phade

Recent college graduation, that's really the skill. It's entry level, so basic computer ability, ability to show up on time, be profesisonal, etc. Training is provided. One of the top training companies in America.

I work at a well-known company in Rochester. We have a hiring need for our department due to a product growth beyond expectations. It's a good foot in the door role with a company you can grow with, and very stable. Good benefits. Work isn't that bad, either. Busy, but not horrible work. Recent college grads, or people a year or two out of college. I know there's probably a few parents here with kids that might fit this bill. Good leadership/bosses, I know them personally. Please PM me if interested.

And then the neighbors get pissed because they had their "bucks" picked out already and the shooting/impact got their blood boiling. They're not growing anythying but food plots, and the damage to the farm crops ends up being realized despite the efforts of the nusiance tags. Farmer needs deer shot, and neighbors want the big bucks and despises the nuisance tags now because all the does are being shot and putting the deer on alert. Nobody ended up winning and most certainly there wasn't a win-win scenario possible. The community effort is precisely the need.

Why do so many people believe that being behind the 8 ball means having lots of deer and big bucks?

100% agree, spot on point there about the 8-ball situation, and I would add not just the herds, but one that hunters can at least reasonable support and buy into. That makes it pretty low odds of success in my book.

Our hunters are as equally incapable of logical, rational, organized decision-making as any other state. The dysfunctionality is the same across the board. Whether Ohio, IL, or NY. The stereotypical profile of a hunter in any whitetail dominant state is the same.

Ignoarance is bliss, especially when you trust the inmates to run the prison. I see alot of "them vs. us" in this thread, and also a lot of "its them not us" and not so much "we have some degree of accountability in this situation." Then it's backed up by posts like yours. Sad commentary on the state of hunting as a whole. Change this from deer hunting to heart surgery, and I think your tone changes when you are on the operating table pretty quickly.

I agree that the DEC is not doing a great job. I also agre we as hunters are not doing a great job. The DEC needs to have a good model and high hunter engagement. There are so many things I can do here at work if employee engagement wasn't important - I'd hate to work for some of the people in this thread. It appears alot of people on this thread seem to forget a model that works for the DEC also has to have a fairly high engagement rate for hunters.

There are a few places at Cornell you can do this! LOL. (It's a joke...)

The people that are reached out are reached out to randomly, on purpose. They are IDed to be a part of the representative sample based on the preset markers/qualifiers, etc. that make up the "whole" of hunting populus. So exactly, you get it. The reason why people shouldn't look into this beyond a casual "oh that't interesting," is because the poll can be manipulated, it has bias (only people who have internet, only allows for one preference, etc.), and because The sample could be biased...have to assume the % was used only because the number of respondents were probably too small to be publish-worthy. There's no tracking of the inputs, so there's no way to know the breakdown. Nor could you assume that there is preference for one over the other options or combination thereof because only one can be selected. Maybe OBR was second choice for 2 of every 4 respondents. Factor that in, and you get a much higher acceptance rate amongst the respondents for OBR (just an example).

Not really. Just madmen spinning the bottle.

I don't know why this stuff flies over your head. You have proven to be a pretty bright person, but equating a poll conducted online from a small time newspaper to one that Cornell is doing seems foolish. Random selection doesn't happen by random, if that makes sense. The info they get back is going to be based on scientific data - they have a subset IDed, the response rate is then weighted and you get data that is representative of the population based on upon the preset markers that segregated them (say for example, landowner, region, age, whatever).

Does it matter, it's an unscientific newspaper poll?

Ten years ago there was about 170k killed. Last year, there was about 170k killed. Weird.

Yeah within a mile.

What 7 mos are they being used though? They're not seed variety - their real selling point is leaf attraction. Now, take that same plot and make it oats, radish, clover, turnip, WR or WW, corn etc. Beans turn with when bow season gets going and then you go through time of little use until you get attraction from the seed pods, which are not generally the purpose for Eagle/similar varieties. Some people are in it to feed deer year-round. Some people believe if they keep deer on year-round, they'll be more likely to be there in the fall. While I understand the theory, I don't think it's super applicable for many people. Beans are annual, labor intensive, and are really a destination plot seed type (other than the late season attraction for seed focused varieties) for times of non-hunting here in NY. In my mind, if you really want the bucks there come hunting season, get into annuals that you know are going to be a draw when you can poke a hole in them. Maybe supplement with a clover or chickory that you can just plant once and do minimal upkeep to keep does in the area come non-hunting months. Remember, food plots make up single digit % of a deer's diet - might as well throw the kitchen sink at them when you can shoot them.

I have more exposure to hunters I know in Kentucky than anywhere else other than NY. The bucks they've taken this year are phenomenal. KY doesn't have AR though, but do have OBR. Interestingly their gun season is pretty crappy timing.

Made offer last year, but no takers. It doesn't get used any longer since I have more toys. I have an older CVA Wolf that I no longer use. It's not the prettiest thing in the world since it's had a fair amount of days in the field, but it'll still shoot and good starter mz. Can include a scope. Would like to be in the Rochester area so I can meet w/Parent etc.

That area has probably some of the highest dpsm in the state, so let's not try to blow the sighting out of proportion. Mendon Ponds park, and high dollar homes/property with about as llimited access as you can get mixed in with heavy ag...

the map hasnt changed much grow...it just hasnt. If you dont believe me, go find it. Most all units that are above the bto are always above the bto.

No idea - I don't know if the permanence of the AR was set in '12 or not. Can't recall off top of my head. The fact is though is that we're way off the mark in many is not half of the state according to the model. And what have we done to meet the objectives? Change the number of doe tags? That's it.

I understand your POV and clearly valid points. Your second paragraph is alot of "them." What about hunters? Isn't part of the responsibility on us to do our part - and I don't think its fair to say the DEC needs to turn around before we do. It should be simultaneously in my opinion. We're just as much to blame as the DEC. Just because the tags are issued, are we required to fill them? Or is it just giving us the choice to fill them? At the end of the day, we're the tool, but also the decision maker at times.

Let me re-phrase this then - where you would rank NY as far as deer managed states go? Overall, whether you include hunter sentiment or not, or just look at the resource management component. Would you say it's top 50%, bottom 50%? Top 25 or bottom 25? I most certainly wouldn't put it in the top 50%.

We have one of the longest gun seasons in the country and I think the longest in the NE, yet we have arguably one of the worst deer managed states by many accounts. We need to kill more deer in certain areas, we need to kill more does in certain areas, we need to grow the doe population in certain areas, and we are really crappy at matching the objectives for harvest within WMUs. That's just the scratch of the surface. The attached pic is from 2012 - according to the rule of the game (ie the model/system we're in right now), the green zones in the top image are the ones where we're "on target." Not alot of green is there...this hasn't changed much at all in the more recent version. I see alot of red, which is where we are off objective by greater than 10%. This is a consistent year after year problem according to the DEC. That 10% each year becomes more important as each year passes. So, according to the DEC, there are plenty of areas where we need to shoot less bucks to meet the model goals. All that red isn't "isolated" to me. More like the OVERWHELMING majority of WMUs with a set objective. The objectives are set to manage to the model, run by the DEC, not the hunters. So again, tell me how can anyone believe that taking less bucks and shortening the gun season isn't good management? We can go round and round, but short gun season can be effective. Does it reduce days afield? Yes. That stinks. But, at the same time, these shorter seasons (or fluidly changed/timed seasons) get the job done, better than we are right now.

Alot of points raised, but the real driver is why can't we as hunters and those responsible for deer management in this state get to the point where we have a model that works? You can blame the politicians and the under-staffing, but then with the things they can do or try to make better, we as hunters can't change or agree on things, leaving us largely idle in the end. Some people wanted no change here to the current regs/season based upon the possibles put forth by the DEC. The DEC put them forth in whatever limited capacity/ability they have, yet we can't agree on changes or want no changes - when we probably can all say that things currently are not great or even good because we can't get a handle on managing the resource. Overpopulation, under-enforcement, under-population, hunter retention, opportunities, and so on and so forth. I see 9/10 posts in this thread thinkg about "yeah, but," or reasons why we can't do something. Very little on the "Let's try to figure out what we can do. Maybe something's possible." I have no answers, but I'm open to discussion on it, and not blindly dismissing anything we can do that might make things better from a model perspective. My opinion is that this requires a cultural change - and that's the type of change that takes the longest.