WNYBuckHunter

Looks like I can now use up to 4 DMAPs instead of 2 in addition to my 4 DMPs, an either sex and another antlerless.

Nope, didnt miss that gem.

If your crossbow is so effective and easy, with all the does running around, there should be no reason for you to be less selective and eat tag soup. You should be knocking down does like crazy.

Not me, thats why Im done lol

I didnt buy it new, there wont be much, if any depreciation. Guns dont tend to drop off like bows or cars. Ill keep it around for now, see what happens down the road. I can always pop a rifle barrel on it and take it out now and then if Im feeling the urge to give my 308 a rest.

I cant wait to get down to the farm this weekend and see if my plots are sprouting. Felt nice when I walked outside this morning.

Scratch it up and plant Winter Rye in there. It will grow, and you dont need fertilizer. We have done this on some of our trails that run through the woods.

They already do in these zones. Number of DMPs available is not the problem. Its land access.

Who knows what they will do.

As far as I know, all of these zones pretty much hand DMPs out like candy. Im in 8H and I get 4 every year. Not sure what you mean about just getting 1, you apply for 2 DMPs when you get your license and another 2 if they have them left on Nov 1.

I love nice racks, but they arent everything to me. Im still gonna hunt the first two weeks, but not ML. The only reason I hunt ML is for a nice buck, or a doe if Im desperate for meat, which Im usually not by then. Now I cant hunt bucks, so I wont bother unless I need the meat.

Why wouldnt I get anything for mine? Id be marketing it on the web, not selling it locally lol. Plenty of people are in the market for TC Custom Shop Encores.

Wait till they plop Mandatory ARs on top of it, you know, different types in the different buck zones they just established.

What about all of the small game and waterfowl hunters that are already in the woods? Failing to see your logic here.

You are probably right. My guess is that there are a few surrounding WMUs that will see their buck harvest reports go up during early bow and late ML season.

Spot on for me, I wont bother hunting that season. The only reason I have hunted late season in the past is its a good opportunity to get the drop on a buck heading to feed. Im usually about burnt out at that point, and now that I cant go after a buck, I wont bother unless I really really had a slim season and need meat in the freezer.

No it isnt. http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/6094.html

We put alot of does on the ground during bow season. The first two weeks wont affect me. Its the late season that will. Im not buying my ML tag this year, or until I can shoot a buck again.

I dont hunt any shotty areas anymore, and ML season just went out the window for me. I might just put mine up for sale.

I have a healthy chunk into mine. Ugh.

I really like Predator Fall Grey, but I still have some Mossy Oak and Realtree stuff that isnt quite worn out enough to replace yet. Soon enough.

Lets see, no ATVs, no camping, no food plots, only factory built stands, cant cut shooting lanes, and I cant get in there to scout or hunt the first two weeks of the season, but Im paying $2300 a year? Sounds like a great deal.....not.

I didnt say that I thought they were close. I couldnt even tell you the last time I took a deer to a processor. I only know of one or two guys that do use processors anymore. $75 to cut up a deer is a joke.

How about you stop cherry picking my comments and respond to an idea as a whole? I was commenting on your assertion that the DEC should be doing deer management right or not at all. I was stating that proper management would be too expensive for the DEC to take on, so that the plan they are laying out is the way they will go. That is, unless you were good with even higher taxes. I never said there would be any cost savings vs what has been in place, I was saying it will be less expensive to do it the way they are vs on more of a micromanagement level. Posted 28 July 2015 - 06:36 AM dbHunterNY, on 27 Jul 2015 - 2:22 PM, said: And less effectiveness and accuracy. Why bother with the activity at all if you're not concerned with it accomplishing exactly what you're trying to accomplish. The old adage still applies, "a job worth doing is worth doing right". Posted 28 July 2015 - 07:28 AM Doc, on 28 Jul 2015 - 06:36 AM, said: So how high do you want your taxes to be? The simple fact is, proper management would cost big bucks for the DEC to do on their own. The department is simply not configured to be able to do it. What would need to be done is the wildlife management portions of the department should be seperate from the rest that deal with pollution, etc. and become its own entity with its own funding. Politics should be kept out of it for the most part, and the department should have control over the game laws and regulations without having to make every change go through the state legislature. Then, this state might set itself up to be able to manage things better than they do now. They would still need the cooperation of co-ops, hunting clubs, landowners and hunters to get things done though. All of that would be at a cost though, more tax dollars, because we all know Albany isnt going to curtail their spending on handouts and political perk programs to fund a new department for wildlife. I already showed the quote where you stated your concern about WMUs, but here it is again, post 77... Posted 28 July 2015 - 05:09 PM WNYBuckHunter, on 28 Jul 2015 - 07:28 AM, said: When it comes to subdividing management zones, there is no money saved by making them larger than what will be effective. We have a WMU system in place that advertises itself as being designed to accommodate habitat and land use variations. That is in place, and staffed and costs whatever it costs. I get the feeling that they are trying to dazzle us with footwork, with no real positive change taking place. we can't manage things with all the WMUs, but somehow mysteriously we will do a better job by glopping all these divisions together into only 9 areas. It feels like someone is trying to slip something past us by pretending on one hand to be doing something wonderful and then implementing all that in a less effective zoning than what we currently have. Where is the logic? I do not argue the point that the DEC is structured completely wrong, but I truly hold out no hope at all that we will be seeing those kinds of changes. And maybe that is what should be talked about, but it is not what is being talked about. My comments are focused on the original theme of this thread. But since the subject of costs and effectiveness have been brought up, I have to note that if you think that it is expensive maintaining the WMUs that we currently have, brace yourself before you begin thinking about the expense of re-structuring the entire department. I have seen the restructuring cost of corporations. I would expect the restructuring of an entire state agency would be no less and likely much higher. If you want to worry about elevating taxes ..... now you are talking some real dollars. I'm simply concerned that we will be losing a more closely controlled existing zoning system (WMU system) for another band-aid that is by design worse and less finely married to habitat and local conditions than what we already have. How on earth does that make any sense at all? I'm not a big fan of smoke and mirrors, and that is why I have to ask how a huge expansion of management zones is either saving any money or doing the management job better by combining diverse habitats and varied land uses and population profiles. There's a dance going on that I really don't understand. By the way does it only bother me that the entire system is built on statistics, and every single year something basic and fundamental is being massively changed thereby destroying all the history that these statistics are built on (just a little side-thought)? Im done beating this to death, its a waste of my time. If you cant plainly see what the conversation entailed, I dont know what to tell you. As far as managing bucks VS does, as I have already stated, I know the correlation between the two and how it effects the overall of the herd, but managing for age (yearling buck protection) and managing for numbers (doe permits) are different and can be approached in different manors (ie different zone sizes, habitat types, etc).

Biologists check deer at processors,etc, then they use percentages, formulas to get the numbers