Really! Does only.....

[Culvercreek hunt club]

So I just got my latest issue of New York Outdoor News and they have a pretty good article on what I am starting to call the "DEC's war on bow hunting" .... lol. Well maybe it's not a war on bowhunting, but they now recognize that the crossbow issue has neutered the NY Bowhunters, and we now make an easy mark for anything they want to do to bow season.

 

This antlerless mandate for bowhunters only, now has a part 2 added in as part of their grand plan for deer management  balanced in the backs of bowhunters. Apparently there is a provision that they also have in mind that says that if the bowhunters don't do a good enough job of singlehandedly controlling the deer population, that old "early muzzleloader season" that was beaten back by NY Bowhunters a decade back, comes back as a punishment. The quote from DEC's Stang: "The next step - outlined in the Deer Management Plan - would be the implementation of a special antlerless only muzzleloader season in select WMUs. We could start to consider more aggressive tactics like an early muzzleloader season" Stang said.

 

I believe you can interpret all of that as when the bowhunters don't take care of the antlerless harvest requirements, we will jam guns into the regular bow season to whatever extent is necessary to handle the management needs.

 

I will resist the temptation to say "I told you so", but here comes the guns into bow season. Starts with the muzzleloaders just to set the precedent and after that? ..... Whatever they want to do.

 

I haven't heard any of the doe harvest remedies aimed at the gun season, so I can only assume that the bowhunters organization being properly trashed now, the DEC feels that the opposition is sufficiently crippled and the time to turn bow season into a more efficient doe harvest time-slot through whatever means possible is now. And now the blueprint for doing that is publicly laid out.

This really isn't new news as a possibility. I think they even talked about it as a possibility in the last 5 year management plan or survey.

[Doc]

This really isn't new news as a possibility. I think they even talked about it as a possibility in the last 5 year management plan or survey.

That's where all of this is coming from. It's not new news. It is simply the clarity that it all has as to where it is heading. We are now seeing the implementation and that is what is becoming the news.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

There are guys out there that sit on doe tags because they think that if they sit on the tags, they wont be there for others to use. They dont realize that DEC issues far more tags than they need filled, just to get around issues like that. It does, however, create an issue because some of those guys are hunting areas with little to no public access, so the number of does that need to be taken, cant be. For the areas I hunt (8H,8N) its an access issue more than anything. Look at 8H and tell me how much public ground there is to hunt. Not much. Short of giving out some kind of financial benefit to landowners who allow public hunting, they are going to have an extremely hard time getting a significant rise in doe kill in those areas. Special seasons, more tags issued, etc just wont work.

Eliminate DMP in those areas and that will entice more public access. I personally know farms that get them and regardless of the rules they are used by family, deer are shot and no recovery attempts made, or more than two taken by DMAP hunters.

[Doc]

When it comes to access, the problem is not an easy one to solve. You cannot order people to open up their land. You can bribe them to if you can find a big pot of money laying around to use for that. But you cannot command it to be done nor use excessive strong-arm tactics to try to force it. I don't know what the answer is to the access problem. I only know that whatever methods that are effective on private closed-off lands will be flat out disasters on public lands or open private lands where the population picture looks entirely different. It is a tricky thing to manage. And I know that expecting bowhunters to be punished until the problem improves is not really going to be the answer or even part of the answer.

[growalot]

Short of giving out some kind of financial benefit to landowners who allow public hunting, they are going to have an extremely hard time getting a significant rise in doe kill in those areas. Special seasons, more tags issued, etc just wont work.

 

You mention you hunt farms...now if a monetary incentive were given out to those farmers to open up their lands to public hunting...I believe you and many other hunting groups of guys would be a tad upset and looking perhaps for other areas to hunt...See it's a catch 22 isn't it because either large tracts of land are already being leased to hunters or it's the friends and family thing...we only have 73 acres but it's family hunting grounds...I know for a fact that ALL of the farm lands around us started leasing to hunters years ago.

The fact is all lands around here that do not belong to anti hunting ppl are hunted...What I find funny is we have a little known park in the area...Harriett Hollister Park...It only allows for deer hunting BUT they are closing it to hunting for the late season. It sits on 750  of acres of prime deer habitat in 8N ..You know one of the proposed doe only areas

[NYBuckHunter27]

I really think that is the wrong approach and what has these areas in the position they are in (As well as limited access). The doe take should be driven by population and the ability of the habitat to sustain them. If the property is over populated I believe as stewards of the resource we should be taking them if it is called for. Donate the venison. it costs you very little to do it. Basically gas to get it to a participating processor.

 

I believe you have a valid point, and yes i should open my eyes to donating although i have heard of places denying intake of deer if they have taken in too many throughout the season. my fear is that everyone is now all the sudden going to jump to shooting a lot of doe and in a few years the population will be too low, i think the lack of a true way to measure the population and take every year is a major factor.

 

Would check stations at all help cure the inaccurate numbers for the annual take? 

[LetEmGrow]

In recent years.....

• Gun Season opener moved to Saturday
• Rifles have been allowed in the majority of the Southern Tier
• You can shoot does with your bow
• You can sign doe permits over to other people

I would also like to add that the fact you can harvest two bucks per year - by itself - is going to limit doe harvest. A lot of the reason NYS has this problem (at least in the areas it exists) is because they push bucks by allowing you to harvest two of them.

 

Here is what I would do (because it has already been dome before in the mid-west).

• Bow Season runs from September 19 - January 31st
• You can harvest one buck per year
• Have an early antlerless only muzzleloader season
• Allow crossbows
• Gun Season is one week

That way people are not so distracted by antlers.
 

Honestly, I don't even care anymore.  I am in a position where I can hunt out of state..... so I do!

 

 

Edited May 27, 2015 by LetEmGrow

[Four Season Whitetail's]

I believe you have a valid point, and yes i should open my eyes to donating although i have heard of places denying intake of deer if they have taken in too many throughout the season. my fear is that everyone is now all the sudden going to jump to shooting a lot of doe and in a few years the population will be too low, i think the lack of a true way to measure the population and take every year is a major factor.

 

Would check stations at all help cure the inaccurate numbers for the annual take? 

Just what we do on our properties. We know how many are there and we decide how many to shoot. Some years its 5 and others its 15 DEC has their hands full with their land and have failed with most of that.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Four Season Whitetails

[Doc]

I believe you have a valid point, and yes i should open my eyes to donating although i have heard of places denying intake of deer if they have taken in too many throughout the season. my fear is that everyone is now all the sudden going to jump to shooting a lot of doe and in a few years the population will be too low, i think the lack of a true way to measure the population and take every year is a major factor.

 

Would check stations at all help cure the inaccurate numbers for the annual take? 

We have talked about a near-perfect way of ensuring harvest reporting. That being the "one permit-one report system where every tag requires a report successful or not. A simple computer sort determines who has complied and who has not. The DEC has no interest in plans to make harvest reporting better. Their comment is that "if it's not broken, don't fix it". In other words, they are perfectly satisfied with the system they've got.

 

I think your fears of the DEC over-shooting their goals are valid. I mean it would not be the first time that that has happened.

[NYBuckHunter27]

Mother nature has her own way of keeping populations in check also.....just saying.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Mother nature has her own way of keeping populations in check also.....just saying.

Ever see that type of "correction" first hand? It isn't pretty.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

In recent years.....

• Gun Season opener moved to Saturday
• Rifles have been allowed in the majority of the Southern Tier
• You can shoot does with your bow
• You can sign doe permits over to other people

I would also like to add that the fact you can harvest two bucks per year - by itself - is going to limit doe harvest. A lot of the reason NYS has this problem (at least in the areas it exists) is because they push bucks by allowing you to harvest two of them.

 

Here is what I would do (because it has already been dome before in the mid-west).

• Bow Season runs from September 19 - January 31st
• You can harvest one buck per year
• Have an early antlerless only muzzleloader season
• Allow crossbows
• Gun Season is one week

That way people are not so distracted by antlers.

 

Honestly, I don't even care anymore.  I am in a position where I can hunt out of state..... so I do!

One week gun season in areas where the population is too high? Bow hunters have shown that they can't get it done in those areas. The gun season accounts for the vast majority of harvest.

[CFHunter]

In recent years.....

• Gun Season opener moved to Saturday
• Rifles have been allowed in the majority of the Southern Tier
• You can shoot does with your bow
• You can sign doe permits over to other people

I would also like to add that the fact you can harvest two bucks per year - by itself - is going to limit doe harvest. A lot of the reason NYS has this problem (at least in the areas it exists) is because they push bucks by allowing you to harvest two of them.

 

Here is what I would do (because it has already been dome before in the mid-west).

• Bow Season runs from September 19 - January 31st
• You can harvest one buck per year
• Have an early antlerless only muzzleloader season
• Allow crossbows
• Gun Season is one week

That way people are not so distracted by antlers.

 

Honestly, I don't even care anymore.  I am in a position where I can hunt out of state..... so I do!

 

Gun season for one week would not help the abundance of doe's some areas have. The reason places have a short gun season is to grow their buck numbers and quality, has nothing to do with population control.

[phade]

One week gun season in areas where the population is too high? Bow hunters have shown that they can't get it done in those areas. The gun season accounts for the vast majority of harvest.

 

We have the longest gun season in the NE (or close to) and arguably the worst management of does in that region. If other states can have a shorter gun season and better doe management, shortening the gun season to one week should be plausible and effective as long as we balance the management. I don't think you can magically shorten it w/out other things rolled into a plan, but it seems like a good thing when done correctly - even a 9 day season spanning two weekends, with the last two days doe only or something to that effect.

 

I like gun hunting just as many others do, but so many states have better overall deer management plans that include a shorter gun season and their problems on whatever apple-to-apple comparison we can generate often puts us at the bottom or near bottom of the pile and rarely middle of the pack.

Edited May 27, 2015 by phade

[Culvercreek hunt club]

We have the longest gun season in the NE (or close to) and arguably the worst management of does in that region. If other states can have a shorter gun season and better doe management, shortening the gun season to one week should be plausible and effective as long as we balance the management. I don't think you can magically shorten it w/out other things rolled into a plan, but it seems like a good thing when done correctly - even a 9 day season spanning two weekends, with the last two days doe only or something to that effect.

I like gun hunting just as many others do, but so many states have better overall deer management plans that include a shorter gun season and their problems on whatever apple-to-apple comparison we can generate often puts us at the bottom or near bottom of the pile and rarely middle of the pack.

I'd buy a 9 day season in areas without population issues. Even a 9 day buck season in high pop areas with the rest of the normal duration as doe only. Tie it with a one buck per hunter change

[steve863]

Should this 9 day gun season be implemented in all regions of NYS, or only the "8" areas?  

[WNYBuckHunter]

You mention you hunt farms...now if a monetary incentive were given out to those farmers to open up their lands to public hunting...I believe you and many other hunting groups of guys would be a tad upset and looking perhaps for other areas to hunt...See it's a catch 22 isn't it because either large tracts of land are already being leased to hunters or it's the friends and family thing...we only have 73 acres but it's family hunting grounds...I know for a fact that ALL of the farm lands around us started leasing to hunters years ago.

The fact is all lands around here that do not belong to anti hunting ppl are hunted...What I find funny is we have a little known park in the area...Harriett Hollister Park...It only allows for deer hunting BUT they are closing it to hunting for the late season. It sits on 750  of acres of prime deer habitat in 8N ..You know one of the proposed doe only areas

 

If I told you the number of people that hunt the property I do, youd be surprised. Its just as full as public ground some years. Theres just a core group of us that are consistantly successful because we put the most time and work in. We know the land and how the deer use it. The others just pop in from time to time for the most part.

 

Ive hunted Harriet Hollister before, stopped because I have better ground to spend time on.

 

Regardless, theres a population problem, it needs to be delt with. No solution is going to make everyone happy.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Eliminate DMP in those areas and that will entice more public access. I personally know farms that get them and regardless of the rules they are used by family, deer are shot and no recovery attempts made, or more than two taken by DMAP hunters.

 

How would eliminating DMPs entice any public access? It would mostly entice poaching, more DMAPs and DDPs.

 

If you mean eliminate DMAPS, I dont see that as being very productive either. Take the farm I hunt, we get 6 or 8 DMAPs each year for the one parcel. They are reserved for whomever shoots the does first. They sit in an old farm truck near the enterance to the land. We always use them, plus some of our DMPs. It still doesnt put a dent in the population because we have neighboring properties that wont shoot does, and one that doesnt allow access at all. None of the properties around us would allow public access unless there was some kind of financial benefit to it. You have to be somehow connected to the landowners to get permission, and even then it wont guarantee anything.

 

Or are you talking DDPs, like nuisance permits?

 

Just my opinion.

[steve863]

So the state wants people to shoot does before they can shoot bucks, yet property owners don't want to give the people who want to shoot these does access to their land.  Well, they are willing to give access to them if they pay the price for a lease, and those leases are generally high because they are based on the BUCKS one could potentially kill on the land.  Most of the buck hunters who hunt these properties will maybe kill a doe or two if that, meanwhile the ones who could care less about killing a buck and would be more than happy with a doe or three get left out of the picture completely. Man, tell me that there isn't something very WRONG with this scenario?  I know that I'd gladly pass up ANY buck to be allowed to kill a few of these over-abundant does if a landowner would give me the opportunity.  And I'd even pay him a reasonable price for being allowed to do so.  I bet I'd never get any takes on this offer, however.  So we go back to the beginning where there isn't any real, feasible solutions to this.

 

 

[WNYBuckHunter]

So the state wants people to shoot does before they can shoot bucks, yet property owners don't want to give the people who want to shoot these does access to their land.  Well, they are willing to give access to them if they pay the price for a lease, and those leases are generally high because they are based on the BUCKS one could potentially kill on the land.  Most of the buck hunters who hunt these properties will maybe kill a doe or two if that, meanwhile the ones who could care less about killing a buck and would be more than happy with a doe or three get left out of the picture completely. Man, tell me that there isn't something very WRONG with this scenario?  I know that I'd gladly pass up ANY buck to be allowed to kill a few of these over-abundant does if a landowner would give me the opportunity.  And I'd even pay him a reasonable price for being allowed to do so.  I bet I'd never get any takes on this offer, however.  So we go back to the beginning where there isn't any real, feasible solutions to this.

 

I dont think that the buck scenario fits most of the situations, at least it doesnt fit the situations around us. People just dont want to allow just anyone onto their property for many reasons, but mostly its because people come in and tear stuff up. We had a bunch of issues with that last year on one property, and it was from guys that have had long standing permission to the place. Knocking down fences, cutting down oak trees without permission (shouldnt cut ANY tree without permission, but hardwwods to boot?), leaving all kinds of trash around, gutting gloves, etc. In turn, fewer people are given permission, and only a small percentage of the ones that are, actually kill deer consistantly, so not enough are taken.

 

If you are ever out this way, let me know, Id be glad to put you in a stand, no money necessary.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

How would eliminating DMPs entice any public access? It would mostly entice poaching, more DMAPs and DDPs.

 

If you mean eliminate DMAPS, I dont see that as being very productive either. Take the farm I hunt, we get 6 or 8 DMAPs each year for the one parcel. They are reserved for whomever shoots the does first. They sit in an old farm truck near the enterance to the land. We always use them, plus some of our DMPs. It still doesnt put a dent in the population because we have neighboring properties that wont shoot does, and one that doesnt allow access at all. None of the properties around us would allow public access unless there was some kind of financial benefit to it. You have to be somehow connected to the landowners to get permission, and even then it wont guarantee anything.

 

Or are you talking DDPs, like nuisance permits?

 

Just my opinion.

Specifically DDP's is what I meant but also runs into DMAP's. I understand how you guys use them but I know of more that DON'T use them the right way. And if they don't want to allow access then let them have every green leaf eaten on their place. When their property is decimated then the deer will move to an area that maybe they can be hunted. There is no obligation to shore up their business by issuing these permits. Kind of like drug testing welfare. you are under no requirement to to it but then suffer the consequences.

[phade]

I'd buy a 9 day season in areas without population issues. Even a 9 day buck season in high pop areas with the rest of the normal duration as doe only. Tie it with a one buck per hunter change

 

I just struggle with the idea that we have a 23 day gun season and even have to resort to doe only seasons when there are shorter gun seasons and better doe management in other states where it does make an impact on numbers control.

 

Ohio while not perfect is a great system because they are fluidly able to change things up - not related to the access, ag, or the soil quality...but just their ability to shift on the fly year to year with changes to manage the numbers and quality. The state hit their target on numbers but probably overdid it this year and guess what, hunters pounded the DNR with feedback, and they're (DNR) already on the ball to make the needed changes to tweak the resource.

 

When I see that, and then look internally here in NY, and we're talking about jamming down a doe only season in bow by bowhunters...and our current season structure...and it just makes me pessimistic at the outcome of this.

 

My resources have told me that there is only a 50-50 chance that, even if this is pushed through, won't take effect until next season due to timing. The key to this is getting a ton of feedback submitted by the June 29 deadline. The more feedback questioning it, the more it'll take them to wade through it all, which could pend the decision to the following season. I've also been told that it really is the last step before muzzleloaders come in, and that may be done in spite if the pushback from hunters on the current regs proposal is monstrous. At this point, it's likely an either-or proposition for bowhunters in the short-term (this year and next)...no changes to the season is as likely as the Bills winning the Super Bowl this year. 

 

What I see is that they implement the doe only in bow, modify the late season somehow, but back off the doe only somewhat or a combo of days within the late season...and then next year, say that it still doesn't work and then implement the smokepoles. Imagine that discussion....doe only Oct. 1-15, the few day or week-long muzzleloader doe only season, and then xbow on the back end of the bow season. It's not much of a bow season at that point and a drastic change from even two seasons ago.

[phade]

So the state wants people to shoot does before they can shoot bucks, yet property owners don't want to give the people who want to shoot these does access to their land.  Well, they are willing to give access to them if they pay the price for a lease, and those leases are generally high because they are based on the BUCKS one could potentially kill on the land.  Most of the buck hunters who hunt these properties will maybe kill a doe or two if that, meanwhile the ones who could care less about killing a buck and would be more than happy with a doe or three get left out of the picture completely. Man, tell me that there isn't something very WRONG with this scenario?  I know that I'd gladly pass up ANY buck to be allowed to kill a few of these over-abundant does if a landowner would give me the opportunity.  And I'd even pay him a reasonable price for being allowed to do so.  I bet I'd never get any takes on this offer, however.  So we go back to the beginning where there isn't any real, feasible solutions to this.

 

I've reached out to ALOT of landowners within the WMUs impacted. By alot, I would say several hundred in the past 4 seasons.

 

When declined, the #1 reason I get is that they hunt the land themselves and/or have a group of hunters already on it. This is probably a 2:1 or a 3:1 ratio to landowners who simply do not allow hunting on their property.

 

Think about that for a second and all of the complaints about access. Land is being hunted, but just not by the hordes or masses. With little public in some of these WMUs, it really makes the issue much more difficult. If they went OTC and doled out tags to those who do have access, I think they'd make a dent in the overall numbers. My group has been stymied a bit because we hunt three WMUs that fall within this high deer population area. So when we pull, we generally pull DMPs for 8H and then one or two for 8F and 8G, to ensure we have them to burn when hunting in those units. What happens is we're sitting in 8H and having to scramble to find a DMP for that unit because we've filled the ones we obtained.Part of the problem nobody has really talked about is that several of the 8s are bordering one another and hunters hunt in both or more units with regularity. Naturally, hunters pull one for each unit and that causes an issue down the road.

 

Go OTC in these units and give the power to the people who can do this right now...no screwing around with seasons, etc. Just go OTC, dole out the tags, and let people engage in a bloodbath. 

 

I will say I think some areas within the WMUs are not as bad as the DEC states. Some certainly are, but some of these areas I have noticed a population drop based on my cam use. Such informal insight, but I am pretty confident in being able to say that. I do fear that if the DEC gets the number they want, we might have a repeat of the early/mid 2ks where it was over-corrected. 

[gjs4]

Let me present the bigger issue at hand; " how many does are there in the first place?"

I agree with many of the sentiments expressed but feel most are missing the point of s management entity that has no substantial data is guaranteed to make bad moves with poke and hope approaches.

As stated by others I could see this as a fluffy Trojan horse that goes nowhere beyond getting the early ml season in place.

They may be understaffed but they're not doing their job well.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Four Season Whitetail's]

So the state wants people to shoot does before they can shoot bucks, yet property owners don't want to give the people who want to shoot these does access to their land.  Well, they are willing to give access to them if they pay the price for a lease, and those leases are generally high because they are based on the BUCKS one could potentially kill on the land.  Most of the buck hunters who hunt these properties will maybe kill a doe or two if that, meanwhile the ones who could care less about killing a buck and would be more than happy with a doe or three get left out of the picture completely. Man, tell me that there isn't something very WRONG with this scenario?  I know that I'd gladly pass up ANY buck to be allowed to kill a few of these over-abundant does if a landowner would give me the opportunity.  And I'd even pay him a reasonable price for being allowed to do so.  I bet I'd never get any takes on this offer, however.  So we go back to the beginning where there isn't any real, feasible solutions to this.

Come north and blast some does. You dont even need tags here. lol   I always try to find room for a time for someone new to hunt. May not be free rein come anytime you want because i keep our bigger acres on the down low to keep the bigger bucks around. But a couple days here and there done smart can get a person some meat and not mess up the whole property at the same time!