TheHunter

We would like to Live and let live (at least 2 years at a minimum), except the anti-AR guys like to kill and kill.. KIDDING!!!!

And where is the data that supports this stat?

That would be great to see that info. Here is the issue, who else is going to have the cash to study something other then an interested party? Can I, as joe hunter fund such a study? Nope. I respect the QDMA and their biologists. When people say that what they come up with based on their experience, knowledge, and expertise as hogwash and bullshit, thats where I have an issue. How can QDM be BAD!? I have food plots, I pass on younger deer. But to make the herd better for EVERY hunter a majority has to participate in some shape or form. I, as a AR and QDM supporter am not asking you to stop shooting bucks. Passing on < 1.5's to give them the chance to grow slightly older, breed, and survive is really in the grand scheme of things a small thing to ask. Every single hunter benefits from that.

SteveB, In 2000 there was a state high of 140,857 bucks taken. 2004 it was 88,733 bucks. It's slowly climbing back up with jumping numbers since then. Here: http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/42246.html

SteveB, thanks for that fun fact, don't forget to mention harvest is down ACROSS THE ENTIRE STATE OF NY. Whoops, forgot to mention that one eh?

Oh, I'm full of crap. LOL, your full of crap. I have first hand experience, family and friends that hunt in AR units that have first hand experience with the benefits of AR. I stated its great in MY AREA, and there are clearly other area's that need it and those that do not. Your assumptions are a joke.

Excellent point punch. Whats odd is, where I hunt, an AR zone. Not only have the bucks been able to mature slightly, there are more harvestable bucks around now then before AR kicked in. So now your presented with a choice, ah should I shoot that nice 6, or nah, maybe I'll wait for those two nice beefy 8's that I saw on the trail cam to come in. What great is, 75% of this Anti AR guys live in zones where harvesting a more mature buck is a possibility. They are speaking for MY AREA WHEN THEY ARE HOURS AWAY and have no idea what the hunting conditions are in the my area.

The BS that spews out of your mouth is phenomenal. Stop insulting our intelligence and admit your a brown its down man. Regardless of what you think, there are a lot of hunters who practice QDM, want AR, and the AR zones will expand and NY state will eventually come up with a state wide deer management plan for area's that need it. Again, YOUR area might not need any assistance, while other area's do.

Exactly, those same bucks will be there the following year for everyone to have an opportunity to harvest or pass on.

For the same reason your attacking him... Yes, food plots are great, and food plots, the ones I plant do not just "last a year". Perennial crops and grasses can last for years and years.

AR's protect yearling bucks. FACT is that Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective of reducing the yearling buck harvest by 70%. Very good QDM stands for Quality Deer Management, hence the reason for supporting one animal. But the result of QDM ends up benifiting more then just deer. QDM is about herd management, habitat mangement, hunter management, and herd monitoring. By improving the habitat for example, by doing food plots, your not only improving sources for deer but also for everything else that feeds there. Turkey, yote, etc etc...

Thats YOUR failed logic, opinion, and thinking.

Don't mind SteveB, his agenda is clearly to discredit and dispute any AR/QDM facts and opinions known to man. I agree, our herd does need age, more so in some area's then others.

Just wanted to say I love the site, and am glad a NY area site came back. Thanks to all, even the members I argue with

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Agreed, same goes for us.

Larry, Before quoting people you should read first. Your fellow ANTI-AR friend DOEWACKER is the one that called 1.5's and 2.5's scrub bucks, not I. And no PA has found zero evidence of any gene pool degration. This is a quote directly from the document I linked to from the PGC. Concerns over genetic impacts of selective harvest are common. Would selecting bucks based on the number of antler points they carried be enough to alter future antler development? Current research is clearly mounting evidence to the contrary. About 1 in 4 litters will have fawns with different fathers. Research has shown yearling antler points are poor predictors of future antler points and size. Percent of hunters harvesting a buck is similar to previous decades. First, yearling antler points are poor predictors of future antler development. Research indicates little relationship between a buck’s first set of antlers and those he carries at 4.5 years of age and older. So, using yearling antler points as a harvest criterion should not influence future antler development in the population as a yearling spike buck and a yearling 6-point can have similar sized antlers by age 4.5 years. Second, most of Pennsylvania’s antlered males are harvested after the breeding season. About 75 percent of Pennsylvania’s antlered deer harvest occurs during the firearms season in late November and early December. The peak of breeding is mid-November. As a result, most antlered males harvested in Pennsylvania have already passed their genes onto future generations. Third, a few mature males are not dominating breeding. In two different studies, yearling males successfully sired fawns in populations with high percentages of older males. In fact, most males, regardless of age, only sired one litter. Fourth, does are regularly being bred by multiple bucks. Initially studied in captive deer, multiple paternity has been documented in every free-ranging white-tailed deer study in which researchers have looked. Populations with different male age structures in different states have seen litters with two or more offspring having different fathers at rates of 20-24 percent. Finally, a buck’s mother contributes half of his genetic characteristics, but nobody can tell what a doe’s contribution to her son’s antlers will be. There is no way to visually evaluate the genetic antler potential of a doe. As a result, 50 percent of the genetic contribution to future antler development is randomly selected in Pennsylvania. http://www.statelibrary.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/document/715029/handout_-_biology_and_hunting_-_antler_restrictions_-_v13_20090806_pdf

Excellent point.

LOL yourself, if you read that was a direct quote from the PGC in PA, based on years of AR. Its 77% of 3H based on a random survey the DEC performed. You can have all the say you want, you have ZERO hunting experience in my WMU, and no idea what your talking about.

AR is in my area, the fact is it works fine for me and everyone I am in contact with personally that hunt in my AR zone and other AR Zones. Their satisfaction has increased, the maturity of their harvest have increased, and 1.5's are living to see the next year and beyond. I do not need any more proof, I see it. The fact that you don't beleive it works means nothing to me.

Steve863, keep attacking us with your immature and ignorant statements. We are posting facts from the PA PGC , NY DEC, other sources with facts that have done biologic research, and our own experiences.

Antler Restriction Report Card 1. Increase buck survival PASS 2. Change breeding timing NO CHANGE 3. Avoid negative genetic impacts PASS 4. Maintain hunter success rates PASS 5. Increase number of adult bucks PASS 6. Increase age structure of buck harvest PASS 7. Maintain hunter support PASS After 6 years, APRs are a success. They have increased buck survival and the buck age structure. They have maintained strong support from hunters. And Pennsylvania hunters are experiencing the same levels of success to which they are accustomed. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CD8QFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.portal.state.pa.us%2Fportal%2Fserver.pt%2Fdocument%2F715029%2Fhandout_-_biology_and_hunting_-_antler_restrictions_-_v13_20090806_pdf&ei=oWaaTNDyKMK88gak3tyJBQ&usg=AFQjCNHe4JL8ICLoyevKy_U4ShRkXRZhfA&sig2=mkTgaVaq_1tlRLGM_Oeszw

Where do you hunt? Oh thats right, your speaking from zero first hand experiance. Doe permits were over exteneded in the years prior, as the DEC stated they over shot their goals and needed to reduce the DMP's to get back within targets. Hunter Satisfaction increased... Yup Majority of 1.5's protected from harvest... Yup Biologic reason for AR... Yup Proof in PA that AR works long term... Yup Majority Support... Yup Buck Harvest as burmjohn showed is clearly all over the place since 2003 statewide. There was a huge drop in 2003 to 2004 statewide. So the conclusion you came to is useless. Nearly every single person here that is for protecting the 1.5's and pro AR has seen an improvement in their hunting experiance. Majority of you that are against it have zero hunting experiance in these AR zones. Thats shown clearly by those who posted in this thread here: http://huntingny.com/forums/index.php/topic,916.0.html and the absense of negativity shown there. Regardless, AR's are not going away in our WMU, regardless of how much you spin it.

WMU 3H is the largest unit in the current Antler Restriction program with 554 square miles. It also shares the majority of its borders with other antler restrictions units and states. This increases AR effectiveness. Current buck harvest is within 10% of the buck take prior to implementation of antler restrictions three years ago. Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective-Yearling buck harvest is down 70%, 2.5 year old buck harvest up 86% and 3.5 year old buck is up 167%. After Antler Restrictions the harvest is comprised of only 18.6% yearlings. The majority of the harvest (54%) is 2.5 year old bucks, and 3.5 year old bucks comprise a full 25% of the harvest. Within WMU 3H hunter support is 77% for continuing the antler restriction program. Hunter support for antler restrictions has increased more than 22% since the start of the program. After three years, opposition to continuation of the program has decreased from 26% to 14%.

Mocking tradition? Hardly. Our tradition is strong and healthly, 60+ years of hunitng in my family and nothing has changed from the fun we have at camp to the stories and harvesting of deer. Entitlement is not my argument. I never said AR is the end all cure, however it works by allowing 1.5's to survive, and giving everyone an opportunity to harvest a more mature deer in addition to allowing the maturing of the herd. Your argument is whats flawed, in YOUR area you say there are mature deer and a healthly structure. In my area there was not. I am not speaking for YOUR area. I'm going based on facts from our area's observations and harvesting.