nyantler

I'm not trying to change anyones mind... just stating how I think it is.. just my opinion just like everyone else... it should be all about herd management.. that is the only reason there is still hunting is because of the conservation argument... otherwise there wouldn't be any rules or regulations... there were no deer hunting regs in NY until the 20th century... so if it's not about management what is it about? I feel that most hunters miss the point of why we even need to regulate at all... we've tried it the other way and it didn't work... the way some guys think here makes me wonder why the DEC bothers with having biologists on the staff... I'm sorry if some here don't like what I'm saying... but it's the reality.. like it or not... As for me thinking the reasons aren't good enough.. thats right.. and who are you to tell me I can't think whatever I want? Kind of a double standard huh?.. you can have your belief but I can't have mine... like I've said before.. I really don't care who doesn't like it.. if I did i wouldn't have said it... it's my opinion and as long as there is a forum where I can voice my opinion I'm going to.. just like everyone else.

You are missing my point... either way choices are limited... the non AR guys chances are better without AR's and the AR guys chances are better with AR... each is limited in some way no matter how you look at it... yet each has an opportunity to kill a buck in either situation. Using the argument of taking away choices works either way. The argument for OR against AR's should be based on good deer management... not on who gets the better deal in their personal hunting experience... as for the AVERAGE hunter... I would say that according to what I've seen so far in any survey.. including the one done on this forum... more are in favor of some kind of AR... so I'm not sure where we all get the notion that the average hunter is against AR's. No matter what hunting regulation is passed.. someone is not going to like it... the fact that it is not liked by some shouldn't be what makes it good or bad from a management point of view... it's either good for management or it isn't.. my opinion is this shouldn't be a one hunter against the other issue... yet some think it should.

yeah.. you're probably not going to get much more than a video, fillingout, and a certificate from NY state either. Even with a safety course... there is most likely more info here on the net than any course you could take.

Kinda like people..lol

I have nothing against meat hunting... most hunters love venison.. my gripe would be using it as an argument against AR's... unless maybe you live in an area that doesn't give out doe permits... then it might be an argument... I'm not sure why it's ok to be a meat hunter for some but not ok to be an antler hunter... Just some food for thought.. some like to complain that AR's limit their choices.. but it works the opposite way as well.. big bucks hunters have had their choices limited as well... the historic slaughter of yearling bucks has lessened the amount of bigger bucks in the woods for guys that like bigger bucks and there is nothing we can do about it.. just sayin'

"I am not suggesting that it's an active line of logic running through their heads-- science hasn't done enough to prove or disprove anything that grandiose, but I am suggesting that their experiences with scents (or sounds or sights) in repeat situations can really dictate how they react" I would say this hits the nail on the head

Not a rack hunter but took the time and money to have one mounted ... AR's have no rule against filling the freezer either.. so you'd be ok.

I think deer tend to learn safe spots where human scent doesn't bother them.. kinda like a war vet that knows it's safe around guns at his gun club... but isn't going to trust a man with a gun in Afganistan.

There is definitely something to that

although we all know how well a deer can smell.. I believe that they have learned to tolerate some smells based on how often and how strong the smell is... a faint human scent may not alarm them as much as a strong scent... seeing how they probably smell human scent nearly all the time in varying degrees.. I'm sure it depends also on what defense mode they're in as well.. if they've been pressured hard.. i'm betting they won't tolerate much human scent at all. Residual human scent left on things probably doesn't alarm them to the point of fleeing for their life, but will cause them to avoid that area just to be safe.

all deer are expendible... I just threw that out there for those that claim they aren't into the antler thing.. let's see how not into antlers they really are...

Here is a good article written about deer and their sense of smell http://www.imbmonsterbucks.com/info.php?id=243

a good tracking dog can smell scent 4 ft under the ground.. and a deers nose is about 5 times better than a dogs...just like a dog.. anything you touch with any part of your body can be smelled by a deer... the older the deer the harsher the reaction to what it smells.. it has had plenty of time to learn what smells absolutely mean danger... and will not tolerate that odor..

you don't have earn a buck where there is no doe hunting... those are mostly low deer density areas.. and the buck age structure is usually better.. no need to do it there... which brings up another idea... how about limiting the amount of buck tags issued across each WMU?? That ought to get some heads spinnin"

I like the idea of having to fill your doe tags first before you can get a buck tag... it will give the meat hunters a chance to get some meat so that they won't have a reason not to pass on a small buck... although I'm sure we'll hear some new reasons for why they needed to kill a small buck after filling their does tags... it will also create situation where guys will have to let a buck walk if he hasn't filled his tags... once you do it a few times it really isn't all that hard.. they may even see some nice bucks while waiting to fill their doe tags.. giving them insentive to pass on smaller bucks in hopes of killing one of the nicer bucks that they've seen.

Hopefully you father in law won't kill something and ask you do drive your muzzleloader tag to him next year..lol

I know plenty that take 2 bucks a year as well

When there are more larger bucks.. there is more competition for breeding rights.. only the strongest bucks will win that right...usually (not always) those are also the biggest of the bucks... not necessarily antler wise, but physically... that ensures that healthy, strong and physically superior bucks will be doing most of the breeding passing those superior genetic qualities on to future generations of bucks... if hb270 was refering to passing on Antler size genetics.. his statement would not necessarily be true

LOL.. now we have gotten to someone wanting a hunter to get shot... do some of you think before you post? The last post would have been ok, but for the first sentence... which didn't have to be written to make your point

Hey.. Good for you..!!

I haven't heard anything yet

From some responses here I think many of you pro AR guys... (which i am one)... really have no idea how the concept of AR's came about as part of a management plan... some of the QDM guys ought to educate themselve on the original QDM model... selling AR's as just a trophy deer producing concept is what has turned some of the anti-AR guys off... If I didn't already know why AR's were conceived to begin with and listened to some of the arguments given buy pro AR guys for why they are for them.. I think I'd be turned off too.

You'll get a kick out of it.. it's a lot of fun shooting instinctively... it's not hard but takes a bit of practice to get good at it.. its kinda like shooting foul shots in basketball..lol

You are right Steve.. there hasn't been one person that has mentioned the real reason AR's should be adopted and how they are really beneficial to the deer... it's a shame but most guys think its just about having more big bucks to hunt... which is the wrong reason to have them... it may be a good residual benefit.. but not what makes AR's a good idea.

Wow that's actually not a bad idea Doe!! Might be good for overhunted areas...only problem would be if somone hunts in another area but lives in the overhunted area.. they might not be able to get a tag for the area that they hunt. I like the idea of taking a doe first before you can use a buck tag in certain areas.. and the doe must be reported before the buck tag is used as well.