DEC new Regulations Buck only

[Dave]

To all you bow hunters out there how do you feel about losing your opportunity to take either buck or doe? Also having guns used during the bow season. And having to apply for a DMP to take a doe.

Dave

[burmjohn]

I'm really up in the air on the buck only tag.  While I understand they want to be able to control the amount of does taken in an area through the issuance of DMP's, I wonder if it may add more pressure on the bucks during the bow season.  I guess we have to see how the DMP's pan out as a result of this... I wonder if they would consider Bow only DMP's?

[Dave]

I'm really up in the air on the buck only tag.  While I understand they want to be able to control the amount of does taken in an area through the issuance of DMP's, I wonder if it may add more pressure on the bucks during the bow season.  I guess we have to see how the DMP's pan out as a result of this... I wonder if they would consider Bow only DMP's?

Good point John, never considered a DMP for bow only. I think that is a better solution, and can be controlled by DMU on an as needed basis.

Dave

[wdswtr]

Do I like it nope but if the deer herd in certain areas are on the decline, giving out either sex tags to bow/muzzleoaders in those areas doesnt help the situation at all.  Wouldnt a few years of this type of regulations that could potentially bring back a declining deer herd be worth it in the long run?  Regulating the number of doe that can be harvested in these areas is a plus in my book.  I think if they felt the herd was healthy through out every region in the state this would not happen.  In those areas where doe permits are readily available it should not be a problem to get the permits to begin with and for those areas that are starved of deer, those extra either sex tags are only hurting them.  It to me is like spending money beyond your means and then complaining about it when the day comes you have to declare bankrupcy.  I would rather them tackle it now than when the deer are gone and we are really ticked off cause they close down areas to hunting all together to get the herd count up.  I truly can understand some of your guys emotions towards this in highly populated areas and those guys will probably not have a problem getting doe tags to begin with.  Its the areas that are underpopulated that need this regulation.

[Dave]

Do I like it nope but if the deer herd in certain areas are on the decline, giving out either sex tags to bow/muzzleoaders in those areas doesnt help the situation at all.  Wouldnt a few years of this type of regulations that could potentially bring back a declining deer herd be worth it in the long run?  Regulating the number of doe that can be harvested in these areas is a plus in my book.  I think if they felt the herd was healthy through out every region in the state this would not happen.  In those areas where doe permits are readily available it should not be a problem to get the permits to begin with and for those areas that are starved of deer, those extra either sex tags are only hurting them.  It to me is like spending money beyond your means and then complaining about it when the day comes you have to declare bankrupcy.  I would rather them tackle it now than when the deer are gone and we are really ticked off cause they close down areas to hunting all together to get the herd count up.  I truly can understand some of your guys emotions towards this in highly populated areas and those guys will probably not have a problem getting doe tags to begin with.  Its the areas that are underpopulated that need this regulation.

For all the proposed changes to be implemented by the DEC I think they left out one very important factor. That would be mandatory reporting of your success and lack of success. This is a important part of deer management knowing the real numbers not a guesstimate like we have now. If we want to know if we have a declining deer herd or if they feel it's in balance the numbers would reflect that. How could they implement a 5 year plan and have not considered mandatory reporting. May be like Doc said they just change for the sake of change and there is no benefit to deer or the hunters.

Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

I really do not see what the fuss is all about. Which way do you guys want it? More deer or less deer? Currently the DEC has no way to control the antlerless take, as every one that buys a bow and/or ML tag automatically gets an antlerless tag. Then you guys piss and moan about not being able to draw a DMP in that zone. How is DEC supposed to hand out a number of DMPs that is really best for the zone?

Really, the ONLY change for you will be that you have to apply for your DMPs and use them during bow. If you dont get one, that means that the antlerless numbers in that area are too low for you to be killing them. If their plan is carried out properly, within a few years you will have a larger herd, with more DMPs available.

Herd health has to be taken into consideration, as it has a direct effect on hunter satisfaction. If you have to make sacrifices for a season or two, then thats what has to be done. If you dont, then just go ahead and keep depleting the herd in your area so you can yell at the DEC some more about why theres no deer.

[Doewhacker]

"Currently the DEC has no way to control the antlerless take, as every one that buys a bow and/or ML tag automatically gets an antlerless tag."

ML and bow account for @20K doe's per year, I say split the ML tag off and leave the bow tags alone. Total bow take is about 35K a year, and doe taken by bow are @9k spread out over the whole state, let the guns do the killing where needed and leave us bow hunters alone.

What if they had a lottery system for buck tags in the low population areas? I bet that would flip some guys out, not me, I just want to hunt and kill deer, what ever they tell me I can kill I'm going to try to kill.

[Dave]

I really do not see what the fuss is all about. Which way do you guys want it? More deer or less deer? Currently the DEC has no way to control the antlerless take, as every one that buys a bow and/or ML tag automatically gets an antlerless tag. Then you guys piss and moan about not being able to draw a DMP in that zone. How is DEC supposed to hand out a number of DMPs that is really best for the zone?

Really, the ONLY change for you will be that you have to apply for your DMPs and use them during bow. If you dont get one, that means that the antlerless numbers in that area are too low for you to be killing them. If their plan is carried out properly, within a few years you will have a larger herd, with more DMPs available.

Herd health has to be taken into consideration, as it has a direct effect on hunter satisfaction. If you have to make sacrifices for a season or two, then thats what has to be done. If you dont, then just go ahead and keep depleting the herd in your area so you can yell at the DEC some more about why theres no deer.

Buck, lets say the DEC wants to increase the herd in a DMU. And they give out X amount of DMP , how will they know the impact of the DMP or how many bucks were taken in that area? They can use the information provided by successful hunters but what about the hunters who don't report their results? So how do they mamage the deer herd if they don't have an accurate count on what has been taken. This is totally flawed . They have no idea what they are managing that's why they are issuing new restrictions.

Dave

[Skillet]

During gun season, my area gets too much pressure.  Once bow is over, I'm all done.  The deer go into hiding, and all you see is hunters.  I think that allowing gun hunters in the woods during archery will disrupt the deer, and you would see a dramatic decrease in overall archery season take.  Anybody else?

[steve863]

I really do not see what the fuss is all about. Which way do you guys want it? More deer or less deer?

Actually this is probably the biggest issue.  Hunters want MORE deer, while the DEC want LESS.  My hunch is that their preference will always win out and then the DEC will occasionally try to come up with different methods to cut down on the total kill only to make hunters think that they are doing something to bring deer back.  This of course will just be a cover-up.  They want deer killed, there is no doubt about that, but also desperately want license sales, so they have to make it look like they are doing something for the hunters benefit just to keep them buying.  As the song says, "MONEY makes the world go around".

[WNYBuckHunter]

"Currently the DEC has no way to control the antlerless take, as every one that buys a bow and/or ML tag automatically gets an antlerless tag."

ML and bow account for @20K doe's per year, I say split the ML tag off and leave the bow tags alone. Total bow take is about 35K a year, and doe taken by bow are @9k spread out over the whole state, let the guns do the killing where needed and leave us bow hunters alone.

What if they had a lottery system for buck tags in the low population areas? I bet that would flip some guys out, not me, I just want to hunt and kill deer, what ever they tell me I can kill I'm going to try to kill.

The DMP system isnt controlled by statewide stats, its zone specific. How would they be able to control the numbers of antlerless deer taken in specific zones without specifying where the antlerless tag can be used?

[WNYBuckHunter]

I really do not see what the fuss is all about. Which way do you guys want it? More deer or less deer?

Actually this is probably the biggest issue.  Hunters want MORE deer, while the DEC want LESS.  My hunch is that their preference will always win out and then the DEC will occasionally try to come up with different methods to cut down on the total kill only to make hunters think that they are doing something to bring deer back.  This of course will just be a cover-up.  They want deer killed, there is no doubt about that, but also desperately want license sales, so they have to make it look like they are doing something for the hunters benefit just to keep them buying.  As the song says, "MONEY makes the world go around".

I dont think the DEC is trying to wipe deer out or cut numbers to the point where hunter attrition gets worse. Hunter's dollars are their bread and butter, and a very large part of why they exist to begin with. I dont think they are stupid enough to cut their own throats. Just because Joe hunter thinks he isnt seeing enough deer doesnt mean that more deer in his area would be good for the deer themselves. The way things are now is obvioulsy not working, you hear it all the time on this site and others "I dont see any deer in my area" or "DEC over issues DMPs for my area", but when it comes time that the DEC does something about it, but cutting the antlerless harvest so that more deer can live that season, the same guys cry that they cant kill more deer.

Bottom line, if the herd is screwed up, it needs fixed. If the numbers are too low, throwing antlerless tags to everyone is not the answer.

[WNYBuckHunter]

During gun season, my area gets too much pressure.  Once bow is over, I'm all done.  The deer go into hiding, and all you see is hunters.  I think that allowing gun hunters in the woods during archery will disrupt the deer, and you would see a dramatic decrease in overall archery season take.  Anybody else?

Hmmmm, youd be willing to break the law to harvest deer because your family need the meat, which you say you cant afford, but you dont take advantage of every opportunity to go get that meat.

[Doewhacker]

[quote author=WNYBuckHunter 

The DMP system isnt controlled by statewide stats, its zone specific. How would they be able to control the numbers of antlerless deer taken in specific zones without specifying where the antlerless tag can be used?

They cant control it, whats the point? Do 9000 antlerless taken by bow really make that huge of an impact on the herd? It would work out to a few hundred per area. Seems like small potatoe's to me and it would serve us better to spend energy on controling other areas. It just seems like I know more about how many deer are in my spots than the DEC does, so why not leave it up to me like we do now.

What about an incentive to get more DMP's filled where they need them filled. I see they get a 6% return rate on doe tags issued each year, and each year there are areas where they issue more tags out by you, how about a way to get more of those tags filled?

[Doewhacker]

"The way things are now is obvioulsy not working, you hear it all the time on this site and others "I dont see any deer in my area" or "DEC over issues DMPs for my area", "

Thats another problem, what some may say is a poor area others have great luck in. Thats where those infrared helicopters come in to help count the actual deer numbers. lol yea right, our state is broke!

[First-light]

We all piss and moan about the number of yotes everyone is seeing these days and don't forget the bears. Best way to keep the herd strong when there is a lot of predation is more fawns. Shoot less does. I also don't like shooting does at bow season, never know who might be following her to your stand.

[Doewhacker]

We all piss and moan about the number of yotes everyone is seeing these days and don't forget the bears. Best way to keep the herd strong when there is a lot of predation is more fawns. Shoot less does. I also don't like shooting does at bow season, never know who might be following her to your stand.

I tell you what I can do Burt, I'll set up down the trail from you and you pass the doe and let me shoot it, you can shoot bucks till your'e blue in the face I'm fine with that. lol 

[steve863]

We all piss and moan about the number of yotes everyone is seeing these days and don't forget the bears. Best way to keep the herd strong when there is a lot of predation is more fawns. Shoot less does. I also don't like shooting does at bow season, never know who might be following her to your stand.

I tell you what I can do Burt, I'll set up down the trail from you and you pass the doe and let me shoot it, you can shoot bucks till your'e blue in the face I'm fine with that. lol 

I have an even better idea, we can pretend to be a yote and a bear and we can kill all the does Burt decides to pass up without a need for a hunting license, a DMP, Either sex archery/ML tag or anything like that.  Of course Burt might take a shot at us if he sees us, but I am confident enough that he will miss us if he does.  Doe, you can stick your tongue at him to distract him while I get away with the venison.  We'll meet up at the truck!   

Looks like Burt's trailcam already caught us setting up.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Like I have said before, it has to be done by zone, you cannot have a state wide system and use state wide numbers. They need to control the number of does taken in each zone, the only way to attempt it is to hand permits out by zone, like they are talking about doing.

DEC figures in natural mortality rates, vehicle kills, birth rates, etc already. Yes, our state is broke, and the most cost effective, best way to improve upon the current system is to go to a total DMP based system and eliminate the either sex tags. Any other way would cost too much.

Im stepping off of the soap box on this one, if you guys cant understand the logic, you never will.

[WNYBuckHunter]

We all piss and moan about the number of yotes everyone is seeing these days and don't forget the bears. Best way to keep the herd strong when there is a lot of predation is more fawns. Shoot less does. I also don't like shooting does at bow season, never know who might be following her to your stand.

So go hunt the coyotes and bears, dont just sit around and piss and moan they are there.

If you dont understand what your area's carrying apacity is, and you dont shoot does, you are hurting your herd. BTW, by "your area's carrying capacity", I dont mean your property, I mean the whole area that the herd covers.

[Doewhacker]

Watch your step getting down WNY.

Seriously though, they say the herd is at what, at least a few hundred thousand, what harm will taking 9000 do. I don't see the need to manage things so tightly that its not fun any more. Manage the gun and ML take and leave bow hunters alone, its hard enough to get one with the bow, no need to make it harder.

[Doewhacker]

"Of course Burt might take a shot at us if he sees us, but I am confident enough that he will miss us if he does.  Doe, you can stick your tongue at him to distract him while I get away with the venison.  We'll meet up at the truck!    [img alt=]http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/smiley.gif[/img] "

Why do I gotta distract him, come on man! I would rather make off with the meat than be the target for him to shoot at. Maybe we can make a card board cut out of us waving at him and put a target right on it for him that way we can both escape unharmed.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Watch your step getting down WNY.

Seriously though, they say the herd is at what, at least a few hundred thousand, what harm will taking 9000 do. I don't see the need to manage things so tightly that its not fun any more. Manage the gun and ML take and leave bow hunters alone, its hard enough to get one with the bow, no need to make it harder.

I always do. 

That 9000 isnt much if you are looking at statewide numbers, but break it down by zone and the story very well may be different. If they want 400 does taken out of a specific area, but there is an influx of bow/ml hunters that year, and 600 does are taken, that could be a serious problem for that area.

[First-light]

We all piss and moan about the number of yotes everyone is seeing these days and don't forget the bears. Best way to keep the herd strong when there is a lot of predation is more fawns. Shoot less does. I also don't like shooting does at bow season, never know who might be following her to your stand.

So go hunt the coyotes and bears, dont just sit around and piss and moan they are there.

If you dont understand what your area's carrying apacity is, and you dont shoot does, you are hurting your herd. BTW, by "your area's carrying capacity", I dont mean your property, I mean the whole area that the herd covers.

Exactly what I meant. The whole area. You can look at some threads here about yotes and people really complain about the destruction on the deer herd. One way to solve it is not to shoot too many does. Not true for the whole state just your area. I don't piss and moan about the yotes, my area has a lot of them but we also have a lot of deer. Steve and Doe better not be down wind of me after a night of beans and franks, that will kill'em without even shooting. ;D

[Doewhacker]

I always do. 

That 9000 isnt much if you are looking at statewide numbers, but break it down by zone and the story very well may be different. If they want 400 does taken out of a specific area, but there is an influx of bow/ml hunters that year, and 600 does are taken, that could be a serious problem for that area.

Do you think that bow hunters could increase their percentage by 25%. I know it was just an example but still? I am separating out the ML hunters by the way, I think that they should be included with Regular season numbers as they are guns and therefore much more effective.