Another DEC abortion on the way...

[beachpeaz]

It sure does look like the state is on some sort of rampage to kill off as many deer as quickly as possible for some bizarre reason if most of the things I am reading on these threads is true.  Maybe if they get all the deer killed off, there won't be ANY reasons for NYS residents to own ANY guns at that point?  Who the hell knows what they have in mind here??  I guess at this point we are all speculating what they will do for this coming season, since nothing definite has been stated yet.  I do however think that the best days of hunting in NYS are well behind us now.  NO way in hell that ANY of these proposals will make hunting BETTER in NYS in the future.  If there is anything left to hunt, it just won't be worth the effort for most to keep participating in this pastime in my honest opinion.  

 

They aren't doing it to make hunting better. 

 

And, its not an IF they do it, by good authority from DEC people involved in these decisions, this is a done deal.  Everyone here keeps using that "IF" part hoping its not true, or just another DEC hairbrained idea.  This one is put to bed, and as I mentioned, the lack of public forum and the enactment of their emergency powers, is a deadgiveway even beyond the information I received form a reliable source.

 

The truly scary part of this is for hunters, is my last point, and that is the early muzzy season coming down the pipe.  I will quote a friend and say that this change is simply a trojan horse for future changes (just like the moving of the 10/15 to 10/1 bow season was for this change).

 

They have a plan in mind that was started a couple years ago (and has NOTHING to do with doe population) and are misleading the public to believe it is something other than it is.

 

 

 

[steve863]

 

They have a plan in mind that was started a couple years ago (and has NOTHING to do with doe population) and are misleading the public to believe it is something other than it is.

 

 

What do you think this "plan" is??

[Culvercreek hunt club]

3) And the big secret that wasn't published is they are looking at putting the muzzleloader season in September state wide.  If that happens, this state's hunting will be destroyed in less than 5 years.  In September, when deer have never been hunted before, you can't send out a gun brigade into the fields where they are still daytime feeding in bachelor groups.  They will be slaughtered.

 

Moral of this, you live in NYS, which is run by anti-gun, anti-hunting liberals who need revenue driven agendas to feed NYC and don't give a darn about anything else.  People just need to accept where we live.  This will never change.

The early ML season was discussed in the last 5 year report and the last survey they did, I believe. It was discussed as an early, antlerless only and  only in areas with over population. Where are you seeing or hearing otherwise?

[beachpeaz]

What do you think this "plan" is??

 

Think about these things for a second:

 

-IF the doe population is out of whack, then why, several years ago, did they start charging to obtain a doe permit?  And, to this day, why are they limited in the number of doe permits you can obtain?  I know in both my units I hunt, which are listed on the reg changes to doe only, unless you buy your license first thing when they are issued, you can't get a doe permit.

 

-IF the doe population is out of whack magically this year then why 2 years ago when they changed bow season from 10/15 to 10/1, why didn't they at that point just leave the regular opener at 10/15 and enact a doe only season from 10/1 to 10/15?

 

-IF the doe population is out of whack SO much so that they have to institue an emergency policy to change the regulations just a few months before the season starts, WHY early season with bow hunters?  Bow hunters represent a mere couple percent of all deer harvests (let alone the fraction of a percent of those harvests that actually occur the first 2 weeks).  As I mentioned in my original post, imagine the impact of the Saturday gun opener as a Doe only harvest followed by the remainder of the season available for bucks.  Most "weekend warriors" who are just filling their freezers will shoot anything, so there is no doubt they would shoot a doe on Saturday morning.

 

-IF the doe population is so out of whack, when they crammed a youth only gun season in the middle of bow season, why not make that doe only?  Hey, if you are trying to get youngsters into hunting, why do they have to shoot a buck?  Your first deer should be special regardless!

 

-AND, if this is really about controlling buck-to-doe ratios, in typical BS politcal fashion, why have a proposal for September muzzy hunt statewide on the coat tails of this "emergency plan."

 

All these doe were not magically born in January to create this sudden spike of "an alarming amount of excess deer."  This is a pattern that has been a result of mismanagement for a decade (see points above).  This is our typical "reaction" system based not in fact or science, but in politics.

 

As mentioned in my original email, our DEC, unlike other states with large hunting populations, doesn't employ biologists and habitat specialist, no, we have politians making political decisions.

 

You ask what the plan is?  It is a non-plan, plan.  It is a bunch of liberals with a half a brain in a room reacting to all the bad decisions they have made in mismanaging our deer herds for decades, now creating more reactionary ill-advised decisions that will surely lead to even more in the future to correct these poor ones.  If I thought like a liberal (besides blowing my brains out), I could answer your question directly.  Since I am a rational thinking grounded in facts and science, I have NO clue what their idiotic plan is, but surely there is enough of a pattern over the past couple years to realize this is the tip of their iceberg agenda.

[beachpeaz]

The early ML season was discussed in the last 5 year report and the last survey they did, I believe. It was discussed as an early, antlerless only and  only in areas with over population. Where are you seeing or hearing otherwise?

 

What you see in a report is less than 10% of what is truly discussed.  I have physically spoken with someone inside the circle who shared with me 5 other plans that were rejected WAY more erradic than this one.  This was the "conservative" plan amongst them.  And, it is not a proposal.  It IS going into effect.

 

I don't disagree that what was discussed was an early anterless only muzzy hunt in past reports that you have read.

 

My concern, stating a pattern, is they are basically using a trojan horse to disguise an end game here.  The DEC's ONLY concern is revenue, which comes from gun hunters.  There will always be a bias towards bow hunters since they are in the minority.  The agenda is simply to get gun hunters early season opportunities.  It will start with anterless, and when the "magical doe population issue" is gone, they will leave the season and open it up for all deer.  Yes, a prediction, but don't put it past our state.  There focus is on license sales and the orange brigade.

[dbHunterNY]

At what point is the lowest hole in the bucket, though?

 

Is anything really being gained if they don't care? I know co-ops are all the rage, but at a certain point, what gains are had. 

 

I don't think any of them dislike deer but really don't think about them in the slightest.  they don't want anyone on their property for almost any reason.  however, we tell them perfect if they join we will ensure nobody goes there and will be eyes and ears.  let them know if we see or hear anything.  so they're like perfect I don't have to do anything to be a part of this, bonus points with my neighbors off my back, and my property is watched while I'm out of town instead of a hunting/party site.  slowly but inevitably we develop a relationship.  we even let DEC ECOs know it's not huntable property too.  these properties are few so concern for access for us is not a concern.  nobody's had or would get permission to hunt their anyway.  now we the coop use it as a sanctuary that's on the outer portion of the co-op but far enough from the boardering properties that don't participate.  so we use it to reduce pressure and hold deer on the co-op more so than otherwise.  now we have a honey hole that always produces like the one you've got and have mentioned.  it's added acreage for added DEC DMAPs.  lastly, when people who are or might join are shown the highlighted map, it's one big warm fuzzy contiguous tract of properties following the same rules.  holes or gaps have always seemed to lead to cause for concern when nearby properties are worrying about passing up bucks or figuring out doe take.

 

...co-ops are "all the rage" because I've found out when done correctly they simply work.  on going PITA especially for those directing the circus but it's true.  as long as it's a community effort, those apart of it see it through, and decisions are deer based and not people based all the good stuff will follow and overshadow anything bad.  DEC could never do what we do with the resources they've got.  They much rather give us what they can to let us do what we're doing.

Edited May 28, 2015 by dbHunterNY

[Doc]

The early ML season was discussed in the last 5 year report and the last survey they did, I believe. It was discussed as an early, antlerless only and  only in areas with over population. Where are you seeing or hearing otherwise?

Yes, it is true that the early muzzleloader season is an established pet project of the DEC. It goes right along with their eager push of crossbows. The picture is clearing now as to what their real agenda is. I believe it is a serious concern about having established a very popular and effective and large chunk of the hunting year and handed it over to those who are least effectively using it to whack on the deer population......the bowhunters.

 

It appears that they have been spooked by the general down-turn in hunter numbers. I think that they have envisioned a trend in hunter participation where they feel that they need ways to achieve higher deer takes by fewer hunters. It is clear now that these radical changes in season/weapon structure are a series of mini-experiments to see just how far they can go with turning a large, potentially productive, part of the hunting year into a season of higher takes by adding in more efficient weapons. I truly do not expect it to stop with muzzleloaders either.

 

With the self-destruction of the New York Bowhunters as the only effective mouthpiece for bowhunter interests, the way is now cleared to develop that time slot and produce the kinds of deer-take numbers that will make up for any potential weaknesses in hunter numbers or participation in the future. And if guns in that time-slot are what's required, the way is now cleared to do so. It all starts with the muzzleloader.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Yes, it is true that the early muzzleloader season is an established pet project of the DEC. It goes right along with their eager push of crossbows. The picture is clearing now as to what their real agenda is. I believe it is a serious concern about having established a very popular and effective and large chunk of the hunting year and handed it over to those who are least effectively using it to whack on the deer population......the bowhunters.

 

It appears that they have been spooked by the general down-turn in hunter numbers. I think that they have envisioned a trend in hunter participation where they feel that they need ways to achieve higher deer takes by fewer hunters. It is clear now that these radical changes in season/weapon structure are a series of mini-experiments to see just how far they can go with turning a large, potentially productive, part of the hunting year into a season of higher takes by adding in more efficient weapons. I truly do not expect it to stop with muzzleloaders either.

 

With the self-destruction of the New York Bowhunters as the only effective mouthpiece for bowhunter interests, the way is now cleared to develop that time slot and produce the kinds of deer-take numbers that will make up for any potential weaknesses in hunter numbers or participation in the future. And if guns in that time-slot are what's required, the way is now cleared to do so. It all starts with the muzzleloader.

You may very well be right, Doc. The only thing I can be sure of anymore is that I know I will be out there, in whatever season, with whatever weapon, whatever bag limits and enjoying it as always. It would make me very sad to see that "quiet" kind of hunting fall to the wayside, but I would still be out there.

[Doc]

I like the idea of co-ops. I think it is great when people decide to actively manage their hunting lands and actually try to apply real science to their efforts. Is it the path to the salvation of NYS's deer management? ..... Not hardly. What it means is that there will be a few relatively limited areas that will be little hunting meccas in the middle of the vast mis-managed state. Also I am sure there are and will be a lot of organized private land that calls itself a co-op but simply results in some more locked-up, no-trespassing, land with or without any special management activities actually going on, or going on only in partial, semi-effective fashions.

 

The bottom line is that the bulk of wildlife management will still be a function of the state. And while private activities are great, we still need to find ways to enhance the state's management effectiveness.

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I like the idea of co-ops. I think it is great when people decide to actively manage their hunting lands and actually try to apply real science to their efforts. Is it the path to the salvation of NYS's deer management? ..... Not hardly. What it means is that there will be a few relatively limited areas that will be little hunting meccas in the middle of the vast mis-managed state. Also I am sure there are and will be a lot of organized private land that calls itself a co-op but simply results in some more locked-up, no-trespassing, land with or without any special management activities actually going on, or going on only in partial, semi-effective fashions.

 

The bottom line is that the bulk of wildlife management will still be a function of the state. And while private activities are great, we still need to find ways to enhance the state's management effectiveness.

I gotta look up the Co-op in Yates County. It will really surprise you the percentage of Yates that is in active co-op

[phade]

That is a big co-op. Spans Italy Valley.

[Doc]

I gotta look up the Co-op in Yates County. It will really surprise you the percentage of Yates that is in active co-op

Lol .... I always like a good surprise.

 

[JFB]

I like it. Remember it's only certain parts of the state. It doesn't appear to affect the low doe areas. There's too many doe in my town, that I know.

 

What many of you are missing is the DEC is effectively removing any accountability measures they currently have imposed on them. They want to get rid of the red tape so they can just nuke the nuisance (deer) any way they see fit and no one will be able to say a darn thing about it. Not to mention they are making nuisance permits easier and all things easier to get numbers to a pathetic level. The 15 days are smoke and mirrors, they want the ability to change regs easier in the future so they can NUKE. DEC is not the sportsman advocate here when it comes to quality hunting experiences. 

[Doc]

What many of you are missing is the DEC is effectively removing any accountability measures they currently have imposed on them. They want to get rid of the red tape so they can just nuke the nuisance (deer) any way they see fit and no one will be able to say a darn thing about it. Not to mention they are making nuisance permits easier and all things easier to get numbers to a pathetic level. The 15 days are smoke and mirrors, they want the ability to change regs easier in the future so they can NUKE. DEC is not the sportsman advocate here when it comes to quality hunting experiences. 

CTFs are a good example of spreading accountability around such that there winds up to be none. Something as basic to deer management as determining deer density targets has been off-loaded to a bunch of untrained laymen who are only responsible to representing their own segments of financial interests.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Lol .... I always like a good surprise.

 

If you compare just to organized Co-op's of over 22,457, non-contiguous, acres to the total area of Yate county (240,640 acres) that is 9.3% in Co-op

 

compared to Yates County land mass (216,320 acres) it is 10.4%

 

The Co-ops only exist in 7 of the 9 townships in Yates. Comparing to the total land mass in just those 9 townships (180,320 acres), That is 12.5 in Co-op

 

These totals do not take into consideration and hard structures or pavements. The available habitat totals in the county and the 7 townships would be less (so % would actually be higher)

[dbHunterNY]

I like the idea of co-ops. I think it is great when people decide to actively manage their hunting lands and actually try to apply real science to their efforts. Is it the path to the salvation of NYS's deer management? ..... Not hardly. What it means is that there will be a few relatively limited areas that will be little hunting meccas in the middle of the vast mis-managed state. Also I am sure there are and will be a lot of organized private land that calls itself a co-op but simply results in some more locked-up, no-trespassing, land with or without any special management activities actually going on, or going on only in partial, semi-effective fashions.

 

The bottom line is that the bulk of wildlife management will still be a function of the state. And while private activities are great, we still need to find ways to enhance the state's management effectiveness.

 

I agree.  Our co-op hasn't changed anything having to do with access though.  same hunters on the same properties and being apart of the co-op doesn't mean you get to hunt any co-op property.  If anything we're bringing in more hunters to certain properties at the request of the landowner to achieve doe harvest goals.  Not all co-ops are created equal and aren't perfect either even for their intentions.  It's a great source of information for the DEC to work with though.

[Doc]

If you compare just to organized Co-op's of over 22,457, non-contiguous, acres to the total area of Yate county (240,640 acres) that is 9.3% in Co-op

 

compared to Yates County land mass (216,320 acres) it is 10.4%

 

The Co-ops only exist in 7 of the 9 townships in Yates. Comparing to the total land mass in just those 9 townships (180,320 acres), That is 12.5 in Co-op

 

These totals do not take into consideration and hard structures or pavements. The available habitat totals in the county and the 7 townships would be less (so % would actually be higher)

That is unbelievably high, but still a long way from impacting the necessity for a state game management agency. This still is quite insignificant and does not qualify as a viable statewide alternative to the DEC, which was my point.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

That is unbelievably high, but still a long way from impacting the necessity for a state game management agency. This still is quite insignificant and does not qualify as a viable statewide alternative to the DEC, which was my point.

And my point was that individual or collective effort is not as insignificant as you make it out to be. I am all for pushing DEC in any way we can but I am not in face of sitting by and waiting on government to tell me what the right thing to do is

One point I didn't make in that last post was that this isn't a solid block of property. So it terms of doe harvest the area within the co-ops draw and influence is higher than the percentage would indicate.

[Doc]

And my point was that individual or collective effort is not as insignificant as you make it out to be.

Actually, according to your numbers, it is as insignificant as I make it out to be. And while it is great for those few that take part in it, I don't really ever see it rising to a level where it will be able to be relied on for credible state game management in any significant way. I really don't want anyone's attention to be diverted from keeping the feet of the DEC to the fire because of false hopes that the landowners will take care of it. The landowners will not take care of it anywhere but on a few selected parcels of land. And even those will vary all over the place as to how focused, correct and dedicated the efforts will actually be.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Actually, according to your numbers, it is as insignificant as I make it out to be. And while it is great for those few that take part in it, I don't really ever see it rising to a level where it will be able to be relied on for credible state game management in any significant way. I really don't want anyone's attention to be diverted from keeping the feet of the DEC to the fire because of false hopes that the landowners will take care of it. The landowners will not take care of it anywhere but on a few selected parcels of land. And even those will vary all over the place as to how focused, correct and dedicated the efforts will actually be.

I guess our definitions of insignificant must be different. Could you do me a favor Doc? Could you point me to the post where I or anyone suggested that Co-ops should be the focus of our efforts while not holding DEC's feet to the fire on the state wide plan? I must have missed that one or misspoke myself. I would like to correct that.

[wolc123]

I live in one of those areas that is overrun with deer.   The problem here is that the deer are natural born "survivors" and have adapted such that even the folks hunting them at night with nuisance permits have a tough time killing them.    The real key in getting the population down to a proper level is killing mature does and they are definitely the most elusive targets around.  Trying to take them out with a vertical bow in the daylight is about the least effective method imaginable.   They always travel in groups, so the only way to draw a bow with all those eyes in close is to get dangerously high in a tree.  Shots from such an angle are often non-lethal.   As soon as any significant hunting pressure is detected, these deer go nocturnal, completely so after the first few daytime gun-shots are heard.  

 

I see the crossbow, used early, as the real key to taking out more of these wise, older does.   Getting in early and without noise,  before hunting pressure gets intense would help a ton.  Just like a ML, a crossbow does not require that draw movement in close like a regular bow, so it can slowly be moved into position for a shot without spooking a group of deer.  It also has the huge advantage over a ML of a silent report. To only allow crossbows at the end of the bow season defeats the advantage, when many of the does are already nocturnal due to pressure.   In areas that need a reduction in population, they should open crossbow, for antlerless deer only, at least two weeks ahead of the current regular bow season.   They also should allow folks to use a regular bow during that special pre-season if they wish.            

 

I don't like the idea of easing restrictions on the nuisance permits.  The biggest problem with those is all the wasted venison.   It would be a lot better to give sportsman who use the meat better tools (crossbow) and more time to get the job done.   

Edited May 31, 2015 by wolc123

[growalot]

From what I have been reading..the "tone" of All the articles is...This is already set to go as is...the "public comments " is just a time block as it were. Something that is going to delay their already set plans until 2016/17. Sort of like a job notice that is mandatory but the dept already knows who they have slotted for the position.
Perhaps a news media campaign before the 29th giving sound reasons why this is a non productive plan should happen. A group such as QDM stating their mission is sound but implementation is certainly not and giving better solutions. Other wise I fear all these discussions have been enlightening, but ultimately worthless. IMO

Edited May 31, 2015 by growalot

[Five Seasons]

NYB are against this, so it must be a good regulation.

[growalot]

The guy that is going to allow me to hunt his lands called today and had me stop over..he had purchased a aluminum climber that faces the tree...and a few other hunting items he wanted me to look over...he wanted to give me the items but I have 2 climbers now and said one of his other hunter friends may enjoy it...did take the multi compartment fanny pack...makes him feel good, he is a nice guy...set up plans to tour the place so I can go in and scout this summer he wanted to go today but it was raining too hard...He has a preserve on one border and hunting lease bordering his other line. I'm kind of excited about this new place...Its hard woods wht and red oak with a leased farm field he has at the base of the wood lot...can't wait to see what they planted in that field this year...so no 8N tags until Nov.1 this or for until I see what the DEC plans on doing...Who knows....I may get my self a nice doe and buck the first two weeks off the other properties....give my home lands a rest the first two weeks and go back to hunting them in earnest on the 15th  if I don't tag any thing...at least I'll be able to shoot a respectable buck if I see one as well as a doe, what ever appears first.

Edited May 31, 2015 by growalot

[orion]

Does anyone else think the DEC can do a lot better in being honest in what they want?

 

Shouldn't they give the hunters the population/deer densities of wmu's? The carrying capacities of wmu's and then what % of the carrying capacity they want the deer population to be?

 

I wonder if they know or even care? Or if they try to get hunters to shoot as many deer as possible till hunters complain there aren't any.