dbHunterNY

Off the top of my head I'm not sure how I copy a link because I use the Facebook app. It's "NY hunt club - a group for the NY hunter." It has over 18,400 members with a vast majority I'm sure are hunters who hunt or have hunted NY. its a Private page that Joe blow who hunts from Kansas can't chime in on. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

They should've. Any survey I've seen that's asked the simple question is around 60+% in favor of them. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

His numbers came from the same source that the one you posted got them plus other surveys done by Cornell on behalf of DEC. So who's write and who's wrong? Haha Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

QDMA as an entity is very much not vested in this antler restriction legislation and lobbying, despite some volunteers who wear that hat are. The article isn't BS. From a very simple perspective if we all stopped shooting deer and let nature solely do the management then would there be an age structure, young to mature? The answer is yes, so why is it so hard to believe it's something that's good for deer and not just a people driven idea? Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Still have that ego? I said it before and I'll say it again. Where this originated from is legit and from the very scientific data you've posted. Once the legislative process is started though it can get messed up in a hurry and original intent lost. This is growing legs whether you think it's half-assed or not. As an educated individual I think you should call your reps with constructive criticism or maybe even ideas to make it less half-assed. I did and will continue to do so. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

looks great.

a huge majority of people don't understand how antler restrictions work or what they can and can't do. wild tangents convos happen and get heated for no reason. legislation like this isn't really the best route to go. DEC should instead get off their a** and review data collected for each WMU. if yearling buck harvest is approaching 60% or higher in a WMU they should do something about it, because it's biologically warranted and hunter satisfaction is probably in the crapper. mandatory antler restrictions should be based on harvest data for that area (which DEC has) with exceptions for youth hunters and first time license holders (which they can do). if the WMU yearling buck harvest is lower then there's no need and it wouldn't do a damn thing. leave the hunters alone. they're doing well and probably happy. feel free to copy this for the next antler restriction thread.

we don't need bucks necessarily that old but some sort of age structure and a good number of young bucks is good for breeding ecology. this link explains it better than i can... https://www.qdma.com/mature-bucks-needs-em/

those that head the NYSCC are very much in bed with politics in Albany. they have and always will be against antler restrictions, no matter what their overall membership thinks. most of their membership probably doesn't even know about that letter. doesn't matter who a resolution is coming from. how a portion of their membership voted is what it is. the fact that they'd just write it off and that it "shocked them" is a bit unsettling. ...as for the guts of the letter here's what i think. of course DEC isn't standing behind it. they have a plan already in place for promotion of voluntary restraint. see how that goes and then revisit mandatory restrictions, just as the letter said. still doesn't change that where proposed ARs are or aren't came from info foiled from a reserved plan made by DEC. NYSCC can't say the Cornell study was conclusive, because it wasn't. it was asked in a way that got answers that conflicted with each other. if you're going to pick pieces out of it though here you go: 69%-"important to protect yearling bucks", 73%-willing to accept some limitations on buck harvest to do so, and 70%-willing to accept some limitations on freedom to take any buck to protect young bucks. DEC has openly stated the results from that survey didn't yield any clear direction, though. Also it's convenient that names of organizations were dropped and then say that something was the outcome as if they all agreed versus DEC saying "Ok well thank you for your time. we're doing this." QDMA for example is a 501.C3 that can't and won't lobby for anything. they most likely didn't take any stance for or against an overall decision but instead provided input on specific discussions regarding deer management. to them it has to be biologically sound (protection of yearling bucks as a whole). they acknowledge antler restrictions as a science involved tool to do so. they encourage exemptions for youth and new hunters. they believe a majority of hunters must support it. they also believe state wildlife agencies should monitor deer management provisions. probably good that despite being legislated and beyond DEC control, DEC has done periodic studies on the areas in NY that currently have mandatory pilot antler restrictions.

most likely was cracked. if you have wraps installed be careful not to get cracks under them that you don't notice. hard to really catch which is why i typical don't use wraps extending to the very nock end of the arrow. any day an arrow breaks and you walk away unscathed is a great day.

depends on the location. some have good thermal cover on the course. others set all their targets out along ponds and in fields. wind gets old in a hurry. i typically bring a glove for the bow hand and release hand with the release goes in a pocket to stay warm. i tend to leave the bow in the truck and not bring it in and out. it'll cause condensation and other stuff i don't want. doesn't seem to change POI though. break up your group into a couple guys each and you stay moving along and warmer. that's what we typically do. clothing shouldn't effect things. sometimes i wear an arm guard just to hold back the sleeves to my layers. fan of vests as a part of those layers so i don't get too bulky in the arms. that's what works for me and who i shoot with.

Curmudgeon and some others just died inside. Can't believe you'd say such a thing. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

By the same token you just implied that you believe hunters throughout NY have the same mindset as FSW and his group. Haha. Mike you have a new admirer. Grows now team FSW! Never would've thought. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

If they would shoot or pass it before ARs they'll shoot it or pass it the same within the guidelines of the AR. I agree though. Fair game doesn't always mean dead. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

If that big 6 turns into something freaky with "trash", abnormal points, or whatever you should share cam pictures. It'd be cool wity character and a treat to see. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Hunter satisfaction and participation isn't a question. Study after study has shown typically you get 2/3 are in favor of manditory (legislation or regulatory) antler restrictions when those yes votes aren't necessarily willing to put up with fuss and effort to do it voluntarily on any consistent basis. It wont ever reach higher than a super majority either because people in general are hard to agree that much on anything. DECs own study of the pilot AR areas concluded that most wanted it to stay. It's not questionable intent if it's to promote just sufficient yearling buck protection as well as meet hunter demands. I wouldn't say the restrictions are severe. DEC wouldn't have considered them in the plan that was ready to go and got FOILed from them and then used to make this legislation. It's far from knee jerk too. AR's have been talked about for well over a decade here in NY. Higher up people in DEC with an agenda against ARs that retired and this legislation are reasons its becoming more of a hot topic. Unfortunately everything can't come from DEC published sources or a NY Outdoor Newspaper. Including data from DEC showing a clearer picture in a smaller area that's not buried in data that is the whole state broad brushed prognosis. I wouldn't have responded to your post with his quote if I had never talked to the guy. I'm just giving all the info I can for people to reach informed conclusions. Today's society seems to have an affliction for movie quotes versus reading the novel the movie was based on. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

That gets into trophy management not herd management. There's a trickle effect into older age classes when it comes to protection but those cases are limited for a number of reasons. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

i believe @RangerClay uses one up your way more. i haven't taken a deer with a flintlock or xbow... i have neither. flintlock would be cool though.

i have to assume she's looked at more photos of each buck, including knowing if a particular one has brow tines. some are in velvet which complicates things. if she says they've all got a 4 1" points on a side than i have to take her word. we're just seeing a snap shot in time, not the view of multiple pictures or visual you'd get if you were there. to drive home your conclusion 2.5 yr olds are still getting taken which would be the intent.

antler restrictions are typically just meant to ensure bucks get to 2.5+ yrs old to be harvested or at least protect a majority of yearlings not around half at best where we are now. especially if promoted on such a large scale, they can't be overly restrictive. if you start getting into the intent to protect bucks 2.5+ yrs old you're starting to get into "trophy management" the older and more restrictive you go. most of us know if you want monster bucks that's the place for voluntary more restrictive antler restrictions or restraint works. most hunters in NY in my opinion are content with shooting anything older than a yearling, so that's "big" enough for them. for truely big bucks for your area that are beyond others standards, the only practical way to take advantage of genetics is to let younger bucks with bigger antlers continue to walk. that's a social issue and subjective straight up.

good point. i do play a great defense to counteract their running game though. i mean once they clear the offensive line of multiflora rose bushes they're typically screwed.

this thread is getting long... i just want to know if a deer "takes a knee" can i not harm it in anyway?

not saying that portions of the legislation maybe questionable, but some individuals FOIL'ed info from DEC and unexpectedly got DEC's prepped plan for statewide antler restrictions that they were prepared to roll out if the Structured Decision Making model was blatantly conclusive. that included all the surveys discussed here and data you continue to post like that above, which i find funny. sorry if i find it ridiculous to play along and think DEC doesn't do science. for anyone who think's what i typed is fabricated and just a conspiracy, feel free to ignore it knowing i'm not clever enough to make it up.

the context that it's said is important. so isn't the use of the word "critical". the deer herd as a whole and even in some areas isn't broken. DEC has published data that says yearling/young buck harvest is continuously going down. also that we have a 1.7:1 doe to buck ratio. it should be a big red flag if a biologist said buck to doe ratio is fine regardless of age structure. so in the context of their projection for the state as a whole it doesn't seem to be needed. however, no biologist should say that young bucks living isn't important from a biological perspective. DEC big game staff has gotten called out by national biologists for loosely using the words "no biological need". this isn't me simply pondering text on the internet. i've talked to Hurst the big game leader about it and seen DEC staff get called out. Hell, he himself sees benefits of antler restrictions. He voluntarily continues to hunt property that has had voluntary antler restrictions for well over a decade. notice it's all carefully worded as to not say there's no advantage or biological need at all. also the biologists don't see a specific benefit with the AR program given their outlook where things are going. yet DEC openly admits there otherwise are multiple management benefit to the AR program, such as "A majority of hunters in the pilot AR units prefer that the program continue (report they did on June 2011, after they'd been in place)". not posting this to really plead the case for this legislation, so much as provide food for thought. DEC's outlook and stance as a group is based on state averages. some areas do quite well with the stats to show it, while others not nearly as much. going back to the one size fits all approach doesn't work. it'd be ignorant to ignore ARs would help some WMU's a great deal, despite for others it probably wouldn't do a darn thing. hunter emotions are the only thing driving this to be a state wide thing. there's always a boarder to complain about no matter how far away.

Other states make you do it for the carcass tag. Others do it in different ways to make it work. I think the bigger issue is DEC blowing off the thought of low reporting rates as no big deal we can manage. That's BS and will never solve the problem. Warnings should be given out and similar to seat belt stuff DEC should be promoting that they'll start to Crack down on those who don't report. It's law and they've allowed the precedent for it to be broken. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk