mike rossi

I just looked at their website, it indicates waterfowl and deer. Nothing about small game - then again it does allow trapping by sealed bid and I didn't see that either. I would call them. If they do not allow small game hunting you can try and work with FWS to get it. You can also become active with the Refuge Friends - however you might be the only hunter in the group - but maybe not. It shouldn't matter anyway, but it prolly does, lol... Keep in mind, every time a hunting opportunity is proposed on a NWR the HSUS weighs in to oppose it. Much of the refuge system was acquired with duck stamp revenue. Some refuges were purchased with almost all duck stamp monies, others partially with duck stamps, and a few were not purchased with hunters dollars. I am not sure about M. For example, I think Iroque near buffalo was bought with something like 80% duck stamp monies. How the land was funded shouldn't have a bearing, but in case you decide to argue that card, make sure the property is in fact a duck stamp land - else you will end up with egg on your face... Fact is in recent years some refuges charge an entry fee or non hunters buy a duck stamp as an annual pass. The number of non hunters who pay entry fees each year is large, its not a small chunk of change. Far more of them then duck hunters, even post duck dynasty. Which brings something else up that you said, I don't think there are more waterfowl hunters than upland small game hunters in NY. I would be almost sure that is the case nationwide - every year more mourning doves alone are harvested then every species of duck and goose combined. I wish you good luck!

You are opening up a big box with this. 1) Mourning Doves are closely related to what you are calling pigeons, and often can be hunted in the same locations, but they have as many behavior differences as they do similarities, therefore hunting for them is frequently different. A few examples of differences are their migratory behaviors; roosting sites; how they react to weather, hunting pressure...There is a lot more to it than the commonality among both species to exploit waste grain as a food source.... 2) I don't see where in the law is a need to distinguish between a rock dove and a feral domestic pigeon to comply with NY Environmental Conservation Law - neither are protected. The identifying mark of a rock dove is considered to be two black bars on its wings, but they are actually the same species. The ancestry of the domestic pigeon is traceable to the rock dove and they are considered to be the same species from a biological perspective. Rock Doves are not native to North America either.The issue is complying with Agriculture and Markets Law which requires identifying non-feral domestic birds by leg bands, which is almost impossible to do. As a side note, just because a bird is banded does not necessarily mean it has not gone feral, but I wouldn't try that with some LEO or some judge.

Its not open and the majority of woodcock have migrated out ,. When the season is open, you also need to make a quick phone call and register in HIP to hunt them. Before next season you report your harvest by calling the same number and that would register you again for the upcoming season. You need to write down the registration number you are assigned and carry it with your license, your license - not your back tag... Always check your bird's legs for bands and report banded birds to the USFWS by phone or on their website.

A number of people have suggested a petition, and every time we responded that we do not know anything about the petition process, so we cannot drive a petition campaign. Perhaps a petition was being considered by the NYSCC when they compelled the DEC to include a dove question on the small game survey? If anyone knows and/or has knowledge about the petition process, please speak up!

About the bold above. The DEC and the FWS have a certain amount of obligation to be transparent about hunting opportunities, and they are, but it is not acceptable to direct hunters to game nor to be be precise about stocking locations/dates/times.... Likewise it is a poor conservation practice, and is not ethical, nor wise, for hunters to promulgate precise hunting locations over the internet. Part of the responsibility that goes with being a hunter, is keeping yourself updated with the law - it shouldn't be a surprise if one property that was in the past closed to hunting is changed to open for hunting and more commonly, the vice versa... Again: The Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge is managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. I know that in most years there are what as known as controlled waterfowl hunts which require registration in a lottery to get a permit. I also believe you must have proof of having completed the waterfowl identification course. There may or may not be other hunting on the refuge but I do not know if there is, the way to find out is through the FWS, not the DEC. The FWS has a website with links to Montezuma NWR including hunting opportunities. Montezuma Wildlife Management Area / Howland Island Wildlife Management Area are not the same as Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge; and are managed by the DEC and the DEC should be contacted about hunting opportunities there. Generally hunting is allowed on WMAs by standard WMA regulations, but not always and even some that are open to hunting have special regulations - more restrictive than the standard WMA regulations.

Because the refuge is not managed by the DEC, it wont be on their website, you need the refuge's website or link to it off of the US FWS website. There is Montezuma state wildlife management area and Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge. You can hunt on both, but on the national wildlife refuge there are additional restrictions and a lottery drawn permit is required , look at the refuges website for info. Everybody defines small game differently - if you mean waterfowl there is a controlled hunt on the refuge and trapping is allowed but you have to submit a sealed bid, the better units I am told, fetch over a grand for a season. I am not sure, but I would imagine that there is a controlled deer hunt from time to time on the refuge to control populations. There is also an landowner cooperative program run out there. I believe the finger lakes national forest allows hunting AND the Finger Lakes are navigable waters, therefore outside of local ordinances you can hunt in the water. Now I have a question. You have quite a bit of public opportunity out there. People from other areas with abundant public access also have the same question about where to hunt, do you have any insight as to why so many people don't know where to hunt?

PR funds are not the only non-tax source of funds the DEC has to pay its staff's salaries. Nearly every time a new environmental law is created, there is a new legal mandate handed down to the DEC, and new federal funds to fulfill that mandate... There are many overlapping job functions between wildlife/fisheries biologists hired for something like industry permitting for example, and wildlife/fisheries biologists hired for game management. However the permitting biologist may be paid from a source of federal funds not derived from sportsmen. The same holds true for law enforcement staff. A new pollution law might require more conservation officers AND create new federal funds, not derived from sportsman, to pay their salaries, yet those additional COs will also enforce fish and game laws... I could be wrong, but I think game management gets the bigger slice of the pie with this system... A wildlife biologist hired and trained to administer the clean water act will perform many of the same functions of a big game biologist and vice versa but a deer biologist isn't going to be assigned to permitting wastewater discharge every other Tuesday... I don't want to delve too deeply into this, but assent legislation prevents sporting license revenue and PR Funds from use in something like replacing coal boilers unless it is to restore wildlife... The PR Funds are correctly called wildlife restoration funds. When a city needs money to replace coal boilers, they would look to other state and federal funds. The DECs involvement, including staff, would not be funded by license revenue or PR funds. In the event the coal boilers were impacting little brown bats or karner blue butterflies, then like it or not, as far as I know, it would be 100% appropriate to allocate PR funds,wildlife staff, and law enforcement staff toward the problem...

Andy, Thanks for explaining that. I was only vaguely familiar with the concepts of even and uneven management and my intuition went astray based on what the terms sound like they mean... Intuition is usually dead wrong and it was... A shelter harvest on the forest - stand level, which you indicated was 5 to 30 acres, would seemingly produce better habitat than single tree selection or group tree selection. I am sure the DEC has its reasons, likely being economics and public relations; but based on what I learned from you I would support the RGS's regime over the DEC's. Although I do not live terribly far from Tug Hill, I never visited the WMA. However, this got me interested and I checked it out on the DEC website. Even with the current management regime it has a lot of attributes of good, productive habitat. I don't want to over emphasize aspen again, and I know that aspen is very common and widely distributed, but knowing the snow fall of the region and seeing all the wetlands, the tract seems like an area that species would thrive. I think I had implied otherwise was the case. Thanks again for the information and educating me , would like to see more of it!

They don't want the sounders dispersing away from trap sites and the swine becoming educated and more wary. Currently there is only a handful, they are not as fearful of people as they can be, and the problem is still manageable. I suspect the DEC might also be concerned about the political impact of southern hog hunting practices. The use of dog packs, very often pit bulls, and hunters finally killing the pig - when the dogs don't, with a spear or buck knife isn't going to fly well around here. Sometimes they even hobble the animals 4 legs and I assume transport it home alive before killing it. Even if the DEC acts preemptively and imposes regulations before this activity grows around here, it would require a few rounds of the law / regulation / rule making process - complete with public comment periods on each of the practices I described. That public comment phase would generate millions in donations for the HSUS, generate publicity for them, and increase their credibility. Anyone who understands how the HSUS operates knows this. Ironic many of you are criticizing this considering that the USDA's Wildlife Service is involved. I say it is ironic because typical Wildlife Service employee would have an attitude similar to many of you. Many of you would fit right in the work place culture and make good wildlife services employees ( assuming you can actually shoot or trap stuff,...) They are passionate about killing all predators and other species they are directed to by their bosses. They are allowed and do use poison, traps, air planes, helicopters, and a variety of contraptions, day, night, summer, winter, bait, no bait. I attempted to post a recent video about this not long ago under a post titled former federal employees blow whistle. Although, I was not able to paste the link, the video is up on you tube and elsewhere. It isn't necessary to watch that video to learn about wildlife services, you can go to the USDA's website and find the link to wildlife services. Hey, they might even be hiring... FYI: USDA is the United States Department of Agriculture. Wildlife Services is NOT the US FWS and it is an agency within the USDA. Now do you like it?

Pass shooting and decoying. They sometimes decoy very well. Some people use calls or call with their own voice. It is illegal to use electronic calls nationwide and battery powered decoys in some states including PA, but they respond very well to wind powered spinners. When using battery powered spinners in NY for waterfowl, doves often come right in. Regular decoys with or without spinners work too. Most people pass shoot however, especially during the first split when doves are moving a lot because they are preparing for migration by forming flocks, feeding heavily and flying around to build up flight strength. Another tactic is ambush. If you scout you can locate resting spots and water holes and hunt by ambush. You can also walk up birds, especially during the second and third splits when birds congregate in heavy cover. Both PA and RI have late seasons and walking up birds works well late season - though most dogs wont point them. From a legal perspective you cant use a rifle or pistol and you cannot bait or manipulate a crop inconsistently with normal local agricultural practices. Normal local agriculture practices are determined by the county agriculture extension office were you hunt, so if you are going to use food plots, harvest crops, or even plant crops - especially top sowing, check with them because that is what the conservation police will go by. Some states offer managed dove fields, but they are crowded and not necessary for good hunting, I would recommend finding your own spot over hunting a managed dove field.

I think I know what you are talking about now. NJ has what is known as the fish and wildlife council and committee. They are unpaid volunteers appointed by the governor. They quote: "help create and finalize each years hunting and fishing regulations". Yes other states and tribes use that too. However, keep in mind, New Jersey still had to go through the same legislative process to designate the mourning dove as a game species. Although they did classify doves as game about 2 or 3 years ago, to my knowledge neither NJ Division of fish and wildlife nor the Fish and Wildlife Council and Committee has yet proposed a dove hunting season. So doves are classified as game in NJ, but there is no open season on them, despite having a game commission. Although I misunderstood you, I still am not a big fan of these citizen boards appointed by politicians. In NY we have the fish and wildlife management board, which I guess does an ok job with private land hunting access coops; the conservation fund advisory board, the open lands advisory board, and probably some others important to hunting. The NY State Conservation Council is another example - a hybrid of a private organization which accepts dues and an advisory board - something I am still struggling to understand. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it the same people who are on the existing boards and the NYSCC the same people advocating for a game commission? I don't see how this would change things much, except facilitate their personal agendas. I am interested in your ideas and what you know about all this.

I have known few farm kids who were picky eaters but whatevey... Eating that fresh grain out of that silo makes for some good eatin rock doves... You all want to eat them swine, though? An animal synonomous with filth and at so low populations in NY few people have seen them - that's the way the dec wants to keep it by the way, some aren't connecting the dots... In contrast the mourning dove is superior tablefare and one of the most abundant species in NY and across North America. So why the interest in pigs, that number in the dozens and not doves which transient populations are measured in the millions? Fact is, although the dec is correct that NY hunters do not have any experience or tradition with doves, they are the most hunted, most bagged, and most eaten - more than whitetails, certainly more than harvested swine, throughout the USA... Every forum has its following, whether its an opinion or a product. This forum is heavy into deer and killing big crap in general, expirtating coyotes, etc... which happens to be par for the course over NY state. However, there are a sizable number of NY hunters who pursue small game who are interested in doves. It is up to those interested hunters to drive the season, the majority average has not come through for 22 years or more... Our plate is full and we have no room to entertain the desires of the NYSCC et al who have not, and will not help us...

What do you mean by Game Commission? There is a citizen board, which the members of are appointed by elected politicians in NY, and the NY Farm Bureau and the NYS Conservation Council get one rep a piece on the board automatically. Is that what you are talking about? This system doesn't get as much credit it is owed for the sorry state of conservation. I would support right to hunt legislation which has been enacted in several states, but that wouldn't have a bearing on what species are declared game and have hunting seasons. The DEC is not going to cater to the sportsmen anyway, that's a pipe dream. After the biological considerations, the social decisions will not disportionately favor the sportsmen. That's political and that's what we got right now. If the DEC was controlling the shots I don't think it would be what you think it would be. Non hunters are increasingly engaged in conservation and there is a formal movement to increase that. Furthermore the majority people being trained as wildlife biologists are no longer males with exposure to hunting. The typical wildlife student is female, urban, and has never had any exposure to hunting or hunters. The hiring practices of state and federal governments also favor females, minorities, veterans, and handicapped persons, (the so called protected groups) under equal opportunity laws. As a group, we sportsmen are not a progressive culture, but we are facing a changing world. There are also a lot of changes in management philosophies, I am not going to get into it. The public at large is more engaged than ever, and to be frank, they always had that right. They are outspending us, and in a few short years will have outspent even our 75 year head start. I just realized I have been typing this for a while, and what started as a post about dove hunting diverted to the premises, ideals, and desires of the NY sportsmen who have been running the show and have failed or have not tried to establish dove hunting.

I am not clicking on any links but I was assuming the authorities were finally wising up and realizing that this is a copy- cat phenomenon. Guess I was wrong... Once they understand that, then they need to evaluate the effectiveness (lack off) of educators counseling students about guns and school shootings. The counseling/indoctrination efforts by the education system to prevent school shootings are obviously causing more of them. Thirty years ago when kids didn't receive talks about guns, were there as many school shootings? I think not and I think there were less gun laws as well. There was some initial evaluation into the role of films and video games in gun violence, that is good, but since we don't hear about it already, we might assume that big money from the film and video game industries bought out the lawmakers?

You have to keep in mind two things operating when you discuss conservation: 1) the level of awareness your audience (readers on this forum for example) 2) misinformation they may have been fed no fault of their own. Back to this recommendations by the Ruffed Grouse Society. They are suggesting a management regime that has been successful in the Michigan aspen barrens - an area basicly a monoculture (one dominant species of tree). That tree is the aspen, which grouse love. It is a shade intolerant and short lived tree - attributes which make it work well with clear cutting. I don't believe tug hill flora is the same. Clear cuts are a loser with hardwoods and saw-toothed conifers, which correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that would describe the flora (trees) around tug hill? Another thing, the regime used in Michigan only cleared 40 acre blocks, this email blast implies their suggestion is 5,000 to 5,111 acres all at once? I have defended both biologists, science in general, and NGOs (non government organizations such as the ruffed grouse society) all the time. I also have advocated for more investment in small game and waterfowl. However I don't really see where the RGS biologists are going with this one, I hate to say it but it seems like a publicity stunt. I could be wrong, I am no expert in forest management. Without any knowledge of the RGS making any prior attempts to enter a cooperative agreement with the DEC on managing TH WMA reinforces my doubts. Again, as I said, I don't follow the RGS very closely and I can be wrong about that as well. But from the info given on this e mail blast I am not submitting public comment to the DEC and making the recommendations outlined by the RGS. There is only one day left to comment and I first received the message from the RGS two or three days ago - not enough time or info for me to decide. As much as I trust NGOs I am familiar with, I am not their puppet, you guys should operate the same way with the NRA, the Republican/Conservative party, the NY Conservation Council and all the right wing evangalists you all "subscribe" too...

About the bold face type above: The DEC did not make any determination on a dove season. They are not allowed by NY state law to designate any species as game, that must be done through the legislative process. If the law is amended to designate an animal as a game species, then the DEC can set a season. The DEC sometimes does make "proposals". A recent example is the proposal to ban the taking of swine. I am not sure exactly the reasons, but the difference is in 1) swine are not native and deleterious 2) some legal difference in environmental conservation regulations and environmental conservation statutory laws. Apparently, the DEC can set some "regulations", but statutory law is passed in the legislative process. I am fairly certain the DEC can recommend a dove season, but I am not sure. In the records of Fred Neff, a long time advocate of a NY dove season, he has a statement from a DEC employee who indicated that the DEC does not get involved in highly controversial issues. That (controversial) would describe dove hunting, mostly because of the dove is a favorite money-maker for the HSUS and also because of some religious confusion, an article we will be posting on face book in the near future - please like, share, forward, and cross-post it and all our articles... Ironically even though the DEC web page titled why don't we hunt doves in NY indicates the reason is low interest, the reason they created that same page was undoubtedly because they receive a constant string of inquiries about why... I don't know if nowdays the DEC will propose a dove season, but I doubt they would oppose one. I don't believe in NY state something like this could be petitioned to be put on the ballot during general elections, which is a good thing because we could not win a numbers game. Several dove bills have been introduced over the last 20 years, but none of them have ever been voted on. In 2010 senate bill 6968 was introduced by Senator John DiFransico, a republican representing the Syracuse area at the suggestion of Fred Neff, an Onadago County resident involved with that county sportsmens federation and in the past with the NYSCC before a personality conflict caused a fallout. Neff had pursued a dove bill in NY for 22 years. The bill was cosponsored by Patty Richie a Oswego republican, Rick Valesky, a democrat from I think the Herkimer area, and some other rebublican, cant remember. There was no assembly companion bill but I did speak to Bill Magee, a democrat in the assembly who represents the Rome area who told me "he is seriously considering introducing a dove bill in the assembly". S6968 expired without being voted on in the environmental conservation committee, much less the entire floor. I called Senator Grisanti, who is the senate chairman of the en-con committee and spoke to his aide. The dude, a kid who sounded like in his twenties, gave me all this BS that you cant eat doves and we only heard from the antis about this and by the end of the conversation he implied that I had convinced him and he would rely the conversation to good ole Mark. Well Mark had ample opportunity now to contact me and/or sponsor his own dove bill - he wasted no time with his crossbow bill, even held a town hall meeting which other lawmakers attended and were visibly nervous about being filmed while on the clock chewing the fat with a bunch of retired cops and firefighters about crossbows - check it out its on you tube. Grisanti however, took his time and was nonchalant about the long meeting. So what we need is a bill in BOTH houses and with BIPARTISAN sponsorship. It cant be a republican bill or a democrat bill and that applies across both houses... We need the DEC to know enough of us want this. We need to let the entire legistlature and governor know as well... We will be outnumbered and the bill will be opposed so we need to write factually correct letters and to newspapers but only in rebuttal to antis. There are some of the things you can do!

We talked quite a bit on here about the social benefits of pheasant and the indirect biological benefits to grassland species of conservation concern. Those non game species, like the spruce grouse, are to be allocated money as well. I was in a muffler shop and read the NRA magazine special conservation issue expressively stating that PR Funds are only to be used for game species - I don't believe that is correct and I am sure that there are large sources of funds which are not derived from hunters. I bring this up because it leads into the concept of partnership - not all NGOs are concerned with game species. The RGS may have overlapping goals with other conservation organizations, in order to pool together resources, ie. money, there has to be consistent goals. It is now accepted that it is foolish not to consider broad-based public support for any and all management decisions. In case that doesn't address the part about holding onto "what we can have" species are classified into levels of concern. You apparently don't care about extinction and will likely go on with a right-wing chant and call me a liberal and all that idiotic crap... If you don't think the legal mandates of state and federal wildlife agencies should cover anything but game, go ahead and write them, lol... Go tell them how hunters pay for all of it and all that crap. Post up the reply. Does this OP dude even hunt birds? LMAO, if he thinks grouse habitat is a good place to run a sled or if we are talking commercial timber harvest, he is mistaken, unless you sled through brush... After the first timber harvest, a brush hog and a match is what will keep the trees young and even- they aint going to grow to commercial value under a grouse management regime... Yup, until I see a picture of him with his bird dog and a smoothbore I think this thread is just another right-winger...

I support the RGS, however, I am not sure about this one. The idea of managing every acre in the 5,000 acre Tug Hill WMA as young forest will not work with the political climate of NY. This would create 5k acres of small trees and brush, great for the game species listed and a wide diversity of other species, but would require frequent maintenance to keep it all young. If the RGS was partnering with the DEC I would take this more seriously, but a mixed aged forest proposed by the DEC is a very happy compromise which may not be optimum for grouse, it is very good. If the RGS and other NGOs and their local chapters partnered ( a common practice) in this with the DEC it would be easier to believe the feasibility of even-aged management on a 5k acre tract, which as the RGS pointed out is a Pitman Robertson property. The draft plan is for one wma and 8 state forests, and It is commendable that the RGS argues or implies that at least the single WMA should be managed differently than the 8 state forests. The email blast doesn't indicate if the RGS or other NGOs have approached the DEC with any partnership proposal, though they may have. Maybe I am misunderstanding them, but the more common practice of managing different age classes of trees in 10 or 20 acre blocks seems more practical than clear cutting 5k acres and then maintaining the entire tract. Another issue is prescribed fire. I believe that the FWS has used it in NY , but I don't think the DEC has a PF crew? That would be one less tool the DEC would have to maintain the habitat in a young, even-aged state... Believe me , I don't agree with the DEC on everything. As a matter of fact, I pestered them about a moist-soil project (wetland) which was pending for 30 years and was working out an adopt a natural resource agreement with them, then somehow in the interim, the project got started and completed. I think NGOs or even a group of sportsmen can partner or partner under a smaller scale known as the adopt a natural resource program ( see the DEC website). And I admit I don't follow the RGS very closely, but this stakeholder input campaign caught me by surprise and personally I don't have enough information to support it...

I know the guys on LI are into birds now and probably will be the rest of the season. Upstate had some interesting weather. About a week ago it started to get cold and birds were locked out of shallow water areas, so they moved onto open water. About 3 days ago, before more cold and snow, there were fresh birds around, but that only lasted a couple days because even rivers and lakes froze and fields got several inches of snow. Even the resident birds, including geese took off, not surprising, the name resident geese or ducks or doves is a little misleading, they are actually part of what is known as the resident mid-latitude birds, they actually do migrate some. It may be more like shifting around compared to birds that go a thousand miles, but they make trips of 150 miles or so. It is going to thaw the next few days. Studies have shown that birds can sense the thaw and use south winds same as they use north winds to migrate. They know a thaw will create backwater and flooded fields. They likely have those favorable conditions south, but the goal isn't to stay south, its to stay as close to their breeding areas as possible - they know they must return and they know the sooner they do the less likely they will loose their territory to a competing pair of birds. Same with the resident /local birds. The upcoming thaw might bring birds again. It will be a different ball game though, last week birds were concentrated in remaining open water, at least the last part of the week. But this next wave, if it happens , will be the reverse, the birds are here for flood water and will be spread out. Any remaining northern birds flying south will feel that south wind and might stop because of the resistance and because it tells them it is warm - if they see open water they might drop. Fresh doves around too. Dove season in PA reopens after Christmas and the birds blown down last week didn't seem to leave with the waterfowl. So the next few days might see some birds again. If anything there will be some mergansers to pass shoot in necked - down portions of rivers. I wouldn't try that now, too much ice and current and cold for dogs.

Clarification: It was NOT a survey dedicated to dove hunting. It was ONE QUESTION about dove hunting that was asked as part of a broader survey about all small game. The DECs conclusion that the reason for the lack of strong interest in dove hunting is because NY hunters have not had prior exposure to dove hunting was arrived at from ONE additional question asked several years later on a different survey, which asked hunters if they have ever hunted doves in another state? As we discussed on here recently, regarding the antler restriction survey, questionnaires normally gather information with a series of questions not a single yes or no question. However asking one or two questions was deemed sufficient to evaluate interest in dove hunting ...

Public comment on this proposed regulation will be accepted until January 25, 2014....

I am afraid you are right... But I wasn't snuffing his question. As a matter of fact after his reply I compiled a list, but I am apparently blocked from pasting links. I even tried typing a few in, but clicking them produces a bogus error message. I wont type them anyway and I am not going to write out every little detail... By the way, the DEC has a link on its website about waterfowl hunting on LI.

Thoughts about this DEC statement, you ask? My thoughts are coy dogs are rare for a number of reasons, but the estrous timing of domestic dogs is only a minor reason as to why. Also: I believe you misquoted the DEC. I don't recall it saying "hybrids between domestics and coyotes cannot exist". What was that link again, please, I would like to revisit that one...

Was there a stochastic event in that locale during the early part of the eighties? Besides, that was thirty years ago, there was much less knowledge back then.

Doc, A reoccurring theme with you is that you despise the use of stats and think its a crock. Remember when I pointed out to you that it was you, not Early, who is resonating with a national animal rights organization? You are doing it again - one of the main talking points of the HSUS is that population estimates of migratory birds, specifically mourning doves are not accurate enough to base management decisions. However, if the estimates suggest hunting one species or another is not wise, the HSUS "believes" the conclusion... Regarding the accuracy and adequacy of this, I think it does indeed show whether a population is increasing, decreasing, or approximately the same year to year and over a period of several years. Does it necessarily reflect what walks under your tree stand - no. Or the number of deer which use land you own or hunt on - no. The distribution of deer across the state is not even and neither is it across a deer management unit (wmu). If you are not seeing anything from a single tree stand or several different stand locations around a state forest does not necessarily invalidate the data for the entire wmu. Remind yourself that this is in fact an estimate and not an attempt to make an exact count. It would show significant changes in populations during extreme periods, but during average years it only suggests trends. Because of all the studies that were invested in, we now understand the biology of animals we can use those estimates and indices to predict what the population will do in the near future in the absence of what is known as stochastic events. You also repeatedly express a dislike for studies.. So lets go there... Years ago we had no idea of the mating systems, reproductive rates, and other biological knowledge about whitetails. Money was spent studying all that and today we have that knowledge. That knowledge enables predicting future population trends to guide management decisions. Without that biological knowledge the numbers would be much less useful. And there is more to it than statistics, it also involves linear algebra and calculus. Few sportsmen are aware that this accumulation of knowledge accelerated with the advent of the Pitman-Robertson Act in the 1930s. Not only did those federal funds pay for studies but it also developed wildlife science programs in colleges and universities. The amount of knowledge today compared to back then is staggering and without it you would really know what a crap-shoot was...