Doc

Pretty darn consistent poll. They don't usually come out all that unified.

Having had a small stroke (no lasting effects), I try to compromise between pure walking, and riding. I live at the base of what I have nick-named "Cardiac hill". We did lose a neighbor to a heart attack on that hill, so it is aptly named. So unless I am still-hunting my way up the hill, I take the ATV. I drive to just under the ridge of the hill and park and then start walking quite a ways back in. In the pre-dawn hours, that keeps me from getting all sweated up, and the machine is silent for at least a half hour while I quietly go up over the lip of the hill and back to my stand up on the level hilltop. The last couple of years, I have used the ATV for taking the deer off the hill when possible. During gun season, we usually have a bit of snow on the ground, and that makes the hill a bit treacherous for ATVs. It can and has turned into a bobsled. So when there is too much snow, I just take a very slow, post daybreak still-hunt up the killer hill and across the top. I don't have any problem with the use of ATVs, even for the youngsters as long as it doesn't interfere with someone else's hunt.

Oh come on. Where's your sense of fun. Don't you like the carnival atmosphere where you get all dressed up in your blaze orange finery wave at all the guys as they stumble past your stand? Look, your getting too hung up on all the skill and challenge of actually studying the habits of an un-stressed herd and trying to pattern the natural movements of deer and trying to figure out how to set up a harvest through outsmarting the critter. Let all the other hunters do the work for you. It will be like one huge all-day drive where you can test out your shooting skills at the panicked deer dashing by. Gee, doesn't that sound like fun?

Probably shouldn't be patting too many coyotes on the head over being such good friends for the bird population until they check with the turkey population out there ....lol. Yeah, the kitty population has been long known to be the scourge of the bird populations. But it isn't only the ones that have gone wild. I suspect that the domestic tabby that always shows up at home each day gets his share of birds as well. Pet owners who think it is great to let their pets run free, seldom think of the efficiency of these exceptional predators.

So now an already faulty harvest reporting system will be made even more unreliable as bowhunters turn in all kinds of doe take successes that never really happened, just to satisfy the DEC's secret bowhunter harvest goals.

Unfortunately, that is not the way the plan is actually laid out. When the bowhunters are unable to make the secret goals of the DEC, they will take that opportunity to insert a muzzleloader season into bow season. That is likely the goal since about decade ago, they tried to do that. This likely is their backdoor route to get what they wanted. Apparently we are not supposed to be smart enough to spot that.

Eddie- It's not whether I can get a doe or even a buck that has me upset. It is simply the stupidity of the change, and the fact that the DEC seems to be going out of their way to single out bowhunters with the responsibility of maintaining deer population management (or else!). Their current attitudes toward bowhunters indicates that they really have a problem with bowhunters occupying some premium season time and intend to change that situation, which of course cannot bode well for anyone who enjoys the change of pace that bowhunting provides. I too have a pile of days to fill the freezer, but still the shoddy treatment and strong-arm tactics being used on bowhunters is pretty irritating to me. And so, I am not ok with it.

So, how do they justify whining about the overpopulation crisis and then lowering the number of permits? That really doesn't make sense. The words don't match the actions.

I was trying to find last year's permit allocations for these WMUs and was unsuccessful. I suspected this might be the case but was unable to get ahold of the data. They have lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, the new regulations are not assumptions. They are indeed fact, and the bowhunters and muzzleloaders are being singled out as the sole population control with some nasty threats being leveled by the DEC if they fail to do the impossible. Those are public declarations without any need for assumptions. They are documented facts and actual regulation changes that anybody can take as a reason for bitching or a reason to applaud. By the way, something that occurred to me just now, is that the only ones that should be upset by all this is the bowhunters only, because if the muzzleloaders hold back on doe harvests, they will be rewarded with a brand new early muzzleloader season. It a no-lose situation for them, and they should be applauding this situation. Sorry, a bit of a side-thought that just popped into my mind.

Generally, the older I get, the later I get on stand.....lol. During bow season, if I can time it exactly right, I will get on my stand a few minutes before legal shooting time. I get a quieter entrance, and do not have deer trying to walk over me prior to when I can shoot. That's important because I use ground stands. Opening day of gun, I have a spot that generally gets me at least a doe opening morning and quite frequently a buck. It is one of those escape routes that deer use when the guys come up the hill from the state parking lot. Its about as close to being a guaranteed spot as I have ever seen. I generally am on stand there at least an hour before the first sign of light, armed with a flashlight to alert approaching hunters that I am there. After opening day, I become a still-hunter and whenever I happen to naturally wake up, that starts my day.

You want us to read minds and establish motives. We do not have enough information to establish the motives behind why they chose to put the deer population management on only the backs of the bowhunters and muzzleloaders. So there is no "yes" or "no" answer. I'm not sure why that is such a hard concept for you to understand. You may not like that answer, because it doesn't validate your assumptions, but really that is the answer. No hate card, just my opinion. So try to control yourself when I offer the opinion that you asked for.

I already have. Try to pay attention and keep up. Repeating one more time for those that are having trouble understanding, the real options for cutting deer populations lie in the more efficient gun season, if the population cuts really are the goal. Pretty simple concept actually.

I think I heard Hurst say that this doe only archery experiment where bowhunters are mandated to manage the deer population, will go for two years and then the next phase of an early muzzleloader season will be implemented when bowhunters fail to satisfy the DEC with proper deer population numbers. So we have two years before a lot of those items happen. They are using the deer population to drive all the items on their wish-list that they have wanted for years.

It does seem like there I a whole lot of thought being given these days in ways to establish non-hunting ways of controlling wildlife populations. We have always felt very secure in the thought that hunting is needed to reliably control populations of various species. But now it seems that hunters are not up to the task. Hunter numbers are slipping. Hunter enthusiasm and effort may also be slipping and now we have documentation that some areas are not being controlled. And so it has occurred to me that society is now looking at hunting as a necessary evil to be put up with only until an acceptable alternative is found. There seems to be a lot of people working on these alternative ways, and perhaps it is just a matter of time before they find, or think they have found, a population management technique that works better than hunters. Is the tolerance and even protection of coyotes part of this? Is this crazy talk about introducing mountain lions and wolves part of this as well? I have heard that the efficiency of these critters is pretty high, particularly when it comes to cervids. Maybe they are more efficient than we hunters are.

Pay attention to all that crap. You might just be able to open up your mind and understand what is likely happening right in front of your eyes or at least get a new perspective on what is happening. I know that is inconvenient, but don't be so darned eager to drink that DEC kool-aid that you refuse to examine other alternative opinions.

But apparently from some of the comments that I have read on this thread, that is a bowhunter phenomenon only. Gun hunters don't have that affliction at all .... lol. I guess that must be what the DEC believes, and we bowhunters will be flogged until we learn the proper hunting motivations and behavior.

Your assumption attempts to make sense of an idiotic, illogical plan. You are pretending to understand their motives with that assumption. I can take that same information in the light of their long-standing desire to hand over parts of bow season to muzzleloaders, and come up with other scenarios and motives for them placing the burden of herd population management on the backs of archers only. I have little respect remaining for the DEC's intellect, but I believe there reasons for placing the impossible task on bowhunters is to justify the implementation of deer hunting with firearms inside of bow seasons by setting bowhunters up for logical failure. And yes that in their minds will cause more does to be taken in what used to be bow season. The real difference in our two assumptions is that you believe that there really is something bowhunters can do about it. I am facing up to the more likely reality that they have no intention of declaring us successful. They want that muzzleloading season in the bowhunting time slot ..... period, and you can kill all the does you want, and they will declare your failure. We differ in assumed motives and outcomes. Are you wrong? Only time will tell.

No, I didn't see one .... lol. But off in the future??? .... Who knows. According to the latest NYON issue, it appears that there is a group in our state called Protect the Adirondacks who were very disappointed that the DEC's draft wildlife action plan did not include a study of possible re-introduction of wolves and panthers. Now there is something that we need in the state ... wolves and cougars. Hopefully some of these groups like The Cougar Rewilding Foundation, never get any traction here in NYS, but with the current strange DEC notions on deer population management, who knows what kinds of weird things they might be starting to favor as deer herd population control.....lol.

You talk like there are options here ..... ha-ha. We don't even know if the DEC targets are achievable. They are not public. All I know is that bowhunters will never be able to manage deer populations on their own regardless of what the DEC threatens. And with built in failure as the only possible outcome, the DEC gets their early muzzleloader season that they tried so hard to insert a decade ago. Coincidence??? .... I think not. I know that such a devious plan gives them guys a whole lot more credit that they probably deserve, but it does make one wonder if there really is any way that we can stave off the arrival of firearms deer hunting in the bow season. I think not!

No it is not obvious as to what they feel. Their stated goal is to reduce the burdensome deer herd in that cluster of WMUs. That is all they have said, the rest is simply imaginings of what you wish they had said. Now if you wish to engage in dreamland imagining, how about we speculate that maybe they think it is a mistake to reserve so much season for a weapon that is not as efficient as guns? Maybe they would like bow season to go away so they could use guns to whack the herd as they see fit. Maybe they have discovered a way to do that and without any established goals stated, they can simply begin by moving muzzleloaders into the bow seasons. and perhaps take things from there. Maybe this is what they have planned and no matter what we do, it is just a calculated foregone conclusion as to how it will come out. See how easy it is to speculate? We can all do it. But until some actual proof or official public statements come out, the fact is that we have to take them at their word ..... which is that they have too many deer and this is their whacked-out way of handling it. Judge it for what it is, not what you imagine it to be.

Heck, if they are serious about whacking the hell out of the does, drop the DMP requirement completely. Open season on does for all seasons ..... period. How serious is this over population problem anyway? You want them wiped out, simply remove all impediments to doing so. And buy the way, eliminate the charge for tag applications in those WMUs also. We can knock down that herd real quick, and it doesn't require limiting anybody. There are so many ways to whack on the herd, that it is hard to believe that population management has to be put solely on the backs of the smallest group of hunters alone. Believe me, there is more to all of this nonsense than simply a need for population control.

I am taking them (DEC) at their word. They have said nothing about reforming bowhunters. In fact they have not even tried to explain why they feel that bowhunters should shoulder the management of doe populations by themselves. All they have officially and publicly talked about is a cluster of WMUs that are in extreme danger of environmental catastrophe because of the horrible numbers of deer. If they really mean this, then I am assuming that the season choice to apply these special programs would be those that have the highest possibility of success. To me that seems logical. Either they feel it is necessary to cut the herd or not. Never mind this imagined, unstated nonsense about getting bowhunters to harvest more of this or more of that. That is simply your speculation based on absolutely nothing they have said. It is only about reducing deer numbers (so they have said). Their public statements are all anyone has to go on, not some thoughts about what you wish they had said.

I reserve still hunting for gun season, but even so, I have found myself in shooting situations on my way to the stand more than just a few times. This often forces some strange requirements for shooting stances that you ought to be at least familiar with. Lowering my profile by kneeling is one of the techniques that I use when caught unprepared in one of those unplanned situations. So, that is one of my practice shots that I try to stir into my practice sessions. I also try to get behind something. That usually is a large tree or blowdown. That brings up another weird stance that needs to have some practice. The idea of standing behind a tree and leaning out for bow clearance. That really messes up all those hours of perfect shooting stance practice. So it doesn't hurt to mix in a few of those kinds of practice shots just to see what happens. And of course, when you are caught cold and a shooting opportunity comes that is not always ideal, you might find yourself having to crouch slightly to get under an obstruction. I try to throw some of those un-natural stances to know just what kinds of problems they involve.

Put yourself in the seat of a DEC decision-maker. You have decided that a dire situation is developing in certain WMUs. The herd is crazy out-of-control. It needs some emergency action to get it all back under control. You know the only way to do that is to take a significant number of does out of the herd. Now if you really believe all that, what season would you use to do that kind of drastic doe reduction? My thought is that if you were truthfully convinced that dire actions need to be used, I would be applying doe only days during some of the days of the most effective season that is likely to have the most significant effect. I have a regular gun season available for use that has more participants involved.Those more participants have demonstrated that they are much more efficient at getting the job done and likely are the only ones who really can. Seems pretty obvious where I would be putting the "doe only" days. Of course I would only do that if I happened to honestly believe the seriousness of the situation that I was portraying and that my only agenda was to bring down the herd size. Can anyone explain why would I be wrong with that decision?