2014 Harvest Report

[gjs4]

If people don't start doing management themselves (ie ignoring the 60k doe permits for a county) and realizing management is not about towns counties or anything behind your trigger control we won't have species left. Winters are killing a ton of deer in some areas which oddly are the focus kill all the doe spots from 2010 data and 2012s deer plan. Base your decisions off your own observations. If you disagree with that approach ask anyone at the dec how many deer live in any given area/zone/whatever and how they know that...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Four Season Whitetail's]

If people don't start doing management themselves (ie ignoring the 60k doe permits for a county) and realizing management is not about towns counties or anything behind your trigger control we won't have species left. Winters are killing a ton of deer in some areas which oddly are the focus kill all the doe spots from 2010 data and 2012s deer plan. Base your decisions off your own observations. If you disagree with that approach ask anyone at the dec how many deer live in any given area/zone/whatever and how they know that...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yup..I can tell ya about how many deer use/live on my property and make my decision on how many need to be removed any givin year.Said it all along that the state has their handsful trying to manage deer on their property, I will worry about what goes on with mine.

[Buckstopshere]

I gave the NY DEC high marks in their deer management after an analysis of the 2014 report compared to other states in this column...on one metric and one metric alone...that is the relative drop in deer take. Some other top deer states are in the throws of a modern whitetail apocalypse compared to N.Y.'s relative balance year to year. Now I know, there was a recent article saying New York is the worst state to deer hunt in...I beg to differ, if you are the average hunter. We have it good and I hope they do not screw it up like the game departments have in the other compared states!

 

http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/article/20150427/SPORTS/150429708/2000/NEWS

Edited May 10, 2015 by Buckstopshere

[Curmudgeon]

If people don't start doing management themselves ........................ Base your decisions off your own observations. If you disagree with that approach ask anyone at the dec how many deer live in any given area/zone/whatever and how they know that...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Some WMUs are too big. However, managing on a micro level - smaller then the home range of a deer is a fool's errand. I have 2 large properties within a mile that allow no hunting at all. How do you manage that? Even if you can manage your local herd, what metrics do you use? Do you judge the population on how many deer you see or kill? How much sign?

 

The only meaningful metric for determining whether there are too many deer is the quality of native vegetation. Are invasives being favored because deer are suppressing natives? Are you seeing barberry, buckthorn, bush honeysuckle increasing? If you have oaks, are they regenerating? Do you know the scores of plant species on your property - or those that should be but are missing?

 

Yes, do you own management but make sure you educate yourself first.

 

[Doc]

Obviously deer management is not as delicate a science as some may believe. We always describe it all in terms of perfection, but there is an awful lot of resilience to deer as a species. Management failures on our part as humans will be handled to a certain extent simply by the forces of nature and the resourceful features of the deer species themselves. That's not to say that gross mismanagement and harvest goals never have catastrophic consequences, but there is a whole lot of leeway before serious permanent damage is done.

 

And so, in general, I would have to say that NYS seems to do a passable job of management. No, we don't have trophy deer behind every tree, and there are no guarantees to hunters, and there are highs and lows and cyclical swings, and the herd never lives up to our expectations of perfection. But, on a macro level, and given the fact that resources are finite, and in spite of the constant whining and occasional disappointments, perhaps the job really is being done to the best that all the practicalities of reality allow.

 

Of course that will not stop me from whining and complaining, but sometimes it is useful to sit back and look at the realities of what is really happening in the world of deer management.

[Curmudgeon]

Back in '00 and '01 two winters with deep snow pack followed a couple of years of high DMPS in western R4. Deer numbers dropped noticeably. Speaking to some people you would have thought it was the end of the world as we knew it. A couple of years later numbers were right back to the highs of the late 90s in 4F.

 

Deer are resilient.

[phade]

Back in '00 and '01 two winters with deep snow pack followed a couple of years of high DMPS in western R4. Deer numbers dropped noticeably. Speaking to some people you would have thought it was the end of the world as we knew it. A couple of years later numbers were right back to the highs of the late 90s in 4F.

 

Deer are resilient.

 

It took almost 10 years for the statewide harvest numbers to even get close to those before the over-DMPed/winter years.

[Curmudgeon]

It took almost 10 years for the statewide harvest numbers to even get close to those before the over-DMPed/winter years.

 

Phade -

 

One of the years in question was a record harvest at the time. DEC was making a serious effort to reduce the population. The goal - helped somewhat unexpectedly by lots of deep snow - was clearly met. They could not anticipate the amount of winter kill when they gave out the DMPs. The problem was that the reduction was not evenly spread across the state.There was a lot of pressure on DEC to increase deer numbers in Delaware County - which took a harder hit than Otsego (4F). I suspect the same occurred in other areas.

 

My thinking is the lower gross numbers were part of the plan.

 

Is there somewhere where you can find long term trend data?

 

 

 

 

[mike rossi]

Even if less permits were issued, the overwintered population of survivors might not necessarily be much larger. Instead of hunters taking them, more would just have starved. If there wasn't enough resources for a small post hunt population, there wouldn't be enough resources for a larger post hunt population. 

 

Even (IF) fewer permits resulted in better over winter survival,  recovery of the population is not as intuitive as it seems either. The first thing to come to mind is a bigger base of doe means quicker recovery. Sometimes that is the case, but not always. A smaller over wintered population might have better reproduction than a larger overwintered population. 

 

 

Edited May 11, 2015 by mike rossi

[dbHunterNY]

Even if less permits were issued, the overwintered population of survivors might not necessarily be much larger. Instead of hunters taking them, more would just have starved. If there wasn't enough resources for a small post hunt population, there wouldn't be enough resources for a larger post hunt population. 

 

Even (IF) fewer permits resulted in better over winter survival,  recovery of the population is not as intuitive as it seems either. The first thing to come to mind is a bigger base of doe means quicker recovery. Sometimes that is the case, but not always. A smaller over wintered population might have better reproduction than a larger overwintered population. 

 

yea this has some sense I can agree with... winter kill would've just been worse like Mike said.  less deer for a given habitat tends to mean relatively healthier deer, enough to make them more productive.  despite not being optimum health, a much larger less productive population in comparison can drop relatively the same amount of deer.  where fawn and winter recruitment numbers don't make the two populations a wash is when you've got natural die-offs from winter or other natural hard hitting deer disasters.  when they happen you've got massive effects with little recruitment with deer being less healthy to take on winter and not balanced enough to take full advantage of bouncing back population wise, versus the smaller and healtier population.  the key is to scale back on harvest after these events despite a healthy herd.  we've seen it here and Midwest has seen it with both wintering, EHD out breaks along, and simultaneous unrelenting harvest pressure.  numbers can get too low such that it doesn't matter how healthy deer are, it just takes time to build them back.

[Buckstopshere]

Here is the historical data for NY state, at least the gross calculated harvest numbers. I think it should be required reading for anyone who wants to argue about "the good old days of deer hunting in NY state." The good old days for the average deer hunter in NY state is now. NY York deer history.pdf

[dbHunterNY]

Here is the historical data for NY state, at least the gross calculated harvest numbers. I think it should be required reading for anyone who wants to argue about "the good old days of deer hunting in NY state." The good old days for the average deer hunter in NY state is now. NY York deer history.pdf

 

way back when I think the good old days where more attributed to fewer seasoned hunters maybe.  as now seasoned experienced hunters are coming from the baby boomer generation as a base and my generation to add to that.  technology has come a long way and now just about every body has an easier means to access property, whether it be it's been chopped up into smaller parcels or things like atv's to get farther back in more readily opposed to hiking it in.  during the late 70's to early 80's.  so I think the good old days is experienced because there was more for one person.  I agree deer numbers are better since then.

[Buckstopshere]

yea this has some sense I can agree with... winter kill would've just been worse like Mike said.  less deer for a given habitat tends to mean relatively healthier deer, enough to make them more productive.  despite not being optimum health, a much larger less productive population in comparison can drop relatively the same amount of deer.  where fawn and winter recruitment numbers don't make the two populations a wash is when you've got natural die-offs from winter or other natural hard hitting deer disasters.  when they happen you've got massive effects with little recruitment with deer being less healthy to take on winter and not balanced enough to take full advantage of bouncing back population wise, versus the smaller and healtier population.  the key is to scale back on harvest after these events despite a healthy herd.  we've seen it here and Midwest has seen it with both wintering, EHD out breaks along, and simultaneous unrelenting harvest pressure.  numbers can get too low such that it doesn't matter how healthy deer are, it just takes time to build them back.

 

That is good speculation, but I like to see the numbers. How much winter kill and where this year, or any in NY state? (I saw the well-done video clip of the winter kill near Syracuse.) As tragic as it was on an individual level, purely anecdotal on a statewide scale. The winter-kill data should be compiled by the state (maybe it is, maybe someone knows of how to access it if it does exist.) Or maybe it is so small on a statewide statistical level, it is not relevant. But for continuing speculation: If deer can get through the coldest winter ever (here in Western NY) and thrive as they have here in Western NY, then perhaps the basis of the original premise finds it a bit fanciful (i.e fewer does would produce just as many deer (maybe) and certainly healthier deer than... more does would.) Interesting thought, but not close enough to reality to really be concerned with. Prove me wrong. Show me the statewide winter-kill numbers,  EHD or Blue tongue...stats or what they have diagnosed as having similar forensics...and they aren't sure really sure about all the factors creating the Midwestern Deer Dieoff. I think it is pretty simple...being a simple kind of guy...Too many doe permits and the mentality that we can't shoot enough does to bring the whitetail population into "balance."

 

Edited May 11, 2015 by Buckstopshere

[Curmudgeon]

Here is the historical data for NY state, at least the gross calculated harvest numbers. I think it should be required reading for anyone who wants to argue about "the good old days of deer hunting in NY state." The good old days for the average deer hunter in NY state is now. NY York deer history.pdf

 

Thanks. Now all I need are how many licenses were sold and the DMP harvest rate. That would be some data I could sink my teeth into.

 

[nyantler]

Is the number down significantly? I wonder if that is indicating a smaller population, or a retreat in habitat quality, or some other factor?

The number is only 2/3 what the number was 3 years ago... but only 17 less than last year...The funny thing is that the numbers fluctuate for all kinds of reasons from year to year... everything from possibly poor weather during the season to hunters just not getting their bigger bucks scored that year. I'm not so sure there is always a correlation between buck (or deer) populations and the number of bucks entered... could be some years... hunting weather conditions can be a big factor as well I think. We haven't really seen any long term trends that might suggest problems with populations or habitat quality at this point.

[nyantler]

Not surprising with all the pressure on those 100 to 120 class 8 pts. Only to be expected. As the yearling buck take goes down, the pressure and the take increases on the 2.5 and 3.5 year olds resulting in fewer mature bucks that would make it into the books if they just had one more year on the ground.

 

Again I don't think there is necessarily any correlation between entries into the Big Buck Club and deer populations, pressure, or fewer mature bucks. And although the number is down the last two years.. the numbers had been significantly higher years prior and since the trend by many hunters to pass on smaller bucks. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just not really sure you're right.

[Buckstopshere]

Again I don't think there is necessarily any correlation between entries into the Big Buck Club and deer populations, pressure, or fewer mature bucks. And although the number is down the last two years.. the numbers had been significantly higher years prior and since the trend by many hunters to pass on smaller bucks. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just not really sure you're right.

 

Well that really gets to the crux of the matter, doesn't it? Is there a correlation between big bucks entered in contests, record books, (basically in the public domain) and the current population of big bucks? Hard to argue that there is not a correlation because all the other factors...such as weather, hunting trends, the moon, etc. should all wash out when compared to other states. It just stands to reason that if all hunters on a given ridge or DMU in NY state all passed on spikes and fork horns, and held out for a decent six point or better, there would be fewer 2.5 year old deer in the population very soon. That is what everyone would be gunning for...just like today. I think that is where we are. We have lots of young bucks, and a few, very few older bucks...3.5 and better. As soon as the yearling crop hits 2.5, very few can get any further in age because all the pressure is on them. So in a way, antler restrictions is the worst thing for producing real trophy bucks. If half the hunters on the ridge settled for a big forky or a big spike, they would be out of the woods and leave the 2.5 to live another year and have a chance to be a real trophy, and not just another run of the mill 110 or 120 class buck. I know that it is a very new and unorthodox concept...going against the grain of most contemporary deer managers. But it just makes sense to hardheaded me.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Buckstopshere

[nyslowhand]

Here is the historical data for NY state, at least the gross calculated harvest numbers. I think it should be required reading for anyone who wants to argue about "the good old days of deer hunting in NY state." The good old days for the average deer hunter in NY state is now. NY York deer history.pdf

Granted, if you look at the historical data, things appear to be pretty good nowadays! But..You have to remember there was a change in how those reported #s were calculated using the speculated change in the reporting rate "fudge factor" when the Decals system was introduced ~2002. I'm guessing at some point in the good ole days, harvest #s were just that (kill #s) & had no un-reported multiplier factored in. Wish there were a footnote in the "NY deer history.pdf" to let the reader know how these harvest #s were calculated. Also when looking at this statistical data, you can NOT compare one year's harvest specifically to another year's. Just too many annual influences within nature, so you must look more at trends over time.

 

This is a fact-less theory, but I believe the human (hunter) factor has a lot to do with why things in the good ole days seemed so great. Deer drives were much more plentiful, less hunting land was posted and the "brown is down" mentality was more predominant. Back in the 60-70s there was a higher % of hunters per capita than currently. Hell, they used to close schools and small businesses opening day of deer season in the olden days due to high absenteeism. More and more hunters currently are self managing the deer in their specific areas, IE; doe harvests, passing on yearlings & small bucks, more focus on mature bucks, habitat enhancement measures, more knowledgeable of whitetails, better technology, etc. Appears to be an evolution of the deer hunter, which is in general a good thing. This has to have some consideration when viewing harvest #s and trying to compare different decades. Just not sure how to make the human factor a statistical variable.

Edited May 12, 2015 by nyslowhand

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Well that really gets to the crux of the matter, doesn't it? Is there a correlation between big bucks entered in contests, record books, (basically in the public domain) and the current population of big bucks? Hard to argue that there is not a correlation because all the other factors...such as weather, hunting trends, the moon, etc. should all wash out when compared to other states. It just stands to reason that if all hunters on a given ridge or DMU in NY state all passed on spikes and fork horns, and held out for a decent six point or better, there would be fewer 2.5 year old deer in the population very soon. That is what everyone would be gunning for...just like today. I think that is where we are. We have lots of young bucks, and a few, very few older bucks...3.5 and better. As soon as the yearling crop hits 2.5, very few can get any further in age because all the pressure is on them. So in a way, antler restrictions is the worst thing for producing real trophy bucks. If half the hunters on the ridge settled for a big forky or a big spike, they would be out of the woods and leave the 2.5 to live another year and have a chance to be a real trophy, and not just another run of the mill 110 or 120 class buck. I know that it is a very new and unorthodox concept...going against the grain of most contemporary deer managers. But it just makes sense to hardheaded me.

Possible outcome here but lets not forget that many of those 21/2 year old bucks have a little more time in their heads on how to survive so just because everybody on the ridge are gunning for them the smarter ones will be the trophys. And that could be many!

[mike rossi]

 Prove me wrong.

 

Never mind. 

Edited May 12, 2015 by mike rossi

[Curmudgeon]

Thanks for an interesting range of opinions. None of this is simple. I hate simple answers to complex problems. They contribute to my curmudgeonliness.

 

 

[Doc]

Here is the historical data for NY state, at least the gross calculated harvest numbers. I think it should be required reading for anyone who wants to argue about "the good old days of deer hunting in NY state." The good old days for the average deer hunter in NY state is now. NY York deer history.pdf

Ha-ha .... The good ol' days of hunting are not necessarily measured in deer harvest numbers. I believe that most people who use the term "Good ol' days" when talking deer hunting are talking more about the quality of the hunt than simply about how high a pile of deer they were able to get.

 

But I do get your point that deer numbers have multiplied over the years. However keep in mind that bag limits have also increased .... significantly. Also there have been significant changes in equipment. Rifle usage has certainly increased harvest numbers over the days when a bird barrel used to double as the deer-gun of choice. Bowhunting equipment advances has placed that style of hunting into a major contributor to harvest numbers where back in the day, bow kills were not even a blip in the data. Season lengths today dwarf what we used to have particularly in the bow harvests. Also, the methods of calculating deer harvests have evolved a lot since 1954. which methods got more accurate numbers? .... Well that's an argument for another thread. The point is that there is a significant amount of "apples to oranges" comparisons that is in these numbers if you are trying to compare deer herd sizes via this data.

 

However, just the power of observation tells you that herd sizes are larger. There shouldn't be a whole lot of arguing over that point. I don't believe that populations have risen by the percentages reflected in these harvest numbers but they certainly have risen.

[dbHunterNY]

Well that really gets to the crux of the matter, doesn't it? Is there a correlation between big bucks entered in contests, record books, (basically in the public domain) and the current population of big bucks? Hard to argue that there is not a correlation because all the other factors...such as weather, hunting trends, the moon, etc. should all wash out when compared to other states. It just stands to reason that if all hunters on a given ridge or DMU in NY state all passed on spikes and fork horns, and held out for a decent six point or better, there would be fewer 2.5 year old deer in the population very soon. That is what everyone would be gunning for...just like today. I think that is where we are. We have lots of young bucks, and a few, very few older bucks...3.5 and better. As soon as the yearling crop hits 2.5, very few can get any further in age because all the pressure is on them. So in a way, antler restrictions is the worst thing for producing real trophy bucks. If half the hunters on the ridge settled for a big forky or a big spike, they would be out of the woods and leave the 2.5 to live another year and have a chance to be a real trophy, and not just another run of the mill 110 or 120 class buck. I know that it is a very new and unorthodox concept...going against the grain of most contemporary deer managers. But it just makes sense to hardheaded me.

 

even with trail cameras and everything else, I have no idea how someone would even remotely come up with numbers for anything based on the population of big bucks that are out there.  if they do, I want to be their friend.  i don't think that number is obtainable.  i do agree with you that there is a correlation, in that a larger population of big bucks would most likely see more big bucks taken (or on record).

 

I've always wondered why people still think antler restrictions are just used to produce trophy bucks.  growing trophy bucks means letting them grow to 4.5+ years old where they have a better chance at reaching 90+% of their antler growth.  Not every buck has the potential to grow into a huge trophy even if you let it live through maturity and others will top out (score wise) at slightly different ages.  antler restrictions are used for entirely different reasons.

[dbHunterNY]

That is good speculation, but I like to see the numbers. How much winter kill and where this year, or any in NY state? (I saw the well-done video clip of the winter kill near Syracuse.) As tragic as it was on an individual level, purely anecdotal on a statewide scale. The winter-kill data should be compiled by the state (maybe it is, maybe someone knows of how to access it if it does exist.) Or maybe it is so small on a statewide statistical level, it is not relevant. But for continuing speculation: If deer can get through the coldest winter ever (here in Western NY) and thrive as they have here in Western NY, then perhaps the basis of the original premise finds it a bit fanciful (i.e fewer does would produce just as many deer (maybe) and certainly healthier deer than... more does would.) Interesting thought, but not close enough to reality to really be concerned with. Prove me wrong. Show me the statewide winter-kill numbers,  EHD or Blue tongue...stats or what they have diagnosed as having similar forensics...and they aren't sure really sure about all the factors creating the Midwestern Deer Dieoff. I think it is pretty simple...being a simple kind of guy...Too many doe permits and the mentality that we can't shoot enough does to bring the whitetail population into "balance."

 

 

that was not speculation based on my own pondering.  it's just the way it works.  you will always have more doe permits than you need, because otherwise those who are successful at filling them would be short changed and you'd be relying on everyone that gets one to be successful.  so you're always going to have relatively too many.  the point to drive home though is your last statement that you can take too many deer.  if other factors that effect population size change year to year how can you expect to hammer the doe herd with the same effort and think that'll work.  you can still determine an approximate and reasonable number of doe to harvest each year.  usually a quarter of your adult doe is a very safe number to harvest, and you if not accustomed to taking more than a doe a season that number can be a little alarming at first.

[Buckstopshere]

Thanks. Now all I need are how many licenses were sold and the DMP harvest rate. That would be some data I could sink my teeth into.

 

 

Here is the DMP harvest rate for the last 12 years. I probably could take a stab at calculating it for prior years...but it would take a long time to wade through all the reports down through the years I have saved. The success rate appears about the same...15 to 20%.

NY Deer management permits and success % last 12 years .tiff