A Sportsman

In some suburban settings your just not going to get the permission no matter how nice you may ask. You have animal rights people, vegetarian types, peoples kids play in the woods and they are nervous about someone with a bow out there, and just grumpy people who enjoy saying "no" for no reason whatsoever. On long island, I always made sure I was 500'. And even still, I've had nearby homeowners call suffolk police. I've had them call env con officer, with a false claim thh I was baiting. Notes left on my car. And all at different spots. Hopefully dec will be able to allow a new setback distance where its needed, and not everwhere in the state. I know I keep saying this, but ill repeat it again since everyone else is repeating their points. The problem I think many hunters may have with the knew distance is that it is too close. For the life of me, I can't understand why they would go from 500 all the way to 150. If it was 300, this thread likely wouldn't be 12 pages. And 300 still would have opened up all kinds of woods, while respecting privacy.

No. You can't hunt Fire Island. Which is why the deer are so tame there.

I have no desire to throw stones here. Just trying to separate fact from fiction for any folks who may be following the thread and don't know about the island and what it is like to hunt it.

The deer that live in most huntable areas on long island are completely different from the ones on fire island and a few of the unhuntable parks or heavily suburban areas. No way near as tame. For normal guys with normal access, shooting a big buck on the island is still very difficult. Steve, if you think otherwise you are simply wrong. You using robert moses park as a means to describe deer behavior on long island is frankly laughable to those of use who hunt here.

Another thing, regarding habitat, again I think you are off. The habitat is fine for deer. Its part of the reason for the large populations. Want to talk about poor deer habitat? How about the Adirondacks and sections of the Catskills. Great hunting experience, but poor habitat. Island is reversed. I can't speak for all hunters on Long Island, but for me, I wasn't born to live here. Its just where I was born and where my family is. Trust me, I'd prefer to live off the grid somewhere. For many of us long islanders, hunting out here is what we have, so we make the best of it.

Steve863, much of what you say is wrong. Have you ever been to Suffolk County? There is quite a bit of land out there that is undeveloped woods. Maybe though what you read you think that the whole county is suburbs with deer running around in between houses. Not the case. Also, a lot of this undeveloped land has been preseved by State and County and allows for good opportunity to state and county resident hunters. These woods will not be developed and will allow for hunting for many years to come. As far as deer as a nuissance, you are somewhat right. There are farms and residential areas which are impacted by high deer populations and the DEC is trying to do what they can to eliminate the issues in these areas. They are not looking at it as a way to help hunters. They are using hunters to get rid of the deer. You are wrong in saying that the DEC does not care about providing a reasonable hunting experience for Long Islanders. They do. The folks I've spoken to over the years never gave me an impression otherwise. I could be wrong but you seem to have a lousy view of Long Island and the hunters here. Born and raised here and trust me, a lot of times i feel that way myself. But be careful, you;d be surprised at how sharp some of the dudes here can be. Sorry if I am wrong, but its just the way you come off sometimes.

The proposed september bear season seems like a pretty neat idea. Doesn't coincide with deer season. Can do some scouting at the same time, bugs aren't too bad. On the down side, Foliage may make it a little tough to see. And if you get one, the clock is ticking to get it skinned out.

Fully agree with your last point doc. Found dec 5 year plan on line. It clearly states that it recommends the change from 500 ft to 150 ft for bow on page 54. As much as we would like to think cuomo is supporting it for political reasons, its hard to make a case for it given DECs own recommendation. In my opinion, hunters will not change their vote on cuomo because of this. Whether he thinks they will or not is moot. Second amendment rights, specificaLly limiting our ability to protect ourselves and our family, usurps some hunting regs changes in a big way. Also as info the dec document states that there is an 18 acre circle in the area between houses while keeping 500 ft from them.

Mike Rossi, I don't know the exact process that was required to "adopt" the proposed rule changes. But I do remember DEC pointing out that some changes could be made by DEC acting alone and others needing to be made thru a legilative process. If I have some time today ill look for that 5 year plan on line.

The number of 150 feet is something I first remember reading in that DEC 5 year management plan document. Few yrs ago. My gut reaction was 150 is too close and that it won't pass the laugh test. But politicians being what they are, mostly clueless, and not willing to take the time to fully understand legislation, the number never got properly analyzed. I think its as simple as "DEC said 150 and it just stuck." I understand the concerns of those of you who don't like the proposed change. But in order to open up the suburban areas to hunting, the number has to be lessened. As I said above however, the 150 number is laughable. 300 is a much nicer number and still lessens the current distance by a whopping 40 percent. Another point, people living in suburbs are used to other people around them. So I don't think they will care as much as some of the rural folks think. Lastly, even with the 500 ft rule, if you hunt in suburb area, you got a reasonable chance at deer running/dying on a private parcel. But honestly I don't hear of it hardly at all. And I personally never been in that situation. I think a little too much is made of this scenario for the frequency with which it happens.

In terms of recovery, I think a lot of people forget that there are a ton of fenced backyards in these suburban areas. The fences provide a physical barrier. In most of the areas I hunt thisa is how it is. Also, a lot of the properties are set on decent sized parcels. The fencelines can be set back pretty far from the homes. For what its worth...

Having hunted the suburban setting for a pretty long time on LI, having to ask permission doesn't seem like it will accomplish the desired effect of taking more deer. It will do little for opening up the little nooks and cranny woods to hunting, on the whole. What I can't underastand is why they would drop it all the way to 150 from 500. Seems like zero thought was put into it. 150 feet is 50 yds! In my mind, 300 ft would have been a more reasonable number.

Sorry to hear it. Thanks for the information. Great to know. Next year maybe I won't hesitate if the shot comes along...

Culvercreek, I agree on the taste. Good stuff for sure. My problem with hunting bear is that if I shoot one, I feel obligated to get either a rug or 3/4 mount done. I just can't see myself discarding the fur. both are pretty expensive. Plus I just had a bear mount done in 2011. Wife would not be pleased at the expense, again.

Excellent thread Doc. I'm interested in what some of the other big woods hunters have to say about this. I've never hunted them specifically, but have seen a bunch over the years while hunting deer in Catskills. If I were to map my sightings, they would seem pretty random. I hunt a pretty large area, maybe 8 square miles or so, and have seen them in a number of different areas. Some years I'll notice a lot of bear sign (droppings/tracks) in specific areas. If I was going to target them, I would look for that sign and focus a little bit on those areas. It may sound silly, but perhaps the best way to target bears would be to look at the DECs published bear take by County and then simply spend a lot of time in the areas that seem to hold the most bears per square mile. Sorta takes the romance out of the hunting end of it. But then again, like I said, my sightings have been pretty random, so.... I will say that if you spot a bear up wind of you, they are not that tough to stalk. So walking, spotting and stalking, same way I hunt deer, i think is a pretty good strategy.

Jjb4900, was their leaving out of spite/disgust with the rule? Or was it due to thinking that there was just too small a chance at obtaining meat (assuming no doe tags, like where I hunt). I am against AR, especially where I hunt, but can't see myself not hunting there because of it. Admittedly, It does help that I can obtain meat on long island with the bow, before rifle season.

This is exactly my fear too. My Dad and uncle have been hunting since the 1960s. The tradition has continued with me, my brother and one of my cousins. But I often think about what will happen with our kids. They are not old enough to hunt yet, but I worry. It would be a shame if it ends. The way we hunt and the area we hunt is not for the kid who is "on the fence" about it. There is no coming back to the house for lunch, no 4 wheelers to take you up the mountains, not a heck of a lot of deer to keep you interested. If the kids don't have the fire, its not something that they will stay with very long. I suppose i can bowhunt on LI with my kids (once old enough). At least the action of seeing deer will be there.

Bubba and Nyantler, what you are describing is exactly what my group has witnessed as well. It seems like there is more value on peoples time nowadays. More folks are working long hours or two jobs, or their wives are working etc. I know personally my wife has become a serious PITA with me hunting the entire opening week of rifle each year. At my camp there are about 9 guys for opening day. About 6 by monday, and about 3 from wednesday til the following sunday. Used to be about 6 straight on through. As for other hunters, the few we see are mostly gone by monday. In my expereince, hunting the catskills, you can't plan on a 2 day hunt every year and expect to be successful with consistency. The weather conditions and/or lack of deer movement will kill you most years. Nowadays peoples brains are not conditioned to accept the fact that it may take a week to get eyes on a buck, in range, and presenting a shot. And so there is disappointment for them many years. I think what we are coming to here is that hunting is changing right along with the way people in general are changing in our country. And it is not for the better.

Sorry for the hijack.

Speaking of caumsett, does anyone know what the rule is in the town of huntington? Like say you have permission from a private landowner, and can maintain 500 feet, are you legal? I believe in smithtown, you are. But have not heard about huntington.

I don't mean to sound like an elitist or a purist, but I do have a problem with high dence hunt. Especially for an animal that already exists in the wild in the same geographic area that the high fence is in. One time I mentioned my stance on this in a bow shop, while unknowingly in the company of a guy who was into this type of thing. By his reaction you would have thought I dropped a "mother" joke on him. Sorry but when I think about someone hanging a giant up on their wall that was shot at some ranch with 10 other bucks watching, I label that person a phony. I can appreciate the "to each his own" mantra, and I often go by that myself, but not here. I think one saving grace in new york is the adirondacks and catskills state land. As push comes to shove, those of us willing to hunt these tough areas will continue to have our positive experiences. When and if those areas get ruined, it will be time to move away. But Hopefully that's at least a few generations away.

I think part of what makes this so alarming to us "old-school" type hunters is the speed at which things are changing. The realization that hunters (as a community) are going awry is something that only occurred to me a handful of years ago. I certainly don't remember having these fears I'm the 1990s. The bogus shows have been around a long time, certainly longer than a handful of yrs, but for a while it seemed like what was going on on tv, wasn't gaining any traction in the "real world", or maybe our part of the country. Now forget it. I have a 6 month old son and I find myself thinking pretty often about how things will be for him as I introduce him to it. I intend to continue to hunt the same way I learned to. Public land, no food plots, no trail cameras, etc. While I don't necessarily expewct others to hunt as I do, I do deserve their respect. With the way things are going, I fear there will come a time when the size of the rack or the number of deer "managed"on a property completely usurps the importance of a hunters means and methods and people hunting "old school" will be looked upon as foolish. Hope I am wrong.

Not only is the line fuzzy, but it seems like there is overlap. Using AR as an example, we've seen AR come about through the bill introduction process (strictly within that one segment of 3A), and we have seen it through creation of regulations from DEC. So both are viable. All things equal, I feel more comfortable with the DECs process rather than the bill/law process. I'd rather not involve the nonhunting public and lawmakers in decisions involving hunting regulations. And despite the fact that some regs I may not like, I still think DEC cares about hunter satisfaction.

GOod points mike and dbhunter. I understand what you are saying. I think sometimes small, yet very vocal or otherwise influential groups can have legislation "sneak" into law without it being properly vetted by all concernd individuals/groups. And I think that is what happened with AR in that one specific portion of 3A. So I suppose my ire should be at least equally directed towards whoever that group of hunters were who sorta pulled a fast one on the rest of us who they new going in were not going to be supportive of rule. Don't mean to make it sound like I'm all bitter about it. I'm not anymore. Well maybe a little.

Totally agree that politicians should not be allowed to have their hand in these types of regulations. If I recall correctly, this is how AR was rammed down the throats of hunters in one section (my section) of 3A. They actually split that wmu in have and enacted AR. Seemingly without consideration of the fact that there was no dmps availible, nor would there be for a very long time, if ever. Regardless of how you feel on AR, we would be best served If the slime that is politians stay out of these types of decisions.