Study: Whitetail Deer in Central New York - An alternative to Antler restriction

[Doc]

I'm not a real biologist.. but i did play one on TV..   I'm sure it wouldn't make any difference to you if I was Doc. Its not about who's saying it with you.. its what is being said... you just don't want anything to do with management.. I get it.

Look, all I did was to respond to a post mentioning a doe only season, and you have me not wanting "anything to do with management" : . Your right in a way. I don't want to have anything to do with that kind of a half-baked idea of short-term, feel-good management. If you are taking ownership of that nutty plan, then any talk about your credibility and credentials is unnecessary.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Doc, in the thread talking about only hunting does for 3 years, he specifically said it wasnt a plan in the works, it was just something to talk about. I dont understand why you keep trying to spin it into some sort of "management plan" that he (or anyone for that matter) really supports or stands behind. Its pure conversation fodder, nothing more.

Why does it keep getting brought into this thread, which has nothing to do with the subject? Lets try to stay on topic or at least close to it lol.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Oh, and dont worry about Larry, he just has 3 or 4 replies to ANY qdm conversation that he repeats like a broken record.  ;D

[wztirem]

I'm personally not a fan of the 3 on a side AR.. I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds.. but like you say... its a start

If it doesn't protect 1.5's, what does it possibly do to help?

I always thought it was hunting season and not antler season. ???

[steve863]

I'm personally not a fan of the 3 on a side AR.. I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds.. but like you say... its a start

If it doesn't protect 1.5's, what does it possibly do to help?

I always thought it was hunting season and not antler season. ???

Yeah, it's a bit amusing ain't it??  They are constantly throwing these theories at us about what's best for the herd and in the end it all comes down to what could be done to get a buck to have bigger antlers on it's head so it would make it easier for them to gun it down!  A blind man could see what their garbage is all about.   

[burmjohn]

I'm personally not a fan of the 3 on a side AR.. I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds.. but like you say... its a start

If it doesn't protect 1.5's, what does it possibly do to help?

It protects most of the 1.5's

[burmjohn]

I'm personally not a fan of the 3 on a side AR.. I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds.. but like you say... its a start

If it doesn't protect 1.5's, what does it possibly do to help?

I always thought it was hunting season and not antler season. ???

Yeah, it's a bit amusing ain't it??  They are constantly throwing these theories at us about what's best for the herd and in the end it all comes down to what could be done to get a buck to have bigger antlers on it's head so it would make it easier for them to gun it down!  A blind man could see what their garbage is all about.   

Wow really? Is that what you take out of all these conversations?

[steve863]

I'm personally not a fan of the 3 on a side AR.. I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds.. but like you say... its a start

If it doesn't protect 1.5's, what does it possibly do to help?

I always thought it was hunting season and not antler season. ???

Yeah, it's a bit amusing ain't it??  They are constantly throwing these theories at us about what's best for the herd and in the end it all comes down to what could be done to get a buck to have bigger antlers on it's head so it would make it easier for them to gun it down!  A blind man could see what their garbage is all about.   

Wow really? Is that what you take out of all these conversations?

Please!  Like a good many of you haven't actually admitted that antlers are the #1 motivating factor behind your hunting??  It's ALL about antlers to you boys and the more you guys keep posting this stuff the more clear it gets for all of us others to see!  Maybe if you fellas could at least try to keep the word "antler" out of some of your conversations here, we might start taking you more seriously.  Some even go as far as giving us their resumes on how many big bucks they've slayed over the years and then start threads like this!  It's down right funny, if you ask me!

[SteveB]

I'm personally not a fan of the 3 on a side AR.. I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds.. but like you say... its a start

If it doesn't protect 1.5's, what does it possibly do to help?

It protects most of the 1.5's

John - his words "I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds" is what I questioned.

In fact the study that started this thread shows in these areas, it does not protect most 1.5's. In fact, it protects only about 40% of them and few bucks actually would get to 3.5 under a 3pt/side rule here. The whole purpose of my posting the study was to show that a blanket statement like AR's would protect 1.5's cannot be made for NYS.

[nyantler]

Every time someone says AR you guys start talking about big bucks... When I talk about any kind of antler restriction at all.. I am always refurring to how it help the age structure of bucks. MEANING... instead of having a majority of 1.5 year old bucks and only a few bucks in the 2.5 or 3.5 age class, and nearly 0 any older than that. How AR might help give a more balanced age representation among the buck population in a given area..

[nyantler]

It protects spikes and crotch horns... but 3 on a side could be a 1.5 old - 4 pt, 5 pt or 6pt. The idea would be for  an AR that allows almost all 1.5 old buck to move on the next year to become 2.5

[Doc]

Doc, in the thread talking about only hunting does for 3 years, he specifically said it wasnt a plan in the works, it was just something to talk about. I dont understand why you keep trying to spin it into some sort of "management plan" that he (or anyone for that matter) really supports or stands behind. Its pure conversation fodder, nothing more.

Why does it keep getting brought into this thread, which has nothing to do with the subject? Lets try to stay on topic or at least close to it lol.

I guess you haven't been reading his replies. It is being defended like a proposed management plan and so I am responding accordingly. I am merely replying to what he is saying. And if the topic has evolved into the discussion of the 3 year doe only season (and I am not the one who brought that subject into this thread), I think that after 13 pages, it should not be too surprising if a topic evolves a bit. Since the doe only season was also mentioned as an "alternative to Antler Restriction" just as the title of this topic, I don't believe it is as far off topic as you are making it out to be.

Doc

[nyantler]

I have only mentioned 3 times that the question was just posed to spark conversation ... I was actually trying to be a smart ass and go over the top a bit  to get a good debate going.. it worked. And there were some great points made. unfortunately Doc none were yours

[Doc]

I have only mentioned 3 times that the question was just posed to spark conversation ... I was actually trying to be a smart ass and go over the top a bit  to get a good debate going.. it worked. And there were some great points made. unfortunately Doc none were yours

Lol ...... Sorry that I failed your standard of good responses. I'll try not to lose sleep over that. :

[nyantler]

Doc its more that you fail to pay attention to what guys are trying to say before you jump all over the topic.. just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is a good idea.

[nyantler]

I'm personally not a fan of the 3 on a side AR.. I don't think it protects 1.5 yr olds.. but like you say... its a start

If it doesn't protect 1.5's, what does it possibly do to help?

I always thought it was hunting season and not antler season. ???

Yeah, it's a bit amusing ain't it??  They are constantly throwing these theories at us about what's best for the herd and in the end it all comes down to what could be done to get a buck to have bigger antlers on it's head so it would make it easier for them to gun it down!  A blind man could see what their garbage is all about.   

Wow really? Is that what you take out of all these conversations?

Couldn't have said it better myself Burm! The only one bringing antler size up has been steve and doc... the rest of us are talking about age...

[Doc]

Doc its more that you fail to pay attention to what guys are trying to say before you jump all over the topic.. just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Now let me get this right this time. Are you just trying to "spark conversation", or just "trying to be a smart-ass", or is this a statement in support of a bogus management plan?

Seriously ..... of course I don't like your plan. Until someone can answer my point about what happens after the three year period, how can I or anybody take such a thing seriously? It's a half an idea, without any end-game, and is certain to accelerate an already declining hunter population. Everyone is tip-toeing around these nasty little details and unanswered questions, but if you are really interested in any kind of serious debate, you can't continue to replace these points with simple insults.

[nyantler]

A little of both Doc... it is not a part of any management plan..no.. it was my idea to spark some debate. What I really was trying to find out is .. If it was something that we knew needed to be done, would any hunters really be willing to do it... or would there need to kill a buck at all costs override helping out the whitetail herd.

[Doc]

A little of both Doc... it is not a part of any management plan..no.. it was my idea to spark some debate. What I really was trying to find out is .. If it was something that we knew needed to be done, would any hunters really be willing to do it... or would there need to kill a buck at all costs override helping out the whitetail herd.

Well, I got to say that your idea of sparking debate sure has the look and sound of a "sell job"..... but anyway .....

I don't think there is any doubt that such a plan would cost us hunters. If you don't believe that, just randomly grab a few posts here and see how many of them talk about doe hunting at all. Turn on the outdoor channel or VS. at any time and see how many programs they have about doe hunting. Open any deer hunting magazine and see where doe hunting ranks in hunter interest. Today, the emphasis is definitely on antlers, to the point where we have successfully created expectations in many hunters, and an attitude that the antlers are the only measure of hunting success. Now tell those hunters that for three years they will not be legally eligible to take that sole symbol of success. I frankly don't thing it would take three years to permanently lose a significant percentage of hunters. That would just form yet one more excuse for people to leave our ranks. What would you expect? Would any hunters do it? ..... probably here and there. However, I would expect the overwhelming majority to reject the idea. Antlers are the thing that we have been selling hunters with out hunting media onslaught. We,ve taught them that there is no reason to hunt other than antlers. Don't be expecting that you can all of a sudden turn it all off. As far as convincing them that such a plan is necessary to "help the herd ...... hell, you haven't even convinced the DEC of that.

Doc

[nyantler]

I agree...

[SteveB]

Actually Joe my only interest in antlers is how they are a poor indicator of age and not a sound way to manage a herd in some areas of NY - like the areas in the proposal that started the thread. There must be some merit to what the proposal put forth, because few of the mandatory points based AR people here wish to discuss it and seem intent to make this just another AR thread.

[nyantler]

Sorry I meant the other steve and i agree that a points based AR isn't the way to go

[WNYBuckHunter]

Doc, in the thread talking about only hunting does for 3 years, he specifically said it wasnt a plan in the works, it was just something to talk about. I dont understand why you keep trying to spin it into some sort of "management plan" that he (or anyone for that matter) really supports or stands behind. Its pure conversation fodder, nothing more.

Why does it keep getting brought into this thread, which has nothing to do with the subject? Lets try to stay on topic or at least close to it lol.

I guess you haven't been reading his replies. It is being defended like a proposed management plan and so I am responding accordingly. I am merely replying to what he is saying. And if the topic has evolved into the discussion of the 3 year doe only season (and I am not the one who brought that subject into this thread), I think that after 13 pages, it should not be too surprising if a topic evolves a bit. Since the doe only season was also mentioned as an "alternative to Antler Restriction" just as the title of this topic, I don't believe it is as far off topic as you are making it out to be.

Doc

Ive been keeping up with that thread, and what I see is hypothetical discussion based on a subject that was brought about with no intimations of it being a real life management plan. Then I see people asserting claims on that thread as well as others, that the original poster is trying somehow to push a plan based on the discussion and throwing out accusations of a "sell job".  :

[agross]

I have hunted in NY and PA.  Started 10 yrs ago in PA before the 3 pt rule went into effect.  I have to say that today where i hunt in PA the deer are much better.  You see a lot more bucks running around in that 90 to 110 inch range.  Now they arent monsters but very nice bucks.

The problem i see is that most of these deer in PA and the ones i've seen in NY arent outside the ears except maybe a few examples.  Now i know passsing a bcu always makes him better but i cant imagine too many hunters being happy if they had to watch 13 and 14 inch wide 100in deer walking passed.

[SteveB]

Sorry I meant the other steve and i agree that a points based AR isn't the way to go

Thanks Joe - I was hoping posting this proposal would generate more discussion and the realization for some why points based is not the cure all every where. I think a good share of the responders here didn't even bother to read it before chiming in with the same ole same ole - from both sides.