A Little Closer Look at the Bear Program Proposal

[stoneam2006]

I'm in favor of a spring season....I don't run dogs and think if they did it should be seperate season to avoid still hunters caught in the chaos. If I had dogs I'd run them gotta be a good time.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Have to figure out a way for them hounds to read the posted signs first!   I have been on other sites and have heard the horror stories from the guys down south where the dogs run deer on every property the deer run on.  Have heard alot of the sss stories where the owner only finds a gps collar in the woods.  Fair game for some!!

[mike rossi]

why is it ok for people to hunt rabbits with a dog but not bear.....same concept, different animal, no?

 

The chase is longer (often miles) and the shooting aspect differs in that plucking a bear out of a tree contrasts with using a smoothbore for a bunny bouncing through cover or watching the cover intensely and  waiting patiently for a bunny to pause to take a shot with .22 rimfire .

 

Hound hunting for bears is sporting and requires a lot of dedication to train a pack of hounds and follow them to a captured bear. But there is little denial that the actual shooting is very easy. I am not taking sides here, just answering your question.

[Doc]

I can tell Doc has a little true information about running bears with dogs. Anyone that thinks hunting with hounds is easy has never raised and trained the dogs. Just think how easy it is when the bear gets treed on the back side of a huge swamp or beaver pond.

 

I have run a lot of hounds in my day, and even with good dogs, you sure don't expect a lot of easy races. Sure is nice when it happens, but don't get used to it.

 

There are quite a few people that run hounds after bear during NY's training season. Funny thing is, most of the guys only care about the hounds looking good, and rarely if ever shoot a bear out when they run in states where it is allowed.

 

I will agree that running with hounds is for big country. I don't even run hounds after coon anymore because there are too many houses and cars.

Amazing .... I am wondering what part of this quote from my reply indicates that I think is easy....."First of all, hunting bears with dogs is not something that I will ever be involved with. I think I have left that level of exertion behind me quite a few years ago ... lol."         

[NFA-ADK]

You are an idiot.

 

No one ever books hunts in other states for Bear by your logic, because you have no interest no other hunters do either.

 

Way to support other hunters. We aren't talking about deer on LI in suburbs, we are talking about Bears in a state wide management discussion.

 

Just like I said before, its nice to see you siding with anti hunters, again showing your true colors.

Even spelling out the sarcasm fact does not work with you, OK.  Another shocker.  LMAO 

[erussell]

Im for anything that kills them dead. They are everywhere now and with coyote's to they are doing a number on the fawns around one area I hunt. Had one fawn on camera last yr. One. Had one herd of about 9 doe and one fawn. Something is wrong there.

[coonhunter]

Sorry for the misunderstanding Doc. Sent you a message.

[Doc]

Im for anything that kills them dead. They are everywhere now and with coyote's to they are doing a number on the fawns around one area I hunt. Had one fawn on camera last yr. One. Had one herd of about 9 doe and one fawn. Something is wrong there.

Somewhere I read that bears are a very underestimated cause of fawn predation.

[mike rossi]

Somewhere I read that bears are a very underestimated cause of fawn predation.

 

That comment just switched the topic from bear management to deer management...

 

One of these days (before feb.21 when they take the draft off the website) I will read it (the draft)-  But in the meantime does the draft reference reducing bear populations to increase fawn recruitment?

 

E Russell may have some personal concerns and observations, but I see the nationwide trend in deer management is toward lower densities to promote biodiversity. The strategy for maintaining hunter satisfaction under smaller deer numbers appears to be the so called quality or trophy animal. A natural predator would be an asset in reducing populations and manipulating age structures for trophies...

 

I read a few lines of the draft which indicate the state has some desire to limit bear numbers in some form or fashion, but is fawn recruitment one of those forms or fashions? I kind of doubt it... Paste it on here, prove me wrong again... Rather be wrong than have to read it myself...

[Doc]

Lol .... Easy there Mike. We tend to let topics drift a bit without calling in the "topic police". If you are super concerned with topic purity, I would suggest that you at take a moment to at least scan the DEC bear management proposal just to show a little sincerity in your concern .... lol. It's not really all that long.

 

Personally I think erussell's concern over bear predation of fawns is a legitimate comment on a topic involving a bear management plan.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

That comment just switched the topic from bear management to deer management...

One of these days (before feb.21 when they take the draft off the website) I will read it (the draft)- But in the meantime does the draft reference reducing bear populations to increase fawn recruitment?

E Russell may have some personal concerns and observations, but I see the nationwide trend in deer management is toward lower densities to promote biodiversity. The strategy for maintaining hunter satisfaction under smaller deer numbers appears to be the so called quality or trophy animal. A natural predator would be an asset in reducing populations and manipulating age structures for trophies...

I read a few lines of the draft which indicate the state has some desire to limit bear numbers in some form or fashion, but is fawn recruitment one of those forms or fashions? I kind of doubt it... Paste it on here, prove me wrong again... Rather be wrong than have to read it myself...

Personally I believe that is why we don't have a 365 coyote season

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Personally I believe that is why we don't have a 365 coyote season

In some places im sure there are 365 days, wide open on anything that can kill a fawn!   I'm pretty sure of a couple. When mature bear kills out number mature deer kills on property that has been in the same hands for years, always have had great deer herds with very few bear sightings and now be hard pressed to find fawns in summer even while putting up hay.  Something needs to be done.  It Is!

[mike rossi]

Lol .... Easy there Mike. We tend to let topics drift a bit without calling in the "topic police". If you are super concerned with topic purity, I would suggest that you at take a moment to at least scan the DEC bear management proposal just to show a little sincerity in your concern .... lol. It's not really all that long.

 

Personally I think erussell's concern over bear predation of fawns is a legitimate comment on a topic involving a bear management plan.

 

Hello Doc,

 

Correct I don't have much interest in this, I did just read it and I will make some comments here.

 

Since the draft is in adobe form, it has a search box. I typed in: fawn, deer, predation. Nothing in the document discussed predation of fawns or adult deer or any other animals. I rest this right here that the black bears  impact on deer is not a concern of the DEC as per the draft. if I missed something in the draft, please show me... Off course, if anyone thinks the DEC should evaluate the impact of bears on deer, that is what the public comment phase is for, and it is your opportunity to suggest that or make other suggestions...

 

The plan breaks the state into four divisions. The recommendations only call for quote: a "modest" population reduction in one of the 4 areas. Two other geographic divisions are to maintain the current populations at the status quo... A fourth division, which is a little confusing because rather than being a contiguous geographic area, it represents the lake plains, the Mohawk valley, and " urban/suburban areas". In this division the DEC wants to prevent bears from immigrating and establishing populations.

 

None the less, the DEC does want to expand bear hunting to achieve those modest population reduction goals. As we been discussing that includes relaxing regs on cubs, baiting, hounds, trapping (likely foot snares), a spring season and tweaking the northern zone season which may displease archers, by the way...

 

Let me point out some trivia for those who might be  interested:

 

Page 4 , on the bottom there is a footnote regarding Grant WE-178-G. That means this draft was funded by Pitman Robertson Funds, 3:1 with state money, most likely from the conservation fund.

 

Objective 2; strategy 2.2.2, The plan does in fact call for a hunter survey. This will be another one of those 5,000 hunter surveys, likely done by Cornell (human dimension unit) or responsive management. Those surveys almost surely will receive Pitman Robertson funding as well.

Edited February 16, 2014 by mike rossi

[erussell]

That comment just switched the topic from bear management to deer management...

 

One of these days (before feb.21 when they take the draft off the website) I will read it (the draft)-  But in the meantime does the draft reference reducing bear populations to increase fawn recruitment?

 

E Russell may have some personal concerns and observations, but I see the nationwide trend in deer management is toward lower densities to promote biodiversity. The strategy for maintaining hunter satisfaction under smaller deer numbers appears to be the so called quality or trophy animal. A natural predator would be an asset in reducing populations and manipulating age structures for trophies...

 

I read a few lines of the draft which indicate the state has some desire to limit bear numbers in some form or fashion, but is fawn recruitment one of those forms or fashions? I kind of doubt it... Paste it on here, prove me wrong again... Rather be wrong than have to read it myself...

 

Its my understanding that hunters are the ones who do the population control. I would rather fill five tags and have a frig and belly full of meat than the coyotes and bears. If they do the job for us then what motivation does the state have for continuing using hunters as game managers. See a bear shoot it. If you dont like Bear meat donate it to someone who does.

[A Sportsman]

E Russell, drag a bear to the road from where I hunt and then ask yourself "was it worth it to donate the meat?"

I understand if someone has some concern for bear predation on deer, if things are really getting out of whack. But we also have to be respectful of nature. If a bear catches a deer and eats it, I say good for him. That's what animals do, they eat eachother. Ill have to just go find a different deer for me.

[Five Seasons]

I don't feel strongly about it but I've always been against baiting any animal.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk