interesting poll

[Doc]

thanks for the link, I posted it on page #5..............I'm not saying that hunters are not under reporting, because it's quite obvious that they are.......I think that the # they eventually come up with is probably fairly close after all the data they add up.

Sorry, I didn't see it. But it is probably good that it was re-posted anyway. That page adds a whole lot of insight into how the DEC is thinking these days.

 

Frankly, I can't comment on whether the numbers sound reasonable or not. I can't imagine what a layman would ever base that opinion on other than blind faith.

[jjb4900]

Sorry, I didn't see it. But it is probably good that it was re-posted anyway. That page adds a whole lot of insight into how the DEC is thinking these days.

 

Frankly, I can't comment on whether the numbers sound reasonable or not. I can't imagine what a layman would ever base that opinion on other than blind faith.

it would be interesting to see an actual breakdown of the numbers and where & how they got them...........if the number is 240,000 and only about half are from actual reports, then they are coming up with 120,000 from other estimated sources...

[phade]

You can backtrack alot of it. Back out 45 percent. Then look at bto and wmu harvest numbers.

Still leaves some factors but you can get somewhat into them by piecing together the random details in different docs/sources.

[phade]

Yeah, like I said there are absolutely no undiscovered ideas that are any good. They've all been discovered .....right? That's the kind of forward thinking that we all need.

Nobody said anything about all ideas. Just yours that you put forth in this instance, nothing against you. The DEC explains why they dont believe in it. Neither does any other agency.

Soooooo.... 1 and 0s? We need to hire you.

At certain points, if no movers in the market move...its not the right idea.

Edited February 1, 2015 by phade

[Doc]

Nobody said anything about all ideas. Just yours that you put forth in this instance, nothing against you. The DEC explains why they dont believe in it. Neither does any other agency.

Soooooo.... 1 and 0s? We need to hire you.

At certain points, if no movers in the market move...its not the right idea.

 

But anyway, The argument that "it can't work because no one has tried it" makes no sense and is counter-productive reasoning. I think those with open minds and no axe to grind can see the value in it. I have heard absolutely no actual reason offered by you or anyone else why it can't work, only roadblocks as to why better methods should ever be tried. That's probably not really a very useful attitude unless you are satisfied that everything in wildlife management is running flawlessly and couldn't be better. That's the DEC's attitude when they say, "Ultimately, the adage, "if it's not broken, don't fix it," comes into play".

[nyantler]

Nobody said anything about all ideas. Just yours that you put forth in this instance, nothing against you. The DEC explains why they dont believe in it. Neither does any other agency.

Soooooo.... 1 and 0s? We need to hire you.

At certain points, if no movers in the market move...its not the right idea.

 

Having worked for the state.. I'm sure that the reason many simple things don't get done has a lot to do with someone possibly losing a job like Doc said. We had an office that fought computerizing in favor of paper pushing for a few years because it meant some of the workers would lose their jobs. Downsizing is very hard for bureaucracies to accept.

[phade]

Having worked for the state.. I'm sure that the reason many simple things don't get done has a lot to do with someone possibly losing a job like Doc said. We had an office that fought computerizing in favor of paper pushing for a few years because it meant some of the workers would lose their jobs. Downsizing is very hard for bureaucracies to accept.

So every agency in the nation can do this, but they dont. And its all because of penicil pushing and bureacracy?

Its not like this is done in other agencies, at least to my knowledge.

[jjb4900]

So every agency in the nation can do this, but they dont. And its all because of penicil pushing and bureacracy?

Its not like this is done in other agencies, at least to my knowledge.

I don't know if those State jobs are unionized or not, but if they are, nobody just walks in and eliminates work or transfers it to another unit without a pretty big battle....not sure if that's the case, but could be a major reason as to why it hasn't happened.

[nyantler]

So every agency in the nation can do this, but they dont. And its all because of penicil pushing and bureacracy?

Its not like this is done in other agencies, at least to my knowledge.

 

I don't know that they don't... or maybe they have a better way that you and I haven't heard of yet... but the plan Doc and I have is quite simple and covers most everything... to say otherwise is just being argumentative for the sake of debate... which I understand is part of what we all like to do on this forum... and yes I do think most of what "doesn't" get done anywhere in the public sector has everything to do with bureaucracy.

 

Good example would be the billion dollar Obamacare website that could have been done for $5 million in the private sector.

[phade]

I don't know that they don't... or maybe they have a better way that you and I haven't heard of yet... but the plan Doc and I have is quite simple and covers most everything... to say otherwise is just being argumentative for the sake of debate... which I understand is part of what we all like to do on this forum... and yes I do think most of what "doesn't" get done anywhere in the public sector has everything to do with bureaucracy.

 

Good example would be the billion dollar Obamacare website that could have been done for $5 million in the private sector.

 

We need to hire you two, then.

 

I'm not being argumentative when I say that a solution THAT simple that hasn't been implemented ANYWHERE, and is one that is known (evidenced by DEC respponse), might not actually be as simple or effective as thought. Some agency, somewhere, would have made this change if it were - even in the land of bureaucarcy - some hard charger somewhere would know he could make a name for himself by implementing such a system if it worked and use it for political fodder. There's just as much "what's in it for me" to implement this as there is to not implement it from that perspective. There's not a conspiracy toward this simple idea. The right ideas or systems float to the top regardless of concerns over job security eventually, and this one seems to still be in the toilet.

 

If you guys believe it is that simple and effective, you two should be pushing it in some degree of activism instead of touting how you cover most everything on a forum. And, I mean that wholeheartedly.

 

I don't have all the answers by any stretch. But to say that a simple and effective solution exists and isn't being implemented on a macro scale just seems silly. I don't think there's a simple answer to any of this, in all honesty, in NY.

[dbHunterNY]

anything involving the state takes a lot of effort, man power, and risk to put a plan into motion.  just to pass the idea up through and reviewed for feasibility requires a lot peoples eyeballs and time.  the idea is simple but implementation really isn't being there's many "nuts to bolts" details to work out and revamping the existing reporting system with required resources.

 

It applies to many things in life.  however, I never think "oh nobody is doing this yet so it must have be tried and failed, or it won't work".  if there was something similarly reported efforts then I'm sure reasons are said why it failed.  unless the those reasons apply then you can't compare the two and you can't assume it won't work otherwise without dissecting it all from start to finish.

I like Docs idea of reporting every tag by end of season whether filled or not.  it's not an end all solution but a piece to the puzzle.  including fines/penalties for game violations should be more than they are now also need to happen.  when repeat offenders caught over and over again are the norm, that means DEC isn't getting the point across.

 

[phade]

anything involving the state takes a lot of effort, man power, and risk to put a plan into motion.  just to pass the idea up through and reviewed for feasibility requires a lot peoples eyeballs and time.  the idea is simple but implementation really isn't being there's many "nuts to bolts" details to work out and revamping the existing reporting system with required resources.

 

It applies to many things in life.  however, I never think "oh nobody is doing this yet so it must have be tried and failed, or it won't work".  if there was something similarly reported efforts then I'm sure reasons are said why it failed.  unless the those reasons apply then you can't compare the two and you can't assume it won't work otherwise without dissecting it all from start to finish.

I like Docs idea of reporting every tag by end of season whether filled or not.  it's not an end all solution but a piece to the puzzle.  including fines/penalties for game violations should be more than they are now also need to happen.  when repeat offenders caught over and over again are the norm, that means DEC isn't getting the point across.

 

 

Exactly - it's the complications that come with a simple, effective, easy solution. Not many of them have taken place in our government. Turns out they aren't so easy, simple, effective as thought. That's why they haven't been implemented anywhere.

[Doc]

It probably surprises no one that government agencies do have a whole lot of inertia when it comes to change. And I understand that resistance to change. In my career, I never welcomed someone lousing up systems when I had spent years becoming an expert at the systems that I used. I think it is kind of human nature. So it doesn't surprise me that people would find innovative ideas from outside their organization to be unwelcome. The direct quote from their own webpage kind of clarifies what we are dealing with. Here is their quote regarding a discussion of this exact idea: "Ultimately, the adage, "if it's not broken, don't fix it," comes into play". And yet if you look at the labor intensive methods and the man-hours of effort just trying to figure out how many hunters are breaking the reporting laws so they can factor it into their harvest count, it is pretty plain to me that the current system has always been broken. But the implication of that quote tells me that they are reacting to new ideas that come from outside with an attitude of intransigence and denial. 

 

  

[Doc]

Exactly - it's the complications that come with a simple, effective, easy solution. Not many of them have taken place in our government. Turns out they aren't so easy, simple, effective as thought. That's why they haven't been implemented anywhere.

By the way, have you actually found some place that states that that system hasn't been implemented anywhere? Not that it really is relevant, but, I'm just curious if there is some info on that system that I could read somewhere.

[nyantler]

We need to hire you two, then.

 

I'm not being argumentative when I say that a solution THAT simple that hasn't been implemented ANYWHERE, and is one that is known (evidenced by DEC respponse), might not actually be as simple or effective as thought. Some agency, somewhere, would have made this change if it were - even in the land of bureaucarcy - some hard charger somewhere would know he could make a name for himself by implementing such a system if it worked and use it for political fodder. There's just as much "what's in it for me" to implement this as there is to not implement it from that perspective. There's not a conspiracy toward this simple idea. The right ideas or systems float to the top regardless of concerns over job security eventually, and this one seems to still be in the toilet.

 

If you guys believe it is that simple and effective, you two should be pushing it in some degree of activism instead of touting how you cover most everything on a forum. And, I mean that wholeheartedly.

 

I don't have all the answers by any stretch. But to say that a simple and effective solution exists and isn't being implemented on a macro scale just seems silly. I don't think there's a simple answer to any of this, in all honesty, in NY.

 

You must not have read my post about having offered up the idea to two NY DEC biologists at a deer forum I was invited to attend... and that they shrugged off the idea as not necessary. I don't have all the answers either... but I do have the advantage of having seen a lot that goes on inside of the state over the years and the attitudes of those making many of the decisions... which is my personal reason for not being surprised that simple solutions get passed up all the time in the public sector by "important people" that if they we're really as smart as they think they are would be doing what they do in the private sector.

[nyantler]

It probably surprises no one that government agencies do have a whole lot of inertia when it comes to change. And I understand that resistance to change. In my career, I never welcomed someone lousing up systems when I had spent years becoming an expert at the systems that I used. I think it is kind of human nature. So it doesn't surprise me that people would find innovative ideas from outside their organization to be unwelcome. The direct quote from their own webpage kind of clarifies what we are dealing with. Here is their quote regarding a discussion of this exact idea: "Ultimately, the adage, "if it's not broken, don't fix it," comes into play". And yet if you look at the labor intensive methods and the man-hours of effort just trying to figure out how many hunters are breaking the reporting laws so they can factor it into their harvest count, it is pretty plain to me that the current system has always been broken. But the implication of that quote tells me that they are reacting to new ideas that come from outside with an attitude of intransigence and denial. 

 

The scary part is that they have no idea that it is broken.

[phade]

By the way, have you actually found some place that states that that system hasn't been implemented anywhere? Not that it really is relevant, but, I'm just curious if there is some info on that system that I could read somewhere.

 

I looked around; I found hints of such a system at certain agencies, but they're almost all draw based scenarios out west, and the "idea" I got from it was more of the herd management on a much higher degree of confidence due to the population numbers/dynamics, like sheep/goats/certain cervids. It was also done on a much smaller geographical scale.

 

The one I remember was Utah and the "once in a lifetime" bull permits. Mandatory whether you hunted or not. The reason I remember it was interestingly enough because they had a general season where reporting wasn't mandatory and instead voluntary - which I presume was also draw based. That is odd as heck to me, but I have to believe there is some rationale. They only poll 25% after looking at it via phone/online survey.

 

I found nothing on the run of the mill whitetail scenario. Most every whitetail state is moving or at the same basic principles we use for reporting.

Edited February 2, 2015 by phade

[phade]

You must not have read my post about having offered up the idea to two NY DEC biologists at a deer forum I was invited to attend... and that they shrugged off the idea as not necessary. I don't have all the answers either... but I do have the advantage of having seen a lot that goes on inside of the state over the years and the attitudes of those making many of the decisions... which is my personal reason for not being surprised that simple solutions get passed up all the time in the public sector by "important people" that if they we're really as smart as they think they are would be doing what they do in the private sector.

 

No I read that. I don't think for a second you should offer that privately in conversation and be done with it...advocacy isn't just telling those two. Start a website (pretty sure you can do that based on your antler mania one, lol), engage the sportsman orgs, etc. Pretty sure very few of the ideas up for suggestion based on hunter input haven't been pushed through similar activities/channels.

 

Just telling two biologists doesn't exactly scream to me that you really believe in it. Heck, even the AR nuts out my way started a website, manned booths, and got petitions on it to force the DEC into some sort of consideration. If you believe it works and are as passionate about it as I interpret you to be, then just telling two biologists is not all that convincing. Otherwise, the apathy you display is precisely why we don't have changes (I'm in the same boat as you in this scenario, so its not a slam on you), because hunters are not accountable to bettering the system even for themselves. If they won't do it, and it should be done, there should be a force behind it, similar to Doc's example about residents getting together on wind farm resistance.

[phade]

The scary part is that they have no idea that it is broken.

 

Agreed; but us as a group doing nothing on a bigger scale to enact change is equally as bad.

[Doc]

I looked around; I found hints of such a system at certain agencies, but they're almost all draw based scenarios out west, and the "idea" I got from it was more of the herd management on a much higher degree of confidence due to the population numbers/dynamics, like sheep/goats/certain cervids. It was also done on a much smaller geographical scale.

 

The one I remember was Utah and the "once in a lifetime" bull permits. Mandatory whether you hunted or not. The reason I remember it was interestingly enough because they had a general season where reporting wasn't mandatory and instead voluntary - which I presume was also draw based. That is odd as heck to me, but I have to believe there is some rationale.

 

I found nothing on the run of the mill whitetail scenario.

I was going to say that it would take an incredible amount of research to go through the reporting systems of all states and be able to say as an absolute fact that no state anywhere has that kind of reporting system. Probably the point that should be taken from all that is that each state seems to have their own ideas as to what system is best, and I'll bet that each one of them is convinced that they have the absolute best system in the country. That's why I place no credibility in whether any one state or the other thinks that the one license-one report system can work or not. It is irrelevant.

[phade]

I was going to say that it would take an incredible amount of research to go through the reporting systems of all states and be able to say as an absolute fact that no state anywhere has that kind of reporting system. Probably the point that should be taken from all that is that each state seems to have their own ideas as to what system is best, and I'll bet that each one of them is convinced that they have the absolute best system in the country. That's why I place no credibility in whether any one state or the other thinks that the one license-one report system can work or not. It is irrelevant.

 

I tend to disagree based on my POV, but that's neither here nor there. Each state works with what it thinks is best (I agree with you on that), but if there's a light bulb idea/system/etc. it is implemented across the board. A good example would be online license sales - every state has some form of it, but different. It's not that they do it different, it's that they all have the same great idea - online licensing. I still think if this were groundbreaking/effective and minimally cost prohibitive, it'd be done somewhere in some capacity for whitetail management. I haven't come across it in any form in my time looking at it.

 

I think such a system become either cost prohibitive, doesn't provide  significant increase in capabilities, or a combination of both thereof. I think the best evidence of this is state's like Ohio going away from mandatory reporting/check-in for whitetails and moving toward similar methodology of most states.

 

The problem is I have zero idea where the sweet spot is between the perfect state and the possible state in a real-world situation.

[Doc]

No I read that. I don't think for a second you should offer that privately in conversation and be done with it...advocacy isn't just telling those two. Start a website (pretty sure you can do that based on your antler mania one, lol), engage the sportsman orgs, etc. Pretty sure very few of the ideas up for suggestion based on hunter input haven't been pushed through similar activities/channels.

 

Just telling two biologists doesn't exactly scream to me that you really believe in it. Heck, even the AR nuts out my way started a website, manned booths, and got petitions on it to force the DEC into some sort of consideration. If you believe it works and are as passionate about it as I interpret you to be, then just telling two biologists is not all that convincing. Otherwise, the apathy you display is precisely why we don't have changes (I'm in the same boat as you in this scenario, so its not a slam on you), because hunters are not accountable to bettering the system even for themselves. If they won't do it, and it should be done, there should be a force behind it, similar to Doc's example about residents getting together on wind farm resistance.

Just as a point of practicality that should be added here, I have to point out that we all have lives apart from hunting. I think we can have conversations and discussions without every issue involving a full-court-press on each and every item. Don't confuse brainstorming with a "drop-everything, let's start a campaign" kind of activity.....lol. I don't know of anybody who functions that way. That all sounds real good, but it flat out ain't going to happen. The DEC answer to this idea on their website makes it pretty plain that they are not interested in outside ideas on how to run their business. I can take a hint.

[Doc]

I tend to disagree based on my POV, but that's neither here nor there. Each state works with what it thinks is best (I agree with you on that), but if there's a light bulb idea/system/etc. it is implemented across the board. A good example would be online license sales - every state has some form of it, but different. It's not that they do it different, it's that they all have the same great idea - online licensing. I still think if this were groundbreaking/effective and minimally cost prohibitive, it'd be done somewhere in some capacity for whitetail management. I haven't come across it in any form in my time looking at it.

 

I think such a system become either cost prohibitive, doesn't provide  significant increase in capabilities, or a combination of both thereof. I think the best evidence of this is state's like Ohio going away from mandatory reporting/check-in for whitetails and moving toward similar methodology of most states.

 

The problem is I have zero idea where the sweet spot is between the perfect state and the possible state in a real-world situation.

Well, you have your ideas, and I have mine, and I guess we both think we are right. All I know is that I'm being called for supper, and right now that has priority.

[phade]

Just as a point of practicality that should be added here, I have to point out that we all have lives apart from hunting. I think we can have conversations and discussions without every issue involving a full-court-press on each and every item. Don't confuse brainstorming with a "drop-everything, let's start a campaign" kind of activity.....lol. I don't know of anybody who functions that way. That all sounds real good, but it flat out ain't going to happen. The DEC answer to this idea on their website makes it pretty plain that they are not interested in outside ideas on how to run their business. I can take a hint.

 

We can all look in the mirror, me included. Some of us write articles on hunting, some of us run websites dedicated to antlers themselves, and some of us are smart old men.

 

I question whether our efforts are rightly focused the more I think about such things regarding NY.

 

Accepting the DEC "No" is a perfect out to do nothing in my mind. The DEC was against the AR in this part of the state, yet that group forced the DEC into adressing it. It still got voted down based on feedback, but nevertheless it wasn't taken as gospel.

[Doc]

We can all look in the mirror, me included. Some of us write articles on hunting, some of us run websites dedicated to antlers themselves, and some of us are smart old men.

 

I question whether our efforts are rightly focused the more I think about such things regarding NY.

 

Accepting the DEC "No" is a perfect out to do nothing in my mind. The DEC was against the AR in this part of the state, yet that group forced the DEC into adressing it. It still got voted down based on feedback, but nevertheless it wasn't taken as gospel.

No, I am not going to form an organization, and set up web-sites, nor camp out on the DEC's doorstep. I'll not be writing articles or trying to force anyone to agree with me. Ha-ha..... Get serious .... lol. As I said before I do have a life outside of hunting issues. I pick and choose my battles and prioritize my time spent on public items, as I assume anyone in their right mind has to. And how the DEC chooses to run their shop is certainly something anyone can have opinions on, but not necessarily something worthy of initiating a campaign over. I'm not sure where you got the idea that I lay awake at night worrying that I have a disagreement with the DEC, but your notion is very wrong. I have an concept that I have passed along to the DEC. They are aware of it as noted on their own web-site, and that is as far as I intend to take it. I am not one of the AR fanatics with an agenda, and certainly do not obsess over the issue as you have mistakenly assumed that I do. It's an interesting concept that I am sure would work far better than current methods. But at the end of the day, it is not something that I have any interest in trying to force them to do.