive, measureable results.


And the measurements and the science tells us AR isn't necessary, and intentions don't make anything "needed". Reality and provable conditions do.


----------



## JPN800

If you western NY guys only shoot big bucks anyway, Why would this bother you?


----------



## Cbell1

WNY Bowhunter said:


> For the life of me, I can't think of a single reason why people would be against a program with these intentions?


Because just seeing horns does not automatically mean you can spray the woods full of lead. (yes, I know this isn't everyone who is against it but its a big portion)
When we got it in PA, I was very skeptical however I am now a believer. It took a few years but we are seeing much larger deer.


----------



## doctariAFC

VA2 said:


> Habitat work will be too expensive and will only consist in some part of the state……….:thumbs_do


We may have some surprises in store. Stay tuned. At least for public lands.

And if the DEC can implement some of the recommendations made concerning improving H/A stamp sales while keeping it voluntary, we'll have the funding in spades.


----------



## doctariAFC

JPN800 said:


> If you western NY guys only shoot big bucks anyway, Why would this bother you?


Because it isn't one hunter's place to tell another hunter what they are allowed to harvest in terms of bucks.

Why do you want to tell another hunter that you have to harvest what YOU deem appropriate? They pay the same for a hunting license as you do, and have every right to choose what to harvest.

Why do you want to tell another to hunt the way you do, harvest what you do?

Considering the fact that zero biological benefit exists and zero biological need exists, the only reason is more big bucks for me today. Because I want to be like Lee and Tiffany and take 200" monsters, never mind the habitat I am hunting is crapola, its about getting everyone else out of my area so I have the big bucks for me.....

That's what it is all about. And the fact you will not wait for the pilot program to complete, rather you just want to rush, rush, rush... do it now, for me, today.

Kinda like Obama and Congress with Health Care. Push it through fast, before anyone knows the facts and the truth.

I prefer to defer to nature, slow and steady, eyes wide open. The issues extend far beyond your own here and now.


----------



## NEWYORKHILLBILLY

mine is in the mail:darkbeer:


----------



## phade

Matt Musto said:


> So what are your reasons for not wanting to pass up a yearling buck with three points? *If you are a good hunter with ample time to fill a buck tag You would be a fan of AR. * If you only get one or two days of hunting a year and only see one three pointer, I could see resenting the fact that you don't have any meat in the freezer.
> 
> You two (doc) surely have some underlying reasons for your great disdain with AR. Possibly selfish, possibly afraid of change, why don't you tell us?
> 
> And again, I could care less what NY state does with regards to AR, I just wish they would stop bending out of state hunters over for a license:angry:


That is a false statement and it represents someone after antlers. If you equate a good hunter with the size of horns on an animal's head that is harvested, then you have a skewed vision of what hunting is all about. Are you a trophy hunter only? I'm just callin' 'em likes I sees 'em.

The fact of the matter is the majority of hunters have few field days per season...which you acknowledge as a reason against AR - and that is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many reasons to not bring in AR statewide. Very little, if any, to make it statewide.


----------



## doctariAFC

phade said:


> That is a false statement and it represents someone after antlers. If you equate a good hunter with the size of horns on an animal's head that is harvested, then you have a skewed vision of what hunting is all about. Are you a trophy hunter only? I'm just callin' 'em likes I sees 'em.
> 
> The fact of the matter is the majority of hunters have few field days per season...which you acknowledge as a reason against AR - and that is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many reasons to not bring in AR statewide. Very little, if any, to make it statewide.


:amen:


----------



## Bo Hunter

So sad that everyone simply misses the problem behind this whole debate. Its education, tradition and ignorance. The attitude that you "have to get your buck". That killing a Doe is killing "next years deer". The guy that says "I'm just hunting to fill the freezer so I will shoot whatever I see" is using that excuse to kill the first deer he sees because he needs to kill. He doesn't "need" that meat. I would guess the average hunter spends a minimum of $200 per season on his license, ammo, gear, gas, travel etc. People that NEED the food, would just go spend $200 on food, and take their gun out and poach deer and eat them. They aren't buying licenses, camo, new guns, staying hotels, etc. They are shooting deer with a spotlight and eating them.

In our little fish bowl of property that we own, which is quite unique as far as terrain, and hunting pressure, we have had great success with QDM on 130 acres. I disagree with some of the statements that are said about small plots of land, how many mature bucks in so many acres etc.

The first year we owned our property, we were over run with Does. Luckily it corresponded with the year Doe Permits were handed out like candy. And we took advantage of it. I believe somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 mature does were taken off the property. We continued harvesting does the following years, and passed on yearling bucks. We had an "8 point to the ears" rule of thumb, but nothing set in stone. We have been doing this, along with habitat improvement, logging, and creation of food plots and cover. Once we started doing our food plots correctly - lime, fertilizer, quality seed, and real farming implements, LOOK OUT! The deer absolutely hammered them. This is our hobby, our thing. Its expensive, but its what we do - not everyone can afford to do it. Luckily, there are 3 of us, we have good jobs, and its something we enjoy spending our money on. Not realistic for many.

On our property, we've got photos of several mature bucks that we've seen many times in multiple locations, which leads me to believe they are as much a resident as the 3 point we have 800 trail cam photos of, just a bit more elusive, as mature bucks are. I've always watched the hunting shows and said, "Come on, when does a mature buck just stroll out into a field and start eating right in the middle of the day." My question has been answered - when there is good food there and he feels safe in doing so! Our rut activity already this year is out of this world. I've seen 8 different bucks this season. Ranging in age from 1-1/2 to 4-1/2, and I know there are 5-1/2 year olds there that no one sees until they shoot them... They are rubbing, scraping, sparring, and even doing a little chasing already. The hunting is so much better, and we see so much more action since we've started our "program".

Unfortunately, the Pro-AR side of the argumentcrew (which I'm not opposed to because I have a self imposed AR's anyway) comes across as a bunch of rack hungry Safari hunters. The opposition to AR's sounds like the pumpkin brigade army of lead slingers that give the first day of gun season its "war" reputation. The problem is, no one ever discusses the true benefits, and what REALLY needs to be done if you want to see an improvement to the size of the animals, the age structure, and ultimately antler size.

You find me a white-tail hunter that doesn't WANT to shoot a big buck, and I will show you a liar. That is every hunters quest - to get the monster buck. Its what keeps us coming back year after year. I'm not saying they will all wait for the big one, but I don't know of any hunters that are going to pass on a 150" 10 point because the meat is like shoe leather...

Here are some photos of our personal success. I've seen had all of these deer within bow range this season with the exception of the 10 point with the sticker on his G2. He's a cagey old buck! We won't talk about why the chocolate rack 9 point isn't dead....15 yards, no shot. :angry:


----------



## Bo Hunter

Another pic of the buck with the sticker point... He's an old pot belly huh?!


----------



## doctariAFC

Cbell1 said:


> Because just seeing horns does not automatically mean you can spray the woods full of lead. (yes, I know this isn't everyone who is against it but its a big portion)
> When we got it in PA, I was very skeptical however I am now a believer. It took a few years but we are seeing much larger deer.


proof is in the pudding my friend.

Pre-AR

PA had approx. 1 MIL Big Game Hunters, 86% Resident, 14% Non-Resident
According to USF&W Reports for PA in 2001

Post-AR

PA had approx. 900K Big Game Hunters, 89% Res, 11% Non-Res
According to USF&W Reports for PA in 2006


At the same time, NYS had

NY approx. 664K Big Game Hunters, 88% res, 12% non-res
according to USF&W reports for NY in 2001

Today, based on DECALS analysis for 2008

We have Approx 566K Big Game Hunters, 84% Res, 16% non-res
Based on DECALS license sales information by county for 2008/ 2009 license year

Based on 2006 USF&W Survey for NY in 2006
540K big game hunters, 86% res, 14% non res


Seems like NYS non-res hunting influence is on the rise. I have to get more granular info from DECALS, as to determine which state is driving the growth, or if it is static and the residents are bailing due to cost and change of opening day.

Some antecdotal information - speaking to Mercyhurst College Campus security guards, all of whom hunt, not a single one of them like the PA structure post HR efforts. In fact, 3 of them no longer hunt PA, they exclusively hunt NY.


----------



## Joe W.

Doc..........you just keep ignoring people who state that they are seeing more and bigger bucks in areas that have implemented AR's. You can't discount peoples personal experience .

You are also very absolute in your statements...."That will never happen while I am around" It must be a very small special interest group you rep because in any sampling of big game hunters in NY you are going to get some folks on each side of the issue.


----------



## str8sh2ter

*I agree...*



WNYBowhunter said:


> I oppose for the simple reason that we have enough rules already.
> I am sick and tired of people dictating how we should live our lives.
> The day my fun activity has even MORE restrictions, it loses it's luster.
> 
> No to AR, let people do what they want.
> If you want AR, practice them on your own property.
> Don't impose your views on others who don't care what you think.


I agreee with this guy.The regs. are to maintain and control the herd numbers mostly[they do a good job at that].We should have the right to choose.When did we start putting more emphasis on antlers than Meat and the Hunt anyways?


----------



## doctariAFC

Bo Hunter said:


> So sad that everyone simply misses the problem behind this whole debate. Its education, tradition and ignorance. The attitude that you "have to get your buck". That killing a Doe is killing "next years deer". The guy that says "I'm just hunting to fill the freezer so I will shoot whatever I see" is using that excuse to kill the first deer he sees because he needs to kill. He doesn't "need" that meat. I would guess the average hunter spends a minimum of $200 per season on his license, ammo, gear, gas, travel etc. People that NEED the food, would just go spend $200 on food, and take their gun out and poach deer and eat them. They aren't buying licenses, camo, new guns, staying hotels, etc. They are shooting deer with a spotlight and eating them.
> 
> In our little fish bowl of property that we own, which is quite unique as far as terrain, and hunting pressure, we have had great success with QDM on 130 acres. I disagree with some of the statements that are said about small plots of land, how many mature bucks in so many acres etc.
> 
> The first year we owned our property, we were over run with Does. Luckily it corresponded with the year Doe Permits were handed out like candy. And we took advantage of it. I believe somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 mature does were taken off the property. We continued harvesting does the following years, and passed on yearling bucks. We had an "8 point to the ears" rule of thumb, but nothing set in stone. We have been doing this, along with habitat improvement, logging, and creation of food plots and cover. Once we started doing our food plots correctly - lime, fertilizer, quality seed, and real farming implements, LOOK OUT! The deer absolutely hammered them. This is our hobby, our thing. Its expensive, but its what we do - not everyone can afford to do it. Luckily, there are 3 of us, we have good jobs, and its something we enjoy spending our money on. Not realistic for many.
> 
> On our property, we've got photos of several mature bucks that we've seen many times in multiple locations, which leads me to believe they are as much a resident as the 3 point we have 800 trail cam photos of, just a bit more elusive, as mature bucks are. I've always watched the hunting shows and said, "Come on, when does a mature buck just stroll out into a field and start eating right in the middle of the day." My question has been answered - when there is good food there and he feels safe in doing so! Our rut activity already this year is out of this world. I've seen 8 different bucks this season. Ranging in age from 1-1/2 to 4-1/2, and I know there are 5-1/2 year olds there that no one sees until they shoot them... They are rubbing, scraping, sparring, and even doing a little chasing already. The hunting is so much better, and we see so much more action since we've started our "program".
> 
> Unfortunately, the Pro-AR side of the argumentcrew (which I'm not opposed to because I have a self imposed AR's anyway) comes across as a bunch of rack hungry Safari hunters. The opposition to AR's sounds like the pumpkin brigade army of lead slingers that give the first day of gun season its "war" reputation. The problem is, no one ever discusses the true benefits, and what REALLY needs to be done if you want to see an improvement to the size of the animals, the age structure, and ultimately antler size.
> 
> You find me a white-tail hunter that doesn't WANT to shoot a big buck, and I will show you a liar. That is every hunters quest - to get the monster buck. Its what keeps us coming back year after year. I'm not saying they will all wait for the big one, but I don't know of any hunters that are going to pass on a 150" 10 point because the meat is like shoe leather...
> 
> Here are some photos of our personal success. I've seen had all of these deer within bow range this season with the exception of the 10 point with the sticker on his G2. He's a cagey old buck! We won't talk about why the chocolate rack 9 point isn't dead....15 yards, no shot. :angry:


That's a good post, and you've captured the essence. Habitat, habitat, habitat. Couple that with low pressure, and you'll have big deer and a lot of them.

But, as you also said, not everyone can afford to do these things, and with little management on state lands, many do not realize the food plots games are affecting deer movement for the guy who has to hunt state lands, again, because of affordability and proximity.

The "average" hunter doesn't spend $200/ yr. Its more like $1400/ yr. Seriously. 

And you are 1000000% correct about every hunter wanting a big buck. I completely agree with that sentiment, another no chit sherlock.

But what makes a trophy is in the eyes and hearts of the one doing the harvesting, and those monster 200"ers are bucks of a lifetime for a reason, and it isn't because the kid down the street, or the Amish buggy riders shot the ones you passed on. Its because the best habitat gets occupied by the most dominant animals, while the subordinates get the slim pickins.

Hunting is not about the horns. Its about the future for those not yet born to be assured of. 

Clearly this is something that is missed by the pro-AR side of the debate, despite claims of good intentions, the facts are NYS doesn't need mandated AR.

Do what you want voluntarily, and encourage others to voluntarily limit themselves too.

And, then, of course, we have myopathy. Meaning, for whatever reason many believe the Department's job is to manage the deer for the hunters. At least that's what I hear from the ill-informed.

Truth is the DEC is charged to manage deer, and all wildife for the PEOPLE OF NYS. This includes farmers, car insurance companies, property owners suffering damage, parents and kids and mitigation of disease exposure risks, etc., wildlife watchers, even bunny huggers and tree huggers. Hunters are the best assets the state has. But we are not the be all and end all of tools the DEC has to meet their charge under the law. See the expanding use of DMAP and DDP (which are FREE, btw).

We bring not only the most effective menas of wildlife management, but also the funding for same, which gives us a big say, but we're not the only concerns in the state. When agriculture concerns are suffering annual $60 MIL worth of crop damage at the hooves of deer alone, do you think they will just ignore the farmers, many of whom are struggling to survive and these problems are compounded by crop loss due to deer and other wildlife? e all gotta eat, and the damage affects prices of food at the market for all of us.

The DEC is asking for better, more flexible deer management tools for antlerless and all deer. They are looking for our help in developing hunter-based suburban and urban wildlife management programs, because we're effective and we fund the paying of bills. The state can be very pragmatic, but that doesn't mean they are solely beholden to us.

Now, you can dig a lot deeper into the entirity of wildlife management and deer management and what the dept contends with every single day, or you can stick the head in the sand and go :lalala: all day long, deluding yourself into believing they are solely there for hunters. Again, your choice.

But when you wake up one day and find out that non-lethal deer management programs coupled with DDP suddenly becomes the preferred way of managing deer, you'll only have your own short-sighted, selfish beliefs to blame. The Department is communicating very well at the moment. Can we listen? From the many posts in this forum, I have my doubts.

But the organized sportsmen and women do listen, and despite our own challenges, we at least have the information needed to understand the big pictures. Still, personal greed and agendas are in play. Something we in R9 are certainly fighting with good success.

Will AR's deliver what is "promised"? No. That has already been well documented and confirmed. Is AR needed? NO, again, well documented and confirmed. But it is up to all of us to set the future, just be very careful what you wish for, as you may get everything you want, and find out that by doing so you have lost everything you treasured the most.

That is reality. Get with it. We need to wait for the data from the pilot areas, first. That is responsible. We are responsible, right? Of course, so we should ALL AGREE on this requirement, first.

Once our eyes are wide open, we can then have an intelligent debate, and a productive discussion. Until that time, the debate is baseless feelings and personal desire. And none of those elements lead to benefit for wildlife. We already learned that lesson back over 100 years ago.

Eyes wide open, folks. No personal desire blindness. Eyes wide open.


----------



## doctariAFC

Joe W. said:


> Doc..........you just keep ignoring people who state that they are seeing more and bigger bucks in areas that have implemented AR's. You can't discount peoples personal experience .
> 
> You are also very absolute in your statements...."That will never happen while I am around" It must be a very small special interest group you rep because in any sampling of big game hunters in NY you are going to get some folks on each side of the issue.


Because it isn't what you SEE. I SEE big bucks every season. I also see little bucks, medium bucks and the like.

But the real tale is in the science, not in a hunter's opinion. Sorry to be so blunt, but a hunter's opinion and attitude changes like the wind.

It also depends on the habitat where you hunt, and the pressure the lands you hunt receives. I don't hear anything about that from the "seeing bigger deer crowd", do you? Do you hear about before AR the orange army was everywhere, now I have the woods to myself? Nope. Because that certainly would not serve to further the cause, would it.

I take those observations with a grain of salt, because there's always more to the rest of the story than "I am seeing bigger deer". Are you hunting public or private lands? Do you hunt near a farm or have food plots placed to keep deer interested in that property (at the potential expense of another hunter on another property?) Are you hunting big woods or small woodlots? What stage is the habitat succession in? What is the state of invasive plant species? 

See what I am saying?

And until the hunters in this region tell me otherwise, it won't happen, and I have a LOT of hunters telling me what position to take, and I know how to take a solid position better than most.


----------



## doctariAFC

To give further understanding, Erie County has a survey up to gauge the PRIORITIES of sportsmen and women in NYS.

Not the personal desires, but the PRIORITIES.

Of the choices for big game hunting, the important priorities are

More access to hunting lands
Increased opportunities for hunting
Antler Restrictions
Habitat Management on State Lands
Reduced DDP and DMAP
Better Button Buck Protection
One Buck per Hunter


All show respondents that are pretty close, not a single one of these priorities are "runaway" priorities. The top one, however, is increased access to hunting lands.

Now, we then have to balance what will benefit ALL HUNTERS, rather than one hunter vs another. What would benefit ALL hunters more?

Access to hunting lands?

Increased opportunity for hunters?

Mandated AR?

Habitat Management on State Lands?


Answer honestly, what would benefit the most hunters? And should we not work to benefit as many of the hunters (and in the process, all in NYS) as possible?

And how does what an individual hunter "sees" translate into benefit to all hunters?

Awaiting an honest answer....


----------



## Zemmer18

I attended one of the meetings and I have to say the hunters mentality shown at the meetings was the most disturbing issue of the night. Why on earth would you bi&$#@ at the biologist because you were turned down for a doe tag in region 7? And it wasn't just one hunter, there were at least 8 to 10 of them that asked the same thing. In a way, I wished an informed person such as Doc had been there to ask a few questions (short ones) so the biologist didn't think we were all a bunch of whining ********. 

One other thing that was brought up at the meeting that hasn't been discussed on here is the research paper that was conducted by Cornell. (there was a slide on it in the presentation)According to the paper or study conducted, the deer management program in NYS is on the verge of failure unless something is done soon. <--the biologists own words. So now are we to assume that the meetings are being held to get our input to help save the program and help them do their job? If so, the meeting we had was a waste of their time for the most part. Don't get me wrong, there were a few good questions and suggestions. 

One of the best suggestions was that if you want your voice or opinion heard, join a local club or organization. This to me spoke volumes. Doc states he represents 23% of the hunters in NY over and over and they have a loud voice. Why? Because they belong to a group and they hammer things out and then present the material as a group. Alot of their suggestions were on the questionaire handed out for all of us to fill out at the meeting. Sure you will have to do your research to see if the club feels the same as you on certain issues but remember we may not agree on all of them. And yes, I joined a local sportsman association recently. 

Good luck to all of you out there this year.


----------



## Bo Hunter

Unfortunately this game is also an industry. Improving the deer herd, and growing bigger bucks = higher land prices and LESS access to private hunting ground. It will bring in outfitters and paid hunts. It will create an influx of hunters into state lands. It also drives out the local country dweller that lives on a modest income because they simply cannot afford to buy property just for hunting - or for any other reason. At the same time, that would bring in a large amount of revenue to already struggling local businesses and restaurants, and the horrible NY state economy.

I called on 90 acres the other day, guy was local, and wanted $1500/acre and that was his bottom line no budge price. Sounds cheap to some I'm sure, but that is way more than any local resident here can afford to pay. And what drives up the price? A stinking deer!

I dunno, I love the sport, and I enjoy improving our land and watching the deer as a hobby. But the older I get, the less enamored I am with commercialization of the sport. It takes away what it has always been and is meant to be. Families and friends gathering together, enjoying a wood stove in a cabin, early mornings hunting, and hot chili when they return from the hunt, along with laughs and some ribbing. Seems society is losing sight of that all together.


----------



## buckfever1969

WNYBowhunter said:


> I oppose for the simple reason that we have enough rules already.
> I am sick and tired of people dictating how we should live our lives.
> The day my fun activity has even MORE restrictions, it loses it's luster.
> 
> No to AR, let people do what they want.
> If you want AR, practice them on your own property.
> Don't impose your views on others who don't care what you think.




I agree.The license fees are outrages.And now someone wants to tell me what I can kill.


----------



## Zemmer18

Bo Hunter said:


> Unfortunately this game is also an industry. Improving the deer herd, and growing bigger bucks = higher land prices and LESS access to private hunting ground. It will bring in outfitters and paid hunts. It will create an influx of hunters into state lands. It also drives out the local country dweller that lives on a modest income because they simply cannot afford to buy property just for hunting - or for any other reason. At the same time, that would bring in a large amount of revenue to already struggling local businesses and restaurants, and the horrible NY state economy.
> 
> I called on 90 acres the other day, guy was local, and wanted $1500/acre and that was his bottom line no budge price. Sounds cheap to some I'm sure, but that is way more than any local resident here can afford to pay. And what drives up the price? A stinking deer!
> 
> I dunno, I love the sport, and I enjoy improving our land and watching the deer as a hobby. But the older I get, the less enamored I am with commercialization of the sport. It takes away what it has always been and is meant to be. Families and friends gathering together, enjoying a wood stove in a cabin, early mornings hunting, and hot chili when they return from the hunt, along with laughs and some ribbing. Seems society is losing sight of that all together.



You want to see something sad - check out this piece of land 7.52 acres in Broome County. I drive past this overgrown field surrounded by hardwoods alot and it is electric during deer season (lots of chasing going on in that field) SO for kicks I wanted to see what they were asking. 

http://www.broomebyowner.com/real-e.../profile/?view=real-estate-profile&number=865

I was in awe. Make sure to do the math and see what they are charging per acre. Now granted this land is located in one of the richest towns in Broome County but it is only 7.52 acres on a country road.


----------



## doctariAFC

Zemmer18 said:


> I attended one of the meetings and I have to say the hunters mentality shown at the meetings was the most disturbing issue of the night. Why on earth would you bi&$#@ at the biologist because you were turned down for a doe tag in region 7? And it wasn't just one hunter, there were at least 8 to 10 of them that asked the same thing. In a way, I wished an informed person such as Doc had been there to ask a few questions (short ones) so the biologist didn't think we were all a bunch of whining ********.
> 
> One other thing that was brought up at the meeting that hasn't been discussed on here is the research paper that was conducted by Cornell. (there was a slide on it in the presentation)According to the paper or study conducted, the deer management program in NYS is on the verge of failure unless something is done soon. <--the biologists own words. So now are we to assume that the meetings are being held to get our input to help save the program and help them do their job? If so, the meeting we had was a waste of their time for the most part. Don't get me wrong, there were a few good questions and suggestions.
> 
> One of the best suggestions was that if you want your voice or opinion heard, join a local club or organization. This to me spoke volumes. Doc states he represents 23% of the hunters in NY over and over and they have a loud voice. Why? Because they belong to a group and they hammer things out and then present the material as a group. Alot of their suggestions were on the questionaire handed out for all of us to fill out at the meeting. Sure you will have to do your research to see if the club feels the same as you on certain issues but remember we may not agree on all of them. And yes, I joined a local sportsman association recently.
> 
> Good luck to all of you out there this year.


Yes, the antlerless management program and the declines in huntr numbers are compounding the issues.

Very good post. And yes, we are our own worst enemies. 

Thanks, and I did pose a couple Q's at the meeting last night, as well as stepping in when Q's were asked of the DEC that were better suited for a sportsman to answer. Especially one Q that was asked by a hunter concerning why in the R9 proposal the early ML season was limited to primitive only. Its to allow the DEC to evaluate an early antlerless season in a low impact setting as to help buy time in determining if it can be incorporated into the antlerless management program, without screwing up areas that have low or no DMP. Slow and steady, caution and care.

If you have not yet read the R9 proposal (which focuses on on REGULATORY action, not LEGISLATIVE action) you may be surprised to find out that tghis plan does address every concern and desire the DEC sees, and has been conveyed by the sportsmen groups. It may not be in the form some may have envisioned, but it accomplishes it all. Many worked on this one, all I did was put it together in a plan.

So everyone understands, Erie County has 58 member clubs, with a total membership of about 15,000 sportsmen and women. R9 has around 30,000 organized sportsmen and women combined, with a total license sales count last year of @ 136,000 BIG GAME hunters. I'd have to back out the non-res to get to the resident hunters in R9 (6 counties)

I am very happy you have joined a club and are getting involved. Thrilled is more like it. Hopefully you can not only attend the monthly club meetings, but also attend the county level meetings, too, as to understand how the organized system works, how to work with the system, develop a historical perspective, etc. Volunter to take committee chairs, become a delegate for your club, the respect and trust will come as you prove to the older guards that you are for real. That doesn't mean agreeing with everything they want, either. Believe me.

Also, as an FYI, another thing that we are working on, going to the access issues, is concerning the state parks. Cannot put into the ppsl, because its a different department, but the groundwork and necessity has been communicated to the DEC Director of FWMR (Riexinger) that we need the Dept to work with the parks dept to open up the parks for the first Sunday of eaerly archery and the first Sunday of Regular Season. I believe we can "emotionally blackmail" the parks into allowing this, as its "for the children", not to mention increased cabin rentals, which is all gravy to the parks Dept that time of year due to low staff, low overheard.

THis will be especially critical if we get the archery opener on C-Day weekend, with kids off school C-Day Monday. And, considering the State and local governments are the top employers in the state, all the hunting gubmint workers and teachers, etc, are off that day, too..... 

There are many reasons why the ppsl from R9 is structured the way it is. I urge everyone to support it, and offer up suggestions to make it better. Like, perhaps including primitive archery during the antlerless only primitive ML? Just as an example.


----------



## Bo Hunter

Good grief that's expensive! $60k and you've got nothing to live in yet! Thats exactly what I'm talking about!


----------



## Zemmer18

Bo Hunter said:


> Good grief that's expensive! $60k and you've got nothing to live in yet! Thats exactly what I'm talking about!


Yeah thats $7912.23 per acre for an overgrown field. Now thats sad right there.


----------



## doctariAFC

Bo Hunter said:


> Unfortunately this game is also an industry. Improving the deer herd, and growing bigger bucks = higher land prices and LESS access to private hunting ground. It will bring in outfitters and paid hunts. It will create an influx of hunters into state lands. It also drives out the local country dweller that lives on a modest income because they simply cannot afford to buy property just for hunting - or for any other reason. At the same time, that would bring in a large amount of revenue to already struggling local businesses and restaurants, and the horrible NY state economy.
> 
> I called on 90 acres the other day, guy was local, and wanted $1500/acre and that was his bottom line no budge price. Sounds cheap to some I'm sure, but that is way more than any local resident here can afford to pay. And what drives up the price? A stinking deer!
> 
> I dunno, I love the sport, and I enjoy improving our land and watching the deer as a hobby. But the older I get, the less enamored I am with commercialization of the sport. It takes away what it has always been and is meant to be. Families and friends gathering together, enjoying a wood stove in a cabin, early mornings hunting, and hot chili when they return from the hunt, along with laughs and some ribbing. Seems society is losing sight of that all together.


Phenomenal post.

Yes, the commericalization of hunting is certainly having an impact. Not necessarily a bad thing when it comes to hunting gear, bow, arrows, guns, ammo, camo, etc, as all those products carry the excise tax to support conservation, and each state gets a good chunk, based on licenses sold, from the Feds for conservation.

Trouble is the lands and land leasing. It is being compounded by property taxes. These $$ do not benefit conservation efforts, and are eating into the available $$ the average hunter has to spend. I dunno about you, but I'd rather spend most of my money on the trappings of the trade than to pay admission to get in the woods. And that cost of admission to a NY hunter is now 59% of your annual budget. The effects are felt in the lower income brackets, where in 2001 Hunters from HH making under $40K/ yr made up 29% of the hunters. In 1996 that group made up 24% of the hunters. Today (2006) not a single hunter is reported as coming from that income bracket. And we can see reductions in the $50K/ yr groups now, too.

This is another reason why we are opposed to mandated AR. The "promise" of big bucks on a parcel of land that you could once hunt for free with permission now costs a hunter a few thousand to access for 2 months out of the year. Food plot usage draws animals in, making the lease more attractive, pulling animals from poorly managed public lands, screwing the average or lower income hunter that has to hunt a state park or state forest. 

Lots going on, folks. Great post! It isn't all about seeing bigger deer. Phenomenal post!


----------



## bigrackHack

doctariAFC said:


> Now, we then have to balance what will benefit ALL HUNTERS, rather than one hunter vs another. What would benefit ALL hunters more?
> 
> Access to hunting lands?
> 
> Increased opportunity for hunters?
> 
> Mandated AR?
> 
> Habitat Management on State Lands?
> 
> 
> Answer honestly, what would benefit the most hunters? And should we not work to benefit as many of the hunters (and in the process, all in NYS) as possible?
> 
> And how does what an individual hunter "sees" translate into benefit to all hunters?
> 
> Awaiting an honest answer....


Wouldn't 1 & 2 be the same thing? I liked the idea of tax breaks for landowners that make land available to hunters.

Related....putting everything else aside, if you want hunting to have a future you _have_ to factor hunter satisfaction into the equation. By _your own numbers_ posted above, NY resident hunters have declined by 18%. Yes, there is more than one factor that plays into the equation, but could some of those numbers be accredited to hunter dissatisfaction and apathy?


----------



## Meleagris1

Vacant land in my neck of NY routinely sells for 10-20K an acre, and it has nothing to do with hunting, despite the fact that most of it is excellent deer habitat.


----------



## dbowhunter

vtec1 said:


> 4 point per side would be nice:darkbeer:


I would honestly like to see 4 points per side. 3 points per side we would still be shooting 1.5 year old deer. In some areas even a 4 pt per side could lead to shooting a 1.5 year old. It's only 1 year passing on the bucks that are 1.5 years old are more than likely be harvested the following year. Hey, I don't care what changes as long as something positive goes through. Everyone wants to shoot big bucks and have a heathier herd. I even did a poll a while back to see about all this meat hunter crap and the results were astonishing. Here was the question:

If a huge doe was on a trail 12yds broadside in front of you. You decide to shoot but you catch movement just as you are about to draw. You watch an beautiful 10pt (170+") coming down the same trail just 30 yards away and closing the distance. What would you honestly do? No you can't shoot both either!!! 

The results were that 80.76 % would wait for the buck even if they stated they would classify themselves as meat hunters. Most of the people that voted to shoot the doe instead of 170" buck were people in Ill, Iowa , and Kansas that stated in the poll that the 170" was still too small, and they would want to see it grow.

I will tell you alot of the people in western NY don't understand the hunting conditions in central/eastern NY. The only thing holding some positive changes are the people in charge who don't want to make the hunting better. They rather get paid for doing nothing. It wouldn't be bad if the hunting licenses went up $50 more dollars as long as my money is paying for something and making things better, not just putting more money in somebodys pocket.
And no Doctari, don't say were all ignorant or uneducated like you always do and tell me about the habitat because you know my reaction.


----------



## Les

Shoot whatever is a trophy to you. I'll do the same, thanks.


----------



## Meleagris1

Les said:


> Shoot whatever is a trophy to you. I'll do the same, thanks.


That is the beauty of a buck tag quota and lottery. If you draw a buck tag you can shoot whatever you want. :darkbeer:


----------



## dbowhunter

Meleagris1 said:


> That is the beauty of a buck tag quota and lottery. If you draw a buck tag you can shoot whatever you want. :darkbeer:


+1 Another way would be first tag either sex (with antler restriction) and over the counter antlerless. I guess we don't live in a democratic society because the way I see the results from the DEC meetings 70-85% of the hunters want some sort of control put in place. The worst part of everyones argument is that they say they are happy with shooting a 1.5 year old, but would shoot a bigger buck if given the chance. With this state mandate everyone would be allowed this opportunity. I don't see what all the fuss and argument is about.

I'm sure everyone knows why there is a limit on the size of game fish. They don't have any problem dealing with this at all. It's exactly the same thing and with the same reasoning. Imagine what are fisheries would be like if you could keep every bass, trout, and salmon for example. *Hence the length restriction!!!!*


----------



## gjs4

Why do any threads on NY ARs get moved on this darn forum...... must have something to do with Doctari


----------



## Les

If I did not get drawn for a tag, I would not buy a license.
That results in fewer license sales. Lower revenue.


----------



## Meleagris1

Les said:


> If I did not get drawn for a tag, I would not buy a license.
> That results in fewer license sales. Lower revenue.


Many states require that hunters buy a non refundable license in order to enter the drawing, therefore no lost revenue.


----------



## JPN800

dbowhunter said:


> +1 Another way would be first tag either sex (with antler restriction) and over the counter antlerless. I guess we don't live in a democratic society because the way I see the results from the DEC meetings 70-85% of the hunters want some sort of control put in place. The worst part of everyones argument is that they say they are happy with shooting a 1.5 year old, but would shoot a bigger buck if given the chance. With this state mandate everyone would be allowed this opportunity. I don't see what all the fuss and argument is about.
> 
> I'm sure everyone knows why there is a limit on the size of game fish. They don't have any problem dealing with this at all. It's exactly the same thing and with the same reasoning. Imagine what are fisheries would be like if you could keep every bass, trout, and salmon for example. *Hence the length restriction!!!!*


Great point on the lenght restriction. I didn't think of that. I never heard of anyone complaining abour that.


----------



## Les

Meleagris1 said:


> Many states require that hunters buy a non refundable license in order to enter the drawing, therefore no lost revenue.


I can guarantee such programs do impact overall big game hunting license sales in those states. That fact for sure impacts revenue. And the prices of those licenses and quota permits must make up that difference.

Those who want big racks just need to hunt for them. They are out there.
All other license holders can make their own determination what is a trophy to them individually.
Additional legislated restrictions do nothing for the retention of or the growth of properly licensed participants.


----------



## Meleagris1

As I said, such a system allows hunters to choose their "trophy" without restriction. Buck tag quotas are set in many states all over the country, and have been for years and its my understanding that hunting is just as popular in those parts of the country now as it ever has been, maybe even more popular. :darkbeer:


----------



## dbowhunter

Meleagris1 said:


> As I said, such a system allows hunters to choose their "trophy" without restriction. Buck tag quotas are set in many states all over the country, and have been for years and its my understanding that hunting is just as popular in those parts of the country now as it ever has been, maybe even more popular. :darkbeer:


Meleagris is correct. I know a large portion of hunters who hunt outside of NY, regarless of the tag price and tag draw. Could someone please tell me about everyones concern of our hunting license revenue. If it was invested back in our sport I would care more, but like I asked in an earlier post, What are we getting for our money? What is all of the extra money generated this year doing for us? Nothing is being done to make our state better. Those of you who never hunted elsewhere, wouldn't believe it if we told you.
I think we can all agree something has to be done. Here's proof, try to do a swap hunt to hunt elk, moose, antelope, mule deer, *prairie dogs*, ect.... more than likely it's not going to happen. I know things are a bit different in Western NY, but I believe in "continous improvement-all the time"


----------



## Les

Meleagris1 said:


> As I said, such a system allows hunters to choose their "trophy" without restriction. Buck tag quotas are set in many states all over the country, and have been for years and its my understanding that hunting is just as popular in those parts of the country now as it ever has been, maybe even more popular. :darkbeer:


Why set a quota at all? Are we missing some data here that tells us there are not enough bucks of all age classes to support a single buck tag per license issued? AR seems to be the original topic of the thread, and it is a completely different subject and program.


----------



## Meleagris1

Les said:


> Why set a quota at all? Are we missing some data here that tells us there are not enough bucks of all age classes to support a single buck tag per license issued? AR seems to be the original topic of the thread, and it is a completely different subject and program.


Yes there is plenty of data in much of NY that tells us that bucks are not reaching upper age classes as a result of too much hunting pressure. Right now the DEC issues unlimited buck tags. If 1 million hunters wanted to buy their "one" buck tag, NY would sell 1 million tags, and every tag holder could then attempt to fill their tags in the same WMU. This is exactly why many of the more popular units and more populated areas are experiencing this problem, especially eastern NY. Buck tag quotas are a far better way of dealing with this problem than AR's for a number of reasons. It is a different solution for the same problem and is in fact mentioned on the DEC's literature regarding antler restrictions and has been brought up and discussed at their latest public meetings regarding deer management and AR's.


----------



## bigbuckdn

I was pro antler restriction untile last week seen a 4 point had to be 160lbs with maybe 10 total inches of antler smallest 4 point I ever seen no 1 1/2 year old deer this reject should be shot its genes will do more harm than good
we don't the law to manage bucks the hunters should be doing it them selfs


----------



## dbowhunter

*Let's change something.*



Les said:


> Why set a quota at all? Are we missing some data here that tells us there are not enough bucks of all age classes to support a single buck tag per license issued? AR seems to be the original topic of the thread, and it is a completely different subject and program.


You're right we should stick to antler restriction and I am all for it. With all of the data compiled in our Sull. and Ulster counties, along with PA, count me in. Anything we can do to improve our herd we should do it.

Here is some data though it is real rough as I have not crunched the numbers this year. 
470,000 big game hunters of which each can aquire 2 buck tags(with added bow/ muzzloader) thats 940,000 bucks that can be taken. If you look at the previous years buck take it has been around 170,000 across the state. Now if you ask me there is not enough buck for 1 hunter each let alone 2!!!! I also know we do not have a good deerr population count or deer take count system in place either.


----------



## Les

No changes to the DDP and DMAP programs? Might as well face into the wind when urinating.
Hunters don't need the state to tell them what a "trophy" deer is. Especially with their weak data gathering methods.


----------



## dbowhunter

Les said:


> No changes to the DDP and DMAP programs? Might as well face into the wind when urinating.
> Hunters don't need the state to tell them what a "trophy" deer is. Especially with their weak data gathering methods.


Yea, like they don't have tell us bag limits, seasons or even lengths of fish we can keep. Face it, laws are put in place because humans cannot control their actions. A lot of guys still can't even with laws in place. We have to have a law that tells us that killing someone is illegal and it's called murder and people don't even follow that. Hey, I don't like to be controlled but if it means a definately better future for our sport count me in. I wouldn't care if they closed buck season down for a couple of years because you have to visualize the results,(look at the big picture).


----------



## Les

dbowhunter said:


> I wouldn't care if they closed buck season down for a couple of years because you have to visualize the results,(look at the big picture).


Then DDP and DMAP would be shooting bigger racked bucks. And bigger racks would be seen on road kills.
It's more about managing deer numbers statewide than it is about managing rack growth.
That's the simple fact.


----------



## sits in trees

Haaaa, looks like another NY hunter pissin contest with dicktari leading the charge!!!


----------



## Limerick3D

My observation has been since the AR went into effect down here in Pa we have seen a real improvement in the size and quality of racks. The best way to get good racks is to shoot older deer. Age is the bigest factor. By opening up the number of Doe tags as liberally as they have, there are still plenty if chances to get meat. If meat is what's important to a two day a season hunter then they can likely and easily get a doe. If a rack is important too, then the size quickly grows in a couple years. 
Why a Opening day only hunter who claims they want meat insists in shooting a spike or forkhorn is beyond me. In my whole life I only shot one 4 point (first buck) and one three point (second buck). Since then, I pass on any buck that's not a wallhanger. But I do take does for the meat. I've passed on several nice bucks with one missing antler (one a big six on the only one he had!). I've had big bucks with both broken off chasing does around my trees all day. I won't shoot. I just hope they try that next year with bone still on their heads.
Pa's reduction in hunter numbers are due to changing society. People don't learn it from parents the way they used to, and children are often demonized for hunting if they go to urban and suburban schools. It's not PC, and that's just the way it is these days. 
Pa will likely be opening Sundays to hunting in the next couple years. Then they can have Opening Day for Bear and Buck on a Saturday instead of a Monday. That will help the numbers quite a bit I bet.
Gary Alt was right about reducing the numbers of does as much as possible, and increasing the age of harvested bucks. Sometimes you have to delay gratification, and not insist on busting that nut early, and often.


----------



## Tax Lawyer

Limerick3D said:


> My observation has been since the AR went into effect down here in Pa we have seen a real improvement in the size and quality of racks. The best way to get good racks is to shoot older deer. Age is the bigest factor. By opening up the number of Doe tags as liberally as they have, there are still plenty if chances to get meat. If meat is what's important to a two day a season hunter then they can likely and easily get a doe. If a rack is important too, then the size quickly grows in a couple years.
> Why a Opening day only hunter who claims they want meat insists in shooting a spike or forkhorn is beyond me. In my whole life I only shot one 4 point (first buck) and one three point (second buck). Since then, I pass on any buck that's not a wallhanger. But I do take does for the meat. I've passed on several nice bucks with one missing antler (one a big six on the only one he had!). I've had big bucks with both broken off chasing does around my trees all day. I won't shoot. I just hope they try that next year with bone still on their heads.
> Pa's reduction in hunter numbers are due to changing society. People don't learn it from parents the way they used to, and children are often demonized for hunting if they go to urban and suburban schools. It's not PC, and that's just the way it is these days.
> Pa will likely be opening Sundays to hunting in the next couple years. Then they can have Opening Day for Bear and Buck on a Saturday instead of a Monday. That will help the numbers quite a bit I bet.
> Gary Alt was right about reducing the numbers of does as much as possible, and increasing the age of harvested bucks. Sometimes you have to delay gratification, and not insist on busting that nut early, and often.


It would be great if this was the common hunter mentality. :cheers:


----------



## dbowhunter

Limerick3D said:


> My observation has been since the AR went into effect down here in Pa we have seen a real improvement in the size and quality of racks. The best way to get good racks is to shoot older deer. Age is the bigest factor. By opening up the number of Doe tags as liberally as they have, there are still plenty if chances to get meat. If meat is what's important to a two day a season hunter then they can likely and easily get a doe. If a rack is important too, then the size quickly grows in a couple years.
> Why a Opening day only hunter who claims they want meat insists in shooting a spike or forkhorn is beyond me. In my whole life I only shot one 4 point (first buck) and one three point (second buck). Since then, I pass on any buck that's not a wallhanger. But I do take does for the meat. I've passed on several nice bucks with one missing antler (one a big six on the only one he had!). I've had big bucks with both broken off chasing does around my trees all day. I won't shoot. I just hope they try that next year with bone still on their heads.
> Pa's reduction in hunter numbers are due to changing society. People don't learn it from parents the way they used to, and children are often demonized for hunting if they go to urban and suburban schools. It's not PC, and that's just the way it is these days.
> Pa will likely be opening Sundays to hunting in the next couple years. Then they can have Opening Day for Bear and Buck on a Saturday instead of a Monday. That will help the numbers quite a bit I bet.
> Gary Alt was right about reducing the numbers of does as much as possible, and increasing the age of harvested bucks. Sometimes you have to delay gratification, and not insist on busting that nut early, and often.


+1 
I know antler restrictions will help in NY also. Thanks for your very valuable comments.:thumbs_up


----------



## Limerick3D

dbowhunter said:


> +1
> I know antler restrictions will help in NY also. Thanks for your very valuable comments.:thumbs_up


The Game Commission in Pa has also gone to the expense of fencing off some acreage after they log it in the State Forests to keep the deer out. The profusion of growth inside the fence is amazing compared to the browsing damage the deer do outside of it. There are areas logged off where I hunt that were logged as much as 30 years ago that have very poor regeneration. I never realized how much damage deer do until I saw those test areas. It's just really amazing.


----------



## bigscott

dbowhunter said:


> Yea, like they don't have tell us bag limits, seasons or even lengths of fish we can keep. Face it, laws are put in place because humans cannot control their actions. A lot of guys still can't even with laws in place. We have to have a law that tells us that killing someone is illegal and it's called murder and people don't even follow that. Hey, I don't like to be controlled but if it means a definately better future for our sport count me in. I wouldn't care if they closed buck season down for a couple of years because you have to visualize the results,(look at the big picture).


amen to that !!!! i have seen the quality of hunting go downhill in the past few years . something needs to be put in place


----------



## bigscott

Limerick3D said:


> My observation has been since the AR went into effect down here in Pa we have seen a real improvement in the size and quality of racks. The best way to get good racks is to shoot older deer. Age is the bigest factor. By opening up the number of Doe tags as liberally as they have, there are still plenty if chances to get meat. If meat is what's important to a two day a season hunter then they can likely and easily get a doe. If a rack is important too, then the size quickly grows in a couple years.
> Why a Opening day only hunter who claims they want meat insists in shooting a spike or forkhorn is beyond me. In my whole life I only shot one 4 point (first buck) and one three point (second buck). Since then, I pass on any buck that's not a wallhanger. But I do take does for the meat. I've passed on several nice bucks with one missing antler (one a big six on the only one he had!). I've had big bucks with both broken off chasing does around my trees all day. I won't shoot. I just hope they try that next year with bone still on their heads.
> Pa's reduction in hunter numbers are due to changing society. People don't learn it from parents the way they used to, and children are often demonized for hunting if they go to urban and suburban schools. It's not PC, and that's just the way it is these days.
> Pa will likely be opening Sundays to hunting in the next couple years. Then they can have Opening Day for Bear and Buck on a Saturday instead of a Monday. That will help the numbers quite a bit I bet.
> Gary Alt was right about reducing the numbers of does as much as possible, and increasing the age of harvested bucks. Sometimes you have to delay gratification, and not insist on busting that nut early, and often.


great post !!


----------



## Ogredude43

*Just my humble opinion*

I have watched several different very large bucks over the last few decades and the "methods" of hunting them by our peers. I think that this is and should remain an individual choice. I am not adverse to AR but I see the downside in too many cases. Someone (or group) sees a large buck and ties up all the land anywhere near it. At which point, they hunt the deer by any and every technique legal or illegal known to man. If this were a perfect world or there was not so much land tied up in posted or leased situations, it might work. The statement regarding the number of bucks taken versus the number of tags allotted just states that there are fewer hunters and or less land available to hunt. When large blocks of land are taken out of the picture, it diminishes the take. These deer are not stupid they know where to go when the shooting starts. I hunt exclusively around my hometown a small town in Western NY Finger Lakes to be exact. There is less land available to hunt every year but the DMAP and nuisance permits continue to flow. So are we looking at all the venues for restriction and the parity to hunters, who by the way pay for their licenses? What about requiring large block land owners to allow a restricted number of hunters on their properties instead of shoot whatever deer is on your property the day you choose to fill the nuisance permits or even allowing for DMAPs instead of nuisance permits at all? All that said..... There are more problems with the management of game than Antler Restriction. Not looking for an argument but these points are not in any of the posts and need to be considered as well.


----------



## vns

Well in the ny hunting book picked up at walmart is talks about talking to ur neighbors u hunt around about doing some managment stuff. I kind of like the earn a buck idea. But i think most people will kill anything that moves with there 15 man drives pack the meat out and its a done deal. Theres alot of people that dont check there deal i know where i live i can kill a deer a day and get away with it. But i do shot 1.5year old bucks for the simple reason i dont get doe tags and we eat what we shoot. If i don't shoot what i do these so called city boys will shoot it and most like wound it. I am actually starting my wall of tight antler deer. Up to a wopping 3.There a gift from god and everyone should be happy with what they shoot. 

I know some place lik GA some counties they have a rule about one antlered must be 4 points.


----------



## sawtoothscream

i kinda think we need it but at the same time i really dont care about the size of the horns. i like the meat.

whats the restriction size?


----------



## doegirl

I'm soon to be a NY'er, and I can't help to compare the situation with that of my home state Ohio.
Ohio is a smaller state. We kill just as many deer as NY does. That's were the similarities stop.
Ohio has a statewide one buck rule. One you're done. Want to burn you tag on a yearling, knock yourself out, but that's it. Archery season is 4 months long. Gun and muzzleloader seasons total 13 days.  Centerfire rifles not permitted. Quite a bit of difference than NY, that's for sure. I think NY, even eastern NY, has the potential to grow big deer. Some painful changes will have to be made to make that a reality....


----------



## sawtoothscream

doegirl said:


> I'm soon to be a NY'er, and I can't help to compare the situation with that of my home state Ohio.
> Ohio is a smaller state. We kill just as many deer as NY does. That's were the similarities stop.
> Ohio has a statewide one buck rule. One you're done. Want to burn you tag on a yearling, knock yourself out, but that's it. Archery season is 4 months long. Gun and muzzleloader seasons total 13 days. Centerfire rifles not permitted. Quite a bit of difference than NY, that's for sure. I think NY, even eastern NY, has the potential to grow big deer. Some painful changes will have to be made to make that a reality....


we have big deer. i have seen so many giants its not even funny. just never get a shot. 2 years ago me and my uncle had a buck come chasing doe during the peak of the rut.

this deer was a monster would go over 150 easy. he went to illinios and said he never saw one deer there bigger than that brute we had come through. I dont know where it went never saw it again. a guy we know what a 140" 8 point that dress at 200#. 

we see some big deer but its not as common as the mid west. but still every year we see a few dandies during the rut.


----------



## xshedhunterx

*personal preference*

I like AR but I also pass on deer that meet the restrictions if a person I'm hunting with shoots him great. Just remember for every few I let walk maybe one will live to meet my personal preference.
Remember if you like shooting bucks and your proud of your kill that is enough
for those who don't agree good luck playing the lottery so you can buy your own land and do as you please as I hope to do.
Those bucks that make it are there, they are just harder to hunt and I may go without a buck for passing on them my choice, but there will always be does for meat


----------



## alwayslookin

*This wil never go away.....*

At a seminar in the Southern Tier I was privy to a group of guys who did a study that showed almost 70 percent of surveyed hunters in 7S supported AR's......they got mad when I told them...."If 70% PRACTICED what they support....it would be a whole different ball game."

Realistically....and I have posted on this before......we need to:

1. Reduce buck harvest in areas where they are over the target harvest for the DMU.....I think the best way is to only allow a second buck on a fee based tag, valid only in DMU's who are below target harvest. Antler Restrictions are not biologically supported in much of the state. I would agree to an "East of 81 /South of 90" rule.....but then again.....those hunters have not shown that they would significantly reduce deer populations in many of those areas when given the chance....take away a buck....they may hunt somewhere else......tough to tell. Not ALL areas , but there are some problem areas in that part of the state....and I live there.

2. Reduce the available Antlerless tags on Public land by going to a Public Land/Private Land DMP system...and for gosh sakes, extend the landowner tags to immediate family.

3. Eliminate Crop Damage Permits for landowners who do not allow access to their property. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that a landowner who wants to be allowed this State approved system, must also exhaust all available options presently available in the same State system. The land is theirs , the deer are not.

4. Eliminate all non DMU specific antlerless harvest......if you can't regulate it, you can't control it. Adjust the # of DMP's to fit your target harvest, period. Too many antlerless deer are harvested with a ML , simply because people can fill ANY tag, ANYWHERE.....thus, local populations can be devastated...with no DMP being issued. I believe this law accounts for the significant increase in ML tag sales, and also to the significant decline in the fee based antlerless tag applications (why would I buy a tag, when every tag I own is good wherever I want to hunt.).

5. Personally....shorten the gun season....concentrate the pressure into 9-12 days....then have a 3 day buck season for ML....or go to a primitive season.

While I practice AR's in Chenango/Schoharie/ and Cortland Counties......the single biggest reason for failure is pressure....the second is not as some have stated "weekend hunters".....it is guys who are local , and kill a deer for Uncle Ned, Aunt Mary, and Cousin Bob.....I grew up here, and it has been prevalent, as has been a "camp meat" mentality.

IA, KS, NE, ILL, OH, etc.., none of them have the hunting pressure, winter, season length , or weapons choices we have here. Most of them have multiple buck laws for residents. The key is pressure....if you don't reduce it....you will not let bucks age. None of them have antler restrictions either.

For the sake of hunting......how do you continue the tradition without opportunity.....


----------



## dbowhunter

*Change Something!!!!*

I agree with alwayslookin, but I would welcome any change to improve the habitat or herd. I think it's ridiculous to pay more money for tags/licenses with no improvement or change.


----------



## sits in trees

you guy's can put all the spins on this you like, i am a hunter from 3J, the first DMU to have AR and all i can say is it's working big time, bigger bucks, better herd! it's been in effect for about 4 years now and it's great, so get off the whole habitat, or just learn some qdm balony bandwadon because the results are in and you arent going to get biggers bucks in NY state any other way with this amount of success!


----------



## NEWYORKHILLBILLY

I am all for the AR sure hope they go state wide with it.:darkbeer:


----------



## rocklocker2

*AR sucks*

since PA did it we get a ton of out of state hunters coming to ny to hunt.personally i cant eat those damn horns so i just try to fill the freezer.


----------



## dbowhunter

*I ask this to all of the so called "meat" hunters!*



rocklocker2 said:


> since PA did it we get a ton of out of state hunters coming to ny to hunt.personally i cant eat those damn horns so i just try to fill the freezer.


rocklocker, I was just wondering since you cant eat the antlers anyway just say a 4.5 year old doe was at 12yds broadside and a 2.5 yr 10pt buck coming in 15 yds behind her (so they weigh about the same) on the same runway. What would you do? Shoot the doe or wait for the buck? You probably can't shoot both since they are so close together.


----------



## Yellowfin

We need to stop focusing on this garbage and start working on getting more gun owners, hunters, and supporters on our side to fight against the problems of too little rights in this state and too much NYC influence. NYS apparently has some odd form of camo'd myopia that is in bad need of curing.


----------



## whitehunter2

rocklocker2 said:


> since PA did it we get a ton of out of state hunters coming to ny to hunt.personally i cant eat those damn horns so i just try to fill the freezer.


i'm sure you can prove this?:wink:


----------



## alwayslookin

*True*



Limerick3D said:


> The Game Commission in Pa has also gone to the expense of fencing off some acreage after they log it in the State Forests to keep the deer out. The profusion of growth inside the fence is amazing compared to the browsing damage the deer do outside of it. There are areas logged off where I hunt that were logged as much as 30 years ago that have very poor regeneration. I never realized how much damage deer do until I saw those test areas. It's just really amazing.


But that regeneration is with ZERO animal interface....remember, if there are deer even travelling THROUGH...they find the food source, as will others, and it does not take long for that food source to be depleted.
Also, if it is on a South facing slope....the winter browsing is intense.
Also, all regeneration is not equal.
The mismanagement of forests in the mid 1900's left a lot of the timber high graded, with no real means to reproduce a balanced forest. Now the forest managers are trying to turn that around or manage it for profit (not necessarily the same methods or goals)
Be very careful of perspective......they create an obvious result, from a situation that is not repeatable in the wild, thus creating the illusion that the intended result is the norm. Kinda like lighting a fat guys pants on fire and remarking how fast he can move. My guess is most fat guys on't light their pants on fire anyway....so it is a moot point. Most landowners will not fence in their timber....so they want an intense reduction in deer #'s, their benefit, not ours or the deer's. They are only showing you the MAXIMUM regenerative capacity of the forest, and in turn are REDUCING the available forage to the deer to some capacity, which begs the question......does this put excessive pressure on the forest OUTSIDE the fence??? IN much of PA, herd reduction was approaching a "critical mass" need...AR's and herd reduction were the result. Most of NY is not at that stage.

I do not disagree with your premise that AR's and herd reduction/balance were and continue to be priorities in PA's long term strategy. Productive for their intended purpose, also.

In all reality, many believed PA's deer herd was at the brink of a virtual collapse when Alt instituted his reg changes......I tend to agree that that was a strong likelihood. NY has areas that are exhibiting the same stress precursors....mostly in the Adirondacks, Catskills, and SE New York. But a statewide restriction on age structure is not a necessity in a lot of the state, thus my previous comments on AR's and more changes.

Understand that one of the STRONGEST oppositions that we face as deer hunters is the Forestry lobbyists, second only to the Agricultural lobbyists,
Those two sectors control the VAST majority of available hunting land...and when push comes to shove, their goals are to reduce deer numbers, and increase profitability. DO NOT THINK I AM SAYING THEY ARE OUR ENEMIES....as ultimately, they are on our side. But their goals, and our goals do not always cover a parallel track. This, in addition to the simple fact that there are a LOT (read vast majority, and look at the reaction of PA hunters) of hunters who are happy with NO AR's, making it more difficult for us to present a unified front, it presents the picture in an adversarial context.

Make no bones about it, there is also a caveat in the system that the DEC uses.....THEY CAN ONLY SUPPORT CHANGES IN LEGISLATION BASED UPON BIOLOGICAL FACTS AND NECESSITY.....re read NECESSITY. The court of public opinion is not used by the powers that be in the way we would like it....mostly to prevent the bunny huggers from forcing public referendum (see CA Mountain Lion Hunting Ban). They can usually find a way to add/remove restrictions based loosely on these statutes, but will always try to implement them around a form of legislative action.

Bottom line.....preach to your neighbor.....it is by far the surest way to alter the herd structure in the short term, then work on presenting a case to the other strong lobbyists to go WITH you to push for the reform, but understand that you may not get the change you WANT.

For the record, I support and PRACTICE voluntary AR's.
This post is to provoke thought as much as action.
Thanks for listening.


----------



## greenboy

i hunt southerntier 9h-9p areas-not for AR bs. 35 years hunting deer here. there are bigger an more bucks now... we do not need the state telling us anything. rules from eastern end of the state... we manage are land have the deer, i plant food plots. save an grow apple trees,an post my land to keep, if its brown its down guys out.so if u can by land an run it your way do it.yes pass AR so jackliters can shoot big buck at nite,pass AR so u can take crap from ny city hunters telling us how to live we are 2 nd. class people of ny.anyway... sorry that is how i feel


----------



## Reelrydor

We need more enforcement too! See my issues at the "NYDEC deer season tickets issued thread".:sad:


----------

