SB 4739 - Establishes the yearling buck protection program

[tuckersdaddy]

How many times do we hear the real facts that AR has nothing to do with herd management and is more about hunters wanting 10 point studs walking everywhere.  This has already proven ineffective.  
Do they mention in any of these surveys about how this has been done in western states and found to be ineffective?
Do they mention how many young deer are shot and left in the woods?  Due to AR?
Do they mention how many 2.5 year old deer are killed with AR?  Usually the same as spike bucks where before AR.  Mission failed!
To me I do not see a major problem with NY deer.  We have some over population issue and low numbers in some areas but overall the herd is strong!  Many clubs and hunters have restrictions they put on themselves for what ever reason that exceed AR and more are doing it every year.  Many parts of the state produce huge bucks thanks to these hunters passing them.
Yea someone 16 and under can shoot any deer great, what about the hunter 7 years in who has never shot any deer?  I would never want to take that away from another hunter, that experience and thrill is what keeps that person in the game!  Restrictions for many with less experience and time will mean defeat.
 
If you asked me 10 years ago about AR I would have jumped on board!  (I was young and needed the money!) Wait that was the pictures!  (I was just young and dumb not as knowledgeable as I am now.)  Learning from my fellow hunters on this forum has changed my view for the better! 
LET US HUNT!!!  Keep your regulations to yourself and your hunting spot, I do but want my brothers and sisters to pick and choose what they want.
My buddy missed a spike in one of my big buck spots, his first shot at a deer ever, I would hate to take away his second shot because of selfish hunters wanting bigger bucks to hunt. 

You may have also missed one point.. What will the long term effects on hunting in NY be? AR with the good genetics in much of NY would increase the amount of horn in NY. As the horn increases the increase in out of state hunters increase (theres that revenue thing again), The tv hunters start showing up and NY becomes the next hot spot. With much of the stateland already crowded at times the bucks become overhunted (happening in many midwest states now). So what does this mean? More people after the same deer, many locals getting push out of areas they have hunted thier whole life, and just a less desirable experiance. We are already seeing some of it as less land in Masachusets and New Jersey beccomes huntable. the influx of out of state hunters is rising. So to add fuel to the fire just isnt appealing to me.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[tuckersdaddy]

What is deer management? Quality Deer Management (QDM) is a management philosophy/practice that unites landowners, hunters, and managers in a common goal of producing biologically and socially balanced deer herds within existing environmental, social, and legal constraints.   Anybody following the actual bill??  Same conversation going on there in the discussion section and it is just about as productive as this onehttps://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/s4739/amendment/a

QDMA is a 504c...... and with most most nonprofits nonprofits...its about the money.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Steve D]

16 minutes ago, tuckersdaddy said:

QDMA is a 504c...... and with most most nonprofits nonprofits...its about the money.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

The post was for the DEFINITION of quality deer management not the organization.

[gjs4]

QDMA as an entity is very much not vested in this antler restriction legislation and lobbying, despite some volunteers who wear that hat are. The article isn't BS.
From a very simple perspective if we all stopped shooting deer and let nature solely do the management then would there be an age structure, young to mature? The answer is yes, so why is it so hard to believe it's something that's good for deer and not just a people driven idea?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

My thoughts is they're eating out of the hand of Lord Jeremy



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

I just got the email on Vermont's harvest data, I know NY has a lot more hunters but it would be nice to have that kind of data for an educated decision on this and other topics!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Larry]

This is not about whether not you are for or ageist antler restrictions. It’s about whether or not you want an individual or a group  to go to a state senator and say the DEC does not manage wildlife the way we want them to. (In this case deer) So here’s our plan and we want you guys to get it passed into law for us. So we can circumvent the DEC because we know what’s best for all hunters.

This is The New York Whitetail Management Coalitions plan. If you think these senators could come up with this legislation on their own then I have a plan for a fast ferry for you to buy into. This origination after the DEC. came up with promoting  voluntary  letting small bucks walk, they sent 6000 form letters not to the DEC but to the governor. Asking him to force the DEC into state wide antler restriction. This origination at best has 6000 members that’s about 1% of the hunters in the state. So do you really want  wildlife management though legislation? If you do then we should get rid of the DEC transfer enforcement to the state police and let the legislature do the management. Think of the money the state could save by getting rid of the professionals and having legislature do the management. All you have do every time you don’t like something or we need a change. We go to the same people that brought us the safe act and the highest taxes in the US that’s who I would like doing my wildlife management for me. How about you?

[Buckmaster7600]

This is not about whether not you are for or ageist antler restrictions. It’s about whether or not you want an individual or a group  to go to a state senator and say the DEC does not manage wildlife the way we want them to. (In this case deer) So here’s our plan and we want you guys to get it passed into law for us. So we can circumvent the DEC because we know what’s best for all hunters.

This is The New York Whitetail Management Coalitions plan. If you think these senators could come up with this legislation on their own then I have a plan for a fast ferry for you to buy into. This origination after the DEC. came up with promoting  voluntary  letting small bucks walk, they sent 6000 form letters not to the DEC but to the governor. Asking him to force the DEC into state wide antler restriction. This origination at best has 6000 members that’s about 1% of the hunters in the state. So do you really want  wildlife management though legislation? If you do then we should get rid of the DEC transfer enforcement to the state police and let the legislature do the management. Think of the money the state could save by getting rid of the professionals and having legislature do the management. All you have do every time you don’t like something or we need a change. We go to the same people that brought us the safe act and the highest taxes in the US that’s who I would like doing my wildlife management for me. How about you?

The problem is, I think the DEC sucks! Do I agree with how the bill has gotten where it is absolutely not but I don't know if I agree with what's on the bill or not because NY sucks at harvest data.

Hell I don't like how trump got to be president but I'm sure as hell not bitching about it because the other option was even worse!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

1 hour ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

I just got the email on Vermont's harvest data, I know NY has a lot more hunters but it would be nice to have that kind of data for an educated decision on this and other topics!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Have an educated discussion on this topic?  Seriously?  There are 20 pages here that should clearly tell you that an informed or “educated” conversation is not possible on this topic.  Any scientific evidence breaks down purely along the sole opinion of whether someone might infringe on the right of someone to shoot what they want to.

Science doesn’t matter.  Other states efforts to maintain a healthier herd doesn’t matter.  All that matters is the fact that some want to shoot whatever they want to regardless of what effect it has on the herd.  Provide whatever science you want.  Many don’t care.  They will refute, without proof, twist it for their stance, it doesn’t matter.  They simply don’t want to hear anything that might warrant a change to their right to shoot what they want.  All they will do with any “science” or biology you provide is tell you that it can’t be true because it is being used only to support ARs.

Why discuss this further.  You can’t use reason.  It doesn’t matter.  Its just about the right to shoot what they want VS someone telling them that they can’t.  That is it.  The rest is useless.

I really can’t tell you if the legislative action that is being proposed has the slightest bit of good intent as a reason for its implementation, or if those behind it only want BIG BUCKS.  I can tell you it would have positive effects on the herd if implemented - but I can’t tell you if that is any driving force behind the proposal.  To some, like me, its not the best alternative but it is a step in the right direction because its better than what we have going on right now.  But if you think we can put logic to this topic for a discussion as a group, forget it.  I see that now. 

You will never get past the fact that it is not about the deer, and what would be best for our deer herd.  Its all about pulling the trigger.  Likewise, you will never convince those on the opposite sidte that it is anything less than a means to have larger antlered deer for trophy hunters.  An educated discussion plays no part here.  If you don’t believe me, read the past 20 pages, it is all the proof you need.

[Larry]

You can’t prove their data is wrong and if it is then whose fault is if we don’t report are harvest. It won’t matter if the legislature dose the management what the numbers are it can be whatever you want the numbers to be.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Some dont have the time to put in...Some dont have the skill to put in...Some dont have the want or see the need for change...Some will leave the sport...Many will find better hunting!  Cant keep everybody happy!

[Buckmaster7600]

 

Have an educated discussion on this topic?  Seriously?  There are 20 pages here that should clearly tell you that an informed or “educated” conversation is not possible on this topic.  Any scientific evidence breaks down purely along the sole opinion of whether someone might infringe on the right of someone to shoot what they want to.

Science doesn’t matter.  Other states efforts to maintain a healthier herd doesn’t matter.  All that matters is the fact that some want to shoot whatever they want to regardless of what effect it has on the herd.  Provide whatever science you want.  Many don’t care.  They will refute, without proof, twist it for their stance, it doesn’t matter.  They simply don’t want to hear anything that might warrant a change to their right to shoot what they want.  All they will do with any “science” or biology you provide is tell you that it can’t be true because it is being used only to support ARs.

Why discuss this further.  You can’t use reason.  It doesn’t matter.  Its just about the right to shoot what they want VS someone telling them that they can’t.  That is it.  The rest is useless.

I really can’t tell you if the legislative action that is being proposed has the slightest bit of good intent as a reason for its implementation, or if those behind it only want BIG BUCKS.  I can tell you it would have positive effects on the herd if implemented - but I can’t tell you if that is any driving force behind the proposal.  To some, like me, its not the best alternative but it is a step in the right direction because its better than what we have going on right now.  But if you think we can put logic to this topic for a discussion as a group, forget it.  I see that now. 

You will never get past the fact that it is not about the deer, and what would be best for our deer herd.  Its all about pulling the trigger.  Likewise, you will never convince those on the opposite sidte that it is anything less than a means to have larger antlered deer for trophy hunters.  An educated discussion plays no part here.  If you don’t believe me, read the past 20 pages, it is all the proof you need.

So you're against AR's too?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WNYBuckHunter]

12 hours ago, tuckersdaddy said:

You may have also missed one point.. What will the long term effects on hunting in NY be? AR with the good genetics in much of NY would increase the amount of horn in NY. As the horn increases the increase in out of state hunters increase (theres that revenue thing again), The tv hunters start showing up and NY becomes the next hot spot. With much of the stateland already crowded at times the bucks become overhunted (happening in many midwest states now). So what does this mean? More people after the same deer, many locals getting push out of areas they have hunted thier whole life, and just a less desirable experiance. We are already seeing some of it as less land in Masachusets and New Jersey beccomes huntable. the influx of out of state hunters is rising. So to add fuel to the fire just isnt appealing to me.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

NY will never be the type of "hot spot" you are insinuating here. The land is broken up into too many small parcels, the hunter density is too high, and there are quite a few chunks of the state that dont have the soil conditions that are conducive to consistently growing numbers of large racked bucks. Many of the WMUs mentioned in this bill are in areas of the state that do just fine in numbers of larger racked, more mature bucks already. They dont need ARs, and a 4 point restriction would make it so that quite a few big, mature 6 points would have to be left to walk, and many 1 1/2 year old 8 points are still open to being taken. It makes no sense if the goal is yearling buck protection in WNY. You would have to go with a spread restriction, or just let it keep going the way it has been, and educate people on aging deer on the hoof/benefits of taking mature bucks vs yearlings.

 

You are also wrong about your notion of the QDMA having a vested interest in ARs, or pushing AR legislation. A simple google search to find their stance on the subject is all it takes to figure that out.

[WNYBuckHunter]

13 hours ago, G-Man said:

So here is the question .. How do you come up with age of bucks taken in NY? 

They do not mandatory check deer. They have no question asking you to age the buck. Its a call in number of points a side.. But they can state 60% year-long buck on a mandatory tag report that only has less than 60% reporting... So now we will base a new hunting law on those guesses.. This from people that complain that the Dec can't regulate for tags and there are no deer( but we will use same numbers to push an adjenda for older bucks) waste of time and not needed.

Im pretty sure they base it on a guess they take when you report how many points the deer had. I know of exactly one person that took their buck to a processor this past season, so that one had a chance at being looked at by DEC. Thats one in about 35 bucks that I personally know of that were taken. Most of the bucks Im talking about were mature. The DEC has no legitimate idea of how many mature vs yearling bucks are taken.

[Death From Above]

49 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

 

So you're against AR's too?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Nope, I am completely for them.  After living in a state for 15 years or so that put them in place during the time I resided there I am convinced they would have a positive outcome.  That said…I cannot say it is the best resolution to some of the problems we have with our deer herd, but I feel that is a different topic than this one. 

All I am saying Buckmaster, is that you cannot have a rational debate with several people on this thread.  There are a few who have said that while they see the merit in either the research or implementation, they do not support AR simply because it limits their ability to decide what they want to shoot.  I understand and commend the honesty, and respect their right to voice it.  While I may not agree with placing personal desire over what might be better in many ways for the whitetail deer, they prefer to keep a choice that has long been theirs, and want that choice to continue for others as well. 

However, reading some of these posts its quick to see how many others will completely refute things that are simple to understand.  They have no idea what they are talking about, they just won’t accept anything that might provide rationale for AR or other changes.   Even the DEC admits that there is completely good reasoning behind protecting the younger bucks in our herd, they just don’t have the balls to act on it and fear the kickback that would come from some hunters. 

 

[grampy]

10 hours ago, Death From Above said:

 

Have an educated discussion on this topic?  Seriously?  There are 20 pages here that should clearly tell you that an informed or “educated” conversation is not possible on this topic.  Any scientific evidence breaks down purely along the sole opinion of whether someone might infringe on the right of someone to shoot what they want to.

Science doesn’t matter.  Other states efforts to maintain a healthier herd doesn’t matter.  All that matters is the fact that some want to shoot whatever they want to regardless of what effect it has on the herd.  Provide whatever science you want.  Many don’t care.  They will refute, without proof, twist it for their stance, it doesn’t matter.  They simply don’t want to hear anything that might warrant a change to their right to shoot what they want.  All they will do with any “science” or biology you provide is tell you that it can’t be true because it is being used only to support ARs.

Why discuss this further.  You can’t use reason.  It doesn’t matter.  Its just about the right to shoot what they want VS someone telling them that they can’t.  That is it.  The rest is useless.

I really can’t tell you if the legislative action that is being proposed has the slightest bit of good intent as a reason for its implementation, or if those behind it only want BIG BUCKS.  I can tell you it would have positive effects on the herd if implemented - but I can’t tell you if that is any driving force behind the proposal.  To some, like me, its not the best alternative but it is a step in the right direction because its better than what we have going on right now.  But if you think we can put logic to this topic for a discussion as a group, forget it.  I see that now. 

You will never get past the fact that it is not about the deer, and what would be best for our deer herd.  Its all about pulling the trigger.  Likewise, you will never convince those on the opposite sidte that it is anything less than a means to have larger antlered deer for trophy hunters.  An educated discussion plays no part here.  If you don’t believe me, read the past 20 pages, it is all the proof you need.

I do respect your opinion, and have listened to your side of the debate. But let me ask this. Is there any possible way, that either one of us, could scientifically give an accurate assessment on the quality of the deer herd, in the others hunting area?  Of course not. But of course, we could look up harvest numbers for that WMU, county or town. But will that still be an accurate, scientific assessment of the quality of the deer herd on our respective properties? I don't think it is. No one knows it better than the ones who put their boots on the ground there. I primarily hunt two properties. One, about 500 acres, the other about 100 acres. They are about seven miles apart. After many years I can say that the deer activity and sightings are never the same on both properties. So I'd really like to know how someone sitting behind a desk, in Albany, or anywhere, can know what's best, scientifically, for the deer, here, or anywhere! We have educated ourselves, to do what we think is best for the deer in our properties. Although admittedly we are not scientists. And reassess every year. Between older and younger hunters, and guests hunting the properties, there is a balance of young and older bucks taken. With some doe.  Seems the deer herd here is doing ok. Even on the heavily hunted state land that borders the larger property. There is a good mix of young and more mature deer. As hunters, are being educated, and "choose" to not shoot every small buck. So my opinion is to to continue to educate, not to legislate. 

[Buckmaster7600]

Im pretty sure they base it on a guess they take when you report how many points the deer had. I know of exactly one person that took their buck to a processor this past season, so that one had a chance at being looked at by DEC. Thats one in about 35 bucks that I personally know of that were taken. Most of the bucks Im talking about were mature. The DEC has no legitimate idea of how many mature vs yearling bucks are taken.

And this is exactly my point! I refuse to support something that uses made up numbers to back it up! I will not support change until I know what we have is broken. Especially when the state has absolutely no clue of the age of harvested bucks.

This is and will be my stance and I'm sure an AR would benefit me personally as I have only shot mature bucks for most of my hunting career.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

45 minutes ago, grampy said:

I do respect your opinion, and have listened to your side of the debate. But let me ask this. Is there any possible way, that either one of us, could scientifically give an accurate assessment on the quality of the deer herd, in the others hunting area?  Of course not. But of course, we could look up harvest numbers for that WMU, county or town. But will that still be an accurate, scientific assessment of the quality of the deer herd on our respective properties? I don't think it is. No one knows it better than the ones who put their boots on the ground there. I primarily hunt two properties. One, about 500 acres, the other about 100 acres. They are about seven miles apart. After many years I can say that the deer activity and sightings are never the same on both properties. So I'd really like to know how someone sitting behind a desk, in Albany, or anywhere, can know what's best, scientifically, for the deer, here, or anywhere! We have educated ourselves, to do what we think is best for the deer in our properties. Although admittedly we are not scientists. And reassess every year. Between older and younger hunters, and guests hunting the properties, there is a balance of young and older bucks taken. With some doe.  Seems the deer herd here is doing ok. Even on the heavily hunted state land that borders the larger property. There is a good mix of young and more mature deer. As hunters, are being educated, and "choose" to not shoot every small buck. So my opinion is to to continue to educate, not to legislate. 

 

Understood, and I think you present good thoughts throughout.  I don’t see any way to be sure of what the deer herd looks like throughout the state an any given time, but at some point we need to generalize this and make decisions that might not be absolutely vital – as deer will likely not be eradicated or become an endangered species – but if we can improve and enhance the herd throughout the majority of NY that is also something to be considered.  If you can advocate “education” as a benefit, then I would think you can see some benefits already to what AR might produce – even though I understand you don’t want it legislated upon you.  I really hope you are correct that this “educating” will be effective, but it hasn’t in my area.  That goes back to my observation vs. the rest of the state, and if it is different elsewhere then I say great.  I hope it works!

We talk to all of our neighbors about the idea of letting bucks go.  On all four sides of our 300 acres each of them says they are excited about it and agree.  Yet each year they all harvest young bucks, to a hunter we think.  We hear it every year…”we shot this little one cause it had a growth on it and was going to die”, “ we killed this one cause he had a weird rack and his genetics were bad”, “we killed this one cause it is late in the season season and didn’t want to waste a tag”.  Add the fact that one side fills tags for all their friends and relatives, and another sees his property is a place to bring a lot of people for easy rifle hunts, then it seems to us that education on the issue has little to no effect.  Each sees a reason to make exceptions to the idea, and each year they all accomplish the act of killing a good majority of our antlered deer, and each year we start off just like the year before.  We no longer talk with them about it because what they say and what they do are completely different.  You are correct though, it could be different near you.

I advocate AR because like the “education” idea there is great merit behind it.  AR just makes the benefits more realistic, while education seems to me to be unrealistic in ma neck of the woods – IF – there is truly a goal of changing our buck to do ratio.

[grampy]

47 minutes ago, Death From Above said:

 

Understood, and I think you present good thoughts throughout.  I don’t see any way to be sure of what the deer herd looks like throughout the state an any given time, but at some point we need to generalize this and make decisions that might not be absolutely vital – as deer will likely not be eradicated or become an endangered species – but if we can improve and enhance the herd throughout the majority of NY that is also something to be considered.  If you can advocate “education” as a benefit, then I would think you can see some benefits already to what AR might produce – even though I understand you don’t want it legislated upon you.  I really hope you are correct that this “educating” will be effective, but it hasn’t in my area.  That goes back to my observation vs. the rest of the state, and if it is different elsewhere then I say great.  I hope it works!

We talk to all of our neighbors about the idea of letting bucks go.  On all four sides of our 300 acres each of them says they are excited about it and agree.  Yet each year they all harvest young bucks, to a hunter we think.  We hear it every year…”we shot this little one cause it had a growth on it and was going to die”, “ we killed this one cause he had a weird rack and his genetics were bad”, “we killed this one cause it is late in the season season and didn’t want to waste a tag”.  Add the fact that one side fills tags for all their friends and relatives, and another sees his property is a place to bring a lot of people for easy rifle hunts, then it seems to us that education on the issue has little to no effect.  Each sees a reason to make exceptions to the idea, and each year they all accomplish the act of killing a good majority of our antlered deer, and each year we start off just like the year before.  We no longer talk with them about it because what they say and what they do are completely different.  You are correct though, it could be different near you.

I advocate AR because like the “education” idea there is great merit behind it.  AR just makes the benefits more realistic, while education seems to me to be unrealistic in ma neck of the woods – IF – there is truly a goal of changing our buck to do ratio.

So, I will respectfully ask. Are you advocating a forced change, through legislation, that will force your neighbors to conform to "your" way of managing the deer herd, on their property? And as previously confirmed, our properties are different. So will I be forced through legislation, to change what may be working for me? So that you can have better bucks on your property? Is either one of our properties more worthy, as to have someone else force their idea, of what constitutes, a quality hunting experience, on the other?

[tuckersdaddy]

NY will never be the type of "hot spot" you are insinuating here. The land is broken up into too many small parcels, the hunter density is too high, and there are quite a few chunks of the state that dont have the soil conditions that are conducive to consistently growing numbers of large racked bucks. Many of the WMUs mentioned in this bill are in areas of the state that do just fine in numbers of larger racked, more mature bucks already. They dont need ARs, and a 4 point restriction would make it so that quite a few big, mature 6 points would have to be left to walk, and many 1 1/2 year old 8 points are still open to being taken. It makes no sense if the goal is yearling buck protection in WNY. You would have to go with a spread restriction, or just let it keep going the way it has been, and educate people on aging deer on the hoof/benefits of taking mature bucks vs yearlings.
 
You are also wrong about your notion of the QDMA having a vested interest in ARs, or pushing AR legislation. A simple google search to find their stance on the subject is all it takes to figure that out.

If you dont believe hunters dont chase rumors, hot tips, or any other lead that comes along you hunting land is privite and sucluded. Want to have some fun? post some pics of solid 8 or 10pt and slowly let it slide where thus big deer is 'at'. Just pick any cross roads on stateland. Put a trail cam up and watch the amount of traffic you get opening week. So as this new AR proposal goes into effect, It will get all sorts of praise.. Look at all these 8pt plus racks out program grows, check out these bucks from Madison county..... Next year there will be no stateland you will be able to comfortably hunt in Madison county, as the chasers flock.

Now for the QDMA... There website is where I verified them being a 504c. Which ever way this prop falls will effect the popularity of the organisation here in NY... giving them a vested intrest... less people less money.. that simple. Im not downing thier processes on growing deer, just the money push behind it. WNY ill buy you a beer sometime and explain the whole deal... but whats on the surface is a sales pitch.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

20 hours ago, dbHunterNY said:

  i can't truely answer that aside from my hunting experience there, which is isolated and therefore hard to ignorantly assume the whole WMU's to be the same.  in those cases it'd fall under don't apply restrictions if you don't need to.  some of the comments on here that say to have the "restrictions" only during this or that portion of the season or for this or that implement don't understand how it'd effect results and basically just be stirring the pot.

We are back to the "need" portion of this. Let's say these hunters in these areas that were skipped were more likely to let the yearlings walk. That probably shouldn't have any bearing if we are being honest. If they are letting "enough" yearlings walk now wouldn't it be "better" to even let more walk?

The areas you are referring to about effect on antlerless harvest can't compared to areas like 8H where there are permits available the last day of the season. There aren't any or very few co-op's. It is a lot of broken tracts of habitat with access issues. I know hunters that say they only need a deer or two and they are done hunting. if that small 6 comes through at 7 am they are taking it. Remove that option and they will take the does to meet that one to two deer goal. I can see how having limited permits may yield other results. 

Again. If it is good for these other areas why not just have at it and get it over with. The some in and some out and others with 3 and some with 4 is BULL$HIT and typical NY. 

Why not just bite the bullet. Let's put ALL antleress into a lottery regardless of the seaon or weapon used. put the entire state at a 4 point minimum and close ALL buck hunting for 2 years. 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

16 hours ago, tuckersdaddy said:

qdma with no vested intrest??? Thier sole exsistance is the buzz around shooting large antler. Take an average hunter with a bit of property tell them they can nurture healthy deer, you have thier attention for mabey 15 seconds until mention the work involved. Mention you can lead them down a path to 175 antler score they dont hear about the work... they just write the check for membership, magazines, hats and anything else. Its a sales pitch. No revenue no qdma. If ARs are passed the same person will have no choice but to turn to qdma to grow big bucks just to shoot a deer on his own property. No vested intrest? yea right.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

Weird. I have been involved for 5 years now and that isn't the approach I have seen. And actually National isn't currently supporting this legislation. Some branches are choosing to. 

Where are you located Tuc?

[stubborn1VT]

48 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

We are back to the "need" portion of this. Let's say these hunters in these areas that were skipped were more likely to let the yearlings walk. That probably shouldn't have any bearing if we are being honest. If they are letting "enough" yearlings walk now wouldn't it be "better" to even let more walk?

The areas you are referring to about effect on antlerless harvest can't compared to areas like 8H where there are permits available the last day of the season. There aren't any or very few co-op's. It is a lot of broken tracts of habitat with access issues. I know hunters that say they only need a deer or two and they are done hunting. if that small 6 comes through at 7 am they are taking it. Remove that option and they will take the does to meet that one to two deer goal. I can see how having limited permits may yield other results. 

Again. If it is good for these other areas why not just have at it and get it over with. The some in and some out and others with 3 and some with 4 is BULL$HIT and typical NY. 

Why not just bite the bullet. Let's put ALL antleress into a lottery regardless of the seaon or weapon used. put the entire state at a 4 point minimum and close ALL buck hunting for 2 years. 

I'd like to think the last sentence? of this post is a joke.  Statements like this show the elitist side of this debate.  It makes me think that you have more in common with anti-hunters than people who choose to shoot "that small 6."  I'm not totally against antler restrictions, but I'm 100% against the attitude that "big buck hunters" get to tell everyone else how to hunt.  I would never tell you what to shoot.  Do you value your big bucks or your supposed balanced herd so much that you want to regulate others right out of hunting?

 It seems to me that whitetail numbers need to be controlled so deer density isn't dangerously or detrimentally high, or precariously low.  Other than that, it's just personal preference.  Buy your license, choose your weapon, and shoot what you legally can.  Blanket regs from the Long Island to the Canadian border don't make a bit of sense either.  Between anti hunters, loss of access to hunting land, more gun regulation and fewer young hunters, we have enough problems.  I'd like to think that I didn't have to add misguided QDMA/ antler restrictions to the threats faced by an average hunter.  

Maybe I'm way off base, but I really doubt that the majority want 3 or 4 on a side.  In my experience, more regulation isn't the answer.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

21 minutes ago, stubborn1VT said:

I'd like to think the last sentence? of this post is a joke.  Statements like this show the elitist side of this debate.  It makes me think that you have more in common with anti-hunters than people who choose to shoot "that small 6."  I'm not totally against antler restrictions, but I'm 100% against the attitude that "big buck hunters" get to tell everyone else how to hunt.  I would never tell you what to shoot.  Do you value your big bucks or your supposed balanced herd so much that you want to regulate others right out of hunting?

 It seems to me that whitetail numbers need to be controlled so deer density isn't dangerously or detrimentally high, or precariously low.  Other than that, it's just personal preference.  Buy your license, choose your weapon, and shoot what you legally can.  Blanket regs from the Long Island to the Canadian border don't make a bit of sense either.  Between anti hunters, loss of access to hunting land, more gun regulation and fewer young hunters, we have enough problems.  I'd like to think that I didn't have to add misguided QDMA/ antler restrictions to the threats faced by an average hunter.  

Maybe I'm way off base, but I really doubt that the majority want 3 or 4 on a side.  In my experience, more regulation isn't the answer.

You haven't seen many of my posts on here or you would now that portion was tongue in cheek.  The part about all Antlerless management being by the lottery system and no more antlerless or either sex in special seasons was serious though. 

[stubborn1VT]

Oh.  Cool.  

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, tuckersdaddy said:

Now for the QDMA... There website is where I verified them being a 504c. 
 

where on the site?