dbHunterNY

in my experience hunting with ARs, i do believe that AR's do slow a hunter down in the sense that they wait to id the target better. which in turn means the it's closer or more into view. a situation where it's deep into the woods or farther away can't be as clearly identified, but more importantly would be more of a marginal shot opportunity. in the case where antlers overall where big enough or it simply had antlers, a hunter might be inclined to take that shot, because they don't know if they'll get a better one. bullets can get deflected or simply miss the mark due to distance. you'd think hunters in general would acknowledge the marginal shot opportunity and pass, which many do. it's a grey area with every situation different from the next, and those marginal shots aren't always passed.

it would've helped him a ton... ARs (adult responsibilities that is) would've helped him a ton. if the kid was genuinely upset he was taking burden and acknowledging fault. seems like a standup kid that just made a mistake. i'd think an adult being there to talk him off the ledge and discuss what happened so he doesn't make the same mistake again would've done a lot. maybe that did happen idk. antler restrictions i don't think has anything to do with it. i suppose you could make the stretch that the preconditioned mindset with ARs is looking more for any head gear but the mistake was simply that of being antlerless or not.

happy bday to you both!

compounds both target and hunting have 2" blazers of all different colors depending on which bow it's for. full helical. trad bow has 5" synthetic feathers with offset same as Goldtip factory i think.

yea as a farm boy we used lots of temporary fencing with fiberglass "posts", wiring, and insulators. i've spent hours handling them. basically grab hold with each hand and push the end down into the dirt without hitting a rock. you'll get in a hurry every now and then skipping putting on gloves. it's a bad idea. tape and other stuff helped, because you can't see it to pull it or cut it out like a normal sliver. eventually they worked out and you were at ease. co-workers on the farm got sold off and eaten i'd imagine so no need for fence anymore.

we sponsor it every year. good mentors with spots to share. success rate is usually pretty high.

helps but really doesn't matter. before he shoots the gun he should have muzzleloader cleaning supplies and pre-cut cotton patches. some blk powder substitutes will eat through a barrel like crazy. I have a T/C Prohunter and have had CVA's. Fit and finish doesn't make up for the difference in cost. He's definitely making the right decision by going with a dependable scope. ML sometimes aren't easy on scopes. if there's a blatantly noticeable delay from trigger squeeze to the gun going bang then switch primer/powder combination. modern inlines shouldn't do that. make sure to not ignore cleaning the breech plug for good accuracy plus get in the barrel just after it were the powder ignited and created a ring of build up if there at all.

i fully believe whether regulated or however mandated antler restrictions should include exemptions for youth and new hunters. given you define the latter to a small extent, it's completely feasible to do so at a state level. i've seen it practiced that way on very large tracts of contiguous ground for comparison right here in NY and the results were awesome. breathe and just keep reading. lol.... in some cases the youth or new hunters set the bar high enough to meet the restrictions anyway and in other cases they didn't. it created an abundance of opportunity. still it was there choice based on the opportunity they could create. experience gained each season is more than maybe it otherwise would be as they experienced more activity and had interactions with deer more often than usual each season. it seems to get them hooked. we don't have a shortage of hunters here in NY. the average age of our hunting population is getting older though and that's a problem may rear it's ugly head when the baby boomer generation gets too old to hunt. having a new hunter or youth hit the woods to compete with seasoned hunters, especially in areas full of the "if it's brown it's down" mind set makes it tough. if you expect to simply tell them "better luck next time" or "that's why they call it hunting.", you're going to be out a hunting buddy eventually. with anything that restricts buck harvest, not just ARs, those against it seem to think implying it's going to hurt youth and first time hunters is a silver bullet. in reality if implemented right it couldn't be farther from the truth.

as a reminder, you'll have this week to sign up for those in eastern NY.

just think of all the off season 3D outdoor shoots you can go to and get dialed in with it before the season.

Culvercreek doc and others read through the "semantics" just fine and still made their case. You've made it clear you're not willing to accept anything short of someone from DEC telling you directly, if you even accept that. So ask Hurst or whomever about whatever yourself then. Specifics are important though otherwise you won't get a specific answer. Semantics I know. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

haha... then read this post.

for amusement please send a letter of acceptance to art kirsh and john rybinski. i can think of others but they'll do for now.

there is no signing up for it. DEC doesn't do trial and error anymore. they tried the 2 weeks doe only and the sky almost fell, it failed, and probably did irreparable damage to hunting and the deer herd .....despite DEC learned something through implementation to move foward.

they've done numerous polls and surveys that show more hunters than not want ARs. they have also surveyed the areas in NY where ARs are now and hunters want them to stay. not many seem to be accepting of surveys so maybe next time opportunity they have to revamp the licensing system and online license sales they do what Buckmaster7600 suggested and have straight foward questions to get results more people would accept. then again if it didn't match what DEC planned to do i'm sure it just wouldn't be made public and someone would FOIL it anyway. hard to believe so many will shoot down DEC credibility, processes, data, etc. and then still use it as beyond contestation to prove a point. i agree it's too bad any discussions on here to make things better ends up being p*ssing match back and forth.

i think culture here in NY has a lot to do with it. you can't shoot down DEC credibility and then say it's solely cultural, because that would be accepting DEC's based prognosis saying the deer herd isn't in need of anything.

if you're going to shoot down my herd impact assumptions that aren't mentioned in the that link to a DEC email, you should realize you shouldn't say it doesn't say that and then make some herd impact assumptions yourself. political polls are largely bias and used to sway speculation of support. the whole time i saw very conservative polls show Trump was doing well and others tagged as liberal showing the exact opposite. in this case there's no agenda. if there was one it'd be to go with voluntary restrictions. they should but really don't need to ask ALL hunter to get an idea. some wouldn't even give you an answer, because they don't know what they are or any impacts they'd have on their hunting. you can think what you want but implying you know what's up and both an state wildlife agency and an ivy league institution are simply guessing is only blowing smoke up your own rear end. i've heard of people getting it. there's been a couple cases in these forums have posted they got it. just because someone didn't post they got it doesn't mean nobody did. there's people that read through these forums and never make a single post.

unless it was someone pulling assumptions out their rear end then yes i haven't seen a single word. you apparently skimmed over stuff or didn't see everything. i'm not going to treat you like you're in remedial reading though and tell you to go back and read it and responses. i responded saying i've actually had conversations with Hurst (who chooses to hunt in QDM co-op with antler restrictions). I made a point that Hurst didn't say there was no benefit and it was based on us excepting what DEC data shows at a statewide level (which many here seem to is a crap shoot when you start zooming in to look at WMUs). that was page 7. on page 8 Doc agreed that it didn't say there was no benefit at all. stubby is saying it won't help the herd in any way. from what i've read, seen happen in the real world, and have been told by multiple whitetail biologists is that's not true.

i haven't seen a single thing posted here or from DEC that it won't help the herd in any way, so that's your opinion or twist. DEC certainly wouldn't propose something to the standing commissioner that was detrimental to the herd, so that AR plan surely isn't. So now we're left with hunter values and interests. A substantial undertaking done by DEC and Cornell concluded that ARs is what most hunters want according to this email that went all the way to the top. Separate from DEC aging deer and what they do on their own. DEC together with Cornell, an ivy league institution, determined a sample size of NY hunters to survey that would yield statistically accurate results. They didn't ask me either, but they didn't have to. What I didn't know is that apparently NY state's deer management decisions and ivy league surveys aren't warranted unless they get you and your friends input first. sorry i didn't know.

DEC's analysis suggests that expansion of mandatory antler restrictions would best satisfy hunter values and interests in the long term. Based on this analysis, DEC plans to propose mandatory antler restrictions for 4 of 7 "buck management zones" covering over half the state beginning in fall 2016 (see map at end). This is also a dramatic departure from past DEC policy, as we have always advocated voluntary restraint over mandatory ARs. .....i didn't produce it, but i'll share it. Quotes above are from the link to FOILed DEC emails. to bad we pay for this stuff and then it's scrapped, because somebody more important than the general hunting population doesn't like it.

right, so your tax dollars paid for a DEC survey and resources to come up with a conclusion that antler restrictions were the best idea (read the link if you have to again) for certain portions of the state based "let the professionals" handle it. then somebody within DEC with pull said nope i'm not going to except the findings and despite your time and effort team we're doing something else. no wonder the end result is things like the 2 week no buck deal.... any structured professional input is scrapped for special interests! can't make this stuff up. haha!

coonhunter... i think we agree that ECOs are spread thin. from what i've read and been told by ECOs is poaching seems to be an act from repeat offenders. they most definitely have their work cut out for them. if the repeat poachers are paying whatever current fine and it didn't deter them from doing it again then apparently the penalties were a joke and didn't do what they're meant to do. multiple cases around have shown poachers jacking deer at night or out of season. they basically cut the head off or made a poor shot and left the body there. i mean these aren't cases of a hunter feed family it's just wonton waste when others are eating tag soup doing it the right way or a resource not going at least to a food closet to feed those really in need. i can't imagine in every case of jacking deer at night the poacher knows the lay of the land their firing bullets into the darkness. also i know many cases day or night where they speed away as to not get caught whether with the deer or not. multiple people i know have seen it, including myself, while trying to get a plate # or any other ID info. fortunately i, friends, or family haven't had a wrong place wrong time incident that lead to injury. i have seen and heard of damage to personal property from crop damage, to run over mailboxes, to bullet holes in equipment and/or buildings. even then i can't imagine these minimum penalties are harsher than DWI, assault, or other violent crimes. they do get a bit higher for frequent repeat offenders. don't know if "you" meant me, but i wouldn't call you in seriousness call you poacher unless i knew you to be one.

the sweet thing about this is that it's not adding to legislation already there. it's changing it. no new laws. only the outcome that when a poacher is caught they get their hand slapped harder and the message that goes along with that is spread. it very well could pull in more funding to pay for more ECOs. how that fine money gets distributed is determined a lot by the specific case and what went down.

i'm not implying they shouldn't do their job or are afraid to do so. they do and will continue to do their job knowing very well the situation i'd think or like you said get a different one. add that many people treat them with disdain, because "they won't let me hunt without writing me a ticket". i mean heck you just outed your ECO buddies saying they hunt more than they work. your analogies kind of suck. not so sure that many commit a robbery with a firearm and then end up going to local court to pay a $250 or so ticket before they go home. many seem to think this will help, but not completely solve the problem. i agree. i also believe if it'll help than why not. maybe some added income pays for a temporary shuffle of ECOs to where they're needed in relatively close proximity to where they already are and at key times of the year. maybe i should've just done a poll; are you (anyone participating) for or against reducing poaching?

man i really hope this thread makes it to 30 pages. brings me joy when antler restrictions get so much attention and an antler restriction bill soo much publicity.