A sad day for New York hunters

[steve863]

the reason they got adopted anyway, is because the majority of Public Comment feedback was favoraable for it, and not against it.

Yes, like the AR supporters sending in copies of the same exact letter, many of which were not even signed. I am not making this up either. Read their report on the public comments and you can read this for yourself. Maybe next time me and Doe can buy a bunch of xerox paper and draft a letter and drive up to Albany and drop them on the DEC's doorstep. It worked for the AR supporters, so it might for us also. LOL At least if these clowns could write a letter in support in their own words I'd give them some credit, instead of sending the same bloody copy 100,000 times!!

Edited September 6, 2012 by steve863

[Doewhacker]

Yes and we can do our own survey too, I just checked and out of those surveyed by us 100% are against AR's...lol

[mike rossi]

I see. If you wrote to the DEC about it;, the reason they got adopted anyway, is because the majority of Public Comment feedback was favoraable for it, and not against it. So again, the system worked. And my mistake, I believe in working these things through the DEC and leaving the Politicians out of it completely. The DEC are the professionals with the science and knowledge to manage and regulate the Deer Herd, not the Politicians. And we should not undermine the DEC's regulatory authority by getting Politicians involved.

Here lies the problems... A decision based on the outcome of a public opinion battle is not necessarily a science-based decision by the DEC...

Don't restrict blame to politicians, but also to their appointees of the citizen advisory boards to the DEC. These board members are appointed by politicians to represent you and I... Some/most board members have no formal training in conservation biology... Another similairly structured board purportedely represent you and I to function as assurance our license money is spent "wisely". The next link in the chain is the NYSCC - if like me, you choose not to be a member and disagree with nearly everything they promote, your just out of luck....

At least PA is open and transparent about their game commission board members by publishing a mini profile about their backround... No wonder PA implemented AR because half of their board members are into AR and trophy hunting! However PA has a law that I am not sure exists in NY. That law mandates that for every dollar of license money a percentage is put toward habitat... As a result PA has a safety net, it can afford to make some mistakes...

Not saying AR are a mistake I will stay nuetrel on this one... My point is whatever the issue the blame is always directed at the DEC staff and the politicians, but not the political appointees and the NYSCC... I don't always agree with the DEC or FWS either, but I also know that too often they are compelled or forced to do things differently than they would have...

The other thorn in our side is the Outdoor Writer's Association. They represent institutionalized thinking, are generally believed to be credible, and have the means to reach a large audience. If they are biased or factually wrong they impact policy and opinions...

Edited September 6, 2012 by mike rossi

[Geno C]

Well, there ya go. The silent majority is indeed silent, aren't they? So what good are they? And who cares about their opinions and how they think the world is suffering? The fact is that the organizations that you are whining about are active, energetic, advocates for what they believe. If you don't like it then take your whining somewhere besides internet forums and play the game the way it is supposed to be played. Nobody cares that you don't have the spine to do anything but complain. I get a bit irked everytime I see these people claiming "Well gosh, their views don't represent me". Get over it ..... if there are so many people who disagree with ARs and the NYB views then stop your crying and get involved like those people did. If you can't work inside of those groups then start your own. Put your damn money and effort where your mouth is instead of just moaning about those that do.

I'm sorry if I appear to be coming on a little strong about this, but it is just something that finally had to be said. Enough of this worthless bashing. If you have such strong feelings about these issues then do something useful and worthwhile about it.

right on Doc... its like complaining about how things are in this country and not even voting...

[WNYBuckHunter]

But not voting is a political statement!

[Culvercreek hunt club]

But not voting is a political statement!

I disagree. not voting is an excuse. and participants in that activity have a rectum full of splinters from riding the fence.

[ELMER J. FUDD]

right on Doc... its like complaining about how things are in this country and not even voting...

From what I gather, it's more like complaining as you said, then voting, then finding out the opposing party is committing voter fraud. (the copied letters)

Can any of you mods show who voted in the original antler restriction poll? I wonder how many one poster's voted, hmmm?

[WNYBuckHunter]

I disagree. not voting is an excuse. and participants in that activity have a rectum full of splinters from riding the fence.

You should know I said that with a very thick slathering of sarcasm on top lol.

I tend to straddle the fence, depending on the issue, but I always vote.

[nyantler]

Why should we accept your answer?? If the DEC gave me that answer, maybe I can begin to accept it. So far they haven't, so I see absolutely NO reason why I should take your answer over theirs.

Who are you kidding?.. if they don't give you the answer you like.. you don't accept their answer either. If you don't like it I guess it just isn't correct. Why not do your own research then you won't have to be a sideline sitter and accept anyone elses answer.

[steve863]

Who are you kidding?.. if they don't give you the answer you like.. you don't accept their answer either. If you don't like it I guess it just isn't correct. Why not do your own research then you won't have to be a sideline sitter and accept anyone elses answer.

So you think I fell from the sky just yesterday and haven't read any of this research you are suggesting?? I can tell you I've read plenty of it and absolutely NONE of it gives me confidence that the health of the herd is the primary objective behind it. It was put in place to help grow bigger antlered bucks for hunters as it's primary goal, period. Now, I have nothing against someone wanting to kill big bucks if that is what drives them to hunt. The problem I have is you people using these "it's best for the herd" theories, when you guys damn well know that most of the people who created these theories could give a crap about the herd, if their wasn't something in it for them. And what's in it for them is potentially bigger antlered bucks. I tell you if you can't figure this out, or can't be honest enough to admit the self-serving facets behind all this, I feel sorry for you.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

"Hi, I am Bob and I would like to shoot a big antlered buck every year"...lol. I guess admitting it is half the battle

[Tio1]

AR has worked in PA. We are starting to see really nice bucks every yr. Understand "trophy" differs from hunter to hunter. Personally - if you want better/more bucks in NY then only kill one. You get one buck tag-you pick the method: gun/bow/muzzldr. This would instantly improve buck #'s.

[jjb4900]

Although I'm not in favor of AR's, I am willing to accept it and see how it goes, I've already gone years without shooting a buck so I won't be devastated if I have to wait to get one again. I do think that it should be statewide instead of targeting a select group of hunter's, I can't imagine any area is overrun with huge bucks, but maybe I'm wrong.

[jjb4900]

And get a youth out there with you, the AR's don't apply to them and they'll be thrilled to take the buck that you can't.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

AR has worked in PA. We are starting to see really nice bucks every yr. Understand "trophy" differs from hunter to hunter. Personally - if you want better/more bucks in NY then only kill one. You get one buck tag-you pick the method: gun/bow/muzzldr. This would instantly improve buck #'s.

There ya go!! Just what said all along. You get 1 buck tag a year. You must have it checked by a check station to make sure its reported. If you are caught with a buck not checked bye bye deer hunting for a couple years!!!

If everyone has faith in the powers that make these laws then there must be something they think is going to help the state of Ny. They did not just put AR into effect in such and such areas because they got a bunch of letters. You should know our great state does not work that way. They think the state has something to gain or the law does not pass!!

[bigpaul]

Change is hard! I'm still not happy about the Saturday opener, but I still hunt. I'm looking foward to the AR's. You can't make everyone happy!

[sampotter]

AR has worked in PA. We are starting to see really nice bucks every yr. Understand "trophy" differs from hunter to hunter. Personally - if you want better/more bucks in NY then only kill one. You get one buck tag-you pick the method: gun/bow/muzzldr. This would instantly improve buck #'s.

I would support this idea. I don't need to kill more than one big buck in one state in the same year. On the other hand, I've only ever done it twice and I've had enough seasons without any mature buck sightings. It would at least make people hesitate for a moment before they drop another nondescript yearling.

I support ARs because I want to see a big buck or two every season and there's no shame in that. Will ARs help the health of the deer herd? It depends on what you mean by healthy. I guess if fawns are being born every year then at least the herd is reproducing. Is the herd in a "natural" state? Not if you are comparing it to what it was when Columbus landed. Imagine if there were no men around and all the 20-30 year old women were being bred by 13 year old boys? It would be like some African countries where all the men have died in war. Babies will still be born but it certainly is not "natural".

Proponents of ARs and QDM that are promoting herd health are saying just that. A healthy herd has a natural age structure that includes 50% of the bucks being 2 years old or older. Yearling bucks rarely get a chance to breed. More competition for does means a more intense rut and a tighter breeding window. With all the fawns being born in a short period of time it makes it harder for predators to make much of a dent in the overall fawn crop.

I read that a lot of PA hunters hated ARs until the second season. Then there were legal bucks everywhere. Shooting yearling bucks is picking low hanging fruit. There are smart ones and there are dumb ones. The dumb ones get shot. Let those dumb ones get to be 3-4 years old and you have a dumb, but nice buck. Everybody wins. ARs are only a temporary one season inconvenience. Most of those yearlings you weren't allowed to shoot will be there next season. Then you will be able to shoot them. At the same time the next crop of yearlings is growing into legal size. That's the beauty of deer- they are a renewable resource that matures fairly rapidly.

P.S. For all you folks that pick at each other's spelling, grammar, or brag about your hunting prowess: grow up.

[Doewhacker]

What percentage yearling take will make you guys happy? 0 ain't gonna happen obviously, how about 55 percent will that do?

State wide yearling buck take is currently 55% and dropping on its own. Not bad considering it was much higher not long ago.

[nyantler]

What percentage yearling take will make you guys happy? 0 ain't gonna happen obviously, how about 55 percent will that do?

State wide yearling buck take is currently 55% and dropping on its own. Not bad considering it was much higher not long ago.

I like 15%.. which is the current percentage of yearling bucks taken in the AR areas... I also like that 36% of the bucks taken were 3 1/2 +.. thats up 258% from 5 years ago... and I like the 5.7% increase in total bucks harvested compared to 5 years ago when the programs started. Sounds like somethings working to me.

[apoallo]

well good arguments. i think it should be a choice. to be honest and Im not ashamed to admit. the only male Ive ever shot in my 8 years hunting was on year 1 with my bow. my 1st spike and first deer. since then I enjoy harvesting doe. and have passed up on quite a few small bucks and spikes. thats my choice and I am waiting for that one adult male that I will bust my nut when he comes my way, that wall mount deer. when I go with my firends we implement our own AR rule. shoot anything thing 4points or more. we live in a non AR zone. this spot we have has ALOT of deer, doe and bucks and considering the construction going around in the neighboring lots there were alot of smaller bucks last season and we are excited to see how big they have gotten. However if someone else found where our spot in located and started taking the smaller bucks, we would not start WW#3 over it. it is a personal choice. If i look back and think if i didnt shoot that spike, would I have gotten hooked on hunting the way I did???? thats questionable who knows

[Larry]

Hey NYantler you are not giving the full data why don’t you show the buck take prior to 2005 and give the full data you may want to look at APX1 but heres the full data to 2010 3h is the only unit that has recovered

ar wmu.pdf

Edited September 7, 2012 by Larry

[nyantler]

Hey NYantler you are not giving the full data why don’t you show the buck take prior to 2005 and give the full data you may want to look at APX1 but heres the full data to 2010 3h is the only unit that has recovered

I stand corrected on the buck take increase.. you are correct that is just in 3H... all the other numbers are still valid... the goal of the program was to protect yearling bucks and it looks like that is working quite nicely... from about 70% to only around 15% now...

[agross]

Regardless of anyones feelings about AR the restrictions do work. I have hunted PA for the past dozen years or so and was there before AR strted (3 pt rule) and through until 2010 when i lost my land.

In the beginning it sucked but you saw more deer. All the little guys that got the pass. Then after it was implemented for several years seeing multiple 2.5 and 3.5 year olds with a few 1.5 yr old bucks scattered in chasing does and rutting like crazy quickly makes you a firm believer.

Now i have family that meat hunts and are not fans of AR because u cant make antler soup but after it is implemented (not that anyone has a choice) it will turn around and after you are seeing more deer and getting bigger bucks you will tend to favor it.

Just my opinion.

[SteveB]

Summary from the file Larry posted:

Summary:

*The pilot AR program substantially reduced the proportion of yearling bucks in the harvest, and harvest composition shifted to older bucks.

*The number of 2.5+ year old bucks in the harvest has increased since implementation of ARs. However, the increase has not fully compensated for the reduction in yearling harvest, and total buck take has generally remained >20% below pre-AR levels. WMU 3H was the only unit where total buck take has returned to the level immediately prior to AR.

*A shift in sex ratios of deer observed in the pilot AR units was apparent, though a similar shift was observed in neighboring units without ARs.

*ARs had no effect on hunter participation for the majority of hunters, but overall participation by non-local hunters appeared to decline because of AR.

*The impact of ARs on hunter satisfaction was mixed. Satisfaction with buck-hunting was generally higher in the pilot AR units than the surrounding region, but similar increases in buck-hunting satisfaction were observed in the surrounding region as occurred within the pilot area. More hunters in the pilot AR area reported being satisfied than dissatisfied with the level of protection afforded to young bucks and with the level of safety they felt in the pilot area. However, a majority of hunters reported being dissatisfied with (1) the number of antlered bucks compared to antlerless deer seen, (2) the number of older, larger-antlered bucks seen, (3) their opportunity to shoot larger-antlered bucks, and (4) the number of older bucks compared to the number of young bucks seen.

Seems like a mixed bag at best.

Certainly not the overwhelming success with majority reception that a few claim it is.

[Doc]

Regardless of anyones feelings about AR the restrictions do work. I have hunted PA for the past dozen years or so and was there before AR strted (3 pt rule) and through until 2010 when i lost my land.

In the beginning it sucked but you saw more deer. All the little guys that got the pass. Then after it was implemented for several years seeing multiple 2.5 and 3.5 year olds with a few 1.5 yr old bucks scattered in chasing does and rutting like crazy quickly makes you a firm believer.

Now i have family that meat hunts and are not fans of AR because u cant make antler soup but after it is implemented (not that anyone has a choice) it will turn around and after you are seeing more deer and getting bigger bucks you will tend to favor it.

Just my opinion.

How could AR not work? It kind of stands to reason that if you are forced to pass up almost every buck you see, you have to eventually see more and bigger bucks. Is anyone really arguing about that? Hey, what the heck .... if everybody was forced to stop hunting completely, you would get that result and more. Just imagine all the neat sway-backed, toothless deer pictures you could get.....lol.