"Why doesn't NY have a dove season?"

[Setters4life]

Andrew Burnett is the principal biologist in our state for any Upland Game & Furbearer project. He's a good resource to talk to.

[mike rossi]

It was never recent. Mourning dove has always had a "game bird" status in New Jersey. Game status affords "protection" through the establishment of season dates and bag limits.There is no open hunting season for dove, hence it is protected.

 

PS - In an analysis put forth back in 2006 by the NJ Sportsmens Federation & NJDFG&W, it was estimated that less than 7,000 hunters would pursue dove in New Jersey based upon the number of upland & migratory hunters. And because both groups have a limited war chest, it was not feasible to move forward with a hunt because of the anticipated lawsuits that would be mounted by various anti-hunting groups. Fear of being sued is a great motivator when the funds aren't available, and the hunters so few. 

 

A proposal in Jersey to change the status of the mourning dove from a "nongame species" to a "game species" was published in the NJ state register  February 21, 2012  - look at page 101, comment 42 and scroll down the NJ DEP's response. 

 

A game species is indeed "partially protected" when a hunting season and other regulation of its harvest is established. However a game species is fully protected when a hunting season is not established.

 

Here is the link: http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/adoptions/adopt_120221b.pdf

Edited May 28, 2014 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

Another issue you raised was that NJ estimated 7,000 people would participate in dove hunting. The pejorative response to that would be: Would you prefer 70,000?

 

However a better response is that NJ has a trapping season for 759 people. A Bear season which 10,000 permits are issues with a hunter success rate of 1.3%. The bear season isn't even its own season, it is concurrent with NJ's 6 day firearm buck season so it provides no additional hunting opportunity except that deer hunters with a permit may opportunistically take a bear. A success rate of 1.3% among 10,000 permit holders isn't exactly comparable to the recreation a mourning dove season would create, even if only among  7,000 participants. I bet very few people who harvest a bear also harvest their buck over those 6 days as well, so where is the big gain in recreational opportunity?  Both trapping and bear hunting are highly controversial as I am sure you know - actually much harder to defend than mourning dove hunting.

 

The numbers in NY are not much different based on percentages and land area. NY has 35,000 waterfowl hunters and 5,000 trappers, though the DEC claims during years of high fur prices up to 10,000 trapping licenses have been sold. I found no data for NY bear hunter numbers. Bear hunting is so lightly participated in in NY that the state recently committed to development of a strategy to create a bear hunting culture,( ie. encourage bear hunting) in the state as part of its ten year black bear management plan.

Edited May 28, 2014 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

I know that. I can't compare them to bluebirds, but then it isn't me that is standing in the way. And if you re-read my comment, you will see that I am not advocating that comparison of the two species. I am simply trying to answer the question posed in the title of this thread. There are organizations that prey on this ignorance to whip public opinion up against any such attempts to expand hunting of any sort. To your average person, their only experience with mourning doves  is watching them at the bird feeder and their association of them with "song-birds". You asked the question as to why NY doesn't have a dove season, and I offer these non-scientific but very real emotional forces as being a possible reason. Frankly, what other possible reasons could there be?

 

So if you are trying to establishing a dove season, it is these kinds of emotional reactions that you first have to deal with. I believe those are the real road-blocks that have to be worked around or removed before you can proceed. How do you do that? ..... beats me. Probably the answer lies more with "moving around" the road blocks than trying to pull them down. Quiet, covert, side-stepping has a whole lot less to do with changing human nature and probably has the best chance of success.....lol.

 

Doc,

 

I want to address what you said above which I bolded. Hunting proposals DO NOT escape the radar of the HSUS. You been chewed on in this thread and its not my intent to contribute to that, but based on that statement you are not at all aware of what goes on. They even know what is going on with local clubs for example the attention received about the holly squirrel slam and the greene crow down. Your a bit uninformed. Furthermore you seem to be of the impression that we are sticking our chin out and telling the HSUS to take a swing, that is not at all the case and you, like others have not figured out or tried to, how we are operating... I went through this sneak it by philosophy a few years ago with all the old federation dudes, as I just did in this thread with the war chest myth. Get off both of those, I addressed them multiple times, I am done with them. Its called moving on.

[mike rossi]

Doc,

 

I guess I am not quite done because there is a very good recent example. The DEC's recent mute swan plan included a number of controversial strategies along with 'public outreach". The draft plan met overwhelming disapproval because the "outreach' needs to be done first, not during and not after a controversial proposal. As a matter of fact, I submitted public comment on the draft plan and one of my recommendations was that public outreach about mute swans should be done first. That is what we are doing, putting the cart in back of the horse instead of in the front....

 

Will education/outreach change the opinions of people who advocate for animal rights? Off course it will not. Nobody will suggest that, but rather it is to foster public understanding about an issue and allow them to form their opinions based on facts.

 

One of the functions we are performing is outreach. We are directing our outreach at the general public because the HSUS and local grassroots anti hunting groups will use newspapers to urge the general public to write their state senate and assembly reps in opposition to dove hunting based on predictable line of statements which  we have debunked. With solid facts, the public is less susceptible to propaganda pleas; and less likely to contact their reps in opposition; and  much less go from neutral to anti hunting.

 

Our outreach is also targeting the lawmakers  themselves; not because we think that the majority will vote according to the facts rather than what keeps them in office; but because we want to arm the lawmakers courageous enough to sponsor dove bills with information so they are not intimidated by a grilling by their peers during bill hearings. As a matter of fact, we want the lawmakers from animal rights country to know that if they grill our friendly politicians with ridiculous propaganda based questions - they will have potent answers for them. The information we are providing  changes the balance of power in a debate and changes which lawmakers will dread a debate during a bill hearing about dove hunting.

 

Our outreach is also directed to hunters that are not familiar with dove hunting to generate interest in it; and also how to deal effectively with opposition to dove hunting. When anti hunters start flooding the newspapers with letters it is up to hunters to win the public opinion battle and to do it they must not only respond, but they also must respond correctly. Your neighbors reading the same local news as you are much harder to influence than politicians. Your neighbors want facts and they want it delivered appropriately. However, as said, even with politicians it can be more of a show of hands. The willingness of either side to fight is based on what information they have. If they ignored our letters and decide to take it up with another lawmaker who did read our material, let them make a fool out of themselves... But you are more likely to get a lawmaker representing your voting district than I am to pay attention. So perhaps those who ignore our letters might not ignore the same information from a voter in their district....  

 

Outreach is not our only function but this post is already quite windy. A word about face book. Face book serves as a means to organize people and get information to them. Cause pages on Face book differ from personal pages. Think of each face book cause page as a magazine. As with magazines you subscribe to the ones you like and receive them in the mail. Articles you find interesting can be "shared" with people you "friend" on face book, like photocopying an article and giving it to a fellow hunter to read, only all you need to do is click your mouse twice and its done. The frequency you receive posts depends on the page, we try to send one post every other day, but sometimes don't send anything for a work week. If a "legislative crisis" breaks out the posts might be more frequent for a while. Unless you pay a fee, and we will not, unless someone donates to us, face book actually limits the percent of your subscribers who receive your posts automatically to 7% although they rotate which subscribers get your mail. Therefore it is recommended that you go to the actual pages you are subscribed to from time to time rather than rely on your news feed. The action of "liking" a face book page automatically subscribes you to online posts and it also functions as an endorsement for a cause. Nobody is suggesting endorsement based on face book "likes"  is a form of petition, but when we distribute an electronic petition in the near future, after the smoke clears from the November election, a face book following will be very facilitative to gain petition signatures.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2014 by mike rossi

[Doc]

Doc,

 

I want to address what you said above which I bolded. Hunting proposals DO NOT escape the radar of the HSUS. You been chewed on in this thread and its not my intent to contribute to that, but based on that statement you are not at all aware of what goes on. They even know what is going on with local clubs for example the attention received about the holly squirrel slam and the greene crow down. Your a bit uninformed. Furthermore you seem to be of the impression that we are sticking our chin out and telling the HSUS to take a swing, that is not at all the case and you, like others have not figured out or tried to, how we are operating... I went through this sneak it by philosophy a few years ago with all the old federation dudes, as I just did in this thread with the war chest myth. Get off both of those, I addressed them multiple times, I am done with them. Its called moving on.

So you are saying that what I said is not true and shows that I am uninformed. You are telling me that there is no impact from the general public on these proposals. You are telling me that opposition to new hunting seasons has nothing to do with emotional reactions of the general public and the organized anti-hunting organizations.

 

Well, I must respectfully disagree with you on all of that. You asked "Why NY doesn't have a dove season?" and I offered my opinion. If doing that has in some way offended you, then I will refrain from replying to your questions in the future. It sounds like you have everything under control and really didn't need to ask the question in the first place.

[jjb4900]

just out of curiosity, does NY have the massive flights of Doves that some of the States were it is popular have? I haven't seen it, so my exposure to Doves is a few pair here and there just like any other bird.....if that's the case throughout NY, I can see exactly what Doc is saying, the majority see them as songbirds and not a viable game species...myself included.

[mike rossi]

NJ got back to me and the correspondence is pasted below. It pretty much is consistent with what setters for life said. However, we are still asking NJ some questions about this fear of litigation. If the HSUS is truly controlling the decisions made by state wildlife agencies than we better start looking at incorporating a legal defense fund into our hunting license fee structure (mandatory). Perhaps the DEC's recent roll over regarding mute swans was due to a threat of litigation. I cant see that being the case however - recent court decisions ruled in favor of the FWS and Pennsylvania Game Commission in regards to mute swans, the DEC is aware of that, it was even stated in the draft plan.

 

The letter from NJ mentions the "game commission". The game commission in NJ is a handful of people appointed by the governor and a few other politicians to represent the states sportsman and citizens. IN NJ there was talk for decades that anti hunters should be represented on the commission, ie. an anti hunter or two appointed to the commission, and that may have already been done, perhaps someone on here knows. Anti hunters or not I have expressed my disdain for these politically appointed  citizen commissions/ councils numerous time and said why they do not work. One reason, of many reasons is: Organized sportsman DO NOT represent  the more numerous unorganized sportsman. A second reason is the leaders of organized sportsman are appointed by politicians.

 

There is a lot of irony in the NJ situation. First of all, a point 99% of the people on THIS forum will agree with; is that NJ hunters essentially choose bear hunting over dove hunting. They were willing to get sued to harvest 130 bears a year but not hunt doves or instead of doves. It would have been much smarter to let the antis pay for the USDA Wildlife Service to handle nuisance bears to the tune of 130 a year. The NJ tax payer would then truly pay for the bear removal as the antis claim is what occurs with sport hunting, which in reality saves tax money to pay the USDA and actually generates revenue instead of burning it... NJ only has about 80,000 hunters and the prospect of harvesting one of the 130 bears isn't going to recruit or retain hunters. As a result the NJ's DEP wildlife budget is going to continue to shrink and become more and more dependent on non-hunter funding of conservation. Remember what I said a few posts up about "attrition"?

 

Second, NJ does a fantastic job at preserving its remaining bobwhite population. They annually burn 2,000 acres and do many other bobwhite management practices. Per the NJ DEP, that is Andrew, sportsman had much to do with closing the bobwhite season for conservation reasons. Closing the bobwhite season resurrected the attention to mourning doves as game. Although funds may be received from non game / teaming with wildlife; NJ sportsman was and still is the backbone of the funding strategy for bobwhite; hunters cooperated with the DEP in closing the season; and yet were not able to hunt a different bird that is the most hunted and most abundant game in the USA. 

 

From NJ DEP Wildlife (AB):

 

My understanding is that NJ sportsmen would indeed like to have an open hunting season for mourning dove.  In 1982, interested hunters formed a Sportsmen’s Legislative Action Committee to promote legislation to return mourning dove to its former game bird status.  In 2009, the New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs (NJSFSC) supported closing the bobwhite quail season and requested passage of a mourning dove season to compensate hunters for lost recreational opportunity.  I’m sure that interest in a dove hunting season has occurred during the intervening years, but each time the NJ Fish and Game Council has opted not to propose an open season. 

 

Some Midwestern states have recently adopted an open dove season after a lengthy and expensive litigation process.  I think one subsequently reverted back to a closed season, but I may be wrong.  In any event, neither the NJSFSC nor the NJDFW have the financial resources that would be necessary to overcome the emotional outcry that would surely ensue a proposed open dove hunting season.  NYDEC probably feels the same (and NY has 700,000? hunters compared to less than 68,000 in NJ).

 

Our waterfowl biologist represents NJ at the Atlantic Flyway Council where season dates and bag limits are recommended for all migratory game birds, including mourning dove and I have copied him on this email so that he can contribute what information he might have regarding dove hunting in NJ.  You might also wish to contact the NJSFSC (http://www.njsfsc.org/) to see what they remember of past sportsmen initiatives aimed at authorizing a dove hunting season in New Jersey. 

[mike rossi]

As far as Doc's post number 32, anti hunters, especially the HSUS, know about hunting and wildlife legislation before hunting groups do. This is really not worthy of arguing about, Doc and others are misinformed about this - you cannot sneak in legislation. AND - IF you did, the state is legally responsible for TRANSPARENCY. By law, the state and the feds must open public comment and must publish it in the state or federal register. Now days they go beyond that - they advertise in the news; on their websites, and on their face book pages. NY DEC has more anti hunters following their face book page than hunters, by the way. Forget about this idea of sneaking bills through....

 

In response to post 33: If you are outdoors enough and now what to look for there are many mourning doves in NY. As there are huge numbers of woodcock that stage on cape may; and Louisiana; and huge numbers of waterfowl and crows converge in certain areas; huge numbers of doves converge in Texas, Arizona, etc.... Nobody compares the staging of woodcock on their winter stopovers with were the are hunted elsewhere... Ditto for ducks, geese, crows...  No, NY doesn't have the flights of Argentina or even Texas, but we have a lot of doves. There will be  preparation, scouting and hunting involved to find them and pattern them however, which is a great thing...

 

On a continental level mourning doves are the most abundant and widespread game bird; and rank 11th in overall abundance among all bird species. There are 3 management units in the USA. All units, including the eastern MU populations cycle up and down throughout the unit and in individual states, but mourning doves are very abundant  even in poor years. They adapt well to human disturbances, depending on what the disturbance is, populations may actually increase in response, unlike other wildlife. A species that increases in response to human activity certainly should be a game species. Even a species that only sustains its population among human activity certainly should be a game species..

 

SONG BIRDS? Doves are not song birds. Song birds are characterized by their vocal apparatus. The vocal apparatus is an organ in the throat. Crows are song birds, doves are not. Crows are hunted in NY...

 

 

 

Edited May 30, 2014 by mike rossi

[Doc]

This is really not worthy of arguing about, Doc and others are misinformed about this - you cannot sneak in legislation.

 

Interesting comment in light of the way the history of the Safe Act passage.

 

But anyway it is time for me to bow out of this fiasco. Personally, I could care less whether there is a dove season or not. So I really have no dog in this fight. And since you already have all the answers, and are not interested in entertaining any other opinions but your own, do whatever you think you must and good luck to you.

[Meat Manager]

Interesting comment in light of the way the history of the Safe Act passage.

But anyway it is time for me to bow out of this fiasco. Personally, I could care less whether there is a dove season or not. So I really have no dog in this fight. And since you already have all the answers, and are not interested in entertaining any other opinions but your own, do whatever you think you must and good luck to you.

Safe Act, never heard of it (can you go 1 hr without bringing it up)?

Uninformed opinions are worse than no opinion at all...just because you have an opinion doesn't make it valid.

In fact those with the loudest most extreme opinions have actually just borrowed them from talking heads at Fox News or MSNBC. Two companies who generate revenue by fanning flames of discontent.

Facts like statistics/documents and contacting reliable sources for confirmation trumps opinions all day (again, thanks Mike for providing this type of content).

That's the problem with message boards and society as a whole today...everyone thinks their gut-felt or tv-taught opinion is equivalent to the word of god.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited May 30, 2014 by Meat Manager

[Doc]

Well, like I said, I have no dog in this fight and could care less whether there is a dove season or not. You guys figure it out.

[Setters4life]

Mike, 

 

I was unaware of the revised amendment.

 

I agree that bear is incidental with NJ's 6-day firearm week, but of those 10,000 permits offered, fewer have been issued each year. Interest is waning. They even dropped the special "bear education class" for those interested in hunting them that was required:

2012 - 6,700 bear permits issued

2013 - 6,445 bear permits issued

 

I agree that closing quail to only two wildlife management areas in the entire state may have been a good thing, but it's still put & take. The past two winters have been tough on birds that get stocked the night before.

 

I would like to see them do the same for pheasant, and close land to hunting like they did in PA, but hunters want meat for their $40 stamp.

 

The estimate of "7,000" dove hunters was Andrew's estimate based on a blend of migratory permits sold and pheasant & quail stamps sold in the state. It's all about numbers. (Waterfowl permits were 10,455 and pheasant & quail stamps were 11,908.) Those permit numbers today represent half the number of hunters who participated almost forty years ago. How do you spur interest to hunt doves in New Jersey, to a very small audience? I would prefer 70,000, but we don't even have that many hunters. The committee formed in 2009 to initiate a dove hunt ceased their efforts due to lack of interest from sportsmen.

 

BTW - When was the last time you ran into a grouse hunter in New Jersey's forests? Just like quail, there are groups making small man-made plots for habitat restoration, but they have netted limited results.  

 

[mike rossi]

Doc,

 

The safe act was put through by a law which allows the legislature to suspend ordinary legislative processes. This law was designed for acts of war and emergencies. Senator Dean Skelos and Assemblyman Gregory Klein as leaders of their houses used this law to expedite the safe act. This has nothing to do with ordinary legislation, especially legislation that they consider low priority, such as a dove bill lol...

 

 

[mike rossi]

Setters,

 

One thing you can do is get regional outdoor writers on guided dove hunts or take them to Rhode Island or PA. A hunt in Argentina or Texas wont represent dove hunting in the northeast, but RI and PA would. Even Delaware, Maryland. Outdoor writers are organized through OW Associations and their thinking and writing is institutionalized, that is they all repeat the same stuff. Get the OW on board and they will pave the way.

 

We are working on material to excite hunters about dove hunting, pass our stuff along. Its all about education, once a sizable group becomes interested in the recreational and meat aspect of dove hunting a sub group of them will be receptive to how it ties into conservation funding and early successional habitat. Wont happen overnight, but we mowed a path with our online presences. They are titled NY Dove Hunting, however most is applicable to other states and we have been reaching out to the other 7 non-hunting states including NJ.

[mike rossi]

Another thing we will look into and will report back about is the quote from Andrew of NJ DEP Wildlife in post 33, second paragraph. I may be wrong, but I am not sure if there was any litigation per se in the midwest. Michigan had the issue of repealing the two year old season but by referendum - a ballot  vote during the general election, not litigation. The HSUS achieved that by gathering petition signatures. We posted the video of the cartoon video they broadcasted all over the state to influence public opinion. About that same time Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa also recently passed dove seasons.

 

Almost half of the states that hunt doves have legalized it fairly recently, and every state has faced opposition, but I am not aware of litigation in the Midwest. Rhode Island's dove season was unsuccessfully attacked a few years ago, but I am not sure if it was via litigation and will look into it and how they defended themselves against the HSUS (which apparently has more influence among the public and politicians, and more money than the states or at least the states wildlife departments).

 

The HSUS certainly does have a history of filing injunction lawsuits demanding an EAS and/or EIS be performed before establishing a hunting season, but this is an embellishment of the endangered species act and has been shot down by the courts over and over. I think the courts have enough prior case law even back in 2006 when this was going on, to dismiss these types of lawsuits very quickly.

 

Another issue is I have been told that non profit anti hunting organizations can recoup their legal fees. I am not sure if this occurs only if the win their case. And I wonder who they recoup it from, does the state have to pay them back? This is another law that needs to be dropped - it allows antis to file frivolous litigation at will and get paid back their legal fees making it a win-win for them - especially when they receive fresh donations for each court stunt. I would say modeling unrelated litigation after the endangered species act is an embellishment and frivolous, especially when they have done it over and over and most times the courts have dismissed the complaints, especially the more recent ones.

 

Never the less, the HSUS has sued NJ several times. I am not sure, but it might be something unique to Jersey's laws. The well-publicized  wolf and spotted owl lawsuits are different, because those complaints would be relevant to the Endangered Species Act. At least they should be different, lol...

Edited May 30, 2014 by mike rossi

[Meat Manager]

I got a dozen or so cooing out back as we speak...

I hunted doves more than anything else from ages 16-18 growing up in PA.

Good fun and good eats.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mike rossi]

I got a dozen or so cooing out back as we speak...

I hunted doves more than anything else from ages 16-18 growing up in PA.

Good fun and good eats.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That is the unmated males (sexually mature at 70 days - good thing because most do not live 365 days with or without hunting) and the paired males version of "gobbling". We stated hearing doves this year on February 22. They have been doing their thing and there will be a good flight this fall...

 

Also been hearing turkeys gobbling, grouse drumming, woodcock penting, and snipe calls... But nothing calling as much as mourning doves, big  surprise huh?

Edited June 1, 2014 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

For New Jersey, a couple of comments about Proposal: PRN-2011-011.Refer to this link:

http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/adoptions/adopt_120221b.pdf

 

Refer especially to page 1 which indicates an "expiration date" of July 13,2014. Which is less than 6 weeks away!

> We do not know what this means and we are urging NJ sportsmen to look into this and take action if necessary. Also, we are not clear on the effect of this expiration date and do not have the time to look into it because it is less than 6 weeks away. We already have, however, reached out to NJ organizations about it without doing any fact checking. If you find out what this expiration date means and/or the status of this proposal and/or the current classification of the mourning dove in NJ, please let me know ASAP so we can pass the information along.

 

Refer to page 101; the comment from a member of the public number 47 and the NJ DEP Division of Fish and Wildlife's response. This stipulation would make the mourning dove and six other birds a game species but would not automatically set a hunting season. It would be preferable that this stipulation included the establishment of a hunting season; however even as it stands it "paves the way for a dove season".

 

Notice that this rule making was under the NJ DEP; Division of Fish and Wildlife; Endangered and Nongame Species Program. The significance of that is that if sportsmen are not watching the Nongame Program, they are not aware of many proposals; however the antis are very much aware of what is going on in both the Game and Nongame Programs.

Edited June 2, 2014 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

Look what we got here - Litigation! This is going to take some time to sort out and there probably are other cases. Be sure to look at the "footnotes" at the bottom which detail each who has the authority to set hunting seasons in each state.

 

http://www.leagle.com/decision/197720252OhioApp2d150_1177

Edited June 2, 2014 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

So if you are trying to establishing a dove season, it is these kinds of emotional reactions that you first have to deal with. I believe those are the real road-blocks that have to be worked around or removed before you can proceed. How do you do that? ..... beats me. Probably the answer lies more with "moving around" the road blocks than trying to pull them down. Quiet, covert, side-stepping has a whole lot less to do with changing human nature and probably has the best chance of success.....lol.

 

Doc,

 

I already mentioned this, but was not specific. The Federal Administrative Procedure  Law and NY Administrative Procedure  Law both require public review of most new proposals. These laws require the state and/or federal government to advertise proposals and hold a public comment period. Anti-hunting organizations have a trained staff which monitor new proposals of each state and the federal government on a daily basis. There actually have been occasions in which the AP Law and/or other mandated procedures were not followed, such as in Ohio in 1977; resulting in successful litigation by anti-hunting organizations. I don't know much about it, but it is also my understanding that non-profit anti-hunting organizations can recoup their legal expenses; I assume that would be especially true if the state or government violated procedural law.  Not certain about this either, but with that it is easy to assume that it would be the state or government agency they recoup their money from; thereby the agency incurring not only their own loss of time or in the unlikely event  they do not use in-house lawyers, legal fees;  but would also pay the legal fees of the anti-hunters...

 

If you want to delve deeper into this or want "proof", here are some links:

 

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/laws/administrative-procedure/553.html

http://www.federalregister.gov/uploads/2011/01/the_rulemaking_process.pdf

http://administrativelaw.uslegal.com/administrative-procedure-acts/new-york/

Edited June 3, 2014 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

That is the unmated males (sexually mature at 70 days - good thing because most do not live 365 days with or without hunting) and the paired males version of "gobbling". We stated hearing doves this year on February 22. They have been doing their thing and there will be a good flight this fall...

 

Also been hearing turkeys gobbling, grouse drumming, woodcock penting, and snipe calls... But nothing calling as much as mourning doves, big  surprise huh?

 

Correction: Sexually mature and capable of reproducing at 85 days of age. Fully independent of their parents at 30 days of age.

 

Also: Jersey hunters, that expiration date is looming fast. We don't know the status of that proposal, if someone can check it out and let us know please... Even without fact checking we already sent notification out among our Jersey network...

[mike rossi]

just out of curiosity, does NY have the massive flights of Doves that some of the States were it is popular have? I haven't seen it, so my exposure to Doves is a few pair here and there just like any other bird.....if that's the case throughout NY, I can see exactly what Doc is saying, the majority see them as songbirds and not a viable game species...myself included.

 

Here is some info that will give you insight about the abundance of mourning doves in New York.  NY is surrounded by mourning dove hunting occurring in Southern Ontario; Ohio; Pennsylvania; and Rhode Island. There are plenty of you tube videos of mourning dove hunting in Ohio if you look. I will post harvest data from Rhode Island and Ohio in the future.

 

1)The 2012-2013 HIP info for Pennsylvania: 18,000 hunters bagged 203,200 mourning doves.

 

2) An older Cornell University report indicates there are 10 Million mourning doves in NY except in the Adirondacks and Catskills. Western NY and Long Island often have "large flocks".  See Page 2 of this: http://www2.dnr.cornell.edu/ext/info/pubs/Wildlife/NYwildlife/mourning%20dove.pdf

 

3) I don't have the numbers yet, but this video shows dove hunting in southern Ontario. This providence opened its first mourning dove season in recent history last fall. Some of the birds are rock doves ('pigeons), but most are mourning doves. Here is the link:

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLo3wo7NfGAflmr7nQIwZQINJ9We36MLFr

[mike rossi]

In Post 44 and elsewhere we urged New Jersey hunters to write letters in support of PRN-2011-011 and stated although we are unsure of it's status the expiration date is looming (July 2014).

 

We also indicated due to the short notice we have not had time to do any fact checking. Glad we used that disclaimer, because it was not necessary to write in...

 

We heard back from NJ DEP today. Good news, the mourning dove became  a game species in Jersey in January of 2012. However, there is not a hunting season for them in Jersey. Not yet anyway.... At some point it will indeed be important to write letters, better yet someone living in NJ should get a petition going directed at the DEP and the Fish and Game Council.

 

Here is the correspondence received today:

 

I was informed by the Endangered and Nongame Species Program Chief Jenkins that mourning dove is no longer classified as a non-game species (effective January 2012 per PRN-2011-011; DEP Docket Number 15-10-12).  Mourning dove is listed as a game species with a closed season in New Jersey’s Game Code (N.J.A.C. 7:25-13) and the pertinent language is:

 

7:25-5.13 Migratory birds

(m) Seasons and bag limits are as follows:

1. Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), sandhill crane (Grus canadensis), and king rail (Rallus elegans) are protected. There is a closed season for mourning dove, sandhill crane and king rail.

2. The duration of the season and bag limits for hunting clapper rail (Rallus longirotstris), Virginia rail (Rallus limicola), sora rail (Porzana carolina), common gallinule or moorhen (Gallinula chloropus) and woodcock (Scolopax minor) are as prescribed by the Code of Federal Regulations by the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the current hunting season.

 

American and fish crows are also listed as game species in the NJ Game Code with the pertinent language as follows:

7:25-5.15 Crow (Corvus spp.)

(a) Duration for the season for hunting the crow shall be Monday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday from the second Monday in August through the third Saturday in March or as otherwise prescribed by the Code of Federal Regulations by the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the current hunting season inclusive, except closed during the six-day firearm deer season, as specified in N.J.A.C. 7:25-7.27(a).

 There is no daily bag limit. There is no season limit.

© The hours for hunting crows shall be sunrise to 1/2 hour after sunset, except on opening day of pheasant season, as specified in N.J.A.C. 7:25-5.2(d), when the hours are 8:00 A.M. to 1/2 hour after sunset.

(d) Hunting methods shall be in accordance with Federal regulations as adopted by the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

 

The regulatory process for amending the NJ Game Code entails consideration and discussion by Council members based on information provided by NJDFW biologists, publication of proposed amendments in the NJ Registrar, an open public meeting and a 60-day comment period.  For your information, the 11-member Fish and Game Council is regional represented (north, central, south) by 6 sportsmen representatives (selected by NJSFSC) and 3 agricultural representatives as well as 1 public member-at-large and the chair of the Endangered and Nongame Species Advisory Council.

Edited June 17, 2014 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

Regarding Post 49 and New Jersey in general: elsewhere the efforts of Ken Ganson, Jerry Natale, and perhaps others, who wrote resolutions to establish dove hunting in 2006 have been brought up.

 

We remind them and NJ hunters that in 2006 the mourning dove was a "protected bird". The ball game is different now because as of January 2012 the mourning dove has been reclassified as a game species in Jersey. This change removes a major road block along the path to a dove hunting season and that path is now much more easy to travel,

 

We have suggested to Natale that he uses face book to organize interested hunters and then direct an electronic petition to the NY DEP and the Fish and Wildlife Council now that the dove is a game species in Jersey.

 

The issue of litigation (a court injunction to block a hunting season) is not something foreign to the  NJ DEP or any other wildlife agency these days. To bring a law suit there must be what is known as a "cause of action." A law suit cannot simply be brought out of thin air. Perhaps if someone could provide us with the argument against the Jersey Bear season we can try to predict how they might approach an injunction against dove hunting. If you expect us ( or me) to look up every single thing, outside our own state no less, become a one species state and hunt only one game, one season, because that is were it is going.

 

A lot of the actions to block dove hunting widely talked about were not even law suits and they cannot be used in every state. For example, in 2006 in Michigan, a referendum vote killed the two year old dove season. Not every state has this referendum system. As early as the 1970's in Ohio the Commissioner of the Game Department there set a dove hunting season, but he did not have the authority to do so, it was the legislature which did. An animal lover got an attorney who uncovered that and the court repealed the season, however Ohio since then has established a dove hunting season. The heads of NJ DEP and NY DEC are well aware they cant set hunting seasons, lol... To make a long story short, although anti hunting organizations, especially the HSUS, will dig deep for any legal maneuver they can construe; every action does not work across every state.