New law establishes antler restrictions in a part of WMU 3A

[burmjohn]

Its posted on the DEC news section , but here also just in case for those who Hunt in this area.

On August 17, Governor Cuomo signed into law a bill (S5602/A394-A; http://m.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S5601-2011) that establishes mandatory antler restrictions in the portion of Wildlife Management Unit 3A that lies south and west of State Route 28 (includes parts of Delaware, Sullivan, and Ulster counties).  The law prohibits hunters from taking any antlered deer except those antlered deer that have at least one antler with at least three points.  The law applies to all public and private lands and all hunting seasons.  Only hunters under the age of 17 are exempt and may take any antlered deer with at least one antler measuring three or more inches in length.

This law goes into effect immediately, and hunters are expected to comply with the new law during the 2011-2012 hunting seasons.  Deer hunting regulations in all other WMUs were not affected by this legislation.  DEC is in the process of updating our website to reflect the new law.

[JCTheGC]

Oh wow, thats great news...  I wasn't sure if it was going to get done this year in time.

[SteveB]

Without before for or against it, I absolutely hate that the legislature is attempting management.

They are even further removed from the real needs then what many feel the DEC is.

[nyantler]

Without before for or against it, I absolutely hate that the legislature is attempting management.

They are even further removed from the real needs then what many feel the DEC is.

Ain't that the truth?????

[A Sportsman]

Hey Folks,

New poster here.  Just came across this site and am happy to be reading some hunting chit chat as I am looking forward to the coming season.  I suppose before I post any comments, I should introduce myself.  My name is Al and I live on Long Island .  Hunting and fishing is all I’ve really cared about for as long as I can remember.  I hunt bow season (mostly on LI) and I rifle hunt about 10 days/year in 3A, specifically in the area that this new regulation pertains to. (south and west of Route 28).  I am 35 and have been hunting State Land in 3A since I was 16.  My father and uncle have been hunting the area every year since the late 60s.   

I should point out that I am not a “computer-guy” and while I’ve lurked on many fishing and hunting websites for the past 10 years, I’ve never actually posted anything.  When I read about this new regulation however, I felt compelled to comment on how much I am opposed to it.

Let me first state that I am not for or against ARs, on the whole.  I am of the thinking that it depends on the specific area. 

The area in question is characterized by huge expanses of mountainous land and virtually no farms.  So the carrying capacity is relatively low. (Doe tags almost never offered in 3A).  Much of the land is designated “Forever  Wild” by the state, which means no permanent tree stands, and no motorized vehicles.  Over time, these restrictions, combined with general decline of hunter recruitment, have meant less and less hunters/hunting pressure.

So you have a huge area, with relatively low deer population and few hunters.  Given these conditions, people would have to be crazy to think that AR is the correct path.  As evidence of my point, Iet me point out that over the past 8 seasons, my hunting party (5 guys) have taken 16 deer.  Admittedly, not a good success ratio.  But 14 out of 16 have had 3 points or more on one side.  And we aren’t hunting for horns either.  We’ve only passed up a few (3 or 4?) small bucks over that time.

My other point is that some years the hunting is very difficult.  Due to population level, weather, and terrain, in a week of hunting, I may only have one opportunity with a good shot on a buck.  After a week of going up and down mountains, in all kinds of weather, busting my hump, it’s insulting (to say the very least) to have someone tell me I can’t take home venison.  I’m so shocked that hunters felt the need for AR in this area, that I can’t help but question all the other areas where hunters wanted it.  In my eyes, those who argue for AR just lost a lot of credibility.

Thanks for listening…glad for the opportunity to contribute to the site,

Al

[nyantler]

Nobody is saying you can't take home venison... it just has to have at least 3 points on a side...

[Larry]

This sounds good deer management by politician.  You guys have no idea what you just did YOU JUST STUCK IT IN ALL REST OF ARE rears. JUST WHAT WE NEED HAVING POLITICIANS MANAGEING WILDLIFE. You guy’s couldn’t wait one more year.

[Meat Hunter]

  Mr. A Sportsmen, from what you say the 3 point rule will have little impact on your group since your lucky enough to find larger bucks as you say of the bucks your group harvested “14 out of 16 have had 3 points or more on one side.  "

So you will still be harvesting 3 points on a side.

If your area is very low on deer shouldn’t you do every thing possible to strengthen the herd? 

69.8% of the sportsmen who go afield in 3A support 3 points on a side.

I have to agree- forever wild- needs to be forever wild and allow natural fires to create clearing and the resulting regeneration to improve wild life habitat.

[A Sportsman]

Hey meat hunter,

I realize that since most of the deer we shoot have 3 points, the rule may not have a big "actual" affect on us.  Let me point out that one of the two that didnt have 3 pts, was a spike that I shot some years ago.  After a week of seeing very few deer, hunting up and down mountains from 5am to 4 pm everyday,  I shot the spike on the very last afternoon.  Long story short, it lifted the spirits of the camp and to this day is one of the deer that I;m most proud of.  (it had only 5" spikes too)

With respect to strengthening the heard, I respectfully disagree.  You have to grasp the true vastness of the woods we are in to get an idea of how little impact the taking of one or two deer will have.  The severity of the winters has all to do with the herd in this area.  not the smathering of deer that get killed by hunters.

Like I said originally, I understand the desire for AR in other areas.  Just not this one.  I am saddened by the number of other hunter in 3A (69%) who desire the 3pt restriction.  I hunt mainly on 3 mountains in the high peaks of the catskills, and many days I cover a lot of ground, and almost never run into other hunters, and when i do its one of the same 3 guys.  I guess I question where these guys (69%) are and why they feel AR would improve their hunting? 

 

[nyantler]

Having an AR in a vast area with low deer density does nothing to hurt the herd in that area... places as remote as where you hunt are seldom hunted heavily because of the vastness... low density is different than low population.. the land might be at its carrying capacity based on the food source... AR's probably would have little impact in that area... so yes.. maybe not necessary but definitely won't impact the deer herd there much... averaging 2 bucks a year in a remote area is nothing to sneeze at.. and it doesn't sound like AR's will cause any problem where you hunt... and usually guys that hunt remote areas are voluntarily taking bigger bucks anyway so they would be more apt to be in favor of AR's.

[A Sportsman]

It is obvious that some people are just in favor of AR across the board without regard for the specifics of an area.  (NY Antler, I do appreciate your comment on seeing how little of an impact it would have on my area). Everyone is allowed to there own opinion....

For me personally, and I think other guys who hunt areas like mine, it doesn;t bother me that some other guy shoots a small buck.  I'm hunting a challenging area because I am up for that challenge.  Deer that get shot are all part of it.  The same way it was for my dad, and the guys who hunted the land before him.  I say kudos to the gent who shot his 4 pointer.  I know he worked a lot harder for that buck than most other hunters work for their's.

But Trust me, if i was a hunting a small private property, where we always see the same spike and 4 ptrs, I would probably support AR.  Or hunt somewhere else.  totally Different situation.

[nyantler]

It is obvious that some people are just in favor of AR across the board without regard for the specifics of an area.  (NY Antler, I do appreciate your comment on seeing how little of an impact it would have on my area). Everyone is allowed to there own opinion....

For me personally, and I think other guys who hunt areas like mine, it doesn;t bother me that some other guy shoots a small buck.  I'm hunting a challenging area because I am up for that challenge.  Deer that get shot are all part of it.  The same way it was for my dad, and the guys who hunted the land before him.  I say kudos to the gent who shot his 4 pointer.  I know he worked a lot harder for that buck than most other hunters work for their's.

But Trust me, if i was a hunting a small private property, where we always see the same spike and 4 ptrs, I would probably support AR.  Or hunt somewhere else.  totally Different situation.

Being for AR's should be solely in the interest of having a balanced age structure among the bucks in a given habitit... without consideration for how hard the hunting is or how much time one has to hunt.. etc... good deer management is done for the sake of improving the deer herd  based on available habitat and other needs within the herd... not hunter interest in big antlers... although that is a "not so bad" bi-product of having a balanced buck herd.

[A Sportsman]

My point is that this area has a balanced buck herd. Remember, it is Forever Wild. That means, there is no other human variables that can impact the herd. No logging (habitat change), no agriculture, etc.

If something isn't broken, why bother fixing it? especially at the cost of taking away a hunter's freedom to choose.

You could say what you will about AR being about "improving the herd based on habitat other needs" but do you really think AR would have ever been congered up if everyone was shooting monster bucks? Not a chance.

we could go on forever talking about this. its such a controversial issue. At the end of the day, this was a needless rule that was borne from politics, not a true understanding of the area. The deer herd is/was as nature allowed. With zero problems of little bucks being killed too early. The only thing it accomplished was that it took away a hunter's freedom. Its a shame.