Highly recommended read for Antler Restriction

[jjb4900]

That's for people a lot smarter than me to decide LOL! I know that the reason the DEC implemented AR's in the Catskill areas is because they deemed the herd unhealthy.

that must mean non-existent..........they should consider cutting back on dmp's and rebuilding the herd before they move on to AR's.

Edited July 10, 2013 by jjb4900

[Arrow Flinger]

that must mean non-existent..........they should consider cutting back on dmp's and rebuilding the herd before they move on to AR's.

 

AR's allow them to rebuild the herd. It protects yearling bucks. More bucks= rebuilding the herd. I'm sure they also reduced the number of DMP's they give out there too.

[jjb4900]

AR's allow them to rebuild the herd. It protects yearling bucks. More bucks= rebuilding the herd. I'm sure they also reduced the number of DMP's they give out there too.

they reduced them for one year and then jacked them back up.........I'd be happier if they cut out dmp's for a year or two rather than impose the AR's beforehand.

[WNYBuckHunter]

That's for people a lot smarter than me to decide LOL! I know that the reason the DEC implemented AR's in the Catskill areas is because they deemed the herd unhealthy.

 

No it isnt, DEC was pressured into putting ARs into place by groups of people that want them. They (DEC) have said multiple times that ARs do nothing for herd health.

 

Look, I know full well that ARs do work to accomplish what they are meant for. They are not meant to fix B to D ratio, they are not meant to make a more "healthy herd". ARs are meant to let the low hanging fruit get bigger (so to speak). Thats all.

 

The problems downstate will not get fixed just with ARs. You will NEVER have the type of herd we have in WNY. Why? You dont have the soil. You dont have the habitat. You have alot of public ground. You have more hunters per square mile. Can you improve some of those things? Sure, but you will never make it like it is here, no matter how many points on a side there has to be for you to pull the trigger.

[SteveB]

AR's allow them to rebuild the herd. It protects yearling bucks. More bucks= rebuilding the herd. I'm sure they also reduced the number of DMP's they give out there too.

 

Not if they are still targeted as trophy 2.5 year old 6 pointers.

AR doesn't and can't stop that - education can.

[jjb4900]

No it isnt, DEC was pressured into putting ARs into place by groups of people that want them. They (DEC) have said multiple times that ARs do nothing for herd health.

 

Look, I know full well that ARs do work to accomplish what they are meant for. They are not meant to fix B to D ratio, they are not meant to make a more "healthy herd". ARs are meant to let the low hanging fruit get bigger (so to speak). Thats all.

 

The problems downstate will not get fixed just with ARs. You will NEVER have the type of herd we have in WNY. Why? You dont have the soil. You dont have the habitat. You have alot of public ground. You have more hunters per square mile. Can you improve some of those things? Sure, but you will never make it like it is here, no matter how many points on a side there has to be for you to pull the trigger.

perfectly put............thank you.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

That's for people a lot smarter than me to decide LOL! I know that the reason the DEC implemented AR's in the Catskill areas is because they deemed the herd unhealthy.

Not true. Their reports even state it was implemented for social reasons. They also state they see no biological benefit for AR's

[Arrow Flinger]

Not true. Their reports even state it was implemented for social reasons. They also state they see no biological benefit for AR's

 

 

If that's the case, we need to pressure them to lower the cost of a hunting license! Shows you how much the DEC knows what its doing. Implementing regulations based on peer pressure sounds like a good plan to me!

[jesse.james]

that must mean non-existent..........they should consider cutting back on dmp's and rebuilding the herd before they move on to AR's.

reducing dmps do not equate to more deer. 6N has not handed out a dmp in over 40 yrs but yet the herd is only slightly more healthy than it was generations ago. For every buck I see there are 5-6 doe. Most of the bucks taken are yearlings.

[jjb4900]

If that's the case, we need to pressure them to lower the cost of a hunting license! Shows you how much the DEC knows what its doing. Implementing regulations based on peer pressure sounds like a good plan to me!

I've always said, if my license restricts me in a way that others aren't restricted to, there should be a lower license fee...............if one hunter can shoot any buck, why am I subjected to the same fee that restricts what I can shoot?

[Arrow Flinger]

I've always said, if my license restricts me in a way that others aren't restricted to, there should be a lower license fee...............if one hunter can shoot any buck, why am I subjected to the same fee that restricts what I can shoot?

 

Good point! If you're paying the same as everyone else, shouldn't you get the same priveledges?

[WNYBuckHunter]

reducing dmps do not equate to more deer. 6N has not handed out a dmp in over 40 yrs but yet the herd is only slightly more healthy than it was generations ago. For every buck I see there are 5-6 doe. Most of the bucks taken are yearlings.

I seriously suggest you start reading up on deer biology instead of how to get bigger racks. Deer numbers do not equate deer or herd health. Carrying capacity determines how many healthy deer an area can support. Keep your herd near that, and theres a good chance its a healthy herd. Western NY doesnt have a 1:1 or 1:2 or even a 1:3 buck:doe ratio, but we have a pretty healthy herd in most areas.

BTW, how many bucks you see has nothing to do with how many there are in the herd. You may just not be in the right place to see them, they may be winding you and leaving before you knew they were there, or there could be 18 other reasons why you arent seeing them. There are guys that hunt the same farms I do, and they go all season seeing 1 or 2 bucks, and complain there arent many around. I see plenty of them through the season on the same ground. I just dont hunt where they do or how they typically do.

One of the reasons less DMPs have not worked as effectively as they could for some areas, are the state wide either sex tags. Does are still being taken from areas that cant handle the removal of them.

[WNYBuckHunter]

I've always said, if my license restricts me in a way that others aren't restricted to, there should be a lower license fee...............if one hunter can shoot any buck, why am I subjected to the same fee that restricts what I can shoot?

Well, you can still go to a non AR area and shoot whatever buck youd like.

[Early]

Wow.....Finally, WNY introduces the concept of carrying capacity.  With the clamor for big racks, we seem to have lost the grasp of fundamental wildlife management.

 

Call it what you will:  .AR...QDMA, or whatever....Most likely the proponents live/hunt in areas where the deer population is UP.....most likely they cultivate "food plots" (aka bait stations) to create/ attract big bucks...most likely they kill multiple deer per year...they are primarily "ambushers" (doing their killing from a "shoot house" overlooking a bait station.....er, excuse me, a food plot.)  They most likely use trail cams to get an edge on the local deer.  From a traditional standpoint, they are not really hunters.  But, they do whine loudly !!!

 

Yep......I am an old fart hunter, who wishes to hunt in a traditional manner...without a slew of new regulations designed to benefit the "food plotters"!

 

OK newbies....take your shots

 

Early

[5.9cummins]

I was started reading this thinking "wow a civil AR thread" then i got to the bottom of the first page. Sure dosent take long for these things to degenerate.

 

Ineviteably the argument i see most predominatly with this issue is there are not enough bucks or at least enough "big bucks". I dont see the point in DEC regulating all the other hunters in the state so a minority can get what they want. I know its for the "health" of the heard.

 

So i would assume a viable substitue for not teaching our kids to use a gun to fix there problems is to hard. So logically we should turn to the government to regulate the guns. It is for the kids "saftey" after all.

 

I have had the pleasure of meeting many, many hunters in this state who consistantly take big deer. They are young, old and everywhere in between. Farmers, carpanters, plumbers government employees. But they all have one thing in common. They BUST THERE A$$. Weather its the willingness to go the extra mile to get away from other hunters, hike 10 miles through the ADK's to track a buck, buy there own property (sucsessful buisness men), or literally repel down a cliff. They all put themselves in a position to kill deer (weather its through the use of money, time or physical effort).

 

And for the record i admire guys who practice voluntary QDMA. I put them in the category with the guys above, there doing something.

[Doc]

I know that the reason the DEC implemented AR's in the Catskill areas is because they deemed the herd unhealthy.

That's not the way I heard it. Most initial AR decisions were legislatively driven. The DEC has said that there is no biological imperative that suggests that AR is required in their management activities. And that AR decisions are based on social wants and needs. That is not exact wording but captures the essence of statements made by Jeremy Hurst (DEC head biologist). In other words, AR has been implemented in certain WMUs because of political pressure and mandates to do so. I never heard any DEC personnel ever say that AR was required for the health of any part of the state herd, and as pointed out above, they have said exactly the opposite.

[BizCT]

I want the guy who baited the deer to be fined and lose his license!

 

CHEATER!

[WNYBuckHunter]

I want the guy who baited the deer to be fined and lose his license!

 

CHEATER!

 

HAHA

 

Its probably just some stock photo he found on the web. Still should have used something that didnt represent an illegal activity if done in NY, which is the state hes talking about.

[foothills habitat]

I wanted to provide some background on this so that everyone understands the position and the situation that we are in, as I am president of the "...one Branch of QDMA..."  The Upper Hudson River Valley Branch that represents Warren, Washington, Saratoga & Renesselaer Counties in NY.   

 

My long time friend owns a farm in Washington County, and In the late mid 1980s we started working on habitat and shooting some does, along with every single yearling buck we saw, and we stacked them up.  Every 10 years or so, we would shoot a 'big buck' that was likely a 2 year old.  We didnt know how old the bucks were, and we didnt care.   

 

In 2000, I realized that my neighbor was letting small bucks go, and we began practicing QDM on my friends farm here in 2000, based on the principes taught by Charlie Alsheimer.   Our buck criteria began as 6 points & eartip spread, and is now 8 points and an eartip spread which eliminates ALL yearling bucks from harvest.  That has since expaned to a QDM Cooperative with 7 different landowners, which I manage.   On the Cooperative and surrounding lands, we are now regularty taking bucks aged 4 - 5 years old with regularity, animals that dress in excess of 200 pounds.    

 

The only thing that made this program "successful" at shooting older bucks was to restrict the harvest, not by aging with body characteristics - but by point & measurement restrictions that were easily identified in the field by the hunters.  Otherwise, they would have survived to live past a year and a half and they certainly were not before 2000.  The #1, lowest hole in the bucket,  was AGE.  not habitat, not soils, not genetics - AGE. Can we - and shouldnt we - want to fix that ?   

 

In 2004 we formed a Branch of the QDMA, and I have been on the Board of Directors since the beginning.   I am also a graduate of QDMA's Deer Steward 1 & 2, and the Certified Lands Inspection program.   Our deer are all aged by QDMA biologists and NYS DEC biologist.   Point being, I know what I am talking about, and I am not one of the many self-certified experts.   

 

Around 2010, a group started talking about "Antler Restricions" to protect Yearling Bucks.  A few were members of our Board.  I was opposed, going with the "Education Not Regulation" as this is truly the best method.    Over time I realized our educational efforts were not enough.  Not enough when we have a 50 acre landowner surrounded by a 3,000 acre QDM Cooperative shooting every yearling they could, sometimes with "friends" hunting, taking in excess of 10 yearling bucks a season.   Some people just simply refuse to be educated.   Our land ownership is agricultural and fragmented habitat, with high hunter density and the yearling bucks do not survive. 

 

In 2010 one bowshop and a handful of volunteers formed the "Southern Washington County Future for Hunting" and gathered over 1,000 signatures on a petition to enact AR in DMU 5S and 5T.    Our County Sportsmens Federation does not represent the local hunters, if they did we would have "AR" in DMU 5S + 5T a long time ago.      

 

There are currently 1,750 members of QDMA in the whole of New York State, and this one local group gets 1,000 + people, local people, that say "We want this", and we have to listen to how its being FORCED on people ?  Not quite.   We conducted an informal survey in the Summer of 2014 with 700+ responses and 90% are in favor of this still.      These same people are now QDMA members and are looking to US (QDMA) to change things.   14 out of 15 on this 'one Branch's' Board are in favor of a regulartion change in DMU 5S + 5T, because we live here, hunt here, and we know what the people want.

 

The website was created "AR for NY" , I dont think if they named the website  "AR for DMU 5S + 5T" it would have attracted as much attention.  The mission of the SWCFFH  group is still Education, look at the webiste.   And yet people will still ridicule the Author, Dick Henry - who was managing deer while we were in diapers ?    

 

We dont really care what kind of regulations you have in other areas of the State, but could they be better ?  If education is working in WNY, by all means thats great - and it's evident from the pictures that are on the internet that someone is passing yearling bucks with regularity. 

 

In Washington County, in these DMUs, we ceratinly could protect a majority of yearlings with a regulation change, meeting the "3 Criteria" set by Kip Adams and QDMA.   If a regulation change is made, QDMA is the organization in prime position to provide the Educational Components necessary to make this the best thing that has happened in NY Deer Management since 1911.

 

Tony Rainville

Branch President

Upper Hudson River Valley Branch QDMA

 

 

 

 

[Doewhacker]

So you informally surveyed your members and concluded the majority in 5S and T want AR's. Shocking results don't you think being that your chapter is built around forcing AR's in MY area.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

 we ceratinly could protect a majority of yearlings with a regulation change, meeting the "3 Criteria" set by Kip Adams and QDMA.  

Please clarify what the 3 Criteria are.

[phade]

Some hunter who owned 50 acres enjoyed shooting yearling bucks amongst your QDM cooperative, giving you the impression that he was "undoing" or negating your hard work on 3k acres. So, because his choice isn't what you wanted, you determined that education isn't enough? So you intend to legislate him into your ideology because he "refuses to be educated"?

 

Education doesn't mean complicity. It means providing people with knowledge to do as they see fit, including making decisions.

 

 

 

Edited February 7, 2014 by phade

[phade]

In general, QDMA prefers the voluntary passing of yearling bucks to mandatory antler regulations. However, we recognize that antler restrictions may be justified in some situations to achieve specific deer management objectives. Regarding our position on specific antler restriction proposals, QDMA examines each on a case-by-case basis and applies a three-part test.

 

First, is the restriction biologically sound? This means the proposed restriction will protect the majority of yearling bucks while allowing the majority of bucks 2½ years old and older to be eligible for harvest. This is always the goal of state-mandated restrictions, though voluntary antler restrictions on private lands may seek to protect some older age classes as well. In either case, the antler restriction criteria must be based on data collected from the affected deer population to ensure the right bucks are protected.

 

Second, is it supported by the majority of affected hunters and landowners? Agencies considering an antler restriction should conduct surveys to determine support levels before enacting the restriction.

 

Finally, will it be objectively monitored to determine success or failure? Without monitoring, there is no way to know if the restriction should be altered to improve success or possibly removed altogether if it doesn’t work or is no longer needed.

Many restrictions fail one or more of these criteria. The QDMA has supported some antler restrictions, opposed others, and taken a neutral stance on still others. In the long term, QDMA is optimistic that enough hunters will voluntarily pass young bucks that antler restrictions will become unnecessary and even cumbersome to more sophisticated management.

 

Pulled from the KA article on QDMA's site.

Edited February 7, 2014 by phade

[phade]

   

 

There are currently 1,750 members of QDMA in the whole of New York State, and this one local group gets 1,000 + people, local people, that say "We want this", and we have to listen to how its being FORCED on people ?  Not quite.   We conducted an informal survey in the Summer of 2014 with 700+ responses and 90% are in favor of this still.      These same people are now QDMA members and are looking to US (QDMA) to change things.   14 out of 15 on this 'one Branch's' Board are in favor of a regulartion change in DMU 5S + 5T, because we live here, hunt here, and we know what the people want.

 

 

Tony Rainville

Branch President

Upper Hudson River Valley Branch QDMA

 

 

So you informally surveyed your members and concluded the majority in 5S and T want AR's. Shocking results don't you think being that your chapter is built around forcing AR's in MY area.

 

Doe, you really need to work on reading, lol. They must have Doc's Delorean or something.

[Doewhacker]

Doe, you really need to work on reading, lol. They must have Doc's Delorean or something.

 

 

opps I missed the year they did an informal survey of their members.