SB 4739 - Establishes the yearling buck protection program

[Death From Above]

9 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

That was made in reference to managing the GENETICS of a wild deer population and if you think that is possible you are misinformed. 

Nope, I stated above that I do NOT feel AR has a strong effect on GENETICS whatsoever.  There are arguments that it does, but I can't say I agree with much of them.

If I somehow missed you referring to genetics instead of the general herd characteristics, I apologize.  I thought it was dismissing a more general effect on the population.

[growalot]

Quote

 

Q: Some states, like Minnesota, time their deer seasons to coincide with the rut, and other states, like Wisconsin, avoid it. What’s the thinking?

A: All of the states do something different. Our season was specifically designed to be held when bucks are most vulnerable. The idea was to put a lot of pressure on males and little on females, which would increase the success rate and not impact the population. That was done in the 1970s when we had 300,000 deer hunters. Now we have a half-million hunters. When you put that many hunters on the landscape for two days, the timing of the season really doesn’t matter. Even if our season was held a week earlier or a week later, it wouldn’t really change the outcome.

 

Q: So one buck will breed more than one doe?

A: Yes, he’ll breed as many as he can. But not every single deer gets bred. Those females that aren’t bred will come back into estrus in December, and males will go through a smaller, almost imperceptible, rut.

 

Q: Is there an effect, genetically, on the herd by focusing on bucks?

A: No. Genetics is largely a black hole. It’s not something we really can measure or influence in a natural system. Deer, in general, are pretty diverse individually. Killing one buck might impact one genetic line, but it won’t have a population-level impact.

 

Q: Are bucks territorial?

A: No. They don’t stake out territory. They do leave scrapes, where they leave scent, and they check those mainly at night. They’re marking where they’ve been. Females will also check scrapes, mostly at night.

Q: Bucks often fight each other during the rut. What’s going on?

A: They’re fighting to assert their dominance, perhaps thinking there’s a chance to do a majority of the breeding, even though they don’t really get to do that. If a spike buck happens on the trail of a receptive doe, he will breed it. It’s who gets there first.

 

Q: Does all of the chasing, fighting and breeding take a toll on bucks, leaving them weakened?

A: Absolutely. They are not eating for 30 days, and they have depleted their fat reserves, big time. The first thing you lose in a significant winter are fawns and older males. You look at a buck harvested the first week of the season, and it looks nothing like one harvested at the end of the muzzleloader season [in December].

 

 

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, Death From Above said:

Nope, I stated above that I do NOT feel AR has a strong effect on GENETICS whatsoever.  There are arguments that it does, but I can't say I agree with much of them.

If I somehow missed you referring to genetics instead of the general herd characteristics, I apologize.  I thought it was dismissing a more general effect on the population.

On 3/9/2017 at 9:02 AM, chas0218 said:

 

I couldn't agree more. It isn't about killing "trophies" it's about better genetics and healthier deer. AR's is one of a few ways of protecting the younger generation of deer and ensuring they will be there for years to come.

 

AR's do nothing for genetics and trying to in a wild herd is a pipe dream. 

Above is my comment. Well you commented directly to it so I would believe you actually read before posting. For someone that keeps claiming over and over and over how much you respect other peoples opinions it sure doesn't come across like that in this thread. But hey, just how I am reading it I guess. 

[Death From Above]

36 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

AR's do nothing for genetics and trying to in a wild herd is a pipe dream. 

Above is my comment. Well you commented directly to it so I would believe you actually read before posting. For someone that keeps claiming over and over and over how much you respect other peoples opinions it sure doesn't come across like that in this thread. But hey, just how I am reading it I guess. 

 

I assumed this forum provided us the ability to debate our thoughts on ideas such as this.  I can respect your right to have an opinion, but disagree on what you base it on, can’t I?  If you don’t believe that I can possess a different opinion but yet understand yours and respect your right to promote it, then so be it. 

I already had agreed with your conclusion earlier that genetics is not part of this discussion.  I referenced the “pipe dream” comment because it was tied into general herd management later by someone else.  Thought I had made that clear on both accounts.

I don’t think that there is any way that NY will put AR in place, and I can accept that our deer management and hunting will continue on the way it is.  It is what it is.  I do worry that fear of regulating what one can shoot or not will trump some other positive aspects that AR can provide and be overlooked.  I understand that will be the likely key to all of this.  But I don’t have to be an “elitist hunter” to wish that AR would be put in place here in NY as it has been suggested in this thread.

My intent from the beginning of jumping in here was only to suggest that:

A.  There are reasons some might support AR other than the big buck trophy hunter.

B.  Show that from what I have seen in PA that if AR was to be implemented in NY all is not lost for those who are concerned about choice, hunter decline, or mistake kills lying everywhere.

Apparently in the process I may have accomplished:

C.  Show disrespect in some way to other's opinions. 

That was not my intent, but again, if you read it that way, so be it I guess.

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, Death From Above said:

 

 

I already had agreed with your conclusion earlier that genetics is not part of this discussion.  I referenced the “pipe dream” comment because it was tied into general herd management later by someone else.  Thought I had made that clear on both accounts.

I don’t think that there is any way that NY will put AR in place, and I can accept that our deer management and hunting will continue on the way it is.  It is what it is.  I do worry that fear of regulating what one can shoot or not will trump some other positive aspects that AR can provide and be overlooked.  I understand that will be the likely key to all of this.  But I don’t have to be an “elitist hunter” to wish that AR would be put in place here in NY as it has been suggested in this thread.

My intent from the beginning of jumping in here was only to suggest that:

A.  There are reasons some might support AR other than the big buck trophy hunter.

B.  Show that from what I have seen in PA that if AR was to be implemented in NY all is not lost for those who are concerned about choice, hunter decline, or mistake kills lying everywhere.

Apparently in the process I may have accomplished:

C.  Show disrespect in some way to other's opinions. 

That was not my intent, but again, if you read it that way, so be it I guess.

 

"I’m not trying to offend the original poster who said it, or the person who applauded the statement after, but to say that “managing a wild deer herd is a pipedream” is simply stupid"

Well you quoted my pipe dream comment and didn't get it right. It specifically stated " AR's do nothing for genetics and trying to in a wild herd is a pipe dream."    

The debate and exchange of ideas kind of breaks down when you back into a corner and counter that an opposing opinion is "simply stupid" 

None of what they are proposing would impact a single day that I hunt. My standards are way  above what they have on paper for this. I just don't agree with the mandate. I prefer the education approach to show what the benefits and results can be. Personally i don't think we could be doing that bad of a job since our yearling harvest rate is consistently heading down in a very consistent trend. I have to go back and look at the numbers but I believe we are about even with  PA that you keep quoting and they are fully mandated. I don't get the rush. If it is trending down and continues that way, why the big need to have a statewide now? If it isn't for an instantaneous increase  in available trophies  then why? The herd health isn't in a desperate situation other than those areas that need severe population reduction. So if it is headed where you want it (based on us being about on par with PA) Why the Legislative maneuver now? 

 

 

[Two Track]

On 3/8/2017 at 7:47 PM, chas0218 said:

Last i checked crossbow falls in bow season, get over yourself no reason gun season couldn't have AR the first 2 weeks. Gun season is almost 4 weeks long. You're not limiting all of gun season so what's the problem? That spike walking around on opening day will surely be there the day after AR are over so you can shoot him and his 4 point older brother. It just has those guys like yourself holding off for 2 weeks before you blast a yearling.

You think guns and bows are equivalent because that is what your arguing right now. Also since when did browtines not count? If it is longer than 1" it counts as a point. Your pulling stuff out your bung.

Chas0218,

I know when crossbow season is currently, but there was a lot of push to keep it out of bow season when the DEC implemented it.  A lot of bow hunters were highly suggesting to reduce gun season to add the crossbow season.  Claiming crossbow hunters would ruin their season or have you forgotten that?  This just after they increased the length of bow season.  I get just over 3 weeks for a season, you get 7 weeks of archery-only before gun season and then another week after.

I never said browtines do not count currently, but who knows how the state may write the legistation for AR's, that was an example of what could happen, We would have to wait years for it to be corrected and passed - DEC could correct in it within the year. 

Normal (non-rifled slug barrel) shotgun range is a little further than an good archer, rifles are an entire another story.  Your set up to hunt makes all the difference in being at the right spot to shoot a deer, no matter what your implement of choice is. 5 yards out of range is 5 yards out of range not matter what you are using - that was my point.  So AR's should be implemented evenly between Archery and Gun season, not one over the other.

Which fish is legal size doesn't matter whether you use a baitcaster, fly-rod, or spincaster to catch a trout, why should it matter whether you use a bow or gun for deer.  Same game being sought, so why different rules on implement on which deer would be legal.

This "me because I am a bow hunter", "need extra time because a bow hunter", "need to keep crossbows to a small section of my season",... stuff needs to stop.  We all hunt. We want all fairness and not have our hunting rights taken away.  We have to work as hunters together, not as bow hunter, or a gun hunter, ...

By the way I work at least 5 days week and lucky if i get take off 3 days during deer season,  The few days I do get to hunt (which is on highly used public land that has limited spot availability) I need to make the most of it.  No, I don't shoot spotted or nursing deer.  I know someone who shot a 65lb deer - 20 years later, we still raze him about it.  If I am in desperate need, don't tell me what I can't shoot.

We don't need Jane from LI, and Jack from NYC who never hunted, let alone handled a firearm or bow, write legislation and vote on it on things they know nothing about or care about. This AR stuff should be with the DEC where and when it needs to be amended, in a more timely fashion. Not years (or decades) if the state handles it.

[phade]

Everyone gets a trophy.

Simple, clear, and agile hunting rules will always trump slow, cumbersome, reactive legislated regulation. Especially those reducing choice and enjoyment of the sport.

I shoot what makes me happy for the most part. I typically pass bucks so Moog can shoot them anyway.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ManicOutdoorsman92]

Not sure that any one said that ARs would completely solve all the herd problems, as overall numbers are a bigger part of the health issue.  AR would have a very positive influence on the health of our bucks and also of our fawns.  If you need to hear the reasoning behind that I can elaborate.  To say that it is “non-sense” is just shallow and an un-informed observation.  Whether or not I am in support of AR or not, I can’t ignore that there is a benefit caused by having them on our deer herd.  To deny it is silly.  I understand that it may not be important to you as choosing what deer you want to be able to harvest, but it would be nice for the deer.

I’m not trying to offend the original poster who said it, or the person who applauded the statement after, but to say that “managing a wild deer herd is a pipedream” is simply stupid.  Why do you think we have regulations from the DEC?  I’m not saying they do it well by any means.  Do you think that other states are incapable of managing their deer herd?

Do you think that deer in other states who have a much “healthier herd” are self-regulating?  Are they smarter across state lines?  Are NY deer missing that self-regulating gene?  Simply put, there are tons of states who regulate their deer herd better than NY.  In fact, does NY do it better than any other state that has whitetails?  I bet you would find it hard to find someone with a biologist’s background outside of this state to say NY does it better than some other state. 

We can disagree, sure I get that.  But to discount simple science and reasoning and say it’s a pipedream is not logical, IMO.  Glad that most other states didn’t get that memo.

For the record, I am not an overall “science guy.”  I am one of those crazy creation – not evolution people, and I don’t buy into all the Global Warning stuff.  Unrelated I know, but I don’t want to come across as “science is everything”.  I just believe in this case there are benefits to following the science.

You know you can move to one of those states if u wish, seems that would be easier. My issue is not being able to shoot what i want as i will pass younger deer, my issue is controlling the vast majority of hunters who want that right. Given hunters/predation, environment and all factors involved in ecology the deer herd is where it should be. Yea, call me shallow or ignorant for stating this but the herd will only accommodate to its environment, and its the deforestation and farming and development that allowed those numbers to climb, and now we got a problem? The problem is theres a group of hunters out there who expect 160 class deer every season and if they arent seeing them theres a problem in the herd. Its all what the environment will allow. Will high numbers cause problems with illness yes, but only so many deer can occupy a partcular chunk before the others go elsewhere, because theres not enough food or space. Its not as if the deer will stay in this chunk until they're on top of each other causing disease, this will only happen in a fenced environment.Whatever excess in the herd will likely be killed by us hit by a car killed by a yote, and if theres space after all that, usually is, the up and comers take their place, natural checks and balances mr. science, its just basic ecology

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

4 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Well you quoted my pipe dream comment and didn't get it right. It specifically stated " AR's do nothing for genetics and trying to in a wild herd is a pipe dream."   

I don’t quite know what to say.  This will be the third, maybe fourth time that I have explained to you that my mention of your comment regarding the pipe dream was in reference to what someone typed after your post regarding herd management.  Yet you bring it up again.  I have no idea how many times I would have to repeat the same thing to you before it sinks in, but I have officially given up trying. 

I can’t quote numbers either, but I THINK you are saying that NY hunters shoot year old bucks at the same rate (%) as PA hunters.  I will have to look into that, because it seems hard to believe for certain.  I can only use the eye test however, and wonder how that is possible.  If I go to a butcher in PA I’d say that yearling bucks are far from the norm.  There are certainly some small basket racks in there, but they aren’t the majority of what I might see.  Drive the road and look at buck poles in PA and once again the majority are 2-year old or older.  Don’t see as many bucks hanging in NY, but the majority I do see aren’t older than 2.  Go to a butcher in NY and I’d say you will see more 1.5 bucks than any other age for sure.  8’s and 10’s are much fewer and far between in a NY shop.  I can’t see how a state that places the majority of year old bucks off limits to most of the hunters (PA) is going to produce the same ratio of young bucks killed to a state that doesn’t.  I find it hard to believe, but I have not looked into it.

If you are correct regarding NY seeing a good increase of older bucks harvest becoming a higher percentage then I say great.  I hope it keeps trending that way.  However, if you agree that there is a positive impact achieved because of this trend then I say why not make sure it happens by putting in AR.  I have no faith that “educating” hunters will work as well in the state as mandating would. 

You ask why the rush or need to do this is if there isn’t a major issue with the herd now?  I say I don’t see the rush.  I can’t say its vital, and I’m not arguing that it has to happen.  I am just saying I’d like to see it happen for the good of the herd.  I will say once again that I cannot produce a reason to put in AR to compete with the concern that you and others have regarding the fact that your choice would be taken away.  I get it, I understand it, and my reasons ARE NOT AS GOOD AS YOURS if any sort of vote was taken on the issue.  I won’t argue that people want choice.  That said, I will argue that there is merit to AR as to how it effects the herd, and I see it as a good thing.  IF it was implemented I would not see it as the end of NY hunting, an immediate and devastating rise in population, a devastating loss of license sales, or a huge number of mistake kills littering the woods.  I did use PA as example for those concerns.

[Death From Above]

2 hours ago, ManicOutdoorsman92 said:

You know you can move to one of those states if u wish, seems that would be easier. My issue is not being able to shoot what i want as i will pass younger deer, my issue is controlling the vast majority of hunters who want that right. Given hunters/predation, environment and all factors involved in ecology the deer herd is where it should be. Yea, call me shallow or ignorant for stating this but the herd will only accommodate to its environment, and its the deforestation and farming and development that allowed those numbers to climb, and now we got a problem? The problem is theres a group of hunters out there who expect 160 class deer every season and if they arent seeing them theres a problem in the herd. Its all what the environment will allow. Will high numbers cause problems with illness yes, but only so many deer can occupy a partcular chunk before the others go elsewhere, because theres not enough food or space. Its not as if the deer will stay in this chunk until they're on top of each other causing disease, this will only happen in a fenced environment.Whatever excess in the herd will likely be killed by us hit by a car killed by a yote, and if theres space after all that, usually is, the up and comers take their place, natural checks and balances mr. science, its just basic ecology

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk
 

 

Manic,

My argument is not that AR needs to be implemented, and again I will concede my reasoning is likely not enough to validate ARs being passed.  I cannot provide a reason good enough to convince anyone who is strongly in favor of choice to instead advocate implementing AR for the healthy aspects it would provide the herd.  

I have no reason to move out of the state, I am just not that upset about the matter.  I simply prefer to save some hunting time to go out of state to enjoy a completely different hunting experience in the whitetail woods.  I’d argue it’s a better experience, but I still enjoy hunting at home in NY as well.  If you prefer to hunt NY then travel elsewhere, that is fine as well.  Not going to suggest you stay in the state because you prefer hunting in NY the way it is.

I have no idea why everything I type continues to generate more details concerning herd #s.  Herd health based on population is a different discussion all together.  I was only advocating a healthier herd based on a more natural age structure as it pertains to male deer.  I do not disagree with what you wrote.  Just don’t think I need to move out of state. 

[ManicOutdoorsman92]

 

Manic,

My argument is not that AR needs to be implemented, and again I will concede my reasoning is likely not enough to validate ARs being passed.  I cannot provide a reason good enough to convince anyone who is strongly in favor of choice to instead advocate implementing AR for the healthy aspects it would provide the herd.  

I have no reason to move out of the state, I am just not that upset about the matter.  I simply prefer to save some hunting time to go out of state to enjoy a completely different hunting experience in the whitetail woods.  I’d argue it’s a better experience, but I still enjoy hunting at home in NY as well.  If you prefer to hunt NY then travel elsewhere, that is fine as well.  Not going to suggest you stay in the state because you prefer hunting in NY the way it is.

I have no idea why everything I type continues to generate more details concerning herd #s.  Herd health based on population is a different discussion all together.  I was only advocating a healthier herd based on a more natural age structure as it pertains to male deer.  I do not disagree with what you wrote.  Just don’t think I need to move out of state. 

Fair enough, but even still I dont see how more mature males equates to herd health, while states with ARs will see older deer do the bulk of the breeding and that may be more natural, i imagine 2-3 yr-olds do the bulk here and they're health is just fine. Large deer here may not be easy to come by but theyre out there, but with less of them theres more opportunity for the 2-3 year olds to make a name with no big boy beating up on them. Its not an unhealthy herd because it has a different relative age structure. One can argue allowing deer to mature makes for a more natural, and it would be if there weren't so many things to interfere before that happens, mostly us agreed, by car or hunting. But its not fair to people out there to fill there freezer no you cant shoot that, its not fair to that kid whose first deer to walk in front of him is a fork or spike, god forbid he shoots it then he's done something wrong, THATS my issue. Trophy deer is perspective, just like ponds i fish some a 16 in bass is a good one others its average. If u kill a 160 in deer in a state with plenty of them it wouldnt be as special as one here, sure you be excited, but a deer like that comes out in ny, youre shitting a brick because theres no doubt its the biggest buck around for some distance

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Adkhunter1590]

I think we should try the ARs for a few years and see what happens. We can all talk until we are blue in the face but that won't prove which side of the argument is right. Won't know until we try it.

Personally I think it will work. I also think because of the rise in bow hunters, social media and expectations, we will see better bucks in NY as the next few years go on. I know I've been seeing better bucks in my area and I think it has a lot to do with more guys holding off on the little ones and waiting. No one really wants to post a 3 pointer on FB. Yes yes I know we all don't care about FB or any of that crap but your only fooling yourself if you think it doesn't impact people in a big way.

Regardless of what the state does or doesn't decide, I'll still be letting immature bucks walk and waiting patiently for a mature specimen. My kids will do the same when they come of age as well. All of my buddies are now holding back these days and I think the trend is really catching on. NY has the land and the ability to produce some monster deer, we just need to give our bucks a chance to get a little age on them

[growalot]

So what your really saying is education is actually working,social media is also impacting the let them grow mentality. Which would have to prove AR legislation,really isn't needed.

[nyslowhand]

Don't you think social media only adds to the trophy hunting mentality, thus encouraging bragging rights??? JMO, but I feel "let 'em grow" is merely a side effect of this.

Granted, I haven't gone back thru all 11 pages to catch up, but... Bet no one has brought up the fact that harvesting mature buck in the pre or early rut stages takes them out of the breeding pool! And just who do you think fills this void, younger bucks?? Don't get me wrong, I'll shoot a nice, mature buck in Oct just as fast as the next hunter! Merely food for thought, rather than fuel for the fire.

My vote is for choice and NOT legislation! If you want legislation to dictate what your neighbors shoot, can't you see this is a rather selfish way of imposing your own (hunting) beliefs onto others??? JMO. Some how the DEC has gotten itself involved in hunter satisfaction, not sure why!!!

[Adkhunter1590]

So what your really saying is education is actually working,social media is also impacting the let them grow mentality. Which would have to prove AR legislation,really isn't needed.

Yes I think better education and ability to easily access such education has absolutely made some impact. What I'm unsure of, is if it has made enough of an impact at this point in time.

Here's how I kinda see it. It's like some Ny hunters are asleep at the wheel when it comes to educating themselves on how we could obtain healthier, more mature deer herds state wide. So I think maybe someone(state) needs to give them a little shake to wake up. ARs might be that shake. There's many states that have similar topography and weather that have higher quality deer herds. It CAN be done here.

I'm also on the side of making ARs only last for 3-5 years to see what and if any impact it makes.

I know some will say this is the state imposing on your right to choose blah blah. But come on now, we all know the state does that a million other ways in our lives. This would be at least one restriction I could understand and see a positive outcome from. Who knows...we could do ARs for 5 years and maybe after 5 years we will all be on here saying " hot damn I'm glad we sucked it up, huntin has been great this year". Just never know until we try.

[Adkhunter1590]

Don't you think social media only adds to the trophy hunting mentality, thus encouraging bragging rights??? JMO, but I feel "let 'em grow" is merely a side effect of this.
Granted, I haven't gone back thru all 11 pages to catch up, but... Bet no one has brought up the fact that harvesting mature buck in the pre or early rut stages takes them out of the breeding pool! And just who do you think fills this void, younger bucks?? Don't get me wrong, I'll shoot a nice, mature buck in Oct just as fast as the next hunter! Merely food for thought, rather than fuel for the fire.
My vote is for choice and NOT legislation! If you want legislation to dictate what your neighbors shoot, can't you see this is a rather selfish way of imposing your own (hunting) beliefs onto others??? JMO. Some how the DEC has gotten itself involved in hunter satisfaction, not sure why!!!

If you had a much larger amount of mature bucks to choose from, it wouldn't matter if you shot a few. But the numbers need to reach that point before it could become a reality. If what your saying is true, Kansas, Iowa, Illinois etc would all be dead zones for mature deer. How could they possibly have a mature deer left in those states if that's all anyone shoots? Kansas bow season opens just as early as us, and they have a early youth/handicap and even a muzzy season to boot. Their deer population numbers are also much lower than ours. Point is, you let them grow and you'll keep seeing more and more big ones. It will take a few years, but it will happen

[wolc123]

I would like to see a compromise version of state-wide AR's in NY state.  I see more pro's than con's to that.  Pro's: 1.) Improve hunter safety thru forcing folks to better identify their target before shooting. 2.) Allow more bucks to reach maturity.  Con:, I only see one, and that is an increased likelihood of "tag-soup".

If I could determine the way those AR's were written and enforced, it would go like this:  For the first (2) weeks of archery and gun seasons, a buck must have a minimum of {3) 1" points on one side.  If a hunter kills a buck that is short of that criteria, he may keep the deer and will not pay a fine.  The penalty would be the loss of the ability to purchase a buck tag for that season, the following year.  This change would also partially implement the "one buck rule" (on a one year delay) that many are asking for. 

This restriction would apply to all hunters, regardless of age.  A youngster can go ahead and harvest their spike or fork-horn on their first year, but might choose to be a bit more selective on their next.   An old hunter who thinks they may be on their last year would have nothing to fear.  Anyone could still kill that wide, mature, heavy-beamed four point, if it is worth the sacrifice of a buck tag the following year.

I see this as a win for all.  Implementation and enforcement would be simple, mostly done by the computers.  I don't like laws that increase the burden on the game wardens, who are already stretched too thin.    

Edited March 11, 2017 by wolc123

[moog5050]

12 hours ago, phade said:

Everyone gets a trophy.

Simple, clear, and agile hunting rules will always trump slow, cumbersome, reactive legislated regulation. Especially those reducing choice and enjoyment of the sport.

I shoot what makes me happy for the most part. I typically pass bucks so Moog can shoot them anyway.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

More witty than usual.  All that pie in the face yesterday must of done you some good!

[Buckmaster7600]

If you had a much larger amount of mature bucks to choose from, it wouldn't matter if you shot a few. But the numbers need to reach that point before it could become a reality. If what your saying is true, Kansas, Iowa, Illinois etc would all be dead zones for mature deer. How could they possibly have a mature deer left in those states if that's all anyone shoots? Kansas bow season opens just as early as us, and they have a early youth/handicap and even a muzzy season to boot. Their deer population numbers are also much lower than ours. Point is, you let them grow and you'll keep seeing more and more big ones. It will take a few years, but it will happen

Unless I'm mistaking not one of those states have AR's? How do they have mature bucks?

If the state thinks we need AR's lets start it on state land for 5 years and see what happens. Many states have certain lands that have different regulations, there's no reason NY couldn't do it as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[growalot]

" Just never know until we try"

This is a perfect quote. Correct me if I'm  wrong. Did they not just officially start the education plan last year? Tell me why isn't it OK to allow that for 5years  to see if it actually works? How blind some to the hypocrisy in this?

[growalot]

They can not use hunter safety as an excuse. The state just came out with last year being the safest on record.

[Adkhunter1590]

Unless I'm mistaking not one of those states have AR's? How do they have mature bucks?
If the state thinks we need AR's lets start it on state land for 5 years and see what happens. Many states have certain lands that have different regulations, there's no reason NY couldn't do it as well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They don't need ARs. Their residents already have the let em grow mind set. They've been doing it that way for so long now they wouldn't know any better.
Well their mature bucks didn't just pop outta their mommas like that, so you tell me how do you think they have so many? They didn't just appear, and they don't have more of em than us.

I'd be fine with state lands being restricted to ARs. We have a lot of state land and it could be an excellent testing ground.

[Adkhunter1590]

" Just never know until we try"
This is a perfect quote. Correct me if I'm  wrong. Did they not just officially start the education plan last year? Tell me why isn't it OK to allow that for 5years  to see if it actually works? How blind some to the hypocrisy in this?

It's not hypocrisy to be on the other side of a debate. I just have a different outlook on this situation. Maybe living and guiding out west ruined me. I like seeing lots of big deer around. I'm a firm believer in that by letting little ones grow, the more big ones you'll eventually see. Everyone I ever met out west would never think of dropping a spike or a 3 pointer. And the point people make that they need the meat is bologna...there are broke people in every damn state, town and county and I never seen anyone out there need to drop dinks to survive. My old boss who's been a outfitter for 30 years told me a million times the foundation to a good herd of big bucks was to let em grow, simple as that. They obviously know what they are doing out there, maybe it's time NY listened.

[Buckmaster7600]

They don't need ARs. Their residents already have the let em grow mind set. They've been doing it that way for so long now they wouldn't know any better.
Well their mature bucks didn't just pop outta their mommas like that, so you tell me how do you think they have so many? They didn't just appear, and they don't have more of em than us.

I'd be fine with state lands being restricted to ARs. We have a lot of state land and it could be an excellent testing ground.

No guns during the rut, 1 buck rule and much better soil.


Thinking NY will one day have a 160" buck behind every tree is a "pipe dream!" There is a plethora of reasons why but most importantly it's hunter densities in the area where there is the potential to grow big ones in NY.

Look at the Adirondacks how many acres is there? With the lowest hunter densities in the state yet how many record bucks come out of there?


This buck was aged at 5 1/2 and won't score 120"



This buck was aged at 6 1/2+ and won't score 100"



Aged at4 1/2 what maybe 120"

Aged at 51/2 again not even 120"

So there's 4 bucks that all reached maturity. Only 2 of these bucks came from the same county with about 250 miles between 2 of them so it's not a regional issue. I have hunted a bunch of other states and have killed a couple nice bucks in my life but I end up back home every year. I have come to realize we don't have the potential to have big bucks in Eastern NY with any type of regularity. And I'm completely fine with that I love the challenge of shooting a mature deer in the land where there aren't any.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

As I have said many times before I don't shoot small bucks. I have before and most likely won't ever again. I cherish the memories of the spike 3 and 4 that I killed before I started not shooting small bucks just as much as my biggest bucks.

How in the hell can I support something that takes the ability to do something that I enjoyed so much away from someone else for my personal gains?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk