NYODN was interesting......

[growalot]

Looks like I maybe hunting down at camp early archery after all...they are talking early archery doe only and our area is one of the ones they are looking at...What a bummer!!! Why you may ask well, and this ties into another article, I know for a fact..... yes a fact.... that the bigger buck are "hunted" starting the week before season opener for both archery and gun. So now those same guys will be out hunting those buck during the no antler time. Also they had an article about deer moving out of core areas, starting up to a week before gun opener...why...guys in the woods and and gun shots...they said this does not occur as much during the archery season....Which kind of backs up the bow hunters associations concerns about the youth hunt at the begining of bow season...So no doe in the first part of bow then a gun youth hunt right about the time buck hunting would start...HHHmmmm that doesn't sound like a good scenario

[dbHunterNY]

you heard that in the Outdoor News?

[Lawdwaz]

Doe only for the first two weeks?

[growalot]

Don't have it in front of me now..but they said high density areas where increased DMP's have not worked.Then Finger Lakes.region was mentioned..they said early in bow season was the goal for doe only...also a doe only in muzzle season if I recall.

The Deer movement was a radio collared study done in P.A.

Edited March 18, 2015 by growalot

[Lawdwaz]

Veddy interesting........doe only for the first couple weeks wouldn't bother me.  Doe only in the ML? I'll voice my opinion on that at the end of rifle season.

[BizCT]

Certain DEP lands in 3N are doe only first 2 days of gun season and then ARs after that.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G-Man]

I've seen deer move a week or.more ahead of gun opening, but it's from the large influx of weekend warriors ,lighting up.campstoves,running atvs to check and hang stands, their scouting a week before season,slamming car and truck doors and cabin doors from comings and going running into town for a drink or materials to fix or repair something at camp. Let alone the re sighting of guns the weekend before the season not to.mention chainsaws and splitters getting camp ready.

Deer aren't dumb living on the land your going to hunt and hearing nothing for months before season and then bam. A circus.moves into town..... that is the main reason deer vacate, the youth hunt is a minute number of participants and effect is minor when compared to hundreds or thousands of camps being opened weekend before season.

[G-Man]

And I've said it before if bowhunters killed more doe rather than waiting for a buck, crossbow would never have been considered, dec wants population control not quality control. That is why the push for doe only in areas..if a guy only eats 1 or 2 deer a year he will wait for a buck for sure.. perhaps they should just go to an ean a buck tag in those areas and watch doe take increase dramatically

[Doc]

Am I the only one who has noticed that every move that the DEC has made for the last several decades has been aimed at new efforts to cut deer populations more efficiently and completely. As far as I can recall, AR in a very few limited areas is the first and only regulation that has actually resulted in a restriction on deer takes. And that was entered into only after they were politically forced into it.

 

I believe they are panicked a bit and not really all that sure that they will always have the hunter participation to effectively control deer numbers at some time in the future. And so they are wracking their brain trying to come up with new way of making hunting more efficient towards whacking on deer numbers.

 

The only problem I have with all these anti-deer regulation changes is that they are mostly state-wide regs that do not take local habitat or existing populations into consideration. They are all kind of arbitrary, one-size-fits-all regulations that are merely aimed at eliminating deer, not managing deer.

[dbHunterNY]

it's better to take doe earlier than later for lots of reasons so I support at least promoting that.  hard to say how many will simply not hunt until they're allowed to take a buck.  I doubt it'd be that many though.  doe only in muzzleloader season might be a problem as many take nice bucks still or hunt because they've got the woods mostly to themselves.  I could see a decrease in muzzleloader privileges sold because of it.

[dbHunterNY]

Am I the only one who has noticed that every move that the DEC has made for the last several decades has been aimed at new efforts to cut deer populations more efficiently and completely. As far as I can recall, AR in a very few limited areas is the first and only regulation that has actually resulted in a restriction on deer takes. And that was entered into only after they were politically forced into it.

 

I believe they are panicked a bit and not really all that sure that they will always have the hunter participation to effectively control deer numbers at some time in the future. And so they are wracking their brain trying to come up with new way of making hunting more efficient towards whacking on deer numbers.

 

The only problem I have with all these anti-deer regulation changes is that they are mostly state-wide regs that do not take local habitat or existing populations into consideration. They are all kind of arbitrary, one-size-fits-all regulations that are merely aimed at eliminating deer, not managing deer.

 

here's some thoughts on this because I've heard concerns from some others about exactly what you said.  DEC can't manage or understand the local deer herd you see often nearly as well as many of you probably could.  Their focus is just too broad, because they've got a whole state to worry about.  I acknowledge the fact that some hunters simply try and fill as many tags as they're given.  However, a hunter doesn't have to fill a tag that he/she can or does receive, but he/she can't fill a tag when one isn't available.  Increasing availability of tags will allow for more opportunity where deer numbers are high and the tags are needed on a micro level.  a property that's next to another with no hunting and tons of deer, but with much less deer down the road for example.  If you're deer numbers aren't as high or higher than they should be then you have the choice not to fill or use yours for the greater good of the local deer.  An important part of this is talking to your neighboring land owners and/or hunters and see what they think.  try to get them on board with holding back taking more deer, if you both feel the same way.  a little bit of correct herd management and deer biology knowledge goes a long way if you're not on the same page.  tell them what you think should happen and why, not tell them what to do.  if you're seeing deer numbers lower than they need to be, most people understand the need to not shoot as many deer, so I've found anyway.  If that's done DEC and us will be managing the deer better than ever.  as I'm sure you know, DEC could do whatever possible in their power, but at the end of the season hunters are the dominant factor that pull the triggers.

[nyslowhand]

As dumb as statewide AR is, this new proposal is even stupider. Can only speak about where I hunt (8F), but the 1st two weeks of bow season I rarely see a buck anyways!  This is the time when I take a doe anyways. If I can't carry-over an unused regular season buck tag or an either sex tag into the late SZ ML season, I won't be hunting then. Only mgmt proposal I'd really buy into is an earn-a-buck plan. Or maybe a donate a doe to earn-a-buck..!?!

 

Hint to the NYDEC...Why establish a long range plan like you did if you are only going to implement "knee-jerk" mgmt proposals. Maybe it's time for a new commissioner!??!

[phade]

Am I the only one who has noticed that every move that the DEC has made for the last several decades has been aimed at new efforts to cut deer populations more efficiently and completely. As far as I can recall, AR in a very few limited areas is the first and only regulation that has actually resulted in a restriction on deer takes.

 

The second sentence is in contrast to the first, lol.

 

AR will expand likely at some point though; I think most people believe it will exist in larger areas of the SE and E part of the state.

 

Also, I think the effort to lump the WMUs together to regionall/locally manage is likely, too.

Edited March 19, 2015 by phade

[G-Man]

I agree doc ,but until we have an amendment to allow hunting and establish a game commission to control and regulate ,there will never be enough staff to do properly, this leads to what joe said you have to police yourself and your own hunting area. Can be hard to do if your in a high population area as you will not get enough tags to kill enough yourself, now you have to allow more hunters onto your land you pay taxes on to lower numbers... many will not do this and the problem goes on and on....

[Doc]

I agree that self limiting is the right and correct procedure. Of course on a large scale, across the hunter population, that is not really very likely. If that mentality could be made to happen, we probably would not need any game laws at all. It is the rules and regulations that set the tone and guide the activities and mentality of the general hunter population.

 

But the larger observation that I was talking about was the constant mindset of the DEC that seems to be solely focused on only regulations that are not aimed at the general purpose of management, but instead is fixated on herd reduction only. As I mentioned above there has only been one reg change that results in harvest limitation, and that is AR which was forced onto the DEC. Other than that, every move has been geared toward herd reduction only without regard to when and where reduction is necessary. Is that management, or just a constant capitulation to public pressures? 

[Bow Addict]

_{So your telling me I have to pass up a nice buck the first 2 weeks of bow,but the gun hunters don't.What a bunch of BS.I'll shoot all the doe you want but don't tell me I have to pass on a mature buck after all the time and effort I put into food plots,etc  and letting the little ones walk.Again I say BS}

[phade]

I agree that self limiting is the right and correct procedure. Of course on a large scale, across the hunter population, that is not really very likely. If that mentality could be made to happen, we probably would not need any game laws at all. It is the rules and regulations that set the tone and guide the activities and mentality of the general hunter population.

 

But the larger observation that I was talking about was the constant mindset of the DEC that seems to be solely focused on only regulations that are not aimed at the general purpose of management, but instead is fixated on herd reduction only. As I mentioned above there has only been one reg change that results in harvest limitation, and that is AR which was forced onto the DEC. Other than that, every move has been geared toward herd reduction only without regard to when and where reduction is necessary. Is that management, or just a constant capitulation to public pressures? 

 

While I know you are thinking about herd reduction, there are some things the state does that is not herd reduction, but herd management.

 

If herd reduction was the goal, there would be DMPs is more areas out east/dacks. The areas with no DMPs alloted is actually aimed to GROW the deer population. I don't see how you could say not issuing DMPs is a reduction goal for the population.

[phade]

I still don't understand why they cap the ability for hunter to obtain DMPs in units where harvest increases are needed. It makes no sense, if Bob the hunter is willing to lay down some doe meat, let him. Why limit him? Fear of localized over-harvest is all they can come back with - BUT - How the heck can that be a concern when they're saying things are so bad they want to implement doe only seasons after the gloom and doom numbers they are tallying for 2014.

 

I have a real disconnect with these thoughts as I know most of the people saying them. They don't have a good answer either.

[DirtTime]

I don't see any issue with this. But I can't find anything in news or on DEC site about this one. I would be interested in any other areas that might be effected.

 

 

Edit:

Still looking, NYODN stands for New York Organ Doners Network.

Edited March 20, 2015 by ....rob

[Doc]

_{So your telling me I have to pass up a nice buck the first 2 weeks of bow,but the gun hunters don't.What a bunch of BS.I'll shoot all the doe you want but don't tell me I have to pass on a mature buck after all the time and effort I put into food plots,etc  and letting the little ones walk.Again I say BS}

Before everyone gets too excited and bent out of shape about this, do we have any credible independent confirmation of the story?

[growalot]

Front page of the NYODN..March 20th issue...

 

DEC eyes "next step" for some units

"Anterless-only" in portions of early archery,late muzzleloader deer seasons

Article continues on to page 31

Quoted Hurst and mentioned the lake plains region and the southeastern area

 

 

PS...BTW the NYODN really isn't very expensive

Edited March 20, 2015 by growalot

[phade]

This article is on their websiter and in print. It is legit.

 

There is strong consideration to move a period of time of the first part of early archery in the sz areas where overpopulation exists to antlerless only. I can't yell loud enough from the rafters that I think the idea sucks as bad as anything I've seen considered, ever. It's a knee jerk reaction - and I don't really think this was clearly spelled out in their five year plan, at least not like this. The antlerless mz season was, and implementing an antlerless season was talked about, but not taking away current time and making it antlerless....

 

 

[growalot]

Oh and the article..." Deer-ly departed:Deer go where hunters aren't" is at the top of page 8 of that same issue. It was a Penn State study on deer movement....

Edited March 20, 2015 by growalot

[Lawdwaz]

I don't see any issue with this. But I can't find anything in news or on DEC site about this one. I would be interested in any other areas that might be effected.

Edit:

Still looking, NYODN stands for New York Organ Doners Network.

New York Outdoor News.

[DirtTime]

Thank you Law.

 

At this point is rumors and hoopla. So you just have to wait and see.

 

I have no problem with this. I think it;s a good thing.

 

I have no issues with trophy hunters, only hunting that 12 is a great goal! But if you only take the bucks, this will eventually cause an issue. There will be more doe then buck, so mating will suffer. Two doe's can't reproduce. So the population will decrease, and if things aren't done, we won't have any deer to hunt.

I see a lot in here about the eco-system, and I get that most people understand that. But if all you do is kill bucks, then you leave does to try and reproduce on their own. Deer are not part of the Parthenogenesis class. They need a mate.