Culvercreek hunt club

I'll give them a suggestion to shore up their management plan. Spend the effort addressing the biggest hurdle in front of most hunters. Land access. dump the damned nuisance tags and find a way to assist hunters in getting in areas. Spread out some of the pressure and get the herd numbers in some of these high density WMU's under control.

I can't agree with this especially in our area. The season that is set up know doesn't allow for adequate doe take. I could get behind stopping antlered harvest early but in high density areas leaving the doe season open. The other thing they NEVER include in these pipe dreams is totally eliminating the antlerless only special tags and doing all the antlerless harvest by DMP's. I would think this would give them the most flexibility of controlling the specific areas.

Wish I could use all of my "likes" on this one.

If you read the power point that was linked above, it basically says the say thing. The herd is healthy and no biological need and it is a social topic. And from the previous survey and comments on this forum, a very polarizing one.

I think it is more of the "Doubting Thomas Principle". When the people in your circles haven't seen a survey and don't share any views that are touted as the overwhelming response to the survey, the little voice on the shoulder can easily question the validity of it. I remember threads on here during the last survey and IIRC not one member had received the survey or knew anyone that did. It would also help if they at least published how they sampled the NY hunting population. In my book, random across the state doesn't cut it for making regional decisions. I would also be curious how they control for variables like responses from large land owners vs small land owners vs hunters that only have access to public land. I believe all of these make a big difference in attitudes, goals and expectations. I would also expect that how much time a person has available to hunt would weigh in to this.

The GRST Branch of QDMA will be holding our Winter Lecture on February 16,th, 7 pm at Monroe Community College. This is a lecture that will be useful to all of us that hunt smaller parcels of land. It will focus on tactics for hunting mature whitetails on small land and also discuss how to increase your management efforts by creating and using Co-ops. Save the date and hope to see you there. Winter 2015 Flyer.pdf

I've probably done it a dozen times in 32 seasons. None in the last 5 years since I have decided to let the smaller ones walk and I could have easily the last 3 years. I don't believe the "records" would show it happens as much as it rally does, especially in areas with few or no doe permits. I believe it is way underestimated the amount that get placed on others tags.

I enjoy the seasons too much to support #3. I would for 2 and 4 though. This does seem like the same process that they used a few years back. Must be Cornell wanted some more funds...lol. Didn't they do the last survey?

Surcharge the fines or increase them to fund more staffing. The Feds moved some of OSHA's fine structure to fund their boots on the ground efforts. Can't see why that wouldn't work.

First, in many parts of the states what you described can easily still be a 1.5 year old deer. so why not just shoot the spike then? Secondly, questions in an attempt to understand another hunter's motivations is judging? Even if it was, who is the "we" that agreed? Now as hunters we are so thin skinned that we can't be questioned? Biz had thicker skin that that. I really don't care what any of you take, just could never understand the unwillingness to take a doe if the population warrants it. To me he has a legitimate reason. The ones I do have a problem with are the guys tat apply for tags and have no intention of using them, just so others can't get them.

I usually only put in enough chips to provide smoke for the first hour and a half or so. It will only go so deep regardless of how long the chips are in there. It only intensifies the amount in the outer layer. Sometimes making it too smokey. Trial and error.

But per your scenario. If you had "tons of land". You would hunt the same way and expect the same opportunities?

what wood did you use and how long was the wood in there?

what wood did you use and how long was the wood in there?

So you have no interest in actual resource management for the health of the herd? Maybe provide some venison donations. It's all about a trophy to mount?

I personally can't see the OBR providing much until they stiffen up poaching penalties. I would be for it but until they make breaking the rules realllllly hurt, it will just be wives and kids and grandpas that take the first bucks.

Substantial population control doesn't happen from buck harvest anyways. It happens with doe harvest. I remember long ago the bow "stamp" bought you the privilege to hunt with a bow and I don't think it originally gave you another deer. It was quite some time but IIRC that is how it was.

Our legal system has always been based on "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", What you are proposing as acceptable is quite the contrary, "it is better that ten innocent men suffer than one guilty man escape." If the Government applied this to other rights, the Anti's would be changing their tune. And actually they use it to hold up movements towards things like voter ID's. It can't be done because that one person might not have their vote counted/cast. How about random searches? for a little inconvenience we can possibly find someone doing something illegal? I whole heartily believe there are those that are too ill too own a weapon. The formula used and the lack of accountability for making such clams is my issue with the new law.

They may have in your assertion that it about the money. Since we are in NY. What do they average?

how much does the average hunt go for?

Really not trying to continue a pissing match but you made the claims about money as a motivator and the loss of license sales. Unless the farmers and high fence operators are all crooks and not reporting income, the math doesn't work. With all the effort your groups have put into this haven't they evaluated possible motivations of those pushing this?

Well if a ranch is writng all there hunts off then they probably should worry more about the IRS than the DEC. You report as income. The ranch will report as income. Those two Alone out weigh the cost of lost out of state licenses for those hunts. Now I can see the govt not wanting to shut down commerce from infected states for $$$. But that still doesn't shore up the argument as to why the high fences is in the crosshairs. Money just doesn't hold water as an argument

but the income tax paid on the hunt is higher than the cost of the license. The math doesn't make sense to justify the actions you are claiming.

FSW. Wouldn't the state benefit from you guys selling as much as you could at the highest prices you can get? Seems like they would make more money that way then shutting you down? No?

Happy birthday Doc. Wishing you many more.