Which would you prefer??

[Doc]

As far as I am concerned there are big deer out there and anyone is free to choose mature deer for harvesting. However that choice comes with limitations. It has to be understood that currently that choice will contain additional challenges because of a lack of AR. However, it was always my understanding that most people who hold out for Mature deer do so because they enjoy the extra challenge and take some a measure of satisfaction when they are successful that they have done something that is not an every-day common accomplishment. But now, some of these people want what amounts to a "subsidy". Now they want help. They want the accomplishment cheapened a bit so that they can be more successful, more often at the choice that they made. They want some of that challenge stripped away by forcing others to have their choices legally removed.

There may be other more practical reasons for AR and the legal removal of choice, but assisting in trophy harvests probably should not be one of them. It is still good that getting a trophy buck has a special significance. Those that choose to take on additional challenges are free to do that. The rest simply want to continue to be able to make their choices as well. For various reasons that I have stated in the past, I think they should be able to keep that choice.

[Pat Rockets]

I am a deer hunter...if it is a slick head..its in danger..if its a large buck..its in danger..and in the last few weeks of the season..every brown furry creature is in danger..i measure my success by #s divided by time..as long as im spending time out there and comin up with deer to eat i(and the boss) are happy..i had the pleasure of the landowner member of my family after somthing like a 16yr absense from the woods parttake in this years goings on..in the start of the year he was certain he was going to tag out..and had the audacity to say "should be easy, deer are everywhere"..and only after the finale weekend did he realize hunting is not as simple as he had percieved and now is dealing with the smell of skunk.just goes to show you it aint as easy as it looks, and ar's would make it even harder for some to be what i call "successful"..in my head a good system would be a pay as you go..bang out 10 deer..then yer buyin that many tags..pass every deer this season, well then thanks for playin..better luck next yr..id rather pay bike tax than see ar in nys

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Interesting post, Doc. Do you think that any buck that makes the cut for a book measurement in an area that is AR should have an asterix next to it. I mean after all it shouldn't really be compared to a deer that made the cut under the old non-subsidised system..lol

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Just some food for thought.. some like to complain that AR's limit their choices.. but it works the opposite way as well.. big bucks hunters have had their choices limited as well... the historic slaughter of yearling bucks has lessened the amount of bigger bucks in the woods for guys that like bigger bucks and there is nothing we can do about it.. just sayin'

So really it it limiting everyone while providing a benefit to some...just sayin'

[Grizz1219]

The guys that oppose the 1 buck rule.... outside the realm of, "don't tell me what to do"... what is the reasoning behind wanting to shoot another buck over a doe?? Or, is the deer herd in your area that low that you don't see enough deer so limiting your choice would dramatically decrease your chances of filling the freezer..

[Culvercreek hunt club]

A pretty large portion of the state does not have doe permits. I think a good number of WMU's are low issue numbers too. I think that could weigh into their views

[hunterman]

I think there is a bigger problem then One Buck or AR. Like a lott of the guys here i hunted for a large part of my life .During that time i probobly hunted from place to place in and around my county.I am probobly one of the few lucky enough to be able to say that.Things have changed .There is not the same amount of land .A farm i use to hunt when i was younger is now a housing development .The open land is harder to find.Everything is posted.There are more hunters on each parcel ,but thats becouse there are less open parcels deer.Meny of the areas holding deer are in the city limit.Each time the couny or town decides to sell what they always sead was forever wild .I useualy have one less place to hunt.Ihope i dont wake up and find theres no place to hunt ,or if there is then you have to pay 3,000 for the privaledge.We need to save some land for us .What us hunteres need to do is stick together in all areas North ,South, East ,.Weast .Try to be sure that there is still vacant adjoining lands where those developments or shopping plazas go in.Its well known that new york state has a lot of land to hunt .Not any more ,look around where you live and hunt Am i wrong..Its not just here its everywhere.Remember when you could sit on stand and watch the animals do there thing ,the fresh air . How nice and calm it was .You could here everthing going on.The good old days.Ihave a some hunteres who live and hunt on land next to me ,We have an agreement as to limitation of what is taken and it is based on the heard size and food suply.We have agreed on mature bucks bucks for the next three seasons .tony

[jusputtn]

Would you rather see the state go to AR's across the state or go to a 1 buck per year no matter what rule????

Neither. I'm not in favor of AR's. I think the buck take should be based on wildlife biology. If the population can only handle 1 buck per year, fine. If it can handle several, cool, though I don't know what I'd do with all that deer meat. I trust that the DMP's would still be given out based on the same theories that they are today.

[Doc]

I definitely could live with a "one-buck rule". No question that it wouldn't change my harvest at all ..... lol. But I still think it is merely a feel-good meaningless effort that would have an insignificant result on buck populations. Somebody did mention one possible beneficial side-effect .... that was that perhaps more hunters would be a bit more selective in the quality of the buck that they take. For those hung up on what kind of deer that others harvest, I guess that might actually work that way. Other than that, nobody would probably ever notice the difference except that rare individual who encounters the luck to have a second buck available for a shot. It turns out to be of no benefit to anyone, and actually irritates a few. So it seems like a lose-lose result..... just the kind of law that we need more of ..... right?

[nyantler]

Joe, it's been like that for as long as I have been hunting. So even with out AR you can still hunt your big bucks if you want too. Just as you have done in the past. But know with AR the odds are more in your favor. Not in the favor of the average hunter, his choices are limited and yours are going up. So for the trophy hunters this is a good deal, not so for those not in favor of AR.

You are missing my point... either way choices are limited... the non AR guys chances are better without AR's and the AR guys chances are better with AR... each is limited in some way no matter how you look at it... yet each has an opportunity to kill a buck in either situation. Using the argument of taking away choices works either way. The argument for OR against AR's should be based on good deer management... not on who gets the better deal in their personal hunting experience... as for the AVERAGE hunter... I would say that according to what I've seen so far in any survey.. including the one done on this forum... more are in favor of some kind of AR... so I'm not sure where we all get the notion that the average hunter is against AR's.

No matter what hunting regulation is passed.. someone is not going to like it... the fact that it is not liked by some shouldn't be what makes it good or bad from a management point of view... it's either good for management or it isn't.. my opinion is this shouldn't be a one hunter against the other issue... yet some think it should.

[Pat Rockets]

Its not natural to manage..hense natural selection..if we could clone big bucks ..everyone would be smilin

[Doewhacker]

Antler I have a question for you, why do you try to dictate how and why others feel a certain way about things?

You routinely say that a guys reason for or against something isn't good enough for you. No one needs a "good" reason to not like something, it is up to them to decide if they are for or against something even if their reason is just cause.

None of this has any thing to do with AR's I suppose, ...just sayin

It is also important to note that there are many different forms of AR's, not just the one DEC has in place now.

[Doewhacker]

And I already know your response to the above statement, "I'm not forcing any thing on any one...if some one is feeling forced to do something from the internet...ect..."

We have ALL heard how you feel on AR's and QDM 1000 times, we get it, its all about herd management for you. I have no problem with how or what you feel on the topic, but it doesnt change any ones mind by the number of times you post it.

[Grizz1219]

Its not natural to manage..hense natural selection..if we could clone big bucks ..everyone would be smilin

But seeing we've altered their habitat, their popualtion has grown tremendously... So, we need to manage the herd. So yes, it may not be natural to manage them, but it is a responsibilty to do so...

[Doewhacker]

Guys we manage them every year, hunting season is management.

[Dave]

Haven't we heard that the DEC studies showed no significant benefit to the deer population. I think I have read it on this site where it was posted right off the DEC website. First of all the way things have been before the AR started, did not stop hunters from shooting big bucks. That was their choice, but now with AR if your not a trophy hunter you don't get a choice. This is not pitting one hunter against another it's just a different mentality of hunting. As far as more hunters on this site being for AR I don't buy it, not everyone on this site posts their preference just the most vocal respond. There are over a 1000 members to this forum i believe and most of the surveys only capture a small group of members. I believe there is a silent majority against AR. MHO

[Grizz1219]

Hence my original question... who would rather see a 1 buck rule over AR's... For the guys that want to go out and shoot a buck... they still can.. guys that want to shoot a mature deer can hold out...

[G-Man]

Doc, i did like the subsidy parody of having more older buck to increase ones chances of harvesting a trophy...got a good chuckle out of that. It seems where few or no dmp are issued and ar's are or will be going in effect they are near high human population areas or remote wilderness. If left unregulated there maybe just seeing a track would make the paper.... As for the majority of the state would ar's even be and issue if not pasted in every magazine and tv hunting show????? If forced into having to make that choice i guess i'd go with ar's but i'd be really unhappy with having any more regs shoved at me....

[Doewhacker]

For those that have not read the DEC plan reguarding their thoughts on the various forms of AR's, now is a good time to do so. Pages 42-47, there will be a test next Tuesday.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/deerplan2012.pdf

[nyantler]

And I already know your response to the above statement, "I'm not forcing any thing on any one...if some one is feeling forced to do something from the internet...ect..."

We have ALL heard how you feel on AR's and QDM 1000 times, we get it, its all about herd management for you. I have no problem with how or what you feel on the topic, but it doesnt change any ones mind by the number of times you post it.

I'm not trying to change anyones mind... just stating how I think it is.. just my opinion just like everyone else... it should be all about herd management.. that is the only reason there is still hunting is because of the conservation argument... otherwise there wouldn't be any rules or regulations... there were no deer hunting regs in NY until the 20th century... so if it's not about management what is it about? I feel that most hunters miss the point of why we even need to regulate at all... we've tried it the other way and it didn't work... the way some guys think here makes me wonder why the DEC bothers with having biologists on the staff... I'm sorry if some here don't like what I'm saying... but it's the reality.. like it or not...

As for me thinking the reasons aren't good enough.. thats right.. and who are you to tell me I can't think whatever I want? Kind of a double standard huh?.. you can have your belief but I can't have mine... like I've said before.. I really don't care who doesn't like it.. if I did i wouldn't have said it... it's my opinion and as long as there is a forum where I can voice my opinion I'm going to.. just like everyone else.

[Doewhacker]

As for me thinking the reasons aren't good enough.. thats right.. and who are you to tell me I can't think whatever I want? Kind of a double standard huh?.. you can have your belief but I can't have mine... like I've said before.. I really don't care who doesn't like it.. if I did i wouldn't have said it... it's my opinion and as long as there is a forum where I can voice my opinion I'm going to.. just like everyone else.

Now you are not making any sense here, come on Joe. That reply is not good enough for me, retype it until I like it or say its good enough for me.

[nyantler]

So really it it limiting everyone while providing a benefit to some...just sayin'

In a way killing smaller bucks is putting a limit on the amount of bigger bucks avialable for everyone... so it still works in both directions I think... a 3 on a side AR rule would still allow for some of the small bucks to be fair game, but also would allow for more hold over bucks each year.. so the limitations would balance out... remember that AR's will only reduce the buck take for a couple maybe 3 years until the ages start to balance out.. then hunters will be taking the same amount of bucks they do now.. just more of them will be bigger... everyone wins.. even the bucks

The truth is all of this would really be just theory if AR's hadn't already been proven to work time and time again for balancing out age structure and buck population. It's just a fact that can't be disputed... whether or not it should be mandated is arguable... its value to age structure and amount of older bucks produced is not. Will it gaurantee a buck for every hunter each year?.. No.. but neither does what we have now...

Edited December 21, 2011 by nyantler

[Doewhacker]

... the way some guys think here makes me wonder why the DEC bothers with having biologists on the staff...

Thank goodness they do employ biologist, other wise they would make decisions based on social issues.....like they say AR's are.

[Doewhacker]

... remember that AR's will only reduce the buck take for a couple maybe 3 years until the ages start to balance out.. then hunters will be taking the same amount of bucks they do now.. just more of them will be bigger... everyone wins.. even the bucks

Wrong answer, the buck take goes down but never goes back to what it was, it is currently down in all but one AR's zone. And on top of that, the 2.5 yr old take goes up by 50% but the 3 and 4 yr olds do not increase by a noticble margin.

[nyantler]

Wrong answer, the buck take goes down but never goes back to what it was, it is currently down in all but one AR's zone. And on top of that, the 2.5 yr old take goes up by 50% but the 3 and 4 yr olds do not increase by a noticble margin.

Can't help that guys aren't good enough hunters to kill the older bucks..lol.. seriously though the reason for that I think is because hunters want to always play close to the rule... in other words they are still settling for the least that can be taken instead of realizing that there are more 3 and 4 year olds to hunt and hunting them. Unfortunately the 2.5 year olds aren't yet as experienced as the older bucks and will still be the easier ones to kill... AR's have done there job by balancing out the buck herd, now it is up to the hunter to do theirs... kill the deer... and never say never.. say yet... as hunters start to adapt over time the kill numbers will climb.