DMP going up another 17% ....

[steve863]

I think it will bring some old guys back to archery season...that's all I meant.

Anyone who thinks the state gives a flying whatever about "hunting tradition," is also sadly mistaken.

Take a look at what's happening in the places where hunters can't get it done...hired hands and thousands of $$$ to kill 20 deer. Some municipalities preferring to neuter their herd than allow hunting.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

The problem in those areas where they want to hire people to cull deer is land access.  You can't force people to allow hunting in suburban type areas.  Plus, plenty of hunters don't see it as a "traditional" type hunt to hunt in someones backyard, thus you don't get many hunters who want to hunt this way.  The combination of these two reasons, along with some others like hunters just wanting to shoot bucks and no does, brings forth the cull solution as the only feasible one to actually reduce herd numbers, although a costly one.  This has been argued here before about the LI situation.  LI never was, and NEVER will be a place hunters will be welcomed with open arms, so one shouldn't be surprised that it's come to this type of solution.  

[Meat Manager]

If the state has 1 main reason, they'd be enforcing things a little bit differently, don't you think?

I don't see any doe required harvests if you buy a tag.

Phade if you want me to link the deer management plan where it specifically enumerates Population Management as it's #1 priority...I know you already know this but I'll go get it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Meat Manager]

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/deerplan2012.pdf

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[phade]

Phade if you want me to link the deer management plan where it specifically enumerates Population Management as it's #1 priority...I know you already know this but I'll go get it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Again, you are confusing the two components. Hunter choice and enforcement.

 

IF the DEC were really concerned, there would be changes in the way they manage the population. Instead, they keep kicking up the same old system. Let's add another XX% to the XX% we issued last year. They did this once before in the last decade and the deer numbers came crashing down. This is showing they haven't learned anything from that mistake - which they admitted.

 

Words on paper and actions taken are very different.

 

If someone wants to pass a doe and hold out for a buck, so be it. Your take on it is just as skewed as theirs.

Edited July 23, 2014 by phade

[growalot]

There you have it...they did do the same thing and were followed by a very bad winter kill...If I recall..next thing you know tags disappeared guys were complaining and hunters became very leery of filling tags when they did start going up....It boils down to a sorry lack of confidence in DEC management...

[Doewhacker]

I think it boils down to too many people not shooting enough Doe's. The @6% return on DMP is wimpy. What do you expect?

 

Shrinking hunter numbers does this also. The ones that go once to hope to fill a tag make a difference. Try to enforce a doe first rule and watch MORE people quit hunting.  

[Culvercreek hunt club]

simple solution....more deer drives! Rack'em and stack 'em

 

[Meat Manager]

They add permits because less than 1/6 issued are filled.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G-Man]

the biggest problem is they have no idea how many deer there are..no mandatory check in.. my town take was 100 buck and 99 anterless acording to them.. (its 7 miles long by 5 miles wide) on 300 acres we took 8 buck and 10 doe.. so we took 10% of total take? one square mile is 640 acres... if i add in the neighbors 4 buck and 5 doe..we are at 15% of total take? on only 500 acres? there are 19700 acres in the town(35 square miles) numbets are way way off.... so how can they manage anything? its up to the indivduals to manage their own herd by usuing what is issued...just cause you have a tag doesnt mean you have to or should fill it..

[Meat Manager]

the biggest problem is they have no idea how many deer there are..no mandatory check in.. my town take was 100 buck and 99 anterless acording to them.. (its 7 miles long by 5 miles wide) on 300 acres we took 8 buck and 10 doe.. so we took 10% of total take? one square mile is 640 acres... if i add in the neighbors 4 buck and 5 doe..we are at 15% of total take? on only 500 acres? there are 19700 acres in the town(35 square miles) numbets are way way off.... so how can they manage anything? its up to the indivduals to manage their own herd by usuing what is issued...just cause you have a tag doesnt mean you have to or should fill it..

I will take their numbers over the nonexistent numbers of the DECs critics.

That said I agree that mandatory check stations would tighten up numbers...still many of those who already fail to report would probably continue to do so even with mandatory check stations.

The reporting system is so easy and we get plenty of tags, why not report?

I just don't get it unless you want to shoot more than 2 bucks a season.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited July 23, 2014 by Meat Manager

[Meat Manager]

Again, you are confusing the two components. Hunter choice and enforcement.

IF the DEC were really concerned, there would be changes in the way they manage the population. Instead, they keep kicking up the same old system. Let's add another XX% to the XX% we issued last year. They did this once before in the last decade and the deer numbers came crashing down. This is showing they haven't learned anything from that mistake - which they admitted.

Words on paper and actions taken are very different.

If someone wants to pass a doe and hold out for a buck, so be it. Your take on it is just as skewed as theirs.

I'm not confusing anything...hunters will not have a choice when mandatory EAB is imposed or much worse yet when red tags and sharp shooters become the preferred means of population control.

Especially in a state like NY where mute swans can not legally be harvested by hunters despite the fact that the DEC and other conservation minded groups support this method of population control.

By the way words on paper must precede actions when dealing with state agencies.

You should have Mike Rossi give you an education on how the legislature and other state institutions function.

Also show me in the data of the last decade where deer take or pop went down.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited July 23, 2014 by Meat Manager

[G-Man]

yes it is easy to report but its not done... so their guess is just that a guess, same as anyone elses.. were there more deer , when i started hunting yes...4 people to a dmp as well. then it dropped to 2 by early 1990's now 1... they know the population is to big in most areas...

[Meat Manager]

yes it is easy to report but its not done... so their guess is just that a guess, same as anyone elses.. were there more deer , when i started hunting yes...4 people to a dmp as well. then it dropped to 2 by early 1990's now 1... they know the population is to big in most areas...

It's not a guess it's a calculated figure based on reported take and many other methods of statistical collection.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[phade]

I'm not confusing anything...hunters will not have a choice when mandatory EAB is imposed or much worse yet when red tags and sharp shooters become the preferred means of population control.

Especially in a state like NY where mute swans can not legally be harvested by hunters despite the fact that the DEC and other conservation minded groups support this method of population control.

By the way words on paper must precede actions when dealing with state agencies.

You should have Mike Rossi give you an education on how the legislature and other state institutions function.

Also show me in the data of the last decade where deer take or pop went down.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

They've been saying that for years and years and still no action. Basically, you are saying to "give them a chance." Duh, they've had chance after chance and still don't do anything different than throw more gas (DMPs) on the fire.

 

Were you not hunting when the deer population fell of the cliff? If you were, you'd remember it. Total take in bold on right. This was caused by the DEC's mismanagement. Period. They even admitted it.

 

Look you keep whining about deer numbers - and we're still not even close to what the height was 12 years ago. A little perspective goes a long way.

 

 

2013 114,716 22,395 88,634 17,822 243,567 2012 118,993 20,263 86,644 17,057 242,957 2011 110,002 19,793 82,090 16,474 228,359 2010 106,960 21,131 84,806 17,203 230,100 2009 102,057 19,710 84,330 16,701 222,798 2008 105,747 20,000 79,953 17,279 222,979 2007 104,451 21,096 76,367 17,227 219,141 2006 96,569 18,336 60,102 14,101 189,108 2005 89,015 16,373 61,179 13,647 180,214 2004 88,733 21,022 80,196 18,455 208,406 2003 107,533 26,883 94,376 24,296 253,088 2002 128,292 36,958 113,317 29,649 308,216

 

Edited July 23, 2014 by phade

[growalot]

Check-in stations...it would be nice...but several issues with that...man hours...unless they could get volunteers to check deer in...but then lawyers get involved and you still have to have  DEC personal there....They would do something stupid like ticket for simple paper work errors...word would travel and ppl would be hiding deer and driving by.....Money that would go to check-ins could be better used getting more hunter ed classes in the areas with waiting lists...thus more bodies a field more deer taken....Offer incentives to Hunter Ed ppl or gun clubs ...doesn't need to be monetary reduced fees special classes taught to them or park tours what ever...Aaahhh but see bureaucracy and paper work...suppose just not feasible now a days

[Meat Manager]

Grow...thanks for providing data.

I disagree with your analysis of that data.

In my view the deer take went way down because the DEC indeed slightly overstepped...

But it was the DECs intention to significantly drop the glutted herd and it temporarily did.

3 seasons later take was back up to the 220s and now back to 240s and the herd is approaching glut again.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited July 23, 2014 by Meat Manager

[Nomad]

I thought my crossbow comment would be easily seen as humor ,kinda a poke at the fear the anti xbow crowd puts forth.747.

I happen to hunt a few thousand acres of managed land,just started to put up a couple hundred more posted signs,then it'll be bulldozing tails,bush hogging,moving countless stands. So I don't think I'm that lazy,I just hunt the way I want ,if that ok.....

[phade]

Grow...thanks for providing data.

I disagree with your analysis of that data.

In my view the deer take went way down because the DEC indeed slightly overstepped...

But it was the DECs intention to significantly drop the glutted herd and it temporarily did.

3 seasons later take was back up to the 220s and now back to 240s and the herd is approaching glut again.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yes, thanks Grow. I am glad you provided that data, lol.

 

They misstepped big time because their ability to manage deer numbers is pee poor. Throwing tags at it is EXACTLY how it happened the first time. They increased tags the same fashion, double digit %. And, they are not doing a single thing different this time around.

 

The DEC's intention at that time was NOT to knock it down to 180K. It's taken ten years...TEN! to just get back to the 240s. They wiped the herd out drastically in some parts of the state.

 

Anyway you slice it, the DEC was at fault, they admitted it, they are doing the same thing ten years later, and nothing different. Yet, you claim that they just "need a chance" to act on their words. Get real.

 

You knock hunters who won't take a doe (which is their decision), and predict the sky falling. Yet, you didn't even know the DEC already burned hunters in the last decade doing the same thing. Can you blame them for not trusting the data, nor wanting to fill every tag no matter what? Seriously.

Edited July 23, 2014 by phade

[phade]

I thought my crossbow comment would be easily seen as humor ,kinda a poke at the fear the anti xbow crowd puts forth.747.

I happen to hunt a few thousand acres of managed land,just started to put up a couple hundred more posted signs,then it'll be bulldozing tails,bush hogging,moving countless stands. So I don't think I'm that lazy,I just hunt the way I want ,if that ok.....

 

I'll hunt with you Larry.

 

LOL. Let me know how it goes this season. I'll do the same.

[HuntOrBeHunted]

In certain areas of region 6 there are tons of doe they need to give out more tags were there needed. Drice around at night and see deer all threw the city.

[gjs4]

Without an accurate census of the population how can the dec determine how many does should be harvested? With only 35-40% of the harvest to be believed to be reported how can you realistically set harvest goals based off other assumed statistics? Guys we are not going to have deer left here soon as our source for management is incompetent.

A few years back I touted I had some knowledge of the crossbow plans - lets just say the antler less ml season will be here soon.

It is all a joke with a sad punch line to come

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Meat Manager]

Yes, thanks Grow. I am glad you provided that data, lol.

They misstepped big time because their ability to manage deer numbers is pee poor. Throwing tags at it is EXACTLY how it happened the first time. They increased tags the same fashion, double digit %. And, they are not doing a single thing different this time around.

The DEC's intention at that time was NOT to knock it down to 180K. It's taken ten years...TEN! to just get back to the 240s. They wiped the herd out drastically in some parts of the state.

Anyway you slice it, the DEC was at fault, they admitted it, they are doing the same thing ten years later, and nothing different. Yet, you claim that they just "need a chance" to act on their words. Get real.

You knock hunters who won't take a doe (which is their decision), and predict the sky falling. Yet, you didn't even know the DEC already burned hunters in the last decade doing the same thing. Can you blame them for not trusting the data, nor wanting to fill every tag no matter what? Seriously.

Okay critcs lay out your plan to count and control numbers the "right way."

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited July 24, 2014 by Meat Manager

[stubby68]

Meat Manager a calculated figure based on unconfirmed stats and unreliable reports is a guess. Being in the woods and seeing alot less deer then 10 or 15 years ago and seeing guys pass up does because they are afraid of missing out on that big buck isnt a guess. Oh and Mike Rossi is a dumb ash

[Doc]

Okay critcs lay out your plan to count and control numbers the "right way."

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you really believe there is a right way to count and control deer. Every plan is compromised by practicality or another way to put it is wildlife management is a function of budgets and gauging the limits of societal acceptance. Do not ignore the fact that the DEC is a political entity controlled by political forces which by definition requires them to try to be all things to all people.

 

Every pressure group has different motives and measures of success. Some want trophy management, others want easy harvests through massive numbers, still others simply want deer to be a totally removed species and there are all kinds of people in between every extreme. And every pressure group has its crack at influencing DEC policy. Money, and political pressure are the fuels that drive our management efforts. I think deer management is a losing activity for the DEC because there is no way that they can satisfy all the political and societal demands and motives. And yet they have to try.

[Meat Manager]

Meat Manager a calculated figure based on unconfirmed stats and unreliable reports is a guess. Being in the woods and seeing alot less deer then 10 or 15 years ago and seeing guys pass up does because they are afraid of missing out on that big buck isnt a guess. Oh and Mike Rossi is a dumb ash

Anecdotal accounts like you describe are statistically insignificant.

The DEC employs wildlife biologists and deploys a scientific method in terms of collecting statistics and calculating populations...

Again...no one else has a plan, you're just a bunch of bitching trolls and "scary government" haters.

And Mike Rossi is the ONLY guy on this site that backs up his political talk with real political action, not bluster and self-delusional bs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited July 24, 2014 by Meat Manager