nyantler

He didn't "prove" anything.. he just wrote something on a piece of paper which has nothing to do with herd benefit... he was talking about eminent biological need for survival not whether it is more or less beneficial.

I've already explained this numerous times on here... you're unwillingness to pay attention is getting old... just because you spout jeremy hurst's talking points without taking them in the right context doesn't mean you know what you're talking about... I will say you have all the info right as he explained it, yet you have no idea what it means as it pertains to what he was responding to... I give.. UNCLE.. you wore me down... you're a lost cause on this subject... and you still think that it's all about trophy hunting for me.. you clearly aren't paying attention... so carry on! PS. Remember... this is where you start with the name calling... just don't want you to miss your cue!

Just because something isn't needed doesn't mean it is not beneficial... Are the deer in NY going to continue to survive without AR's..Sure. Is it better to have a stable buck age structure in the whitetail population..YES. Not having AR's will not put our deer herd in eminent danger which is the basis for Hurst's statement, but that in no way implys that he somehow doesn't think yearling buck protection and age structure isn't beneficial to the herd.

You just proved my point... the program isn't working!... unwanted pregnancy is worse than ever and feeding money into free birth control isn't working! Money being used for unwanted children has increased even with a taxpayer funding of birth control and nobody is trying to take away money for unwanted children. It is not practical to continue putting money into a program that is not working... regardless of anyones morality.

I think this article by Jeremy Hurst words should be sufficient to prove AR is part of the NY Deer Management Plan Brought to you by: Jeremy Hurst, Wildlife Biologist, NYSDEC Last fall, DEC adopted a Management Plan for White-tailed Deer in New York State, 2012–2016. The plan provides strategic direction for our program and will help us focus our efforts where they can best meet the biological and social demands associated with deer. Through the plan we emphasize the value of hunting as a tradition and as the primary tool for deer management, the need to create new opportunities for young deer hunters, and the importance of addressing the ecological impacts associated with deer. The plan outlines six primary goals that encompass the priorities for deer management and the values and issues expressed by the public: 1) manage deer populations at levels that are appropriate for human and ecological concerns; 2) promote and enhance deer hunting as an important tradition and management tool; 3) reduce negative impacts caused by deer; 4) foster public understanding and communication about deer ecology, deer management, economic aspects and recreational opportunities; 5) manage deer to promote healthy and sustainable forests and enhance habitat conservation efforts to benefit deer and other species; and 6) ensure that the necessary resources are available to support effective management of white-tailed deer in New York. This fall, DEC has adopted regulations to begin implementing several strategies of the deer plan, primarily geared toward increasing opportunity for hunters. These include: beginning the Southern Zone bowhunting season and the regular season in Westchester County (bowhunting only) on October 1; establishing a late bowhunting season in December in the Northern Zone; allowing Deer Management Permits (DMPs, “doe tags”) to be used in all seasons in the Northern Zone; expanding mandatory antler restrictions (3 point on one side minimum) into Wildlife Management Units (WMUs) 3A, 4G, 4O, 4P, 4R, 4S, and 4W; opening all of Suffolk County for the special January firearms season, subject to local discharge ordinances; and establishing a Deer Management Focus Area in Tompkins County to intensify use of hunting to assist communities with the burden of overabundant deer populations. Also this fall, we will be implementing a new big game hunter log to track hunting effort and sighting rates of deer, black bear and moose during the regular firearms season. Logs will be sent to a random sample of hunters throughout the state. Moving forward, our next major tasks from the deer plan will be to: develop Wildlife Management Unit groupings for use in deer population monitoring, harvest analysis and management decisions; evaluate making Bonus DMPs antlerless-only or requiring hunters to take more than one antlerless deer before earning an either-sex Bonus DMP; develop an objective system for identifying appropriate strategies to reduce harvest of young bucks (see Antler Restrictions and Other Buck Harvest Strategies); and develop an index to asses deer impacts on forests and incorporate that index into deer population objective setting. Aside from deer, over the coming year, DEC’s Big Game Management Team will also be drafting a management plan for black bear and developing a research program to assess moose populations.

The management decision is to reduce the number of yearling bucks being taken in AR areas... a decision by the DEC to "manage" the amount of yearling being harvested... it's simple... These are the first 2 sentences on the DEC.. Antler Restrictions in New York page: An antler point restriction is in place in WMUs 3A, 3C, 3H, 3J, 3K, 4G, 4O, 4P, 4R, 4S and 4W in Southeastern New York. The antler restrictions is designed to reduce harvest of yearling (1.5 years old) bucks. I believe the highlighted sentence constitutes management of yearling buck harvest as designation for AR's.

I'm not sure it's any more costly in this case, our tax dollars being given to planned parenthood and somehow there still is an increasingly rampant problem with unwanted pregnancy... that tells me that the tax dollars are being wasted because they haven't made a difference in the amount of bad choices being made.

Oops I almost forgot that one!!

I agree.. there are churches popping up all over just to avoid taxes and make the pastor rich.. I think we are talking here though about tradional churches that have been in existence for 1000's of years.... the ones where the pastors don't drive a Mercedes...lol

The Whitetail deer management coalition of NY is the group lobbying for yearling buck protection... they are the group that have help get AR's instituted in the current WMU's... they are currently making proposals for the rest of NY based on deer herds numbers, ratios, habitat quality.. etc. based on research of the WMU's over the last 3 years... their proposal IF an AR was to be used in the central and western NY WMU's is spread measurement instead of point restriction realizing that it would be much better for ensuring better yearling buck protection... currently they base it on trying to save approx. 67% of the yearling buck herd across the state... they realize that is not optimum but a good start for seeing results more quickly. Their original plan was 4 on a side, but their current thought is that spread measurement will have a better protection rate... I think my point is that 3 on a side doesn't seem to be an option here. Just to clarify.. I spoke with an officer of the coalition about 2 weeks ago.. just to see where they were headed and voice my opinions and concerns... the idea of spread measurement instead of 4 on a side is where they are leaning now... at least for region 7 specifically

I never get how some of you scream UNFAIR when you are faced with a management decision that affects you personally... but are okay with imposing your own unfair idea to remedy the problem... you get to do what you want and others get punished... just for shits and giggles.. tell me how your plan benefits the deer

I'm not sure that anyone is "trying" to make things harder for any hunter... unfortunately there will always be a certain small percentage of the hunting population that for what ever reason will have their own limitations on when, where and how they can hunt... but it is a small percentage, and rules and regs will always favor the the majority... right or wrong... that has always been the way... we have to admit that over the last 40 years hunting opportunities ( available tags and season length) have gotten better not worse... guys younger than us complain about things today, but you and I and many others know how it was years ago with shorter seasons and 1 buck tag with limited "party" permits for antlerless deer... I for one haave nothing to complain about as far as opportunity. Most limitations are imposed by the hunters personal choices and situation than anything the DEC has done.

You might not get the chance to shoot the 6's in 7J... the proposal for AR in region 7 and most of central and western NY WMUs is for a spread restriction instead of a point restriction... I guess they get that the 3 on a side rule wouldn't protect enough yearlings in this region... just some info to ponder.

Now that you've made the statement.. show some proof that poor people can't get birth control.. we already know that free birthcontrol is available to the poor and the not so poor.. the fact that poor women are getting pregnant has little to do with the availability of birth control and more to do with lack of responsibility... and that doesn't seem to be much of a problem either because they also have the option of a free abortion at the same place they get the birth control... can you see the problem we have here yet or is none of this getting through??

The churches money comes primarily from fundraisers and donations from the community... taxing them would only be taxing the community again... much of the money raised is used to fund programs to help the needy and the community.. so you would also be taking money away from those programs... If you are going to tax the churches.. you should also tax not for profit organizations as well... any money that goes to employees of the church or not for profit org. is taxed anyway as income withholdings for that individual... so by taxing the church you would only be taxing the money earmarked for programs designed to help those in need.

Not really a good analogy... KKK is made up of white supremacists ... Caucasion is a race... homosexuality is not.. NAMBLA actually has caucasians as well.. that doesn't define its membership... and I think Culver gets it.. I'm not bashing homosexuals here.. I'm making a point about lumping a whole group with the sad actions of a few members of that group... NAMBLA's sad actions should not reflect on all homosexuals.. just like a Catholic priests actions should not reflect on Catholisim as a whole.

Legally you cannot carry a firearm while bowhunting. It is unlawful to: Possess a firearm of any description when bowhunting or when accompanying a person bowhunting during special archery seasons.

Just don't burn the house down with all the firepower... Happy Birthday Eddie!!

6 weekends is not enough? And for God's sake... why would you pay any attention to your wife during hunting season??? LOL... that would give you 7 weekends!!

For some hunting is usually over by 7am opening day anyway..LOL

Grouse.. thanks for posting what I am too exhausted to post myself... defending NAMBLA for any reason and saying they are not a homesexual group is something I didn't think we needed to prove to anyone here.. but I guess I was wrong.. thanks for the help.

Just like Catholisim is not a crime and pedophilia is... and you are not getting my point.. early's statement about relating isolated insidents with catholics as a whole is ignorant and absurd.. you always assume that when I post something to make a point that it is what I think.. I was pointing out how rediculous he is to lump any group with isolated incident and gave exampes of other instances that occor that he has no problem with based on his views.. You should be talking to him not me.

Great shot of the spider web!

Yes thats how it works... but D&DH keeps saying it was scored as a non-typical.. which isn't correct. I thought I'd pass on why I think the original B&C decision was correct... this pic of the king buck point in question explains it quite clearly. Each point should come into the green line at the same point not different points to be typical. This pic illustrates where the original decision got it's basis..

Yeah I kind of got that from the article too... if thats the case I think we have a new world record. I'm wondering how many past scored bucks will petition for a rescore based on common point decisions of the past... they may have opened a whole new can of worms here. What I don't understand is that the buck was always scored as a typical, just with an abnormal point. I don't see how anyone thinks it was scored as a non-typical that knows anything about scoring. The whole thing is rather confusing... I don't like just getting the D&DH take on all this... it's always best when a world record goes in without controversy. I think that the record will forever be tainted after all thats gone on... that is sad. Yet, nobody can ever doubt the exceptional rack on this buck regardless of it's score.