The argument for a shorter gun season lies not in the bow hunter versus gun hunter debate as many who have read this thread have been mislead to believe. The arguement is for improving the health of the whitetail deer herd. This is well supported by scientific research. Despite the science this is a complex issue and hunters need to be informed on this in order to make the best decisions to support the longevity of our sport. The DEC's decision making process is to balance the two sides of the trophy hunter vs meat hunter disparity. So lets all take an unbiased look at the statistics and sciendce before taking this any further.
Lets look at the year 2016 for an example of numbers:
- In NYS 78% of deer harvested in the calendar year are killed by firearms
- 27,199 bucks were killed with archery equipment/ 107,006 bucks with firearms (79% of all bucks are taken by firearms)
Based on these numbers we can be certain that the firearms season has a much greater impact on the buck (and doe) population that the archery season. If we were to shorten the season we would have more bucks surviving to maturity thus improving the age structure of the herd. Age structure is a summary of the number of individuals in the herd of each age group i.e. fawns, 1.5 year old bucks, 2.5 year old bucks, and so on. Research shows that herds with an imbalance of young bucks leads to does not being bred until their 2nd or 3rd estrous cycle. This leaves their fawns born 1-2 months later making them less likely to survive the subsequent winter. Additionally when young bucks are allowed to do the bulk of the breding, due to the lack of mature bucks, their body weights drop low enough to compromise their ability to survive the winter.
The evidence was also presented earlier in the thread that the "Big Buck" states of the Mid West have short gun seasons. This leads to better herd dynamics and improved trophy quality, despite high numbers of deer taken.
So here we have information that tells us shorted firearms seasons could improve herd health and increase number of mature bucks in the woods. I dont know any hunters who would say that more mature bucks in the woods is a bad thing. This drives up hunter interest and allows for hunter retention. One of the most critical threats to the future of hunting is diminishing hunter interst and the lack of a voice of the hunter masses in politics. It is currently our privilage as US citizens to go out and hunt, however we need to make an effort to be informed on how hunting is conservation to convince the non-hunters of our value.
Are there other ways we could achieve improved age structure.. yes! These include changing to a 1 buck per hunter regardless of weapon system, earn a buck programs, antler restrictions, move the firearms season further back from the rut ect. None of which are all that appealing to most because they are more restrictive regulations and force certain behaviors that not all value.
To reitierate the reason for this type of change is not to support bow hunters more than gun hunters. It is to reduce the harvest of bucks to improve age structure of the herd for overall health and opportunity for more mature bucks. I realize this is long winded and complex to a certain extent. I do feel that this is critical information to know when thinking about these issues and not pitting this as a this groupp versus that group arguement. The dividing of hunters as a whole is a tactic that anti hunters will use in the future to try and remove our privalge to hunt. It is our job as hunters to be educated, vocal, and aware of the issues that effect the beautiful pastime we all share.