SB 4739 - Establishes the yearling buck protection program

[Four Season Whitetail's]

10 minutes ago, ManicOutdoorsman92 said:

If u carefully read my posts thats the point im getting across,through natural selection the strong will find there place, antler growth is no inducation of strong genetics . And this notion of, we have to let bucks grow, and " cull this buck" becaus it has bad genetics ( low antler potential) is absurd especially the hunters stating, " its for a healthier herd"

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk
 

A poor genetic animals will not grow great antlers regardless of age and food intake.. Givin age to let them show true potential (Genetics) will help the herd to a point. Breeding  the biggest and strongest of the herd makes for a healthy herd.

[Larry]

This is a copy of the letter I sent my state senator:

Sir let me give you a little back ground on myself. I have been hunting deer since I’ve been 16 I am now 59. So I have spent some time in the woods. I am able to take the whole month of November off to hunt deer. I do not shoot small bucks that’s my choice.

Even though I pass on small bucks. I don’t believe I or anyone else has the right to tell someone what a trophy is or to force their way of hunting onto someone else. This legislation is being brought forth on behalf of one individual and his origination and if I had to guess what that origination is it would be The New York Whitetail Management Coalition. They are trying to do an end run around the DEC I would like to see wildlife management left to the experts and not to the wannabe experts.

The DEC has just started promoting a voluntary yearling buck program. I would like to give that program 5 years to see how that works first. We have not even seen the harvest data for the first year of the program.

This is just bad legislation. This legislation would just further reduce hunter numbers and cut revenue to the DEC. The person who is only able to hunt a few days and can’t take a month off to hunt. Will not spend the money without a fair chance of harvesting a deer they don’t care how big it is they just want a chance at getting one. If you wish to contact at my e-mail or if there is any way we can have a sit down on this legislation I would appreciate it. Thank you for your time.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Larry

[grampy]

Larry, I could not have written that any better! That sums up my feelings on this subject, exactly!! Nice job!

[grampy]

On 3/14/2017 at 7:11 PM, moog5050 said:

Closed our office at 2pm today.  But don't worry, I am still billing you!

Didn't know you were a lawyer. Pretty cool! By the way, I got this speeding ticket.....................lol

Edited March 16, 2017 by grampy

[dbHunterNY]

On 3/11/2017 at 11:41 AM, 88GW said:

Read this. Seems as though dec is not standing behind this and they are sticking with whatever data they collected from a 2016 study. 

 those that head the NYSCC are very much in bed with politics in Albany.  they have and always will be against antler restrictions, no matter what their overall membership thinks.  most of their membership probably doesn't even know about that letter.  doesn't matter who a resolution is coming from. how a portion of their membership voted is what it is.  the fact that they'd just write it off and that it "shocked them" is a bit unsettling.

...as for the guts of the letter here's what i think.  of course DEC isn't standing behind it.  they have a plan already in place for promotion of voluntary restraint.  see how that goes and then revisit mandatory restrictions, just as the letter said.  still doesn't change that where proposed ARs are or aren't came from info foiled from a reserved plan made by DEC. NYSCC can't say the Cornell study was conclusive, because it wasn't.  it was asked in a way that got answers that conflicted with each other. if you're going to pick pieces out of it though here you go: 69%-"important to protect yearling bucks", 73%-willing to accept some limitations on buck harvest to do so, and 70%-willing to accept some limitations on freedom to take any buck to protect young bucks.  DEC has openly stated the results from that survey didn't yield any clear direction, though.  Also it's convenient that names of organizations were dropped and then say that something was the outcome as if they all agreed versus DEC saying "Ok well thank you for your time. we're doing this."  QDMA for example is a 501.C3 that can't and won't lobby for anything.  they most likely didn't take any stance for or against an overall decision but instead provided input on specific discussions regarding deer management.  to them it has to be biologically sound (protection of yearling bucks as a whole).  they acknowledge antler restrictions as a science involved tool to do so. they encourage exemptions for youth and new hunters.  they believe a majority of hunters must support it.  they also believe state wildlife agencies should monitor deer management provisions.  probably good that despite being legislated and beyond DEC control, DEC has done periodic studies on the areas in NY that currently have mandatory pilot antler restrictions.

[dbHunterNY]

On 3/11/2017 at 0:27 PM, ManicOutdoorsman92 said:

Again how do more mature male deer equate to a healthier herd, every one keeps saying this without saying why, it is more natural for 4,5, 6 YO to breed but why is it healthier, what is damaging the herd by having the dominant 3 yo do the breeding instead.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk
 

we don't need bucks necessarily that old but some sort of age structure and a good number of young bucks is good for breeding ecology.  this link explains it better than i can...

https://www.qdma.com/mature-bucks-needs-em/

[Larry]

I can't get the letter to come up can you sent it to me print to small

[dbHunterNY]

On 3/14/2017 at 0:31 PM, Lawdwaz said:

I'd like a brief breakdown on the goings-on here.  

100 words or less.....

a huge majority of people don't understand how antler restrictions work or what they can and can't do.  wild tangents convos happen and get heated for no reason.  legislation like this isn't really the best route to go.  DEC should instead get off their a** and review data collected for each WMU.  if yearling buck harvest is approaching 60% or higher in a WMU they should do something about it, because it's biologically warranted and hunter satisfaction is probably in the crapper.  mandatory antler restrictions should be based on harvest data for that area (which DEC has) with exceptions for youth hunters and first time license holders (which they can do).  if the WMU yearling buck harvest is lower then there's no need and it wouldn't do a damn thing.  leave the hunters alone.  they're doing well and probably happy.  feel free to copy this for the next antler restriction thread.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, dbHunterNY said:

a huge majority of people don't understand how antler restrictions work or what they can and can't do.  wild tangents convos happen and get heated for no reason.  legislation like this isn't really the best route to go.  DEC should instead get off their a** and review data collected for each WMU.  if yearling buck harvest is approaching 60% or higher in a WMU they should do something about it, because it's biologically warranted and hunter satisfaction is probably in the crapper.  mandatory antler restrictions should be based on harvest data for that area (which DEC has) with exceptions for youth hunters and first time license holders (which they can do).  if the WMU yearling buck harvest is lower then there's no need and it wouldn't do a damn thing.  leave the hunters alone.  they're doing well and probably happy.  feel free to copy this for the next antler restriction thread.

I don't get the exclusion of some units in this. Especially out by me. 8H and 8M, with 8 H being one of the units listed as having a huge population problem. It may be a simplistic view but I would think that having the mandatory AR's would put a bigger focus on the doe population. Not the half a$$ed way it was done last time. This go around you are almost asking hunters that don't want AR to go to the areas that do have it to take young bucks. To me if they are going to do it then do it and do it across the board. right or wrong I am fed up with NY's style of half A$$ed 

[moog5050]

1 hour ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I don't get the exclusion of some units in this. Especially out by me. 8H and 8M, with 8 H being one of the units listed as having a huge population problem. It may be a simplistic view but I would think that having the mandatory AR's would put a bigger focus on the doe population. Not the half a$$ed way it was done last time. This go around you are almost asking hunters that don't want AR to go to the areas that do have it to take young bucks. To me if they are going to do it then do it and do it across the board. right or wrong I am fed up with NY's style of half A$$ed 

Bad idea.  I have several upcoming spikes on the hit list in 8H.

[Larry]

Here something you all are forgetting 85% of the land in NY is I privet hands. So what you’re  doing is trying to pass a law telling someone how or what they can hunt on their land. Because you think your way is the right way for everyone and you know what’s best for us all. Holy crap that’s that sound like, could it be we have PROGRESSIVE’S on this site. SHIT!

You have the right to hunt on your land the way you want so go head put in any rule you want. But trying to force another land owner to do it your way. By using Big Government because you are ether a progressive or a cry baby.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, Larry said:

Here something you all are forgetting 85% of the land in NY is I privet hands. So what you’re  doing is trying to pass a law telling someone how or what they can hunt on their land. Because you think your way is the right way for everyone and you know what’s best for us all. Holy crap that’s that sound like, could it be we have PROGRESSIVE’S on this site. SHIT!

You have the right to hunt on your land the way you want so go head put in any rule you want. But trying to force another land owner to do it your way. By using Big Government because you are ether a progressive or a cry baby.

You mean like how the Government does things like the 3" spike rule? The setting of actual season dates? Setting what weapon can be used when and where? Setting bag limits? 

[Four Season Whitetail's]

52 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

You mean like how the Government does things like the 3" spike rule? The setting of actual season dates? Setting what weapon can be used when and where? Setting bag limits? 

And i just read a nice write up about it on Newz Junky and one of the top leaders of the QDMA is all over standing behind this bill saying......Pass It!  Hunters are passing young bucks but not enough of them!!!!!!!!!  Make It Law!

[Culvercreek hunt club]

54 minutes ago, Four Season Whitetails said:

And i just read a nice write up about it on Newz Junky and one of the top leaders of the QDMA is all over standing behind this bill saying......Pass It!  Hunters are passing young bucks but not enough of them!!!!!!!!!  Make It Law!

'top leaders"? who is that if you had a link I would love to see it. 

 

Is it the one with the quote form  John Rybinski ?

Edited March 16, 2017 by Culvercreek hunt club

[Four Season Whitetail's]

1 hour ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

'top leaders"? who is that if you had a link I would love to see it. 

 

Is it the one with the quote form  John Rybinski ?

Yes just went back and reread it. It was that guy. It's on a post on Syracuse.com. Says he supports it like most hunters do?

[G-Man]

On 3/14/2017 at 0:31 PM, Lawdwaz said:

I'd like a brief breakdown on the goings-on here.  

100 words or less.....

Here are the questions that are not addressed.. 

Will passing yearling based on points make us shoot bigger bucks because there Will be more of them or will we still lack success as they are older but more experienced and will avoid us same as older deer do now?

Yes individual experiences will vary across the state but an individual filling all the buck tags for everyone in the party will not and isn't that a bigger problem? 

Does anyone think perhaps just using continuing education is better than exceptions based on age? Do you get a break if you start hunting at 30? And if so for how many years..how do you enforce it?

 

Asking hunters if they want to shoot bigger bucks is about the same as asking if they want to win the lottery.. Everyone does but most don't purchase the lottery ticket every day..

Realistically. They are not needed and do not serve a need in reproduction.. They are simply there as an attempt at hunter satisfaction.. 

[Rebel Darling]

Another FYI...

O'Mara amended the bill, and Assemblywoman Woerner introduced the Same As in the Assembly this afternoon.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/s4739/amendment/a

Amended WMU's in the A version.

Someone's having an effect, and/or listening...

ALSO - On the Senate side, Senators Amedore, Funke, and Larkin added their names to the bill as Co-sponsors.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Rebel Darling
Additional Info

[growalot]

Well they added camp to the 4 pt rule...I see 8 H 8M and a few others are still out. When they started this whole thing wasn't it 3 pts in the original areas?

This is one sly way of getting land back into the housing market or the huge lease guys that have been circling these areas for at least the last 10 years,because in places like 8X where taxes are stupid high...deer are hard to get any ways 3-4 thou. a year with low doe tags given in hard to hunt land..camps will go on the market..watch the big hunting leases swoop in....

Edited March 18, 2017 by growalot

[gjs4]

No need for it - education is clearly working. Look at the harvest trends for the past 10 years.

Please tell me this is sarcasm.....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gjs4]

Regardless of the state the vast majority base their seasons on culture and dollars. Dogs in SC, baiting in The south, snow tracking in the NE...... Thanksgiving slaughter here. None of those are needed per sound biology. New weapons here.... needed for numbers? Nope. Perhaps revenue stream or to perpetuate the decline portion of the aging cranky hunter bell curve. These threads are always a riot ... everyone believe the states estimated numbers, doesn't question how they could even attain them, and then proceeds complaining about how their personal interests should be made law for everyone to follow.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gjs4]

Wondering how many of you understand the phrase of "only a dumb bird craps in its nest"...... now back to your propaganda more stocked weapons being needed and how if you pass a half racked 3pt will lead to bountiful Booners


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[phade]

17 hours ago, Rebel Darling said:

Another FYI...

O'Mara amended the bill, and Assemblywoman Woerner introduced the Same As in the Assembly this afternoon.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/s4739/amendment/a

Amended WMU's in the A version.

Someone's having an effect, and/or listening...

ALSO - On the Senate side, Senators Amedore, Funke, and Larkin added their names to the bill as Co-sponsors.

I'm sure dbhunter will now come back and still say the original proposal wasn't some poorly crafted piece of crap. This amendment is just proof that an idiot wrote it or that the authors half-assed it from the get-go.

[phade]

11 minutes ago, gjs4 said:

Wondering how many of you understand the phrase of "only a dumb bird craps in its nest"...... now back to your propaganda more stocked weapons being needed and how if you pass a half racked 3pt will lead to bountiful Booners


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

In some areas - that half-racked 3 pt would be still legal. LOL.

[G-Man]

I still would like to see the science that says this needs to be done?.... 

We have more deer and issue doe tags 3x what is needed because the take doesn't meet what is required to keep population in check in many areas.. Of you don't live in and are with high numbers an hour drive will get you to one.. 

This is simply a hunter satisfaction legislation. 

[growalot]

It's the loudest chick that gets the worm...period...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYq2X2zmcgs&feature=youtu.be

Quote

New York State Whitetail Management Coalition

Working to improve deer management and buck hunting in NY

notice it doesn't say "and deer hunting" it specifies BUCK hunting

Edited March 18, 2017 by growalot