AR question

[jjb4900]

So, after watching this thread unfold, I have come to this conclusion.....some are for AR's and other's are against it and neither side has strong facts or evidence to prove they are correct..........is that about right?

[nyantler]

Please provide us with some unbiased proof that it's been a success? Just YOU saying it holds very little water. And is this success measured from a hunters point of view, or are there actual proven benefits for the herd?? I have found mighty little data to back your statement that AR's have "proven to work". You want them and like them, so for you they are working, but show us some unbiased studies to try to make the rest of us believers? Good luck!

P.S. Please don't bother posting any jibberish from QDMA or similar organizations, for they are surely NOT unbiased.

you can get the deer data from the DEC for NY... increased average deer weights, decrease in yearling buck harvest, increase in adult buck harvests... the only one you need for NY though is the decrease in the number of yearling bucks harvested which was the intended goal of the program.. which would equate to AR's being successful in the areas they have been implemented... you can check the data in the other 22 states as well... it is there... what you won't find is any data saying they have been unsuccessful in achieving their intended goal.. which is always to decrease the number of yearlings killed and increase the number of mature bucks to create balance in the age structure... which is always a benefit to the herd. The only reason that AR's would not work would be due to hunters not adhering to the AR law... or maybe a disease taking over the herd and killing all the deer. The data is there if you really want it... but like I said before hunters that don't like AR's really don't care what benefit they do or don't have for the deer herd or how successful they are, sadly there is no proof in the world that is going to change that... For me personally, as soon as someone can prove that they are not successful and beneficial... I will stop supporting them.

[nyantler]

So, after watching this thread unfold, I have come to this conclusion.....some are for AR's and other's are against it and neither side has strong facts or evidence to prove they are correct..........is that about right?

Not at all... except for the part where there are some for and against them... there are numerous facts, data and hard evidence that prove they work... and you really don't have to look hard to find it...

[jjb4900]

I'm against them, but am smart enough to realize there are benefits.......just referring to what this thread has taught us.........shouldn't take a brain surgeon to realize if you don't shoot small bucks they will be bigger the following year. I just don't like being told what to shoot based on another groups ideals.

[Meat Hunter]

Dang, I thought this thread was dead!

“I think very few would dispute that AR's would grow a large racked deer population. I think the point of contention is at what cost? “

What cost? I let a couple/ few yearling bucks walk by watch year, just like I let fawns and does go by when I do not have a tag, without killing them. Big deal. Happy to see them and see them spar and call.

Got 16 years worth of spikes in a small box pre AR and 6 years of racked bucks since ARs got started. It is really a no brainier but I understand how folks can be apprehensive and concerned. I got two great ways to do the euro mounts which is what I have been doing since we got ARs.

The people that are experiencing the great hunting in the yearling buck protection areas are busy outside scouting for bucks! Not posting how great their hunting is to some folks that love to argue against ARs. Folks that do not even have them! LOL

The 3N area is a private land management plan, not DEC AR regulation. That’s why they have a no buck rule for the first few days. BTW a guy who lives near there has a room full of BIG bucks from that management program.

Steve are you in the AR area now?

[Meat Hunter]

I just don't like being told what to shoot based on another groups ideals.

THe other group is the majority of hunters in NY, in all parts of NY. Cool that you understand that they work.

[nyantler]

I'm against them, but am smart enough to realize there are benefits.......just referring to what this thread has taught us.........shouldn't take a brain surgeon to realize if you don't shoot small bucks they will be bigger the following year. I just don't like being told what to shoot based on another groups ideals.

See thats what I'm talking about... you really haven't learned anything at all if thats what you got out it... it isn't about anyones ideals.. it's about balancing the buck herd... it's about age not antlers... it would be much easier to sell if bucks didn't have antlers... but they do.. and that is the best and easiest way in the field to judge yearlings from adults... no matter how anyone slices it... you can't have a diverse buck herd with a balance of younger and older bucks without noticing that there are bigger antlers among the herd. The DEC has done such a bad job ( or I guess a good job)managing NY for small bucks over the last 100 years that hunters believe age diversity isn't a good thing for the herds... somehow we have been led to believe that its okay for the vast majority of bucks to be under 2 years old...

[burmjohn]

you can get the deer data from the DEC for NY... increased average deer weights, decrease in yearling buck harvest, increase in adult buck harvests... the only one you need for NY though is the decrease in the number of yearling bucks harvested which was the intended goal of the program.. which would equate to AR's being successful in the areas they have been implemented... you can check the data in the other 22 states as well... it is there... what you won't find is any data saying they have been unsuccessful in achieving their intended goal.. which is always to decrease the number of yearlings killed and increase the number of mature bucks to create balance in the age structure... which is always a benefit to the herd. The only reason that AR's would not work would be due to hunters not adhering to the AR law... or maybe a disease taking over the herd and killing all the deer. The data is there if you really want it... but like I said before hunters that don't like AR's really don't care what benefit they do or don't have for the deer herd or how successful they are, sadly there is no proof in the world that is going to change that... For me personally, as soon as someone can prove that they are not successful and beneficial... I will stop supporting them.

Bingo!

[nyantler]

No different than what you do in every AR thread Joe, I know, I know, DEC is wrong because you don't agree with them.

You lost me there.. what is it that I don't agree with?

[jjb4900]

nyantler, maybe you missed my second post where I say I realize the benefits and that it shouldn't take a brain surgeon to see the same....I am against them for personal reasons.....my reasons are based on not everyone has the luxury of living close to hunting grounds and many of us have time restraints...that's it and nothing more.

[nyantler]

You sure are painting with a pretty broad brush there. You're making a lot of assumptions about people who read these forum messages.

I'm only painting what is there to paint.. if it's broad then it's broad... noone has posted one argument for why AR's are bad for deer... and I contend that they not only can't tell anyone why they're bad, they can't tell anyone why they are good for the deer... they can only tell why they are bad or good for themselves... I understand the opposition from a personal level... I have yet to see opposition because it is somehow not a good idea for the herd... and that comes from a selfish.. meaning about self rather than about the objective of the program.

[jjb4900]

oh, and am willing to give anything a try, I don't need to kill a buck every year, so am willing to see how it goes..........I'm against them now but may change my mind in a few years.

[Doewhacker]

You lost me there.. what is it that I don't agree with?

"mandatory ARs are not necessary to maintain a healthy deer herd in New York. Statewide pre-season adult sex ratios average about 1.6 adult doe per adult buck; yearling antler beam diameters indicate deer are in good physical condition; and more than 94% of adult female deer are being bred with more than 86% of conceptions occurring within a 28-day period centered in mid-November. Also, the yearling portion of the statewide buck take has been dropping, without mandatory ARs, from greater than 70% in the early 1990s to less than 55% in 2011.

Still, DEC frequently hears comments from hunters such as, “we need antler restrictions, because the adult sex ratios are strongly skewed and deer breeding is compromised,” or “because the older bucks have all but disappeared in my area”, but data do not support these perceptions. In fact, hunters are taking more older-age bucks in NY now than ever before in our recorded history of deer hunting "

any of that ring a bell? Adult buck take of 3.5 and up has not increased a whole lot in most of the AR areas, 2.5's however are getting hammered like they would have before AR's at 1.5.

[Doewhacker]

THe other group is the majority of hunters in NY, in all parts of NY. Cool that you understand that they work.

Yes the same majority that supports voluntary AR's(54%), and the same majority that totals up to @2000 state wide over a few years worth of survey's. Staggering.

[Meat Hunter]

Adult buck take of 3.5 and up has not increased a whole lot in most of the AR areas,

That is just wrong- show me the data! 3.5 year old harvest is up 258% in the AR area and it almost 3 times the state level.

For the state to get to the same low yearling buck harvest as in the AR area would take 56 years at the current rate of decline. That can happen in one year with the correct AR!

BTW the DEC defines yearlings as adults which is not biologically correct. Also they are counting fawns; see one buck fawn and one doe fawn see balanced bucks and does. Very few adult bucks to count after season. What we are looking for is multiple age classes of bucks as nature intended.

There are a lot of biologists that say there are biological benefits to protecting yearling bucks. Dick Henry DEC retired who ran the entire state deer herd as state deer biologist say it’s biologically better.

We know that adult bucks do more that there share of the breeding when they exist in the population and it is better for the mature bucks to do the breeding.

[Meat Hunter]

Doewacker - we need to change your name to yearling buck killer because if you like to wack does then you should not need to kill yearlings so should be ok with ARs.

What kind of dog is that in your PIC?

[Doc]

See thats what I'm talking about... you really haven't learned anything at all if thats what you got out it... it isn't about anyones ideals.. it's about balancing the buck herd... it's about age not antlers... it would be much easier to sell if bucks didn't have antlers... but they do.. and that is the best and easiest way in the field to judge yearlings from adults... no matter how anyone slices it... you can't have a diverse buck herd with a balance of younger and older bucks without noticing that there are bigger antlers among the herd. The DEC has done such a bad job ( or I guess a good job)managing NY for small bucks over the last 100 years that hunters believe age diversity isn't a good thing for the herds... somehow we have been led to believe that its okay for the vast majority of bucks to be under 2 years old...

What we have seen under the existing buck harvest regulations (3" minimum) is a herd that through the 80's and 90's spiraled out of control to the point where the antlerless permit system could barely keep up. We have seen harvested deer layered with fat to the point of almost being obese. We have seen some very nice deer for those that cared to work hard enough for them. The health of the herd has been exceptional to the point of having them become a nuisance that often tests the ability of hunters and the permit system to control. What we don't have is a trophy behind every tree, but I have yet to hear any credible biologist claiming that the deer herd is "unhealthy" because of buck age structure or any other reason that can be concocted. The fact is that if the herd gets any more "healthy", we are likely going to have a habitat crisis.

So I like the talk about AR being required to keep the herd healthy through balanced buck age but it all sounds too much like someone trying to fix a problem that they can't demonstrate exists. I find the trophy antler wants and needs of hunters to be a much more believable and credible motive behind the AR craze. I may not personally subscribe to that thought, but at least it is something that I can believe.

[Doewhacker]

That is just wrong- show me the data! 3.5 year old harvest is up 258% in the AR area and it almost 3 times the state level.

For the state to get to the same low yearling buck harvest as in the AR area would take 56 years at the current rate of decline. That can happen in one year with the correct AR!

BTW the DEC defines yearlings as adults which is not biologically correct. Also they are counting fawns; see one buck fawn and one doe fawn see balanced bucks and does. Very few adult bucks to count after season. What we are looking for is multiple age classes of bucks as nature intended.

There are a lot of biologists that say there are biological benefits to protecting yearling bucks. Dick Henry DEC retired who ran the entire state deer herd as state deer biologist say it’s biologically better.

We know that adult bucks do more that there share of the breeding when they exist in the population and it is better for the mature bucks to do the breeding.

Right its up 258%..don't argue with me ask the DEC

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/arsummary11.pdf

[burmjohn]

"mandatory ARs are not necessary to maintain a healthy deer herd in New York

Man the gov't is always right aren't they? Fact is one person in a higher level dictates what is said by these biologists, and its not based on science and facts and a proven track record in other states.

The yearling portion of the statewide buck take has been dropping, without mandatory ARs, from greater than 70% in the early 1990s to less than 55% in 2011.

Its great to see. Its a shame it isn't as low as the AR area's.

Still, DEC frequently hears comments from hunters such as, “we need antler restrictions, because the adult sex ratios are strongly skewed and deer breeding is compromised,” or “because the older bucks have all but disappeared in my area”, but data do not support these perceptions. In fact, hunters are taking more older-age bucks in NY now than ever before in our recorded history of deer hunting "

95% thanks to AR's...

any of that ring a bell? Adult buck take of 3.5 and up has not increased a whole lot in most of the AR areas, 2.5's however are getting hammered like they would have before AR's at 1.5.

If you look at the stats and trends 2.5's make up a majority of the take however not the same as the 1.5's did in non-ar years, 3.5's and 3.5+ percentages are increasing every single year. Going from sub 10% to 30+% for those WMU's since AR's were introduced.

[Doewhacker]

Doewacker - we need to change your name to yearling buck killer because if you like to wack does then you should not need to kill yearlings so should be ok with ARs.

What kind of dog is that in your PIC?

Honestly I don't care about AR's, I just love to mess with guys like you and NYantler. I am the freezer filler for my hunting party, my brother is the big buck killer.

That is a fawn pointer, I use him to point out new born deer so I can go up and club em to death. (JK) It is a Wirehaired Pointing Griffon

[burmjohn]

Now that was funny.

[Doewhacker]

Man the gov't is always right aren't they? Fact is one person in a higher level dictates what is said by these biologists, and its not based on science and facts and a proven track record in other states.

Its great to see. Its a shame it isn't as low as the AR area's.

95% thanks to AR's...

If you look at the stats and trends 2.5's make up a majority of the take however not the same as the 1.5's did in non-ar years, 3.5's and 3.5+ percentages are increasing every single year. Going from sub 10% to 30+% for those WMU's since AR's were introduced.

Its important to note that most of mypost that John was replying to was a cut and paste from the DEC, I injected that last part.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Doewhacker

[burmjohn]

Its important to note that most of that post was a cut and paste from the DEC, I injected that last part.

I realize that. I read the same reports. I just responding based on the statistics the DEC gave me from the checks and aging they do

[jjb4900]

oh, and nyanter, I;m really not here to learn anything from you, but thanks for trying to be a teacher.

[covert]

Honestly I don't care about AR's, I just love to mess with guys like you and NYantler. I am the freezer filler for my hunting party, my brother is the big buck killer.

That is a fawn pointer, I use him to point out new born deer so I can go up and club em to death. (JK) It is a Wirehaired Pointing Griffon

Once manbearpig causes a new ice age you'll have to retrain him to point on baby seals.