interesting poll

[G-Man]

nyoutdoor news did a poll dec 26th, on how the dec should change deer hunting, thought results were interesting.

27% were for antler restrictions

28% were for no change

20% for 1 buck season

15% for education

9%   for shorter season.

 

 now the real question for me is what areas (should of been done by region or by wmu's) responded and how......  what the catskills need is not what is needed in wny , or wny needs are not the same as the dacks....

Edited January 26, 2015 by G-Man

[Merlot]

Yeah, read that poll. Not a dominant view on the choices provided in the poll. I lean towards the one buck/per year option. Gives everyone a chance to hunt the buck of their choice...some can lean towards holding out for a mature buck, others can opt for a younger one...then spread the wealth a bit by still offering doe permits as needed in each management zone.

Of course, what do I know...just my humble opinion.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

The part of that poll that I don't like is they are only allowed to select their most important preference. I am actually a bit surprised at the  popularity of the "no change"

[NFA-ADK]

I understand the big buck hunters wanting better deer but I am against limiting one deer per hunter and AR.  If they do one buck it should be per county.  EX:  You would be allowed one buck in Suffolk and one in any other county.  This would still allow hunter the option of getting two bucks without affecting the population.   In area's with high population ANY deer taken will help with population control and to eliminate an extra buck would not help with the crop and vegetation damage they do, especially large bucks. 

 

I feel it is a shame that we base our hunting regulations on personal hunters view vs the needs of the deer and population control.  I thought the DEC was to protect and manage the deer herd, apparently its only to make hunters happy by imposing more regulations on other hunters.  ARG!

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I understand the big buck hunters wanting better deer but I am against limiting one deer per hunter and AR.  If they do one buck it should be per county.  EX:  You would be allowed one buck in Suffolk and one in any other county.  This would still allow hunter the option of getting two bucks without affecting the population.   In area's with high population ANY deer taken will help with population control and to eliminate an extra buck would not help with the crop and vegetation damage they do, especially large bucks. 

 

I feel it is a shame that we base our hunting regulations on personal hunters view vs the needs of the deer and population control.  I thought the DEC was to protect and manage the deer herd, apparently its only to make hunters happy by imposing more regulations on other hunters.  ARG!

attempts at population control through buck harvest is short term at best. True population control is only achieved through doe harvest. If specific areas have uncontrollable, high numbers then processes/programs like the use in 8C should be implemented. I still assert that the biggest hurdle to controlling/maintaining the populations in the out of control areas is Access, Access, Access.

[phade]

nyoutdoor news did a poll dec 26th, on how the dec should change deer hunting, thought results were interesting.

27% were for antler restrictions

28% were for no change

20% for 1 buck season

15% for education

9%   for shorter season.

 

 now the real question for me is what areas (should of been done by region or by wmu's) responded and how......  what the catskills need is not what is needed in wny , or wny needs are not the same as the dacks....

 

Does it matter, it's an unscientific newspaper poll?

[First-light]

Does it matter, it's an unscientific newspaper poll?

 

You mean there is a science to all this crap we are debating??? lol

[jjb4900]

Does it matter, it's an unscientific newspaper poll?

I'm sure I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be pretty much just as accurate as the random poll that DEC is sending out? although it may have a method as to how they send it out, the info they get back sure as hell isn't going to be based on scientific data

[phade]

I'm sure I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be pretty much just as accurate as the random poll that DEC is sending out? although it may have a method as to how they send it out, the info they get back sure as hell isn't going to be based on scientific data

 

I don't know why this stuff flies over your head. You have proven to be a pretty bright person, but equating a poll conducted online from a small time newspaper to one that Cornell is doing seems foolish.

 

Random selection doesn't happen by random, if that makes sense. The info they get back is going to be based on scientific data - they have a subset IDed, the response rate is then weighted and you get data that is representative of the population based on upon the preset markers that segregated them (say for example, landowner, region, age, whatever).

Edited January 26, 2015 by phade

[phade]

You mean there is a science to all this crap we are debating??? lol

 

Not really. Just madmen spinning the bottle.

[jjb4900]

I don't know why this stuff flies over your head. You have proven to be a pretty bright person overall, but equating a poll conducted online from a small time newspaper to one that Cornell is doing seems foolish.

 

Random selection doesn't happen by random, if that makes sense.

I can"t imagine that any responses to any random survey or poll, regardless of the source, are anything other than the personal opinion of those responding.........I can't imagine the majority of people apply any scientific thought other than what they want...now if you're telling me these random selections really aren't random, but more a selection of people they specifically want responding to the survey then I get it........and I understand that they break them down by region, wmu, age..etc. But, my main point was, that the info they get back can't certainly be looked at anything other than personal opinion can it?

Edited January 26, 2015 by jjb4900

[First-light]

Not really. Just madmen spinning the bottle.

There is a few places at Cornell you can do this!! lol

[phade]

I can"t imagine that any responses to any random survey or poll, regardless of the source, are anything other than the personal opinion of those responding.........I can't imagine the majority of people apply any scientific thought other than what they want...now if you're telling me these random selections really aren't random, but more a selection of people they specifically want responding to the survey then I get it.

 

The people that are reached out are reached out to randomly, on purpose. They are IDed to be a part of the representative sample based on the preset markers/qualifiers, etc. that make up the "whole" of hunting populus. So exactly, you get it.

 

The reason why people shouldn't look into this beyond a casual "oh that't interesting," is because the poll can be manipulated, it has bias (only people who have internet, only allows for one preference, etc.), and because The sample could be biased...have to assume the % was used only because the number of respondents were probably too small to be publish-worthy. There's no tracking of the inputs, so there's no way to know the breakdown. Nor could you assume that there is preference for one over the other options or combination thereof because only one can be selected. Maybe OBR was second choice for 2 of every 4 respondents. Factor that in, and you get a much higher acceptance rate amongst the respondents for OBR (just an example). 

[phade]

There is a few places at Cornell you can do this!! lol

 

There are a few places at Cornell you can do this! LOL.

 

(It's a joke...)

[Culvercreek hunt club]

There is a few places at Cornell you can do this!! lol

Ithaca in general

[G-Man]

Still interesting, as for the actual Cornell survey, I truly hope it is done by region or wmu. for an ar's are favored around rochester , but shorter season favored in southern wny, 1 buck in a Catskill area, I see the results very regionalised, areas with high population and success may favor no change.. though for a little online poll it was surprising the number % of no change

[G-Man]

To try and make the entire state a trophy state is really unthinkable to me even the big buck states have better areas or regions to hunt in.. soil type,habitat lend a lot to the total growth an animal can achieve.

[Doc]

Frankly I don't give a damn what hunters are thinking. All I want right now is for the DEC to be working on perfecting their methodology for controlling deer populations relative to localized habitat. I don't want them wasting one more minute or dollar worrying about how to get older deer, or bigger racks, or any of that meaningless crap. I don't think that anyone including the most deluded DEC employee believes that they have maximized deer population control (which is their prime directive), and here we are running around talking about NYS becoming a trophy state, and whining about 1-1/2 year old bucks being taken. Somehow we have to get our priorities straightened out.

 

So they can run all the polls they want, whether it is some supposed wonderful Cornell scientific poll/survey or some newspaper running a just-for-fun poll. It all means nothing as long as they still cannot perform the most basic management function....population control. Get the fundamentals perfected, and then maybe it's time to worry about adding a few bells and whistles.

 

Hunters are not the management agency that we pay the big dollars for, and since when do we rely on hunters as being the college trained biologists that should be running the DEC. Who the hell is running the show anyway? I hate to see our taxes and fee money going to an agency that relies solely on polling hunters to determine wildlife management and what directions that management should be heading. How about they make their own decisions for a change based on what they were taught when they got their degrees in their fields of expertise. That's what we pay them for.

[First-light]

There are a few places at Cornell you can do this! LOL.

 

(It's a joke...)

Now we have a Copy Desk……lol

[JFB]

I read NY Outdoor News as one way to keep up on whats occurring. HOWEVER, I find them extremely biased in their "reporting". They often don't objectively report news, rather they add their spin and slant articles to one side often. I've sent letters to the editor who admits they write and report on many stories according to their personal opinion (and I'm speaking outside of the editorial section). 

 

As for the survey, if they offered a six pack of bud light to be allowed as you hunt, I'm sure most of the "no change" votes would be swayed.... our "majority" is less than impressive. 

[dbHunterNY]

that poll was a "feel good" poll anyway.  DEC should be just doing what it biologically sound for the deer regardless of what I or any other hunter thinks.  I've talked with people who know deer like a person knows their drive to work and I've also thought about the stuff my myself.  1 buck per hunter per year wouldn't work well enough to be biologically sound.  it'll help but not enough.  then 3 points to a side or especially total won't well as an antler restriction to make enough of a difference either.  despite that might make some feel good it's not even worth doing in the first place.  the community won't remember it for what it was that failed but just deer management in general that didn't do much.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

that poll was a "feel good" poll anyway.  DEC should be just doing what it biologically sound for the deer regardless of what I or any other hunter thinks.  I've talked with people who know deer like a person knows their drive to work and I've also thought about the stuff my myself.  1 buck per hunter per year wouldn't work well enough to be biologically sound.  it'll help but not enough.  then 3 points to a side or especially total won't well as an antler restriction to make enough of a difference either.  despite that might make some feel good it's not even worth doing in the first place.  the community won't remember it for what it was that failed but just deer management in general that didn't do much.

How about buck on a 100% lottery system then? No landowner preference and must be for a specific WMU.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

I read NY Outdoor News as one way to keep up on whats occurring. HOWEVER, I find them extremely biased in their "reporting". They often don't objectively report news, rather they add their spin and slant articles to one side often. I've sent letters to the editor who admits they write and report on many stories according to their personal opinion (and I'm speaking outside of the editorial section). 

 

As for the survey, if they offered a six pack of bud light to be allowed as you hunt, I'm sure most of the "no change" votes would be swayed.... our "majority" is less than impressive. 

How true is this... The Editor Steve Piatt likes to put his spin on the opinion section even when he prints words on things that have been proven not to be true. Letters to the editor only get put up if they dont contradict his views or they dont prove him wrong.  Anyways i must have missed this poll.  A couple of the numbers would have changed a bit i guess.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

that poll was a "feel good" poll anyway.  DEC should be just doing what it biologically sound for the deer regardless of what I or any other hunter thinks.  I've talked with people who know deer like a person knows their drive to work and I've also thought about the stuff my myself.  1 buck per hunter per year wouldn't work well enough to be biologically sound.  it'll help but not enough.  then 3 points to a side or especially total won't well as an antler restriction to make enough of a difference either.  despite that might make some feel good it's not even worth doing in the first place.  the community won't remember it for what it was that failed but just deer management in general that didn't do much.

See i am not sure this is correct. If 1 doe was shot in place of the yearling buck. Shot by the desperate hunter on Dec 1st because he has that tag and his holding out for a big buck that did not pan out,,after already shooting a yearling in early season.would help the doe take in those areas. So really in some areas a 1 buck rule would make some tag more does if they want meat.

[dbHunterNY]

How about buck on a 100% lottery system then? No landowner preference and must be for a specific WMU.

 

it's not about protecting more deer, just the right deer.  lottery systems are more for herd populations with lower numbers, such that you can't have over the counter tags for whomever wants to buy them.  I mean I know places like Kansas do it but they have a much larger demand to hunt there.  in those states the vast majority of hunters are passing younger deer voluntarily.  I think our situation in NY is different.