So I wonder how that 2 week kill only doe is working out

[WNYBuckHunter]

I'm going hunting. Go annoy someone else. Keyboard warrior.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

LOL, you have no clue about anything do you.

[WNYBuckHunter]

I agree to an extent, I do know that in my area 2.5 or older bucks weigh in around 180 dressed I have only taken 1 doe that weighed in at 170 dressed all the rest were 120ish so I will get about an extra 20lbs of meat off that buck.  What I don't really understand are these "meat hunters" that take a 1.5 yo buck that weighs less than an average doe. To fix this they should have just put in antler restrictions on 1 or 2 neighboring WMU to see how it worked out in terms of doe harvest. It probably would have worked a lot better than this doe only.

 

Heaviest 2 1/2 Ive personally seen on a scale taken from this area (rochester/fingerlakes) was one I shot a couple of years ago that dressed at 162 or 167. When I saw trailcam pics of him before I killed him, Id have sworn he would have dressed alot more than he did.

[chas0218]

Wondering where you hunt and what level of antler restrictions do you think would have made a difference?

I hunt near Sodus NY. If they did a 3 point rule I think it would have been a better alternative than to the doe only. We have Several 80 and 90 inch 8 points on our cameras which 2 out of the 6 might make it to next year. Too many brown it's down hunters in our area. 

 

 

Heaviest 2 1/2 Ive personally seen on a scale taken from this area (rochester/fingerlakes) was one I shot a couple of years ago that dressed at 162 or 167. When I saw trailcam pics of him before I killed him, Id have sworn he would have dressed alot more than he did.

The deer in our area are grain fed. Not because we feed them but because they eat corn and soybean all season. They bulk up really fast, with the high protein diet. Our property consists of 100 acres of grain fields and 120 of hardwoods. Needless to say they are big deer. I used to hunt in Farmington coolie rd to be exact and deer there were the same way, my father-in-law shot a nice 8 point 3 years ago that dressed was 196lbs. the worst part was we dragged that deer guts and all to the road before field dressing. 

Edited October 15, 2015 by chas0218

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I hunt near Sodus NY. If they did a 3 point rule I think it would have been a better alternative than to the doe only. We have Several 80 and 90 inch 8 points on our cameras which 2 out of the 6 might make it to next year. Too many brown it's down hunters in our area. 

Read what you wrote. how would a 3 point on a side save those 8 pointers? 4 point on a side wouldn't.

 

To be honest I don't see AR's increasing the doe take to the needed levels. If you look at the harvest numbers and figure that 60% of the bucks would have had to be passed and assume that those hunters instead took a doe (if they could have) . you aren't talking about a significant enough doe take increase.

[Five Seasons]

I know people in these affected areas and as many on here they are not thrilled with this rule but guess what... They aren't sitting around whining about it on a keyboard. They are out there hunting because that's what they love to do. If some people on this forum put as much effort into hunting as they do arguing about things that aren't going to be "solved" on a public forum they'd be deadly in the woods... Debates are fun, but at the end of the day I wait all year to sit in a tree with my bow and I wouldn't let this rule stop me from doing just that. If you truly are a "trophy hunter" then maybe staying out of the woods is a valid point, but for the vast majority I say, "Just get out there and hunt." That's MY opinion...

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

i forgot this was a forum for solving problems with a direct line to the DEC and not one where we discuss, vent, debate and kill time.

 

[chas0218]

Read what you wrote. how would a 3 point on a side save those 8 pointers? 4 point on a side wouldn't.

 

To be honest I don't see AR's increasing the doe take to the needed levels. If you look at the harvest numbers and figure that 60% of the bucks would have had to be passed and assume that those hunters instead took a doe (if they could have) . you aren't talking about a significant enough doe take increase.

No I understand what I typed I didn't say it would have saved the 8 points. What I was referring to was AR would keep people from killing the smaller bucks 1.5 yo that have less meat than the average doe.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

No I understand what I typed I didn't say it would have saved the 8 points. What I was referring to was AR would keep people from killing the smaller bucks 1.5 yo that have less meat than the average doe.

so what does that do to have a major take down the doe population?

[WNYBuckHunter]

 

I hunt near Sodus NY. If they did a 3 point rule I think it would have been a better alternative than to the doe only. We have Several 80 and 90 inch 8 points on our cameras which 2 out of the 6 might make it to next year. Too many brown it's down hunters in our area. 

 

 

The deer in our area are grain fed. Not because we feed them but because they eat corn and soybean all season. They bulk up really fast, with the high protein diet. Our property consists of 100 acres of grain fields and 120 of hardwoods. Needless to say they are big deer. I used to hunt in Farmington coolie rd to be exact and deer there were the same way, my father-in-law shot a nice 8 point 3 years ago that dressed was 196lbs. the worst part was we dragged that deer guts and all to the road before field dressing. 

 

 

They are grain fed here too lol. Im in 8H. Number of points doesnt mean much, we have 1 year olds that are 8s and we have 4 year olds that are 8s.

[chrisw]

i forgot this was a forum for solving problems with a direct line to the DEC and not one where we discuss, vent, debate and kill time.

Kill time is about it.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thought you were going hunting?

[chas0218]

Read what you wrote. how would a 3 point on a side save those 8 pointers? 4 point on a side wouldn't.

 

To be honest I don't see AR's increasing the doe take to the needed levels. If you look at the harvest numbers and figure that 60% of the bucks would have had to be passed and assume that those hunters instead took a doe (if they could have) . you aren't talking about a significant enough doe take increase.

I take it you are talking about this 60%, it equates out to about 13,689 bucks in the southern zone if you took half that many doe I think the AR would have worked.  This is all mathematically sound but in the real world we all know it doesn't work like that but just a little food for thought. 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I take it you are talking about this 60%, it equates out to about 13,689 bucks in the southern zone if you took half that many doe I think the AR would have worked.  This is all mathematically sound but in the real world we all know it doesn't work like that but just a little food for thought. 

 

2013 deer take.JPG

Don't look at SZ numbers. we are talking about a few select WMU's it isn't the entire SZ. follow?

[chas0218]

Don't look at SZ numbers. we are talking about a few select WMU's it isn't the entire SZ. follow?

If you don't want me to look at those numbers then why refer to them?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

If you don't want me to look at those numbers then why refer to them?

Aren't we talking about the WMU's that are doe only? They are in the SZ but not the entire SZ. If you want numbers to evaluate them only look at the harvest data in those areas. I never said anything about the entire SZ

[Bow Addict]

I love deer weight estimates.

[fasteddie]

Nuts to this ..... I am heading out to Mendon with the hopes of getting a shot at a DOE ....

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Nuts to this ..... I am heading out to Mendon with the hopes of getting a shot at a DOE ....

I leave in the Am to go up North and shoot a doe with my ML in an area that doesn't have doe permits...lol

[growalot]

I'm glad I am not an out of stater with limited time spending lots of $$$ dollars and dealing with this...those lease guys have this and now all the great fallow fields that held a ton of deer turned into a barren shite fields where nothing grows or travels except in the summer early fall when the corn is there..not during hunting season. they are now down to  10 and 15 acre wood lots plus their owned 5 acres and house...with 3 families and some friends hunting it...lol

No buck first 2 wks and no buck all of late season.....bet Vermonts looking better and better...

Edited October 15, 2015 by growalot

[landtracdeerhunter]

Buck season starts tomorrow! Now, we get serious.

[Jmny]

There is one MAJOR point of distinction that's being overlooked. And that is "FREE WILL". Basically to compare a hunter that had the ability to shoot a deer of his choice( providing a dmp permit was acquired) But forfeited that right, (by taking a buck that apparently was considered a shooter by that hunter) and HIS INABILITY TO SHOOT A BIGGER BUCK LATTER IN THE SEASON, WAS A CHOICE MADE BY THE HUNTERR( not DEC).

Those hunters in the anterless only DMP's don't have that FREEDOM of choice.

I personally have no problem taking a doe or two( maybe even 3 or 4) depending on availability of second chance permits in my DMP and the success of my fellow hunting buddies.) But , I'm not about to go into the woods without the ability to shoot a buck that meets my requirements as to whether it's a shooter. THE DEC HAS INSTITUTED A HUNTING POLICY THAT HAS

STRIPPED THE HUNTERS IN THE ANTERLESS ONLY DMP OF THEIR FREEDOM OF CHOICE.

Now, let's examine what group of hunters they have placed these restrictions on?

Basically you have two separate groups. Those hunters that would never shoot a doe. So, the DEC policy could effect these hunters, but I believe the a greater percentage of these hunters would travel to non affected DMP

For those first 15 days.

The second group affected would be those hunters that have already choosen to assist the DEC in deer management by "PAYING" extra for the"PRIVILEGE" to help.

And how does the DEC repay these hunters for their assistance and the extra monetary compensation? "TAKE THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE FROM THESE HUNTERS". So, they have paid additional monies to assist the DEC in deer management but in doing so, involuntarily gave up their right to shoot any deer of their choice.

What are the possible results of this new,in my opinion, ill conceived policy?

Don't believe those that those hunters that refuse to shoot does will change their hunting attitude. Then there is a possibility that those that have in the past, chose to assist the DEC, will not purchase DMP permits. Or, a record number of DMP Permit kills will be reported.( Both true and untrue). So much for reliable feedback from the hunters.

Common sense tells me that if I want to address the problem of aver abundance of antlerless deer in an area, I would be smarter to appeal to those that have already exhibited a desire to take does. To be honest I would provide the incentive to the part of the hunting season that is the least limited. That would be the gun hunters.

Now when? There a couple ways that come to mind. The most effective would be a week of special antlerless only, one week prior to opening of bow season. (Wow, irritated a few hunters with that suggestion). But, I don't believe restricting this,week to muzzleloader would obtain the desired results. So labeling it as gun season, would include whatever weapon you choose to hunt) Finally configured a possible incentive for non antlerless hunters to contemplate a change in their hunting philosophy,which would assist in,bringing the effected DMP back into the management objectives, thereby eliminating the need for a special early gun season for that DMP. Having the special one week antlerless only season before the bow season instead of after the late bow/muzzleloader season? Two and a half months to determine if another special week of antlerless only is needed in certain DMP's.

By the way, losing your ability to take a buck the first 15 days of deer season is all the incentive one needs to voice their negative opinion concerning antlerless restrictions in DMP's. I would believe the only people in support of this antlerless only policy , would be those uneffected.

But my opinions are just that opinions. I don't attempt to state factual information. Nor, do I chastise those that have an opinion different than mind. But that might change when I achieve status of elite hunter..

Just my donation to the " food for thought"

Edited October 15, 2015 by Jmny

[Culvercreek hunt club]

There is one MAJOR point of distinction that's being overlooked. And that is "FREE WILL". Basically to compare a hunter that had the ability to shoot a deer of his choice( providing a dmp permit was acquired) But forfeited that right, (by taking a buck that apparently was considered a shooter by that hunter) and HIS INABILITY TO SHOOT A BIGGER BUCK LATTER IN THE SEASON, WAS A CHOICE MADE BY THE HUNTERR( not DEC).

Those hunters in the anterless only DMP's don't have that FREEDOM of choice.

I personally have no problem taking a doe or two( maybe even 3 or 4) depending on availability of second chance permits in my DMP and the success of my fellow hunting buddies.) But , I'm not about to go into the woods without the ability to shoot a buck that meets my requirements as to whether it's a shooter. THE DEC HAS INSTITUTED A HUNTING POLICY THAT HAS

STRIPPED THE HUNTERS IN THE ANTERLESS ONLY DMP OF THEIR FREEDOM OF CHOICE.

Now, let's examine what group of hunters they have placed these restrictions on?

Basically you have two separate groups. Those hunters that would never shoot a doe. So, the DEC policy could effect these hunters, but I believe the a greater percentage of these hunters would travel to non affected DMP

For those first 15 days.

The second group affected would be those hunters that have already choosen to assist the DEC in deer management by "PAYING" extra for the"PRIVILEGE" to help.

And how does the DEC repay these hunters for their assistance and the extra monetary compensation? "TAKE THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE FROM THESE HUNTERS". So, they have paid additional monies to assist the DEC in deer management but in doing so, involuntarily gave up their right to shoot any deer of their choice.

What are the possible results of this new,in my opinion, ill conceived policy?

Don't believe those that those hunters that refuse to shoot does will change their hunting attitude. Then there is a possibility that those that have in the past, chose to assist the DEC, will not purchase DMP permits. Or, a record number of DMP Permit kills will be reported.( Both true and untrue). So much for reliable feedback from the hunters.

Common sense tells me that if I want to address the problem of aver abundance of antlerless deer in an area, I would be smarter to appeal to those that have already exhibited a desire to take does. To be honest I would provide the incentive to the part of the hunting season that is the least limited. That would be the gun hunters.

Now when? There a couple ways that come to mind. The most effective would be a week of special antlerless only, one week prior to opening of bow season. (Wow, irritated a few hunters with that suggestion). But, I don't believe restricting this,week to muzzleloader would obtain the desired results. So labeling it as gun season, would include whatever weapon you choose to hunt) Finally configured a possible incentive for non antlerless hunters to contemplate a change in their hunting philosophy,which would assist in,bringing the effected DMP back into the management objectives, thereby eliminating the need for a special early gun season for that DMP. Having the special one week antlerless only season before the bow season instead of after the late bow/muzzleloader season? Two and a half months to determine if another special week of antlerless only is needed in certain DMP's.

By the way, losing your ability to take a buck the first 15 days of deer season is all the incentive one needs to voice their negative opinion concerning antlerless restrictions in DMP's. I would believe the only people in support of this antlerless only policy , would be those uneffected.

But my opinions are just that opinions. I don't attempt to state factual information. Nor, do I chastise those that have an opinion different than mind. But that might change when he status of elite hunter.

Just my donation to the " food for thought"

The other thing to note is forcing me to shoot only does in the early season instead of when I usually end up doing it (gun season), changes the time I take them but does nothing to change the numbers.

[chas0218]

There is one MAJOR point of distinction that's being overlooked. And that is "FREE WILL". Basically to compare a hunter that had the ability to shoot a deer of his choice( providing a dmp permit was acquired) But forfeited that right, (by taking a buck that apparently was considered a shooter by that hunter) and HIS INABILITY TO SHOOT A BIGGER BUCK LATTER IN THE SEASON, WAS A CHOICE MADE BY THE HUNTERR( not DEC).

Those hunters in the anterless only DMP's don't have that FREEDOM of choice.

I personally have no problem taking a doe or two( maybe even 3 or 4) depending on availability of second chance permits in my DMP and the success of my fellow hunting buddies.) But , I'm not about to go into the woods without the ability to shoot a buck that meets my requirements as to whether it's a shooter. THE DEC HAS INSTITUTED A HUNTING POLICY THAT HAS

STRIPPED THE HUNTERS IN THE ANTERLESS ONLY DMP OF THEIR FREEDOM OF CHOICE.

Now, let's examine what group of hunters they have placed these restrictions on?

Basically you have two separate groups. Those hunters that would never shoot a doe. So, the DEC policy could effect these hunters, but I believe the a greater percentage of these hunters would travel to non affected DMP

For those first 15 days.

The second group affected would be those hunters that have already choosen to assist the DEC in deer management by "PAYING" extra for the"PRIVILEGE" to help.

And how does the DEC repay these hunters for their assistance and the extra monetary compensation? "TAKE THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE FROM THESE HUNTERS". So, they have paid additional monies to assist the DEC in deer management but in doing so, involuntarily gave up their right to shoot any deer of their choice.

What are the possible results of this new,in my opinion, ill conceived policy?

Don't believe those that those hunters that refuse to shoot does will change their hunting attitude. Then there is a possibility that those that have in the past, chose to assist the DEC, will not purchase DMP permits. Or, a record number of DMP Permit kills will be reported.( Both true and untrue). So much for reliable feedback from the hunters.

Common sense tells me that if I want to address the problem of aver abundance of antlerless deer in an area, I would be smarter to appeal to those that have already exhibited a desire to take does. To be honest I would provide the incentive to the part of the hunting season that is the least limited. That would be the gun hunters.

Now when? There a couple ways that come to mind. The most effective would be a week of special antlerless only, one week prior to opening of bow season. (Wow, irritated a few hunters with that suggestion). But, I don't believe restricting this,week to muzzleloader would obtain the desired results. So labeling it as gun season, would include whatever weapon you choose to hunt) Finally configured a possible incentive for non antlerless hunters to contemplate a change in their hunting philosophy,which would assist in,bringing the effected DMP back into the management objectives, thereby eliminating the need for a special early gun season for that DMP. Having the special one week antlerless only season before the bow season instead of after the late bow/muzzleloader season? Two and a half months to determine if another special week of antlerless only is needed in certain DMP's.

By the way, losing your ability to take a buck the first 15 days of deer season is all the incentive one needs to voice their negative opinion concerning antlerless restrictions in DMP's. I would believe the only people in support of this antlerless only policy , would be those uneffected.

But my opinions are just that opinions. I don't attempt to state factual information. Nor, do I chastise those that have an opinion different than mind. But that might change when he status of elite hunter.

Just my donation to the " food for thought"

Or in those areas you could just call in your permits for those that are opposed. Then DEC would have to adjust their fudge number. Looking at the harvest report for deer in the effected areas doe to buck ratio is 1.2 to 1 or closer to 1 to 1 isn't that close to the ratio they want? I guess I'm not sure why they are trying to off more does other than to please the big wigs in Albany complaining about money doled out for crop damage and such.

 

Now am i condoning illegally calling in tags? No, I'm just giving another scenario one I feel many landowners/leasees will end up doing by trying to shove this down our throats.

Edited October 15, 2015 by chas0218

[Nomad]

I hunt near Sodus NY. If they did a 3 point rule I think it would have been a better alternative than to the doe only. We have Several 80 and 90 inch 8 points on our cameras which 2 out of the 6 might make it to next year. Too many brown it's down hunters in our area.

The deer in our area are grain fed. Not because we feed them but because they eat corn and soybean all season. They bulk up really fast, with the high protein diet. Our property consists of 100 acres of grain fields and 120 of hardwoods. Needless to say they are big deer. I used to hunt in Farmington coolie rd to be exact and deer there were the same way, my father-in-law shot a nice 8 point 3 years ago that dressed was 196lbs. the worst part was we dragged that deer guts and all to the road before field dressing.

FYI Cooley road is in the town of Canandaigua. We own land on that road , the wife's family has since the 1,800s . Not to many dressed 180 pound 2 1/2s .

Btw what farm did you hunt ? There are only a few , I know most of them .

Edited October 15, 2015 by Larry302

[Jmny]

I've noticed a lot of resentment towards landowners, As someone that hunted state land for the first 12 years of my adult hunting life I am extremely aware of the problems that arise with hunting state land. The primary concern was safety. Being in the woods with inexperienced hunters that shoot at running deer, unloading their guns. Then there were those that had no problem mixing hunting with alcoholic beverages. Then you had to worry about another hunter walking through the area you've been stump sitting for an extended period of time. It became abundantly clear if we (family) wanted to improve our hunting environment we would need to purchase land. So, if your disgruntled with your hunting situation, time to step up to the plate and become a land owner. Get together with your relatives and close friends and buy a parcel of land together. Splitting the cost of ownership with all that will derive the benefits of hunting private land is the way to go. A secondary solution would be acquiring a lease for exclusive rights to hunt a particular parcel of land. Expense varies depending much much work you want to put into it. You can enlist the services of someone else that takes the time to research the prospective landowners to see if they might be interested in leasing the hunting rights. Or you can invest your time and money into researching the owners of certain parcels( platt maps) and making a phone call followed up with a personal appearance, agreed during the prior phone conversation. Be prepared to offer $10-$25 per acre for exclusive rights to hunt the land.

Other than that there are other alternative to avoid the crowded state land. It's been my experience that hunters,that take to state land only hunt the acreage that is relatively close to a road. In fact I would suggest that 70-85 % of the hunters,are within 200-300 yards of the road. Another way to alleviate hunting pressure is to change the days you hunt. Saturday is the heaviest hunted day of the week followed by Sunday. Allow the deer to reestablish their normal activity Monday and tuesday then hunt Wednesday and Thursday. Yes it is true you pay the price (inconvience) for being unable to financially afford buying or leasing land. When looking to acquire permission to hunt land make sure the owner of the land resides on the land. This individual will be more likely to grant permission. The land owner might look favorable to leasing hunting privileges to responsible hunters.(helping to offset their taxes,,especially if they don't hunt the land themselves).

Edited October 16, 2015 by Jmny

[Doc]

Okay .... so now the season in my WMU has finally started. Yesterday was great weather .... a bit breezy, but the temp and lack of rain was great. Unfortunately no deer showed up, but at least I didn't have to face the possibility of spooking bucks that I had no legal right to shoot.