stubby68

No I dont. However we all know there a lot of guys who do. Just read the hunting threads about all the bang bang bang during season. Those guys do not practice safe hunting to begin with what makes you think making them stop to count points will change that. It could also make more guys give up on being sure of what they are shooting at that is beyond that buck. Your target should not be the the rack. It should be the deer. If you decide to shoot that you make sure of what is beyond that deer. How many times have you heard someone say I missed a big buck and then say how many Pointe it had. If you had time to count points you had time to make a safe kill. Them knowing the number of points and still not making that kill says they were shooting at rack and not worrying about anything but.

I know this isn't at me but in the other thread does were brought up. I asked why Noone ever pushes for protecting younger does. I can't remember the exact words but it was asked. And ignored because no one wants to admit it is all about the bone. Antlers are rare? Seems to be a lot of pics posted of bucks every year. Plenty more of trail cam photos of them as well. An age structure as nature intended? Is there any data showing what nature had that age structure at before humans? I do not mean before we started hunting them. I mean before wee were here. The moment humans got involved we changed 21st nature had and needed. Anything now is just a guess. Housing ,farming ,even predator hunting and anything else humans do changed nature's structure. We have no clue what nature intended for a proper age structure. Maybe if we took a whole state and moved people out and let nature take over we could in time see what nature intended.until then everything else is a guess. We kill predators and they take out the oldest weakest and sickest the way nature intended. Humans can not make up for the lose of those predators thus skewing things. Humane manage for 21st they want not what nature wants or needs plain and simple.

I have had more then one close call. That is why I hunt my own land and am very hard on tresspassing. You say you are conserned more with keeping hunters safe then the size of the antlers but if this passes the main focuse would be on the size of the antlers.AR could make things worse. A hunter will be more focused on the antlers to make sure it is legal and less focused on what is the other side of that deer. If they can just shoot now and not worry about the points yet some still do not look at anything but the deer why would you think making them worry about the number of points would make them see more then just the deer? Heck it could cause more hunters to look more at the deer and less at what is beyond. Makein in it more dangerous. I am not saying it will but that is what is more likely to happen. Haveing to take time to count points takes time away from them looking at the back ground and might make for more snap shots after the count hits the required number of points to be legal. I know most of us already take the time to make a safe shot but we also know there many who do not. Make in them focus on the number of points could make that worse. Just pointing to the other side of the safety issue you mention.

I agree with you but It really does not make you pass 1.5 year olds. There are more then a few 6, 8, and 10 point 1.5 year olds out there. All it does is make a few guys happy that others have to hunt the way they do.

Just limit it to one buck no matter the weapon and leave it at that.

I would rather have one in the frying pan then the book.

How would they know

I never said I know more the anyone. What you posted does not say for the good of the herd it says for the good of the hunter. You want me to see something that is not there. You are on Cornell like 8th is a lollypop. I don't care what the status is. There study was done by asking a certain group of hand picked hunters a very small number when compared to the number of actually hunters in the state questions. These questions were worded and asked in such a way as to get the answer that was being looked for. Everything after was a big guess. Just the small s a moly number of those asked was not enough alone to say the majority. If you have 50 people in a room and ask 20 of them if they want pizza for a dinner and 15 of them say yes that would be the majority of 20 people in the room you didn't ask all so maybe the 30 you did not ask wanted something else but by not asking you never know. You can not claim a majority rule unless the majority have spoken which they havent. I have asked many times for someone to explain why older bigger bucks are better for a herd rather younger smaller ones. I have seen prove b that it doesn't hurt and it doesn't help. Yet not one person can explain why letting all the bucks get older and bigger is better. They always end up saying the same v thing because bigger antlers is better.giving me something that has nothing to do with the hunter and everything to do with the herd maybe then I can see your point.

I have already stated I will not change what or how I hunt regardless or it passing. I have also stated that In the past I have passed on older bucks and taken younger ones. Big old one are nice to look at but not much for eating. You are or rent there is no data given to prove the number of hunters that actually took 2.5 year olds. However that is just one of the problems pointed out in the artical. Also it is not different then NY saying most of the bucks killed are 1.5 years old. Unless every b UK taken is aged there is no way of knowing a true number everything else is a guess. There are a lot of 1.5 year olds out there the would fall well out side the AR restrictions. I have many 8 and 10 points to prove that. So again just using AR to control an issue that is not as bad as some would have you believe is not going to work. Artical also says that the AR was tried for a long time in places before it was determined to not be working and ultimately dropped for better solutions. Why not go to a 1 buck limit? Total number of bucks killed would be lower thus leaving more of all age classes for the next year. And maybe it might get more doe killed in areas where there numbers are out of controll.

I am saying that it won't help the herd in the way or to the extant that everyone pushing it claims it will. I am also saying that what you posted does not say it is being done for the herd. It says it is for the hunter. Almost every statement made about it being good or that it needs to be done ends in the words older bucks with bigger antlers. Antlers do not show age of buck yet that is what is being pushed as the yard stick for ageing. Nobody is even thinking of all the other affects AR have and the problems that can come from it. Now and in the future. There article out there that explain the problems with AR and that places that tried it also dropped it and ended up better off. Why is it always buck management and never whole herd management? The only time the whole herd is mentioned is when trophies are brought up and then someone says big antlers are good for the whole herd. Yet Noone can explain why these big antlers are good for anything other then the hunter. How many do you think would push for a or even hunt if p&y or b&c or any of the big buck clubs went away and bucks could no longer be mounted and braced about. Instead of AR why wouldn't one buck rule help more. Then guys wouldn't get 3 bucks a year and that would leave them to grow get older and bigger. Hurst went on a quality decoration management hunt and said the words they wanted to hear. You say he didn't say thereally was no benefit but did he say that there was a definite benefit or that down the road AR could turn around and bite us in the rear end? I'm not against changing things but how about trying something that does not have to be about bigger antlers and more of them. Like I said try limiting the number of bucks killed not the age. Killing all older and leaving all younger does not look like the right approach. Killing less of each age class looks and sounds better. Just limit the number of bucks one guy can kill and give them a choice to take a doe with that tag instead of not using it at all.

What twist? It says for the hunter. Where does it say for the herd? I'm not twisting a thing. If it were for the herd then why not say tha? You are the one twisting it and your opinion is to put words where there are none. You think they wouldn't propose anything that wasn't good for the herd. What you posted does not say that ,it specifically says for the hunter. Just because you think they wouldn't propose something not good for the herd does not mean they will not. As for the survay. They can only say that the majority of the hunter surveyed want it. Then they guess the rest. Unless they survey all hunters the can not in any way say the majority want it. No more then they can say the majority of bucks killed are 1 1/2 years old when the actually only check a small number and the rest they count points, or know the number of deer in the herd or how many were killed. Putting the word Cornell in it still only makes it a guess and nothing more. Well it does make it an expensive guess. Until they survey every hunter and age test every deer they will not have accurate numbers of either. Heck look at the presidential election . Experts predicted that Trump would lose because of surveys and stats. We all know how that worked for them. Sample size prove nothing.for there surveys to have warrant they need to ask ALL HUNTERS. Not just a few hand picked ones who were asked questions that were leading at best. Any survey taken on a small sample size of the population can be made to show what ever the desired out come that is wanted. Funny how this survey was done yet we never hear of anyone who got it or anyone who knows someone who knows another who got the survey. One would think that forums like this and all the other social media sites someone would know someone who took it.

My example with my buddies was mentioned to point to the fact that in my areas there is not a big problem with poaching as was the example of others e c os sitting down town shooting the breeze, or the forest ranger who never got out of his truck or even asked any questioned. There are officers galore in areas where nothing or very little is happening yet in areas where poaching is a problem there are very few. Maybe they need to just move them from lower problem areas to higher problem areas.

I know you are but what am i

There it is best satisfy hunters values and intrests. Does not say it helps the herd in anyway or tha t it is need for anything other then the hunter. Funny I nor anyone at know we're asked what we wanted. They s Surveyed a small number and then made up the rest . Just like the do with age of the deer taken

You said a mouthful. ..

A person who hunts my only do it less then 12 days a year but a hunter hunts many more then 12 days. Plus all the days scouting, researching, learning and preparing for there next hunt. Besides that a thread about hunting is far important then a thread on beer on a hunting forum. Your right. What's your point? All I did was post a link to an article I found intresting. However some articles such as the one in my link point out that it was proven over many many years not to work and was dropped as a result. These articles are not backed, written or influenced be quality decoration management association as many of the ones saying in works are. These are also stating facts that were proven over longer periods of time then most others. Also point out many places that tried and found same results. A lot of the article on AR are just propaganda used to support what certain people want. The facts they point out are based on only a few short seasons of AR.Not many years and multiple trial and failure in multiple areas. As the article says AR only work in small privatized areas where heard can be closely controlled. As for it working in other states let's use pa for example. I have family in PA and know many others who hunt. Heck my ups delivery guy lives in pa. All of these people say the hunting socks since AR and keeps getting worse. Unless you only want the antlers and are fine with not seeing anything at all or at most ones that are not legal to shoot. Some of these people have stopped deer hunting all together because it's not worth it anymore. Some people stopped hunting in PA and come to NY to hunt. In some areas the deer populations improved because of fewer hunters which meant fewer deer being killed. Yes there are those who say things are great now but those are the trophy hunters who will always think less competition and more big antlers is great. I'm not against doing something. One buck tag would be the best. One buck no matter what weapon you use. Funny how the same guys who say I shouldn't not be allowed to kill the buck I chosever because it takes out the young ones still want to be able to kill 3 bucks in one year.I these guys are so worried about numbers of bucks out there especially big ones then why kill 3 take one and be done with it. Funny how we always hear how there are not enough old big bucks in NY yet every year there is no shortage of pics of old big bucks taken in ny.

I've been hunting about 35 years and have only seen 2 Eco while hunting. Other then the ones I hunt with. Neither of the ones did any more then wave at me. However I have seen as many as 4 all sitting together down town shooting the breeze. Even the ones I hunt with do more hunting then work. However if the get a call they respond. In my area it decently is more then one for 100 square miles. More like one for 10 miles. Just isn't a big problem in some areas. We also have lots of forest rangers here never seen any of them at all. One time I saw on parked at some state land. I went to pick up a buddy who had gotten a doe. The officer never got out of hiss truck. After we loaded the doe he said congrats and we left. Never a question or check of anything. Tag want even on deer it was in buddies pocket. Not saying they don't do there job just that in some areas they know there isn't a big problem. Maybe they should move some of the ones in non problem areas to high problem areas. On opening day of trout season though they are all over checking people. Go figure. It is there job. They knew they might get calls like this when they took the job. If they don't want to do what they were hired for then they should get a different job. That's like a police officer saying I'm not going to a robbery call because the per might have a gun. What good are they if they are afraid to do there job. There job requires dealing with people who are more than likely armed and they knew this when they applied for the job. Yet you think they shouldn't be required to do there job. The fine handed out or punishment should not determine if they do there job. That's like saying speeding tickets do not have a big enough fine so do not enforce the law because the person in the car might have a gun.

http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/articles/facts-antler-restrictions-deer-hunting Good read

Actually there are 28 pages of arguing about each other's opinions.

First I already stated I will not change how or what I hunt. So no I will not buy a tag and not use it. Second who are you to lecture someone about doing what they see fit on there own property?

When have I ever hidden the fact that I do not shoot decorations and will pass them and take a young tender tasty one? I have said a good many times I shoot young bucks . Can't ( still hide) something I never hid in the first place. I hide nothing. Never have never will. But you can still kill those trophies you like to brag about yet never prove you have gotten. Like I said I hunt for my own reasons and to make myself happy. Unlike you who seems to do it to please others and to make sure you have something to brag about. You worry about you and I will worry about me.

There is no accuracy to question. Like I said even if all tags were reported and not one I'll able deer was killed the would be no way to know age stats unless every deer was aged with jawbone. Number of points tells them nothing about how old the buck was. Even when they do checks at butchers they age by points and size. Or take a quick look at teeth which can be clos we but still not good enough to be accurate in there guess of how many 1 1/2 year old bucks are killed. What I own are the tags I purchase I will kill enough deer to fill the tags I have and no more. I will however fill them with an animal that makes me happy. Not one that makes the Dec or anyone else happy. I hunt for my enjoyment and mine alone.

Assume nothing

Pass or not I will not be changing a thing. I pay for the tag I'm filling it. And I know I will not be the only one. The Dec nor anyone else knows or can even come close with a guess how many of what age are out there or have been taken. Nor do they know what the herd numbers really are. The checks they do are very few trend far between in most of the state. Even if every tag was reported they wouldn't know what are due the animals were. Antler size or number of points say nothing about age. I have seen spikes taken that were a rendered at 5 plus years. I have 2 10 points that are both arendgegedged at 1 1/2. One is twice the size of the other both in rack and body size. Both taken in same woods during the same season. One by myself and one by my uncle. I also have a 3 1/2 year old that is a 4 point and the rack will sit in a ice cream bowl. Until someone can explain to me how only shooting big old bucks is making the herd better for the animals and not just for the wall then I will shoot what I want. How does killing all the old deer and letting all the young ones walk help the herd. I thought we wanted good age structure. Leavening all young and killing all old puts the balance toward the young and isn't that against what everyone wants? I mean everyone says old means big and big is what they want right. Everyone complains they do not see enough old big bucks too many small young ones.