Alternative thinking

[Doc]

Just got done reading a pretty good suggestion that kind of becomes a replacement for the "Does Only" attempt at reducing deer numbers. It also implements the "One-and-Done" rule that so many want, but with a way that hunters could earn additional buck opportunities.

 

Some guy commenting in the latest NYON letters section, suggested a system where the OBR would be enacted, but with an option that taking one or two does in the overpopulated areas would be rewarded by the issuance of a second buck tag or an additional either-sex tag. Well, I tweaked some of his suggestion a bit, but the general theme of his suggestion is there.

 

I thought that was a pretty good idea. It takes away all the perceived restrictive aspects and replaces all that negativity with a reward system for whacking the does. It's an incentive instead of a punishment. Kind of a new way of looking at management policies. Tweak it and mold it around a bit to fine-tune it, but I do like the change in thinking from harassing hunters to rewarding them for taking does. Those kinds of decisions are things that I could get behind and support. yeah, it's a pretty raw idea and needs some work, but I think it gets hunters behind the idea of taking does (perhaps even enthusiastically) without really taking much of anything away from them. What do you all think?

 

[A Sportsman]

Yes doc, this type of rule is more palatable than simply having the one buck rule to me. In my mind, it puts emphasis on an attempt to manage does/deer population, by area, as opposed to having a flavor of "a way to have larger bucks".

I would hope that if a rule like this would pass, that the bonus buck tag could be achieved by taking one doe, not 2.

[WNYBuckHunter]

While its a good idea to address the doe overpopulation idea, it still doesnt address the other things that a OBR does.

 

 

[phade]

Just got done reading a pretty good suggestion that kind of becomes a replacement for the "Does Only" attempt at reducing deer numbers. It also implements the "One-and-Done" rule that so many want, but with a way that hunters could earn additional buck opportunities.

 

Some guy commenting in the latest NYON letters section, suggested a system where the OBR would be enacted, but with an option that taking one or two does in the overpopulated areas would be rewarded by the issuance of a second buck tag or an additional either-sex tag. Well, I tweaked some of his suggestion a bit, but the general theme of his suggestion is there.

 

I thought that was a pretty good idea. It takes away all the perceived restrictive aspects and replaces all that negativity with a reward system for whacking the does. It's an incentive instead of a punishment. Kind of a new way of looking at management policies. Tweak it and mold it around a bit to fine-tune it, but I do like the change in thinking from harassing hunters to rewarding them for taking does. Those kinds of decisions are things that I could get behind and support. yeah, it's a pretty raw idea and needs some work, but I think it gets hunters behind the idea of taking does (perhaps even enthusiastically) without really taking much of anything away from them. What do you all think?

 

You do realize this strategy has already been tested in Reg 8 and the DEC has already dismissed this, right?

 

The 8C system was set up this way and their experience was very poor (for whatever reason) and they did away with the ability to get additional buck kills as a result. They actually got rid of the bonus either sex tag to encourage MORE antlerless harvest. So, in their mind, offering this up is likely too much admin work, and that they believe it won't result in more antlerless kills. I tend to agree, because most people will kill what they kill now, just in a way that allows them a second tag.

 

DEC tested the potential to expand the Bonus DMP program (Phase 1) in 2013 by exploring the impact of issuing Bonus DMPs in WMUs 1C, 3S, 4J, and 8C as antlerless-only rather than either-sex tags as they had been previously. This was an important step to reduce the workload of administering the program and focus hunters on antlerless deer, a critical factor for potentially expanding the program. However, results of these trials suggest that expansion of any Bonus DMP program would not yield the desired increase in antlerless take. Harvest reporting data also indicate that hunters are not limited by the availability of antlerless tags in the WMUs of the rule change.

Edited September 8, 2015 by phade

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Phade, but those are archery only areas and access in 8C is probably the worst in all of region 8.

 

I would like to see the OBR. I would also like ALL antlerless to be handled in the lottery system with all weapons having an equal opportunity at the permits.

 

Run this bonus program through all the seasons and not just in archery for the high population areas.  

[Five Seasons]

sounds like a blend of OBR and earn a buck which I like. Might not stop some guys from reporting fake harvests, but it's a start if you hope most people have ethics.

[phade]

Phade, but those are archery only areas and access in 8C is probably the worst in all of region 8.

 

I would like to see the OBR. I would also like ALL antlerless to be handled in the lottery system with all weapons having an equal opportunity at the permits.

 

Run this bonus program through all the seasons and not just in archery for the high population areas.  

 

I'm not talking about the merits, I'm saying the DEC has already gone on record that they will not implement changes to the way they dole out tags. It's more of the shove it and take it message they cast.

[dbHunterNY]

You do realize this strategy has already been tested in Reg 8 and the DEC has already dismissed this, right?

 

The 8C system was set up this way and their experience was very poor (for whatever reason) and they did away with the ability to get additional buck kills as a result. They actually got rid of the bonus either sex tag to encourage MORE antlerless harvest. So, in their mind, offering this up is likely too much admin work, and that they believe it won't result in more antlerless kills. I tend to agree, because most people will kill what they kill now, just in a way that allows them a second tag.

 

DEC tested the potential to expand the Bonus DMP program (Phase 1) in 2013 by exploring the impact of issuing Bonus DMPs in WMUs 1C, 3S, 4J, and 8C as antlerless-only rather than either-sex tags as they had been previously. This was an important step to reduce the workload of administering the program and focus hunters on antlerless deer, a critical factor for potentially expanding the program. However, results of these trials suggest that expansion of any Bonus DMP program would not yield the desired increase in antlerless take. Harvest reporting data also indicate that hunters are not limited by the availability of antlerless tags in the WMUs of the rule change.

 

yea many here in 4J that I've talked to didn't even know about it.  check station times were a pain from what I remember.  for here at least, if more people knew about it and it was easier to make it to a checkstation then I think they would've had better participation.  poor execution and promotion in my mind.  many hunters out there don't read the NYODN or dig for info as much as many of us do.

[dbHunterNY]

sounds like a blend of OBR and earn a buck which I like. Might not stop some guys from reporting fake harvests, but it's a start if you hope most people have ethics.

 

here in 4J you had to check your harvest in to get the bonus (either-sex) DMP.  no way to really fake a harvest.

[Doc]

Yeah, I am not all that good at explaining these plans. It usually takes a whole lot of attempts before it gets clear.

 

Basically it is a "one buck per season rule" that has a trap-door for the extra buck tag for those that really feel they just have to harvest another buck. Since extra bucks appear to be the big appeal to hunters and that seems to be the lure that can get them to kill does. Why not use that mentality. They can have their 2nd buck, but they have to earn it. Ha-ha .... see, you even get a bit of Earn-a-buck in there too. Now I don't know if the DEC tried exactly this plan or not, and frankly I don't really care. It sounds like a good plan to me and I thought I would bring it here for discussion.

[phade]

Yeah, I am not all that good at explaining these plans. It usually takes a whole lot of attempts before it gets clear.

 

Basically it is a "one buck per season rule" that has a trap-door for the extra buck tag for those that really feel they just have to harvest another buck. Since extra bucks appear to be the big appeal to hunters and that seems to be the lure that can get them to kill does. Why not use that mentality. They can have their 2nd buck, but they have to earn it. Ha-ha .... see, you even get a bit of Earn-a-buck in there too. Now I don't know if the DEC tried exactly this plan or not, and frankly I don't really care. It sounds like a good plan to me and I thought I would bring it here for discussion.

 

My understanding from discussions on this, the trial areas simply moved WHEN people shot their doe, and didn't drive up harvest numbers. Once the either sex is issued, the bonus implications stopped. Thus, people would shoot their doe at the time that allows for the either sex.

[shawnhu]

I've spoken to many hunters that hunt LI and Westchester when this bonus either sex tag was issued. Many hunters that were after horns were thrilled about the idea of possibly getting 7 or more bucks in a year. Whether or not any of them achieved these numbers is probably what the DEC considers a failed experiment.

X-Calibur Lighting Systems

http://facebook.com/XCaliburLightingSystems

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I've spoken to many hunters that hunt LI and Westchester when this bonus either sex tag was issued. Many hunters that were after horns were thrilled about the idea of possibly getting 7 or more bucks in a year. Whether or not any of them achieved these numbers is probably what the DEC considers a failed experiment.

X-Calibur Lighting Systems

http://facebook.com/XCaliburLightingSystems

the way it ran in 8C. you filled your doe permit and the checked in the deer (I believe you had to bring in the head). they gave you bonus either sex tag. you could take 100 antlerless by going through the same process over and over again. UNTIL you took an antlered deer, then you were done.

 

it was quite a while ago that I had property up there that I could do this.

[A Sportsman]

At the time the bonus either sex tag program ran, NY hunters already had 2 tags that could be used for a buck in their pocket. I can say that personally the opportunity to exchange a filled doe tag for a buck tag never really meant much for me. many years I shot a doe but didn't bother checking the deer in for the bonus tag. 2 buck tags is all I really wanted/needed. and I would bet many other hunters are similar.

Shame that this important factor would likely be overlooked by dec in assessing whether the earn a buck bonus tag would be entertained along with OBR.

[A Sportsman]

I would think most hunters would value the opportunity to obtain that second buck tag if we started the season with one tag. Some OBR fans might forgo obtaining the second buck tag. But the vast majority would be looking for that early season doe, which is what state wants in these areas.

[greensider]

what if you dont live in one of those areas now i have to travel and hope to find a new spot to hunt screw that stop taking my hunting rights away leave it alone and do (your) part by filling your tags

[nyantler]

It's disheartening that we have to always find a way to entice hunters into doing what is best for conservation. We've been trying to get ratios in sync for years without any real headway and still most hunters are reluctant to do what is needed to get the herds in balance. I would rather see the DEC start explaining exactly where we are and exactly where we need to be... then tell hunters what they need from them to reach those goals. Instead of, looking for ways to trick hunters into what they want them to do. I truly believe that OBR would rekindle the old mindset of using your wife, grandmother, or dead uncles tags to keep buck hunting... for those who may have forgotten, that was the way of the hunter as recent as 35 years ago... if the issuing of 3 times the tags as 35 years ago has not worked, I don't see how just shuffling the deer tag deck a little will make any difference as long as hunters don't know what the true numbers goal is, "earn a buck" tag or not... just doesn't make sense to me.

[Doc]

It's disheartening that we have to always find a way to entice hunters into doing what is best for conservation. We've been trying to get ratios in sync for years without any real headway and still most hunters are reluctant to do what is needed to get the herds in balance. I would rather see the DEC start explaining exactly where we are and exactly where we need to be... then tell hunters what they need from them to reach those goals. Instead of, looking for ways to trick hunters into what they want them to do. I truly believe that OBR would rekindle the old mindset of using your wife, grandmother, or dead uncles tags to keep buck hunting... for those who may have forgotten, that was the way of the hunter as recent as 35 years ago... if the issuing of 3 times the tags as 35 years ago has not worked, I don't see how just shuffling the deer tag deck a little will make any difference as long as hunters don't know what the true numbers goal is, "earn a buck" tag or not... just doesn't make sense to me.

It's even more disheartening that the DEC finds it necessary to develop bonehead plans like this antlerless only edict in certain areas. And yet, here we are. Now the reality..... Hunters want to hunt. They for the most part do not want to manage. We pay taxes to have that done. As it turns out, for the DEC to be effective in their job, they must have the cooperation of the hunters. So, if they have to do some cajoling and enticement that will likely work a whole lot better than dictating and restricting. Yes there is definitely some educating and promotion that needs to be done. But the mentality of hunters has to be understood and dealt with, since they are the only population control tool that has so far proven to be viable.

 

We have gotten into this mentality where antlers are the only measure of success in deer hunting. That, I believe, is the root of the problem that results in the refusal to shoot does. The fact that we can issue permits until we run out of paper, and hunters refuse to use them, shows that there is a hunter mindset problem. Until somebody figures a way to put a feeling of challenge and satisfaction back into shooting does, we may very well have to rely on gimmicks that provide an acceptable reason and incentives to these hunters to shoot a does. We can decry the fact that we have to resort to that, but we also have to face the human nature involved in the problem.

[nyantler]

It's even more disheartening that the DEC finds it necessary to develop bonehead plans like this antlerless only edict in certain areas. And yet, here we are. Now the reality..... Hunters want to hunt. They for the most part do not want to manage. We pay taxes to have that done. As it turns out, for the DEC to be effective in their job, they must have the cooperation of the hunters. So, if they have to do some cajoling and enticement that will likely work a whole lot better than dictating and restricting. Yes there is definitely some educating and promotion that needs to be done. But the mentality of hunters has to be understood and dealt with, since they are the only population control tool that has so far proven to be viable.

 

We have gotten into this mentality where antlers are the only measure of success in deer hunting. That, I believe, is the root of the problem that results in the refusal to shoot does. The fact that we can issue permits until we run out of paper, and hunters refuse to use them, shows that there is a hunter mindset problem. Until somebody figures a way to put a feeling of challenge and satisfaction back into shooting does, we may very well have to rely on gimmicks that provide an acceptable reason and incentives to these hunters to shoot a does. We can decry the fact that we have to resort to that, but we also have to face the human nature involved in the problem.

I guess my point was that the cajoling and enticement and issuing of 3 times as many tags over the last 40 years has really gotten them nowhere. During those forty years the DEC has never explained where we are and what the goals are. It's very hard to come up with a working plan when you aren't telling anyone what the objective numbers are. Yes, dictating and restricting isn't the answer either and is starting to piss off more and more hunters... I'm not saying the DEC needs to hold classrooms to teach biology or start a billboard campaign for managing deer. But the hunters, being an important resource, need to understand the problem and the proposed solutions and have some say in those solutions if we're ever going to get their cooperation. The only way to change hunter mindset is to educate them on what and why... after that maybe a little tickling of their nuts may be in order to give that extra push to do what needs to be done.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Way back when...Like 30 years ago..Letchworth State park had 100.s of deer standing on the side of the road as you drove thru the park..There were deer up at our hunting camp in Barney Pond. Pa had so many deerit was a scary trip to visit family in West Virginia every year and we used to count the dead and alive deer we saw along the road on our way thru and came up with crazy number. 

Back then you had to have 3 people on a party permit to hunt the park. You had a backtag you filled in with pen and had to mail back and doe tags were like taboo. The DEC has went to both ends of the spectrum with our whitetails, Most didnt turn out well. People now complain because the park has no deer to hunt- There are plenty of deer on that park. Many areas in the Northern tier have no doe tags and Ar because there are no deer and many places in the South are not over ran by deer.  

Until they find a way for hunters to get to the deer in the areas they need thinning then nothing will change. P!ssing off a wole group of hunters(Bow) and doing the same to the landowners in those areas..Tell them they cant shoot something on land they burn money and sweat..Let alone taxes..into is not gaining them any friends thats for sure.

 

Antler and Doc are both right but neither side is going to budge.  Being told you cant do something in hunting when people hold it so dear at heart is going to cause problem's...Kinda like dropping a dime on someone for something they did and they lose their hunting.....You will have problems.

[A Sportsman]

Doc/ NYantler,

How much do you think the drop in hunter recruitment has to do with this inability to kill enough does?

And What about other cultural changes? I tend to think, on the whole, there are less hunters who are learning how to cook. And probably destroy venison when they prepare it. There are more hunters nowadays who either don't like it themselves or are married to women who refuse to eat it. Heck I think less families actually cook their own dinner on a regular basis than in years past. There are also hunters who don't shoot many deer because of the "terrifying experience" it will be for their wife when they bring it home. As stupid as that sounds. Also what about butchering? Do fewer people butcher their own? If I didn't do my own, at 80 a pop that starts to hurt my wallet.

Another thing to consider is land development and suburbs? As more land is developed in some of these over run areas, deer crowd into what woods there are left. And they exist in suburbs that are off limits to hunting. I think these factors certainly play in to the reason why hunters in some areas may not be killing enough deer to meet the the goals (as mysterious as they are) of the dec. It's a darn near impossible task to begin with.

[Doc]

I guess my point was that the cajoling and enticement and issuing of 3 times as many tags over the last 40 years has really gotten them nowhere. During those forty years the DEC has never explained where we are and what the goals are. It's very hard to come up with a working plan when you aren't telling anyone what the objective numbers are. Yes, dictating and restricting isn't the answer either and is starting to piss off more and more hunters... I'm not saying the DEC needs to hold classrooms to teach biology or start a billboard campaign for managing deer. But the hunters, being an important resource, need to understand the problem and the proposed solutions and have some say in those solutions if we're ever going to get their cooperation. The only way to change hunter mindset is to educate them on what and why... after that maybe a little tickling of their nuts may be in order to give that extra push to do what needs to be done.

Agreed. What is up with all the secrecy regarding facts, figures, goals, etc.  It makes one wonder if they really do have any of that. It does seem that everytime they offer a peek inside the workings of the DEC, there are even more doubts and suspicions that maybe there is no cohesive plan or perhaps they are truly operating by the seat of their pants. Brings to mind that old saying: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt".

 

But I agree. The relationship between the DEC and hunters seems to be a one-way partnership in which hunters are dictated to without the benefit of knowing where the dictates are headed or the details, whys, and wherefores of the actions. They may not believe it, but to me it is obvious that they need the buy-in of those carrying out the plan (hunters). The success of the plan relies on it. So either they feel that buy-in is not necessary, or even scarier, maybe the facts and figures don't exist and the DEC is just winging it.

 

[Five Seasons]

the cost of a check station and staffing etc seems like it would never fly across the whole state.

[growalot]

A Sports man ...Wow you hit the nail on the head....We use to have to take dads , and 3 other guys deer from camp just because of the they don't eat it ,the wife won't "allow" it it at their home...crazy ...anyways this is why I mentioned it they wanted more deer shot then they should do the job of net working places for these deer to be taken...either for human consumption or any of the many zoos in this state...I wouldn't even care if it was for dog food if the DEC got the cash for it to off set operating costs, or real program budgets.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

the cost of a check station and staffing etc seems like it would never fly across the whole state.

The lions share of the high population areas are in Region 8. I don't know about the proximity of the other WMU's to their region headquarters but in 8 it is a pretty easy drive down there to have the kill verified and another tag issued.