dbHunterNY

DEC had an educated plan for AR implementation at the ready. it got the axled due to politics and fear of the possible chance it could fail. thing is without failure we'd never learn anything and things wouldn't continue to be better.

and the problem i have is the notion that where they're justified for use will destroy so much opportunity and they're set in stone forever. it also bothers me that no matter how much the soap box gets worn out all the disagreement of ARs leads back to antler size first and i first and the deer second. in reality experiences with deer in field and the ability to just sit back and enjoy things sky rockets. if you put the deer first then you ensure the hunting tomorrow will be the best it can be. most people reading this realistically won't truely know what i'm getting at. you have to experience and see better hunting unfold to understand. otherwise it's just words on the screen. if hunters are conservationists, since when did enjoying the harvest and hunter desires trump doing better for the deer, just enjoying encounters with deer, and enjoying experiences to be had in the outdoors? if we can't shoot any deer of our choice that's there, are they less important? if we can't shoot what we choose are conservation efforts better left elsewhere?

no... i'm trying to remain respectful so please do the same. if you knew me, you'd know i'm by far not in it for myself and know with absolute certainty how much that statement burns my a**. certain regions ARs would work very well. for others the improvements might not be worth it to offset any negatives. they can be taylored and make a difference anywhere but know when someone says statewide regardless of who they are you should take that as assessing them in various regions throughout NYS. some will get them and some won't as it should be. Right now people seem to have this notion of they fix everything or they don't work at all. that's ridiculous. i just want people to accept the fact that they can work when state mandated. don't try to disapprove they'll work or not work here because of an exact situation that's different VT, PA, Michigan, Missouri, etc. we're not them. they'll effect areas in NY how they'll effect them.

not talking hunter management i'm talking herd management. deer out here aren't in the same situation as the deer out your way. believe it or not we could use it out this way.

you know damn well i know what the WMU's are. go ahead one of them is mine. i think they can work anywhere but i don't think they need to be every where and probably shouldn't be. maybe some people we know push state wide but if it was "state wide" chances are they wouldn't even be in your area or the adirondacks. you can fight tooth and nail all you want but maybe we should fight tooth and nail for our regions alone as we know them best and be open to others being different. if you push for all antlerless to be done through lottery like the DMPs are and no doe tag can be universally taken anywhere. more accountability in doe harvest would happen and i'll fight right there with you. we both know we're on the same team anyway. DEC relies too much on cautious speculation of deer take when it comes to doe harvest.

i agree a lot of hunters in the adirondacks don't want ARs due to lack of deer. i'm not trying to push ARs up there or where you are. you and i both know where we both stand on ARs, that they really shine in the southeastern 2/3 of the state, and that within our relative inner circles ARs are succesfully being used BOTH in the adirondacks and where you are. the lack of consideration of ARs being a valid game management tool has to stop and we should all be clear that knowledge is out there of what effects they have in different regions. i'd love to have the potential you guys have out their to grow respectable deer. that fact is we don't have it out this way and we have more hunters. different needs for different regions.

those either or tags are a big portion of antlerless take throughout the state. not every place in the state is blessed with HIGH DMP tag allocations like where you hunt. many rely on preference points or a tax id for 50+ acres of land. "most if not all referring to" is an assumption on your part.

that's one of the major points of AR's for a region within a state. it's less likely they'll do much in areas of adirondacks and areas from niagara to rochester and just below. they really shine for areas in the southeastern 2/3 of the state. it makes the small acreage little guy empowered to feel he doesn't have to take only what he/she gets walking into their little piece of heaven. it's only getting worse too. big acreage is leased to help pay some taxes and upon each generation it gets subdivided and/or sold off. we have over 80 land owners in our QDM co-op only bound by handshakes between landowners, by far most of them are less than 80 acres.

you wouldn't think it but youth hunters have no predetermined views or stances they see things for what they are and where they're going. i'm still pushing for youth hunters to be exempt as long as they're a youth hunter. they've all told me to basically go fly a kite and it's good the way it is now. right now we have it as first buck gets a free pass from AR's. it still doesn't make sense and i've told them it's good to get some deer under their belts first. our restrictions are more than what should be state implemented too.

it happens much less than you'd think. by far more common now without ARs for people to shoot a deer and not tag it so they can still hunt and hold out for a bigger one. manditory reporting has to happen. accountability here in NY is setup to fail.

you can look if you want but it wasn't anything related to justifying ARs up there or not. more to set the record straight. nothing personal. not trying to tear anyone down.

sorry to clarify i wasn't stating it to pose an argument. i'm just saying you can take a doe there and "no doe" isn't completely accurate. the "no doe" up north has gotten thrown around a lot lately.

even in areas with voluntary antler restrictions that's usually a given. even a hunter who's old but never has shot a buck gets free pass. that's the way it should be.

you just earned a friend.... some people went out of their way to get that info into the handbook, if it was left up to DEC it probably would've never been considered and had happened. even within inner circles of people all for young buck protection, some have said it wouldn't do much of anything having stuff like that in the regs guide. not enough out there and nobody would really read it. i think it's done a lot of good.

to be clear, i think anyone can buy a tag to hunt doe anywhere in the state except WMUs that are NYC and city of Buffalo. in some areas you're talking about you just can't hunt them with the most efficient weapons.

you can't make that sole connection. it's that way by default as most land in NY is private land, if you disregard the adirondacks. hell DEC's 1:1.7-1.9 buck to doe ratio is skewed because of up north. in AR areas and areas of western NY it's 1:3 even during the season but everywhere else it's closer to 1:5. it'd be worse but the herd corrects itself with respect to ratio each year when doe drop more fawns.

so neither of you care about a less likely but probable chance that happened to this buck with growing 'mutt' antlers? lol....exactly. practically any hunter would be thrilled to take a fully mature 6.5+ yr old regardless of it's antlers. it coming in with its brute like presence, maybe rubbing and snapping off a tree or kickin a$$ and showing other bucks who's boss, is more than enough for most hunters in my experience. a deer that old isn't applicable to an antler restriction conversation because they aren't designed to protect bucks to full maturity. the point is though that hunters can appreciate even a small increase in opportunity to hunt bucks with more age and dominance for their respective area. maybe that just means more 2.5 or 3.5 yr olds with no to very little chance at seeing anything older.

In all honesty people who are in the dacks love it. They actually get to see deer versus hunt for days and see little. They get over the idea of not killing something most years. It's replaced with more opportunity for a better buck, anticipation of hunt turnout, increased activity, and more overall experience. Face it you can hunt just north of where I am for years, not see a deer , and therefore have basically no hunting experience when it comes to actual interaction with deer.

if they make them better it wouldn't be restrictions with the same quality of hunting. hunting would be better to off set them. it's hard to understand until you experience it for yourself. so I'm not passing judgement and I understand where you're coming from. if things didn't get better any restriction would go away.

DEC staff regional biologists included travel about the country side burning gas and man hours at local butchers and other places to get harvest data to make up for lack of reporting. i'll believe they even hire people seasonally or part time in addition to go collect this data. it'd only take one person. for our QDM co-op we ask for more info than what DEC records for harvest data. our process is so simple the hunters check in the deer themselves at an unmanned station. in OK you basically weigh the deer on a scale in town outside the local 24 hour 7-Eleven and then walk into to get a caracass tag and fill in data into a book similar to one you sign to vote. they could make it work.

If the hunting is better you recruit more hunters. do what's best for deer to make them thrive and hunting will be better.

Not true the survey that Cornell did prove 70% are in favor of them for increasing their odds at a bigger buck as long as it's not just their little area but instead law so everyone had to do it. The survey asked questions though that opened the door to a mixture of conflicting results. they got the results of yea I'd like to shoot anything and everything but have a great opportunity at shooting a bigger buck and sustainable population. any knowledgeable hunter knows there's contradiction. it's no different than yea I want money but no I don't want a job. for that last statement you can have as many doe as you like but a buck will only get to so many of them for them to be making more fawns. it'd be different if the bucks weren't being mowed off as many of the doe are ready to be tended to. in many areas in NY this isn't a problem because people do shoot some doe and pass some bucks. in areas where shooting a doe is taboo and any legal buck is great then it does seem to be an issue. fawn recruitment sucks then. I grew up in one of those areas. about everything else you typed I'm hard pressed to differ with ya.

saw lots of activity sunday it was just isolated in cover and other areas. not much out in open fields or drifting side hills.

plowed driveway. truly measured and not counting drifts we've gotten somewhere close to 13" maybe. didn't start until Saturday night. late sunday morning we had a measured 9" but it didn't stop until Monday morning. yet 1 hour down the road in Albany they got maybe an inch. something about upslope and mountains being around us farther north. some by me had cars buried with drifts. wouldn't know there was a car under there.

problem is it's subjective. the argument is that you're basically disassembling the gun to get the mag out. any gun can be disassembled to detach a magazine or components that make it up. your just not doing it much. so how readily or not does it have to be to make it detachable.