NYODN was interesting......

[Doc]

There seems to be an assumption that as soon as hunters buy a crossbow, they set down that nice new shiny rifle that been becoming more and more popular throughout the southern zone counties recently. No one is forcing any new converts to the bow season or crossbow to not participate in the gun season. So don't be so quick to write off regular gun season. There is still a lot of people locked into that method of deer hunting. Also, I don't believe that the DEC will always be passively letting gun hunters slide out of the picture ..... if indeed that truly is happening, which I truly doubt.

 

We are always prone to theorizing and trying to predict the future without any actual knowledge, but regardless of how quickly people are ready to predict the demise of gun hunting, I'll believe it when I see it. And so far no one is really seeing it. Current numbers don't bear it out. So I will continue to go back to my original question: if you have a system of herd reduction that you really believe in, why not implement it where it in the most efficient season. Or to add onto that question, why exclude any of the seasons? I mean we can muddy the waters in any fashion we choose but none of that comes anywhere near answering the question I posed originally.

[phade]

There seems to be an assumption that as soon as hunters buy a crossbow, they set down that nice new shiny rifle that been becoming more and more popular throughout the southern zone counties recently. No one is forcing any new converts to the bow season or crossbow to not participate in the gun season. So don't be so quick to write off regular gun season. 

 

Doc, who said anything about weapons being put down? I said the percent of regular gun take is going to decline because crossbow kills are going to increase until market saturation occurs. There were three weapons (relatively speaking) and now there are four. With 4,000 kills in crossbow this past season, they still need to come out of the same 100% pie that existed when there were only three weapons to slice up and all else is equal. 

Edited March 24, 2015 by phade

[tj1187]

Dont bow and ml hunters already have the same anterless tags in their pocket as gun hunters? Why arent they using them?

[nyslowhand]

I don't think it's strictly harvest numbers/days afield w/ a specific weapon that they believe is an issue. I think it's the mindset that hunters are not simply pulling the trigger despite the tags being there already. Hence the talk about antlerless days.

I just know I'm going to get crucified for this, but here goes... Isn't this "mindset" the trophy hunting phenomenon? Which along with being propagated on TV shows and social media, the DEC has also bought into!  The dilemma the DEC has created thru their own making is to promote trophy hunting and then saying that hunters must also shoot a lot of does while hunting for "racks". Yeah, right! Not to contradict Oprah or Dr Phil, but people rarely change and the DEC has no hope of changing this behavioral pattern with their current thinking.

[phade]

Dont bow and ml hunters already have the same anterless tags in their pocket as gun hunters? Why arent they using them?

Theyre using them at an even lower rate.

[Doc]

I just know I'm going to get crucified for this, but here goes... Isn't this "mindset" the trophy hunting phenomenon? Which along with being propagated on TV shows and social media, the DEC has also bought into!  The dilemma the DEC has created thru their own making is to promote trophy hunting and then saying that hunters must also shoot a lot of does while hunting for "racks". Yeah, right! Not to contradict Oprah or Dr Phil, but people rarely change and the DEC has no hope of changing this behavioral pattern with their current thinking.

Your right, there is a conflict of hunter goals. You have the DEC  saying the hell with big racked bucks, we want you all to become doe hunters. And then you have TV, magazines and every other hunting media saying that if you can't shoot a big-racked buck, you're nothing as a hunter. Mixed messages coming from everywhere. And now you even have the DEC signing on (begrudgingly) to expanded AR. Yeah people can argue all they want that AR has nothing to do with trophyism, but hunters automatically make that connection, right or wrong. So AR has become code for trophy hunting promotion. Again, right or wrong that is the way it is received, and once again, perception becomes reality to the majority of hunters.

 

How do you straighten it all out and get people to sign onto the notion of doe reduction? ..... I don't know ...... really. If it was easy, it would have already been done. But I would think the first step would be for the DEC to come up with a steadfast, consistent mindset themselves.

[dbHunterNY]

I think people are reading into this a little too much like it's a happening because it's a fad or trendy and trophy driven.  It's just DEC trying to manage the deer herd in the most basic and feasible way possible, and that's by controlling population.  for decades the management goal was to grow the deer herd.  don't shoot doe and as long as a few bucks are alive, you good to go.  now in general there are plenty of deer around and we're at the point where we don't need herds to grow.  we've now got to simply keep what we've got in check.
 

ARs are still new to NY hunters.  It's not yet understood why and what they'll do, so right now the only concept they have is bigger antlers.  then those thoughts spiral out of control into the false idea that it'll give us all monster trophy bucks.  doe reduction hasn't been thought about by hunters as a whole for decades.  it can and will change.  it's just a slow process that won't happen over night and by itself.  education and realization that it's not the same deer herd it was 30+ years ago is imperative. 

 

[phade]

What is concerning to me is the national trend of lower deer harvests by state. It'll be interesting to see what the tally is here in a month or so.

 

Some of the midwest states are in really bad shape compared to 5-10 years ago for trophy caliber bucks/avg. buck size. 

[nyslowhand]

^^^^ Do these mid-west states offer any explaination for this downward trend?

 

Possibly the amount of that land for the "average joe" to hunt has become owned/leased by outfitters. Remember reading a couple years ago that the Lakoskys either owned or leased a combined total of ~5K acres.

[Doc]

What is concerning to me is the national trend of lower deer harvests by state. It'll be interesting to see what the tally is here in a month or so.

 

Some of the midwest states are in really bad shape compared to 5-10 years ago for trophy caliber bucks/avg. buck size. 

One of the things that doesn't often occur to folks is that a smaller over-all herd, generally means smaller numbers of bucks. Fewer does = fewer fawns = fewer bucks born = fewer mature bucks running around. So I would guess the doe harvest does have a residual effect on how many trophy bucks that there are. Seems logical that if you are going to maintain a "bare-bones" over-all deer population, you probably shouldn't be expecting a bumper crop of trophy bucks every year.

[orion]

Why doesn't the state come out and tell hunters what type of deer density numbers they want?  If they have goals for population control hopefully they have #'s.

 

IMO in order to have older mature bucks you need more deer then the DEC wants.

[phade]

One of the things that doesn't often occur to folks is that a smaller over-all herd, generally means smaller numbers of bucks. Fewer does = fewer fawns = fewer bucks born = fewer mature bucks running around. So I would guess the doe harvest does have a residual effect on how many trophy bucks that there are. Seems logical that if you are going to maintain a "bare-bones" over-all deer population, you probably shouldn't be expecting a bumper crop of trophy bucks every year.

This is in contrast to biologist expectations. There is some issue going on, either directly or otherwise indirectly, or is not related. Herd size has shrunk alot widespread across states. There are a few articles out there about it. You might find it interesting.

[dbHunterNY]

One of the things that doesn't often occur to folks is that a smaller over-all herd, generally means smaller numbers of bucks. Fewer does = fewer fawns = fewer bucks born = fewer mature bucks running around. So I would guess the doe harvest does have a residual effect on how many trophy bucks that there are. Seems logical that if you are going to maintain a "bare-bones" over-all deer population, you probably shouldn't be expecting a bumper crop of trophy bucks every year.

 

compared to over populated versus optimum a lesser population could produce as much or more fawns and consequently bucks.  In this context of being well below holding capacity or "bare-bones", I most definitely agree that you'll have fewer bucks added to the herd and down the road have less mature bucks assuming constant harvest rates of mature bucks that were born or living just before the down turn.  also another thing to consider that backs what you said is the fact that, in a free ranging herd, less bucks born can mean less probability that one will hit the free range genetic lottery and have well above average antlers. 

... not sure the quantity of mature or trophy bucks is high on the list of DEC concerns, but that's my understanding.

Edited March 26, 2015 by dbHunterNY

[Five Seasons]

What is concerning to me is the national trend of lower deer harvests by state. It'll be interesting to see what the tally is here in a month or so.

 

Some of the midwest states are in really bad shape compared to 5-10 years ago for trophy caliber bucks/avg. buck size. 

 

agree. I sometimes wonder if there is a big driver, or if it's a culmination of things. Reduced habitat, worse off economy leading to less time in the woods. Outfitters buying up land. More posted land. Hunters becoming more competitive and some infighting because of it. Agricultural decline? Less hunters? Harsher winters. Educated deer.

 

lots of things to consider.

[dbHunterNY]

Why doesn't the state come out and tell hunters what type of deer density numbers they want?  If they have goals for population control hopefully they have #'s.

 

IMO in order to have older mature bucks you need more deer then the DEC wants.

 

what their deer density numbers desired are would still be generalized so much it wouldn't help some.  the most focused I could see it being is maybe per WMU or WMU region.  they publish whether or not harvest harvest goals are below or above expectations so that's related.  I feel like maybe they look at it more from a sustainable harvest perspective than actual deer density.  I don't think having mature bucks is as much of a concern to them as having a healthy population of bucks in general to ensure there's a consumable deer population each following season.  I don't work for DEC though so that's my view from the outside looking in.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

agree. I sometimes wonder if there is a big driver, or if it's a culmination of things. Reduced habitat, worse off economy leading to less time in the woods. Outfitters buying up land. More posted land. Hunters becoming more competitive and some infighting because of it. Agricultural decline? Less hunters? Harsher winters. Educated deer.

 

lots of things to consider.

I think money will be the driver. I really think Ny is buying into the idea of non resident tags and such and they are going along with the antler craze like the rest of the country. Truth is that there are only a few areas of Ny that are over populated, Not counting the cities that are way over populated.

[Doc]

agree. I sometimes wonder if there is a big driver, or if it's a culmination of things. Reduced habitat, worse off economy leading to less time in the woods. Outfitters buying up land. More posted land. Hunters becoming more competitive and some infighting because of it. Agricultural decline? Less hunters? Harsher winters. Educated deer.

 

lots of things to consider.

My theory is that the DEC is panicked because of all of the above. I think a lot of their current actions have nothing to do with current conditions. They are using their famous crystal ball, and looking at a time when hunter numbers and participation will no longer be able to keep up with population growth and the decay of current deer carrying capacities. So there continues to be more concentration on whacking deer populations and finding more ways to universally diminish the quantities of deer even significantly beyond what is necessary today and beyond the desires of hunters. This all ties into my prior comments about all new regulations and rules being aimed at hacking on deer populations. I have no idea whether that really is the mentality of the DEC or not, but it sure looks that way from where I sit.

[Doc]

Why doesn't the state come out and tell hunters what type of deer density numbers they want?  If they have goals for population control hopefully they have #'s.

 

IMO in order to have older mature bucks you need more deer then the DEC wants.

Here are the results of the CTF meetings where the harvest goals are established:  http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7209.html

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Here are the results of the CTF meetings where the harvest goals are established:  http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7209.html

Funny how they have no info on Ft Drum. They have to check in all their kills on Drum so there should be good record keeping on harvests. That probably works into my favor as far as managing my property but still should be some kind of report for those 109,000 acres!

[steve863]

 

Some of the midwest states are in really bad shape compared to 5-10 years ago for trophy caliber bucks/avg. buck size. 

 

 

This is interesting to me.  I wasn't aware that there has been a downward trend in trophy bucks in these areas.  My guess would be that these areas are simply getting overhunted.  Becoming a well known trophy area doesn't exactly work to the advantage of big bucks.  You get outfitters leasing up land and getting hunters in to kill these bucks, and before you know it there aren't that many big bucks around anymore.  This happens in LOTS of places.  A place is great for a few years and then everyone wants to hunt it and after a few years the place becomes a wasteland.  This should be a lesson for all those that think it would be great for NY to become a big buck state and to try to attract non-resident hunters to come in.  Yeah, it would probably make some landowners and outfitters some money for a few years, but if you overdo it things will go down hill pretty fast.  Lets not even begin to talk about where all this would leave the resident hunters. 

Edited March 27, 2015 by steve863

[growalot]

So the last year for this TF  was back in 2009... Now I live in 8N and own in 8X and board 8 M...

 

10% decrease in both N/M 2009...Yet for many years now  8 N has increased DMP and I believe Farm ones as well we get two plus 2 more Nov. 1....M right next door has had a decrease in their DMPs until last year.

 

8M Livingston (Wyoming, Steuben, Ontario) 1992 10% decrease 3.9 8N Ontario, Yates, Livingston (Steuben) 2008 10% decrease from 2008 level 4.6

 

8X camp has always been difficult even way before 2009 lucky to get 1DMP rarely 2 Father in law almost counts on the land owners....They also had a bad fawn kill some years ago ..for I was at least one of the ppl reporting it...Yet they recommended a 2% decrease over 8N...I'm asking...am I read this wrong? are the decreases ,what they want as far as decreasing population or something different? because the DMPs being given out do not seen to correspond with this...and 2009 till now 5 seasons so much can happen in that amount of time....

 

 

8X Steuben (Allegany) 2008 12.5% decrease from 2008 level 4.1

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Wanna make an impact in the high density areas? Peal away the last two weeks of bow and slide it to gun. make it doe only and use your buck tag on an antlerless if you wish.

[Five Seasons]

My theory is that the DEC is panicked because of all of the above. I think a lot of their current actions have nothing to do with current conditions. They are using their famous crystal ball, and looking at a time when hunter numbers and participation will no longer be able to keep up with population growth and the decay of current deer carrying capacities. So there continues to be more concentration on whacking deer populations and finding more ways to universally diminish the quantities of deer even significantly beyond what is necessary today and beyond the desires of hunters. This all ties into my prior comments about all new regulations and rules being aimed at hacking on deer populations. I have no idea whether that really is the mentality of the DEC or not, but it sure looks that way from where I sit.

 

you're probably right. I don't know what a DEC guy makes and how thin their resources are, but if it's what I believe it to be, I do give them a little leeway. I mean, this is the government we're talking about. Very little they're doing right these days.

[Five Seasons]

Wanna make an impact in the high density areas? Peal away the last two weeks of bow and slide it to gun. make it doe only and use your buck tag on an antlerless if you wish.

 

so the rut. you want to take the best 2 weeks of archery and make it doe only for gun hunters? I hope you're kidding. There are plenty of other times in the year to go doe only. Mississippi has the final week of bow either sex, but you can MZ hunt for doe only. I thought that was a pretty interesting take on it.

[growalot]

I tried to find past DMP availability charts and every link brought me back to last years...do they not archive these?