dbHunterNY

I've come to like the comfortech stock... soaks up quite a bit of recoil and the cheek piece I think really saves your cheek. don't notice it as much with normal stuff but when you get into the heavy or 3.5" stuff. for example for coyotes I use hevi-shot dead coyote 3.5" shells with T size shot.

i bought a supernova mostly for turkey. it is a reliable pump with features i liked; coating, magazine button, comfortech stock, big trigger guard, etc. didn't get steady grip so i can use it for other things, but for a dedicated turkey gun steady grip is good. it also has a slogan outdoors ultraflex sling that's pulled tight to the stock for little movement but still able to sling over your shoulder without adjustment do to the stretch. also for better aiming close in and for slight changes in POI for different loads I've got a Burris Speed bead reflex red dot mounted between the butt stock and receiver. oh yea camo is Realtree advantage timber. You always hear people say their guns pattern well but they leave out some details. this is what I'm using and getting now: 132 pellets in the head and neck of a standard HS Turkey head patterning target at 35 yards. There's also 77 pellets on the left half and 75 on the right half of the 11"x11" target that was portions of the pattern that didn't hit the bird. I'm shooting 1 3/4 oz of #6 hevi-13 shot 3", from the 12ga Supernova with a Pure Gold ported turkey choke. So that's 37% percent in the head and neck. 78% on an 11" x11" paper target. like i said at 35 yards.

Idk better in multiple ways.... the point being just better within constraints of what's good for the deer and good for next season and the ones that follow. you could also throw in good for the habitat/native browse that's getting wiped out in places. also add people who don't hunt; trying to get to work after dark without hitting a deer every time, getting landscaping tore up, or businesses taking on damage (farm crops, vegetable farms, orchards, etc). as a hunter you can see more rutting action, more opportunity for harvest by taking doe where they need to be, and having opportunity at a nice buck (maybe even the biggest buck you've taken) year to year by moving away from the yearling age class. .....better.

i think neither of those things. I'm not trying to come across as a self-righteous ass. they have their primary reasons why they did it, being hunter based and not deer based. they think the system works fine enough that things aren't necessarily broke. i partially believe that in the sense deer are going to stick around. remember they even used the saying "if it's not broke don't fix it"? i just don't agree with that mindset. i think that just because something isn't subjectively broke doesn't mean you shouldn't make it better. i think at least our area is broken enough in which we should try to fix it... many of us in the area i hunt are anyway. the bandwagon is getting bigger every year which is good.

lost what i typed taking care of something else.... out of the first paragraph... I made one statement that said any antler restrictions by a co-op that are above and beyond those that I recommended, are for bigger antlers and not what I've continuously focused on (ratio, productivity, fawn recruitment, etc). you really had to turn co-ops in general and everything I said about buckzillas and 30 pointers?? come on. lol what I proposed wasn't even close to a solution that one should consider to get there. growing monster bucks isn't relevant to any conversation of state mandated ARs. ARs do increase doe harvest. also DEC has acknowledged that there is a level of hunter satisfaction/desire that increases after the first year. if it wasn't there they wouldn't continue it or consider it for other areas. even many hunters around the co-op I'm in that don't like antler restrictions and haven't volunteered to be apart of it have agreed that if they were mandatory that the restrictions I said wouldn't be that unreasonable. many of them didn't have a problem with the restriction measurements and points tallies. they more had an opposition to limiting choice in any way from what they're used to. the bottom 1/2 of VT and NH is not much different in climate and geography than were I hunt in 4C, above, and below. I live less than a half an hour from the border. a buck eats more than a doe but all the benefits are the same and worth it as they would be here. increased body weights are better regardless if they're needed to survive the winter. i get it. for what they want to do, it works. so it's sound in that sense. I'm looking at "biologically sound" being the bigger picture in improving the herd to be more ideal (or at least better than what it is). that's the whole idea right? making things better? Vermont's ARs i and others feel have limited effects by design. 3 points total doesn't do much. a lot of stuff can environmental stuff can effect antlers. i can't imagine a decade of a particular practice can effect genetics that much in a free ranging herd that's not that intensively managed for both doe and bucks. others that hunt in NY and/or VT that i know don't think the AR did enough to significantly notice a difference. many are average hunters not bias towards any of this stuff. i my opinion that's probably a big factor why hunters are starting to care less about having it. why keep limiting us if barely any results are seen from the hunter? anyway i gave a couple options for ARs that i think would work in an area that needed them for reasons other than trying to grow antlers. i don't like point only ARs and would rather go by spread/beam length if we couldn't have both. both i think is better. knowing that some of us might have mandated ARs in areas we hunt, what would you choose and maybe where/why?

yes I'm aware what they said and I read the report they did on the effects ARs had in the areas it was used. they don't need to change their stance at all. their stance is that their primary concern is hunter satisfaction. I'm telling right now that in some areas it isn't ONLY a social issue. I hate to say it but the general hunting public I'd guess is more concerned with what other hunters think about it more so than the actual biological effects. when we have fawns with spots during bow season that's a biological issue. before anyone jumps at the idea that momma was probably a fawn that gain enough weight to get bred and fawn later, know multiple cases weren't so. momma deer were fat, healthy, and old enough. when people race to shoot a spike that's trying to give attention to two separate doe of a bigger doe group because no other buck is around, that's also an issue. these might not exist where you are but they do in some areas of NY. the effort to reduce the doe population is directly related to how many bucks you have to balance it. otherwise you'll have the same problem. effects ARs can have on a herd are beneficial. that's what everyone should be paying attention to not what joe blow hunter down the road thinks, unless you happen to be talking to him. learning what makes people happy doesn't make us any more educated on what's good for the deer, unless you're thinking about what's good for the deer.

my GUESS is that some stuff we'll see for 2015 season and some stuff will be later. things like aggregates you might see sooner and stuff like buck harvest restrictions for each will come later I my guess. goals of each might also printed with regs to follow. i can see them setting up the frame work first.

I understand a co-op rules and state regulations are not the same. I assure you that if a co-op gets big enough there's very real public issues, concerns, limitations, etc. much of the same hurdles and backlash a state would see. we've worked more with DEC now as a co-op than I ever have figured we would. both restrictions of beam length/spread or quantity of points are regulated by NY or some other state so to say it's not feasible and can't be publicly regulated is just not the case. our co-op ARs were derived from state ARs with the same goals in mind. other co-ops are using the same ARs and measurements. co-ops who restrict more seem to be doing so for more reasons; to get bigger antlers and older bucks. you're completely entited to an opinion. mine is that what I typed was very relevant. there's no finite number of deer or goal that's determined to be defining line of yes everything is sound or no it doesn't. as you said every state or entity has their own goal in mind with varying accepted levels of success. I don't think the picture each state has of what is sound and what isn't is black and white. for example both VT and NY think it's important to protect yearling bucks and have put ARs in place to do so. VT figured it's ok to save fewer yearling bucks than NY being their restriction is 3 points total versus 3 pts on a side. So are you telling me one is sound and one isn't? the more defining characteristics you look at the more likely you'll be looking at a specific age class of buck that is the focus of your goal. the fewer variables you have the more "sound" an idea is, that's a fact of science. any time I've seen an AR considered by the state it's to protect yearling bucks. most reading these threads have figured out why now. if the purpose of such a reg is different then let me know. food for thought I guess.

i was told the first survey and this other "New hunter" survey are still being processed. also i think it was said the company that does all of DEC's printing usually has a back log of stuff from everywhere. so 2016 was what I was told, which would also correspond with the management plan they put out that nominally ends in 2016.

I definitely understand when you say it needs to be simple. it's really not that complex though. if we can get 11,000+ acres worth of "if it's brown it's down" hunters (we're talking hundreds) across a few townships to work with it, as well as those in southern states, then the rest of NY state hunters will do just fine. i wouldn't sell their capabilities too short. that is in areas where ARs would be useful. one problem you have is the simpler you get with restrictions the less effective they are and less biologically sound they are. you have to understand that DEC wouldn't implement new changes like that and then crucify you if your buck comes close to the minimum say maybe spread wise or if one point wasn't 1" or more per their current standards. if everyone thinks it needs to be simpler then I'd say it'd have to be 4 points on a side like half of Missouri. 3 in my mind doesn't do it. even then what do you do with bucks like G-Man shoots, symmetrical 4 or 6 pointers with spreads out past the ears? you let them walk maybe for life and spread their DNA or you come up with something else like spread or beam length to give a hunter the green light.

it was during a meeting that usually is pretty lengthy. if we don't move topic to topic we'd be there all night so no I didn't. I'm not sure if he knew anymore but I'm sure i'll find out.

before having land in a co-op 4 points to a side was many hunters breaking point. we ran with 3 points to a side for a while and we were taking lots of 1.5 year old deer with basket racks. that's the bad part about ARs with only higher # of points and no beam length, opposed to a lower # of points with a beam length/spread restriction. for the co-op we're on we have restrictions of minimum 3 pts on both sides and 15" outside spread. other co-ops in the area of 4C have that as well. it seems to be working out well for the purposes of taking 2.5 yr old deer and up, leave enough bucks for the doe. if the state was to put ARs on the table this would be what I want and now I think it'd probably be a good idea to have a higher spread or beam length that allows harvest if it doesn't meet the points quantity minimum. not sure what that would be. 15" outside is easy because it's close to as wide as ear tip to tip. maybe there's a beam length associated with beams extending to nose from broadsided view? idk that said we've always had bucks without brows, even before restrictions, and they seem to always be the first to go. we still get them here and there though. after almost 20 years we've figured out it's near impossible to eliminate those genes from the free range herd. the small number of "scrub" bucks we get with few points at an older age are a drop in the bucket when it comes to genes of the herd I suppose. we just continue on and not worry about it.

no idea how they figure it out. Cornell extension contact mentioned something along those lines that a goal was to get a look at results from women and minorities who are new hunters opposed to white males that maybe started late in life. due to printing or something he said changes or results won't be seen until at least 2016 for the survey though.

the new hunter one I've been told is pretty much for female or minority hunters that are new. it's one of 2 recent surveys DEC is conducting through Cornell. I don't think we'll see either results effect anything until 2016 though.

22LR without a doubt. anything bigger than a woodchuck out past 50 yards and you just get something else.

Nice. definitely helps to have multiple guys. My dad and crazy uncles got one as a group years back and got it out whole. it was a smaller bull moose I think from Quebec. took ropes, every hand, and a truck to get it back to camp. The outfitter thought they were crazy and so did others from couple area camps.

most people don't understand that for big hunting product companies Pro Staff really stands for promotional staff. expert is subjective and I know I'm not one. last time I checked I'm not being paid to travel the country to do hunting seminars. .....my freezer never seems to be empty and that is all.

...and for the doe side of things i agree with not limiting those who are successful. i think maybe additional tags somehow like Phade said is a good idea and i still strongly stand by what I've said on these forums of allowing for sooner filling of tags to help doe harvest (i.e. allow a hunter to fill two of three tags with doe during archery but still be able to use one to hunt for a buck without waiting until the next portion of the annual season). i'll add more info in that a big part of doe harvest out this way is the reluctance to shoot a doe more than so than the opportunity or ability. low numbers decades ago and the misunderstanding of herd management has many still thinking that any doe shot will decimate the herd. we're working on that through education with the various QDM co-ops in the area.

I just said within the QDM community, not meaning QDM biologists. Not any Dougherty and definitely not Hurst. I don't even know where Hurst would stand on anything. That and the info i gave in the last post is enough. Social media isn't really the place to throw names out there without permission and absolute clarity. Things get messed up and twisted rather easy. It's not important who said what so much as very knowledgeable deer biologists said it'll have effects sure but it's not the best solution.

well first off I'm not speaking for them. I'm just passing on some stuff I've heard. you said qdm biologist. not me. yes, they're apart of the QDMA. as far as I know there isn't really any official stance so to speak from the QDMA though. just individuals discussions between one another. in some areas in NY OBR may work but it doesn't seem to be the answer for NY in general. I can at the least say it's not for counties around here. Exception maybe for 4J (Albany) because it's bow only. I don't think you really need to limit harvest given the big limitation though. The opportunity for doe there is already practically the most it can be. so i guess it wouldn't be for 4J but for a different reason. so to roll with OBR i guess I'm saying sure but not for WMUs or areas around here (4C). then I'm using an educated thought saying that areas like the dacks and catskills would be no too.

i think you're a pretty knowledgeable individual but you sure are making lots of assumptions. the first was biologist was talking in context of the DEC survey options for NY. The second biologist was having a conversation with the person I got info from specifically about NY and the surveys as well. the first biologist lives here in NY and not exactly disconnected. my thoughts are other states have a lot of hunters already passing yearlings so the one buck they take isn't nearly as likely to be a yearlings. so buck to doe ratio might be a little better. also that ones buck is probably older than here so age structure is a little better. states concerns are more basic. sustaining the deer herd, keep harvests rates high enough to keep people happy, and keep both residents and non-residents buying licenses. my man worry is OBR is just forcing someone to shoot one buck. still don't understand the effects that harvest has on the rest of the herd. so you're not fixing the problem. I think basic education throughout NY will go a long way. after a while basic stuff will sink start to sink in and things will get better slowly. in the mean time any decision made by DEC better have a good reason behind it that they let everyone know when whatever it implemented. also it better be primarily for the deer and not to make people happy. not everybody will be happy but if it's for the deer they'll still respect the intentions despite not agreeing. otherwise, NY hunters won't take what DEC asks of them seriously. just another rule, instead of everyone working toward a better deer herd to benefit everyone; hunters, commuters, nurseries (businesses), etc.

I think it was a field & stream article where a hunter for some reason stayed behind at the hunting cabin while everyone else got into trucks and traveled a few miles away to their hunting spots. a nice buck 15-20 minutes after they would leave traveled down off a ridge next to the cabin to feed in a field behind it. can't remember how the hunter figured it out but the buck patterned the hunters. to add to this when my wife is home during the day mid week when not much activity is going on she'll see deer come out into our back yard. during the weekend and evenings when I'm out around the house they're never seen. similarly I try to check my trail cameras at the same time every time. you're more predictable to the deer and less of a presence.

how far will you be shooting? I've got multiple Nikon 3-9x40mm scopes and they all work good and seem to hold zero.

went years ago before the messed up stance on evil black guns. really liked the show. bought a bunch of stuff from smaller mom and pop companies for a good deal. stuff like custom arrows for the wife, fire starting steel, and then I got some rifle slings I'm sold on. they're the only slings I have for all my guns now.... slogan outdoors ultraflex sling... made in the USA and guaranteed no matter what.

I can definitely agree with this due to my schedule always seems to fill up. need a calendar on the fridge to keep everything from turning into a multi car pile up on the freeway of life. ... on another note to the poll options. I heard reliable second hand info that another well respected deer biologist within the QDM community thinks that a 1 buck per year limit will not work well enough from a biological stand point to do what needs to be done. we'll see in 2016 how these couple Cornell/DEC surveys and their results effect everything.