My take on antler restrictions

[chrisw]

Agree again.
Therein lies the irony of AR's! It's OK for those all for the AR's to tell us what to hunt, but, go against the grain of how they think and "Bammo!".
 

So it's ok for you to tell me how to hunt but not ok for anyone else to do the same to you? You really don't get it do you? Look up "hypocrisy" in the dictionary...

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[G-Man]

1 hour ago, chrisw said:

 

So you get to decide what a "hunter" is but everyone that supports AR's can't support AR's without being selfish or elitist or "trophy gatherer's"? I'm far from a "trophy gatherer," but I consider myself a hunter. People often times try to make it look like they're sticking up for the masses and doing the "right" thing but in reality you're only sticking up for the people who think like YOU. We're all entitled to an opinion, but to label someone as not being a hunter because they choose to shoot older deer is the same thing you're blasting people who support AR's for, I like AR's for the most part, (although I'm on the fence most of the time) but you won't see me call someone who shoots a small buck every year not a hunter. Just because someone doesn't fit YOUR definition doesn't make you right. Everyone who likes AR's is not a hunter, everyone who agrees with me is a hunter....? Hypocrisy.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 

 

I would really like to see why someone wants ar's. Biologically not needed to reproduce... So 

[chrisw]

I honestly didn't read all that bc for some reason the font is black and hard to read and I don't care. That being said I see you take your kids hunting kudos to you I take my boy hunting and trapping and fishing all year in the freezing cold showing him that the hunt is in the chase that sitting in the cold all day without seeing a single deer is still awesome bc that's what it's about. It's about the connection to the woods the connection to nature the idea that you have no idea if a 10 point of a spike will cross your path. It's about reading the land and knowing where and when to stand there. It's about the hunt not about the kill. Sadly that is fading fast in "hunters" now a days. You want to hang 100 cams plant kill plots hunt outta heated blinds by all means do what makes you happy. But when I say I should have the right to choose what I shoot don't try change that bc, like you may not agree with the tasty button bucks I shoot I don't agree with how you hunt. It's not about how anyone hunts as long as it's legal I don't care but don't try and tell anyone else how or what to hunt either

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

"It's not about how anyone hunts as long as it's legal." That's your quote correct? Then explain to me how you gathered that a lot of hunters aren't real hunters because they hunt different than you? You keep jumping back and forth every time you post, pick a side man. Again, I'm not arguing against your idea of hunting, I agree to a large extent, up until you start discrediting other hunters for hunting different in one post, then saying that it doesn't matter and to stop judging how others hunt.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[G-Man]

I try to shoot older deer points are irrelevant that's me personally.. Many of my.friends have started to do the same but I can honestly.say if you gonna shoot a small buck shoot a four pt. Or a spike..leave those 1.5 year old 7,8,9,10+ alone..you can spout off all you want about how a spike can be a 10+ but I will say an 8 is already an 8 maybe it will be just bigger or have more points next year. But barring injury it will be at least an 8..  A spike.. Who knows.. Most.likely born late..so it will take 2 or 3 years to catch up. 

Taking the best and healthiest via point restrictions in large hunting densitiy areas will high grade a herd same as cutting all the good timber leaves trees to grow but they may become large but are "scabs" never worth anything but pass on their seed and the woods are less diverse.. 

[DirtTime]

14 minutes ago, chrisw said:

 

So it's ok for you to tell me how to hunt but not ok for anyone else to do the same to you? You really don't get it do you? Look up "hypocrisy" in the dictionary...

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 

 

I get it, and you don't pay attention! Learn to read! My issue with AR's is it should up to the hunter to be able to choose what they want to hunt and kill. I have stated that over and over again! If you want to only kill older or bigger racked bucks, I don't care! If you want to shoot younger spikes or 4 points, I don't care! We buy out tags, so we should be able to shoot w/e we want no matter how you hunt! Pay attention to what people post before you run your font!

[Death From Above]

18 minutes ago, stoneam2006 said:

I honestly didn't read all that bc for some reason the font is black and hard to read and I don't care. That being said I see you take your kids hunting kudos to you I take my boy hunting and trapping and fishing all year in the freezing cold showing him that the hunt is in the chase that sitting in the cold all day without seeing a single deer is still awesome bc that's what it's about. It's about the connection to the woods the connection to nature the idea that you have no idea if a 10 point of a spike will cross your path. It's about reading the land and knowing where and when to stand there. It's about the hunt not about the kill. Sadly that is fading fast in "hunters" now a days. You want to hang 100 cams plant kill plots hunt outta heated blinds by all means do what makes you happy. But when I say I should have the right to choose what I shoot don't try change that bc, like you may not agree with the tasty button bucks I shoot I don't agree with how you hunt. It's not about how anyone hunts as long as it's legal I don't care but don't try and tell anyone else how or what to hunt either

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

Exactly, I am not telling you what to shoot.  Shoot what you want.  I'd like to hunt the way I'd like to as well.

The reason I have probably 50 posts on these AR threads, but haven't said that I am in favor of AR being legislated in NY is because of the choice issue.  I get it.  I know that many do not want choice taken from them.  However, to me choice does not override what is best for our deer, and if imbalance becomes too much of an issue and legislation is needed then I am all for it - whether than means AR, shorter seasons, OBR, whatever.

Imbalance of buck/doe ratios or not, I now fully realize (after reading all these pots about the subject) that it wouldn't matter what proof was out there, or how much evidence was easily seen, none of the factors that could possibly arise would overcome many hunter's simple desire to keep the choice in play.  There is nothing powerful enough for some to look past their own rifle scope.  That I now see.  I also see that you, and many others, only see the "opposition" as elitist and unethical, non-traditional trophy hunters.

If AR ever does get put into play in NY, I hope it is because of biological reasons/benefit, and not due to who screams the loudest.  However, it doesn't appear that the implementation of AR or other rules could ever appear to be done for the right reasons to a great majority of our hunters.  How it effects the deer herd is now of little relevance, and in many eyes not worth considering.  If it goes against what they want then there simply can be no validity to it.

[stoneam2006]

Exactly, I am not telling you what to shoot.  Shoot what you want.  I'd like to hunt the way I'd like to as well.
The reason I have probably 50 posts on these AR threads, but haven't said that I am in favor of AR being legislated in NY is because of the choice issue.  I get it.  I know that many do not want choice taken from them.  However, to me choice does not override what is best for our deer, and if imbalance becomes too much of an issue and legislation is needed then I am all for it - whether than means AR, shorter seasons, OBR, whatever.
Imbalance of buck/doe ratios or not, I now fully realize (after reading all these pots about the subject) that it wouldn't matter what proof was out there, or how much evidence was easily seen, none of the factors that could possibly arise would overcome many hunter's simple desire to keep the choice in play.  There is nothing powerful enough for some to look past their own rifle scope.  That I now see.  I also see that you, and many others, only see the "opposition" as elitist and unethical, non-traditional trophy hunters.
If AR ever does get put into play in NY, I hope it is because of biological reasons/benefit, and not due to who screams the loudest.  However, it doesn't appear that the implementation of AR or other rules could ever appear to be done for the right reasons to a great majority of our hunters.  How it effects the deer herd is now of little relevance, and in many eyes not worth considering.  If it goes against what they want then there simply can be no validity to it.

Im one of probably few who do not think we have a herd issue we have plenty of deer they just are smarter and private land access is another area that makes general pop think the herd is bad. That state needs to help with access issues with maybe tax incentives/liability waivers or something bc alot of land is not hunted and deer know it. Stateland has deer if you work for them as well as everywhere else. The biggest problem with AR's is the fact they just want to legislate the entire area at once not knowing what may be best hwre. I mean I can get doe tags 20 miles down road but 0 at my house????how does that work we have issues and they don't start with AR's. I think state game lands could be managed much better with some timber being taken to open up for undergrowth and whatnot dig some ponds do some actual work to help the herd. AR's helps nothing it's really just for bone on the wall

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[chrisw]

I get it, and you don't pay attention! Learn to read! My issue with AR's is it should up to the hunter to be able to choose what they want to hunt and kill. I have stated that over and over again! If you want to only kill older or bigger racked bucks, I don't care! If you want to shoot younger spikes or 4 points, I don't care! We buy out tags, so we should be able to shoot w/e we want no matter how you hunt! Pay attention to what people post before you run your font!

Go back and read my post again, you are completely missing what I'm saying, yet again. I'm not sure how to make it any simpler. Your getting defensive and I'm mostly agreeing with you. It's your confused logic that you're correct and anyone who thinks hunting can mean something different is wrong.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

13 minutes ago, stoneam2006 said:

 

Im one of probably few who do not think we have a herd issue we have plenty of deer they just are smarter and private land access is another area that makes general pop think the herd is bad. That state needs to help with access issues with maybe tax incentives/liability waivers or something bc alot of land is not hunted and deer know it. Stateland has deer if you work for them as well as everywhere else. The biggest problem with AR's is the fact they just want to legislate the entire area at once not knowing what may be best hwre. I mean I can get doe tags 20 miles down road but 0 at my house????how does that work we have issues and they don't start with AR's. I think state game lands could be managed much better with some timber being taken to open up for undergrowth and whatnot dig some ponds do some actual work to help the herd. AR's helps nothing it's really just for bone on the wall

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

 

There are probably a lot of things that NYS could do for "herd health", and maybe your example of creating ponds might be one of them.  I can't say for sure how many things could be of help.  But, I can say, that in most, if not all of NYS our buck to doe ratio is not ideal.  You say that AR might put "more bone on the head", and I say that would probably be true.  Estimated harvest numbers came out again today from the DEC, and as usual we kill a lot more bucks than does.  Hidden in that number is the fact that 15-20% of the antlerless take are buck fawns.  Add to that the fact that mortality rates are higher on bucks than does in general not including deer that are wounded and not found/reported.  All this adds to a continued lopsided ratio of does to our bucks.  More bucks would be good for the herd.  More bucks equals more likelihood of older bucks, this is once again good for the herd (see length of rut, dates of conception, less stress on each buck, fawn predation, fawn winterkill, etc.).  If AR was implemented there is a more than reasonable chance that we would increase the number of bucks that make it through the year, which only can help the two scenarios I mentioned above.

Argue all you want about bone on the head, and you can also say that with AR we are not saving our somehow "genetically better" young bucks, it doesn't matter.  Whether you want to agree, or you can understand it, AR would have more benefits than just more bone on the head, or bone on the wall.  The question is whether that it is important enough to put AR in place to help any of this or not.  I am guessing that it isn't to the DEC regardless of what they push in their "DEC Delivers" propaganda. 

  

[DirtTime]

14 minutes ago, chrisw said:

 

Go back and read my post again, you are completely missing what I'm saying, yet again. I'm not sure how to make it any simpler. Your getting defensive and I'm mostly agreeing with you. It's your confused logic that you're correct and anyone who thinks hunting can mean something different is wrong.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 

 

Which post?

 

I am not getting defensive. If I am, I don't mean to be, just sick of being told how to hunt and what I should and can hunt, by the DEC and other hunters! I think every hunter who buys their tags, should be allowed to fill those tags how ever they see fit. If I want to shoot a spike, why should that bother anyone? I bought my tags, paid the same price as everyone else. Same goes if you want to only shoot older bucks or larger racks, you bought your tags, hunt and kill what makes you happy. I just don't like as someone else mentioned, "Being told what to hunt" by anyone, including the DEC. DEC might do the best they can, but they certainly aren't on top of most things IMO. As long as you are hunting legally, I don't give a rats tail hair how you hunt or what to choose to kill.

[stoneam2006]

There are probably a lot of things that NYS could do for "herd health", and maybe your example of creating ponds might be one of them.  I can't say for sure how many things could be of help.  But, I can say, that in most, if not all of NYS our buck to doe ratio is not ideal.  You say that AR might put "more bone on the head", and I say that would probably be true.  Estimated harvest numbers came out again today from the DEC, and as usual we kill a lot more bucks than does.  Hidden in that number is the fact that 15-20% of the antlerless take are buck fawns.  Add to that the fact that mortality rates are higher on bucks than does in general not including deer that are wounded and not found/reported.  All this adds to a continued lopsided ratio of does to our bucks.  More bucks would be good for the herd.  More bucks equals more likelihood of older bucks, this is once again good for the herd (see length of rut, dates of conception, less stress on each buck, fawn predation, fawn winterkill, etc.).  If AR was implemented there is a more than reasonable chance that we would increase the number of bucks that make it through the year, which only can help the two scenarios I mentioned above.
Argue all you want about bone on the head, and you can also say that with AR we are not saving our somehow "genetically better" young bucks, it doesn't matter.  Whether you want to agree, or you can understand it, AR would have more benefits than just more bone on the head, or bone on the wall.  The question is whether that it is important enough to put AR in place to help any of this or not.  I am guessing that it isn't to the DEC regardless of what they push in their "DEC Delivers" propaganda. 
  

If more bucks would help our herd wouldn't a 1 buck rule have more of an effect than ars?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

11 minutes ago, stoneam2006 said:

 

 

If more bucks would help our herd wouldn't a 1 buck rule have more of an effect than ars?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

 

 

You bet.  I think there are MUCH better ideas than AR to help our deer herd.   

[upstatehunter]

On 4/4/2017 at 9:03 AM, Belo said:

Where did you ever think AR's were to allow animals to live longer? what a weird thing for a hunter to say. AR's are strictly to provide more opportunities to harvest larger bodied and antlered deer. Never has anyone said they wanted AR's so deer could live longer... what a weird post.

Again greed is the only reason for restrictions .......not the well being of the animal..  Just so you can brag with the horns.....********************....all commercial hunting now

Edited April 5, 2017 by WNYBuckHunter
inappropriate language, plese see the forum TOS. Tone it down or youll be out of here.

[stoneam2006]

You bet.  I think there are MUCH better ideas than AR to help our deer herd.   

Glad we agree....instead of us all fighting about AR's let's figure 9ut a plan that will actually help the herd without legislating until hunting is no longer fun

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

12 minutes ago, stoneam2006 said:

 

Glad we agree....instead of us all fighting about AR's let's figure 9ut a plan that will actually help the herd without legislating until hunting is no longer fun

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

 

I wish,.  If you think AR would cause and uproar, just wait till there is talk about a one buck rule, shorter seasons, etc.  Unfortunately any changes to the buck to doe ratio would require limiting the current seasons and bag limits we now have.  If the balance of our herd ever got to a point that the DEC felt they had to intervene its gonna be painful for some hunters.  This AR debate is a prime example.  While AR is not the solution, it could be a step towards rectifying the issue.  Changes like these would obviously not be popular to everyone, so I see it as a steep hill to climb.  Apparently, even though the DEC agreed that there were good reasons to encourage selective harvest of bucks, they did not want to tackle the issue either.

[chrisw]

Which post?
 
I am not getting defensive. If I am, I don't mean to be, just sick of being told how to hunt and what I should and can hunt, by the DEC and other hunters! I think every hunter who buys their tags, should be allowed to fill those tags how ever they see fit. If I want to shoot a spike, why should that bother anyone? I bought my tags, paid the same price as everyone else. Same goes if you want to only shoot older bucks or larger racks, you bought your tags, hunt and kill what makes you happy. I just don't like as someone else mentioned, "Being told what to hunt" by anyone, including the DEC. DEC might do the best they can, but they certainly aren't on top of most things IMO. As long as you are hunting legally, I don't give a rats tail hair how you hunt or what to choose to kill.

It was more so stoneam that I was referring to but you were agreeing with him. The issue I had with his argument is that he was sick of people judging how he hunts and what he shoots, but then he openly judged a large portion of hunters as "trophy gatherer's." In his words, anyone who doesn't hunt within the text of how he hunts isn't even classified as a hunter (food plots, cameras). You can't say you're sick of people judging how you legally hunt and then do the exact same thing yourself to another group.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Death From Above]

12 hours ago, upstatehunter said:

Again greed is the only reason for restrictions .......not the well being of the animal..  Just so you can brag with the horns.....*******************....all commercial hunting now

Wow, intelligent post.  Great mental imagery. 

If you, or the person who's post you quoted can't see that AR would cause some bucks to live longer, then not sure you should partake in this conversation.  The point of AR is to help some bucks live longer, so that you don't send a bullet at them.  Can you not understand that?  No bullet into deer = deer not killed = equals deer live longer.  Did that help?

Now if you or the quoted poster cannot understand how allowing bucks to live longer might benefit the herd, then so be it.  It might be out of your reach I guess.  Either that or it doesn't jive with your "greed" to shoot everything you want to, so you write stuff like you just did and call relevant biology bunk.

 

[upstatehunter]

30 minutes ago, Death From Above said:

Wow, intelligent post.  Great mental imagery. 

If you, or the person who's post you quoted can't see that AR would cause some bucks to live longer, then not sure you should partake in this conversation.  The point of AR is to help some bucks live longer, so that you don't send a bullet at them.  Can you not understand that?  No bullet into deer = deer not killed = equals deer live longer.  Did that help?

Now if you or the quoted poster cannot understand how allowing bucks to live longer might benefit the herd, then so be it.  It might be out of your reach I guess.  Either that or it doesn't jive with your "greed" to shoot everything you want to, so you write stuff like you just did and call relevant biology bunk.

 

Have you read any of my posts.....i think you read everything wrong

[Death From Above]

16 minutes ago, upstatehunter said:

Have you read any of my posts.....i think you read everything wrong

Well, if you somehow implied something other than I should "jerk off with my horns" after I brag about them, because there is no reason for AR other than commercial hunting, and no plausible benefits to our deer herd...then you might be right....I somehow misread it.  ?

[nybuckboy]

bleeeeeeeeeeeeeep!  Anybody got a referee whistle for these two. OMG

 

[Larry]

THIS IS THE SAME CRAP THAT’S ON THE OTHER TOPIC CAN’T WE TAKE THE PAGES FOR THIS TOPIC AND ADD THEM TO THE OTHER ONE SO WE CAN GET TO 50 PAGES FASTER!!!!!!!!

[Doc]

5 hours ago, Death From Above said:

The point of AR is to help some bucks live longer, so that you don't send a bullet at them.  Can you not understand that?  No bullet into deer = deer not killed = equals deer live longer.  Did that help?

There you go. Now you are getting down to the real direction some of you want to go. Throw up whatever roadblocks you can think of to stifle success, and all the deer will live longer. Isn't that great. Maybe just shut deer hunting down every other year. That would work too. Not only that but enough more people would drop out of hunting and make even more deer live longer. Great! Now let's see just how many new pop-fad management plans we can throw out there in the name of making older deer. I'm sure if we try hard enough, we can wreck the entire sport of hunting with these damn crazy ideas designed to frustrate hunters.

[Jeremy K]

5 hours ago, Larry said:

THIS IS THE SAME CRAP THAT’S ON THE OTHER TOPIC CAN’T WE TAKE THE PAGES FOR THIS TOPIC AND ADD THEM TO THE OTHER ONE SO WE CAN GET TO 50 PAGES FASTER!!!!!!!!

No ,because someone decided their ideas on AR was so important that it needed its own thread. 

[chas0218]

Passing on small deer doesn't make you a hunter...it makes you a trophy gatherer...



Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

No i hunt for meat and instead of me taking 2 yearling and a doe to help fill my freezer i take 2 mature deer leaving an extra rubbing around to get bigger.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[growalot]

Quote

So it's ok for you to tell me how to hunt but not ok for anyone else to do the same to you? You really don't get it do you? Look up "hypocrisy" in the dictionary...

BINGO ,DING,DING,DING,DING

There it is in a nut shell, power pure and simple. It's is exactly why they got together in the swinging _ _ _ _  clubs and are attempting to by pass the DEC...LOL get out the old label maker and paste as many labels as you can on this thing, but it's all about power. It started with talking some friends and even neighbors into doing what you(general term) wanted.Then grew and the more power that was felt in you(general term) having control,  the more you wanted it to spread.  More organizations ,hunting clubs blah, blah, blah. Because well, no one likes being the odd man out and hey years of guys making snide off hand remarks about what one feels is a PERSONAL trophy..is an effective bucket of cold water,as it were. I mean go to the other thread and take a good look at the latest snide comment one member made to another. Perfect example  when getting out that tape measure and measuring your own bone doesn't do it for some of you guys any more, you need to search out others to measure. What good is it if they aren't as close to yours,where's the competition in that!  

JMO ...Well and a good number of years watching men...woman aren't much better, just look at Hilary. Now that's probably the best comparison I could have come up with here,come to think about it...

Edited April 5, 2017 by growalot