Antler Restrictions - What are your thoughts?

[TheHunter]

Within WMU 3H hunter support is 77% for continuing the antler  restriction program. Hunter support for antler restrictions has  increased more than 22% since the start of the program. After three  years, opposition to continuation of the program has decreased from 26%  to 14%.

Some more facts to read here: http://www.nyswmc.com/conservation-facts/

THERE IS STRONG SUPPORT AMONG NY DEER HUNTERS TO PROTECT YEARLING BUCKS:

    * 59% of all NY deer hunters support a program that would protect yearling bucks, while only 18% were strongly opposed. (Cornell HDRU Survey 08-5)

    * Among hunters from the proposed 2009 AR program expansion areas, there was a level of support of 67%, yet NYSDEC opted to not implement the expansion. (NYSDEC survey March 2009)

    * Overall, 56% of the deer hunters in southeastern New York are dissatisfied with their buck hunting opportunities. (Cornell HDRU Survey 08-5)

[Lawdwaz]

Doc.. did you find and read that article in Outdoor life yet? You pretty much summed up the point of the authors.

I keep forgetting to go out town and pick up a copy. I might go out for supper tonite and stop in to get one.

Thanks for reminding me.

Available on line??

[Fairgame]

Everone jump on the internet and find some facts!!!

[SteveB]

How about these from the same NYSCC resolutions pages - not so positive:

http://www.nyscc.com/resolutions2010/antlerrestricharvestpg1.html

2010 RESOLUTIONS

Please note:

Committee comments are recommendations only;

all resolutions will be voted on at the  NYSCC Annual Meeting in September to determine a resolution’s passage or failure.

[font=]Subject:  Antler Restrictions/Alternate Harvest Strategies

Page 1 of 3 Pages

[/font]

  # 7-10  Delaware County

Whereas there has been a sustained effort on the part of sportsmen who already have mandatory antler restrictions in their counties to impose them on Delaware County;

Whereas Ulster County has proven that the Council’s help is not mandatory for implementation;

Whereas Delaware County Federation has continued to oppose the restrictions in our county which comprises WMU’s 4O and 4P by an overwhelming majority vote;

Whereas the data coming out of the areas that were in a 3 year pilot program has had mixed reviews and should continue to be studied;

Whereas the most negative potential effects of the restrictions are not always quickly experienced and need time to be appropriately studied;

Whereas there is no biological need for mandatory antler restrictions;

Whereas buck take from those areas that were supposed to recover in 3 years have not recovered, and after 3 years one of the WMUs was still down 39%;

Whereas hunter satisfaction that was supposed to rise with implementation has actually fallen. Dissatisfaction has risen double and triple the rate of satisfaction.

Whereas Pennsylvania has seen an annual 4% DECREASE in the number of nonresident licenses sold since the implementation of mandatory antler restrictions;

Whereas Pennsylvania has seen a buck harvest drop from a 2001 pre-restriction harvest of 203,247 to a 2007 harvest of 109,200 after it had 6 years to start a recovery;

Whereas New York does not have a penalty that fits the offense. In New York it is a minimum $250 fine and $75.00 surcharge with up to $2,000, 1 year in jail and a revoked license;

Whereas New York has by no means tried other alternate ideas to achieve the goals of the mandatory antler restriction advocates;

BE IT RESOLVED that the NYSCC oppose the implementation of mandatory antler restrictions in Delaware County’s Wildlife Management Units 4O and 4P. 

[Lawdwaz]

Everone jump on the internet and find some facts!!!

Hey Joe-

I was only trying to help Doc from spending his money on a rag like OL. 

[TheHunter]

Yeah umm, Im not in Delaware county nor every spoke for them.  I was posting FACTS for my County, thanks again. (fail)

[Fairgame]

No problem Lawdwaz. 

[SteveB]

Yeah umm, Im not in Delaware county nor every spoke for them.  I was posting FACTS for my County, thanks again. (fail)

Failed nothing - showed that the NYScc can't agree statewide.

Plus a lot of good points made that demonstrate the supporters may be wearing some real thick rose colored glasses.

[TheHunter]

Again, I'm not imposing statewide AR.  Some WMU's do not need AR, as their herd is doing just fine. Just as they do DMP management by WMU.  Clearly for 3 its working, and there are more supporters then those opposing it.  Your the one failing to see what everyone else is seeing.

[Fairgame]

When did you start hunting these zone Steveb.  The only thing you have is from what you read not from experience.  Your opposition doesnt hold water with the person hunting these zones. 

[Doc]

Again, I'm not imposing statewide AR.  Some WMU's do not need AR, as their herd is doing just fine. Just as they do DMP management by WMU.  Clearly for 3 its working, and there are more supporters then those opposing it.  Your the one failing to see what everyone else is seeing.

What criteria would you use for imposing AR or not? Who would cough up the resources for administering yet another management responsibility and making the ever changing decisions as to whether AR is appropriate each year?

Some interesting questions when we are talking about an agency that can't even afford to keep its law enforcement staff intact.

Doc

[Lawdwaz]

How about the honor system? ;D

[Doc]

How about the honor system? ;D

No, I don't think you understood what I was getting at. If it is decided that we need an AR law and that it shouldn't apply everywhere in the state, it does require some resources and planning and administration to determine what WMUs are appropriate and which are not. It is another system to be managed. The DEC can't even handle what's on their plate now because of slashed budgets and resource starvation. How are they supposed to take on more? Just curious.

Doc

[Doewhacker]

Again, I'm not imposing statewide AR.  Some WMU's do not need AR, as their herd is doing just fine. Just as they do DMP management by WMU.  Clearly for 3 its working, and there are more supporters then those opposing it.  Your the one failing to see what everyone else is seeing.

You AR guys do realize that DEC does not support any further AR zones and you may well see them go away right? And also you do realize AR's do not improve the herd right?

Also there are more supporting it but how many, what is the margin? Do you have any facts or data to back your claims... so far you guys have posted zero FACTS but alot of opinions.

[steve863]

The only reason AR's were implemented in the 4 WMU's is because you had some vocal "sportsman's" groups pushing for it.  The same was tried in the Delaware county, the county I hunt in last year.  Again we had some unknown "sportsman's" groups in the county pushing for it but luckily the DEC smartened up and figured that "sportsman's" group don't necessarily represent ALL hunters in the area and shot it down.  So what is happening here is that we are getting some unknown sportsman's group coming out of left field and trying to push everyone else around.  That is BS and I am glad that the DEC finally woke up and realized what was happening here.  If there could be a poll done of EVERY hunter that hunts these regions, I will guarantee anyone that AR's would lose out.  The DEC saying that there is NO biological need for AR's says it all in my opinion, and shoots any of these theories that AR's are good for a deer herd right out of the water.  PA's recent report pretty much says the same thing also.  AR's are for trophy hunters who want to try to make it easier for themselves and that is pretty much it.  Since there is no biological need for them according the the game departments, what else can they be??  I dare anyone to give me a good answer.  I will say this to the proponents of AR's and those who hunt in the regions where AR's are in effect.  Enjoy them while you can, because it won't be long before they are history! 

[Doc]

You AR guys do realize that DEC does not support any further AR zones and you may well see them go away right? And also you do realize AR's do not improve the herd right?

Also there are more supporting it but how many, what is the margin? Do you have any facts or data to back your claims... so far you guys have posted zero FACTS but alot of opinions.

What we see is a lot of, "I saw this" and "I saw that" and "I remember how it was and now it is so much better". These are the same things we have all said at one time or another about places that have never had AR. I'm not saying that they are wrong, I just do not see this as very convincing scientifically gathered data. That is something that I have been complaining about all through this thread and others before it. Personal observations and anecdotal evidence that one gathers just among their own aquaintances is not really proof that anything is really working or isn't. The system has been in effect long enough so that at least the beginnings of trends should be showing up in actual official harvest data, wouldn't you think. I wouldn't think that the judgement of success or failure should still be relying on personal, extremely local, single-point, observations. Some of the info is hard to get simply because it hasn't been publicly documented, but certainly harvest data for each WMU is available. Why isn't anyone quoting harvest changes from before AR and now with AR. I have caught little pieces of such data in some articles that I have read and I must say that I am not impressed. For those that are really trying to convince someone that AR works, I would have thought that a long time ago they would have been shoving their statistics of success at everyone. But no ...... that has not happened. Instead we hear what this individual saw or what that individual saw, or here's a picture of some big deer or, I know a buddy that saw this and such. How many pages to this thread now and unless I missed it, no real pieces of data. .......... How come???

Doc

[TheHunter]

You AR guys do realize that DEC does not support any further AR zones and you may well see them go away right? And also you do realize AR's do not improve the herd right?

Also there are more supporting it but how many, what is the margin? Do you have any facts or data to back your claims... so far you guys have posted zero FACTS but alot of opinions.

Christ, I've posted nothing but FACT.

 

• 
   
• Majority support it.
   
• WMUs 3H and 3K: 77% of respondents said the program should continue, 14% said it should not continue, 9% had no opinion.
   
• WMUs 3C and 3J: 60% of respondents said the program should continue, 29% said it should not continue, 11% had no opinion.
   
• State Wide Support:
   
•  
  • 
     
• Central and Western New York hunters: 57% support, 30% oppose, 13% no opinion
   
• Northern New York hunters: 52% support, 34% oppose, 14% no opinion
   
• Southeastern New York hunters: 63% support, 26% oppose, 11% no opinion
  

  [*]The 1.5 Harvest was reduced

  [*]59% of all NY deer hunters support a program that would protect yearling bucks, while only 18% were strongly opposed. (Cornell HDRU Survey 08-5)

  [*]Among hunters from the proposed 2009 AR program expansion areas, there was a level of support of 67%, yet NYSDEC opted to not implement the expansion. (NYSDEC survey March 2009)

  [*]Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective-Yearling buck harvest is down 70%

 

[steve863]

And how in God's name is this FACT??  You say 67% supported it in the unit they tried to implement AR's in last year.  Well, I hunt in that unit and know quite a few others who do also.  I personally asked everyone of them whether or not any of them had been polled on AR's.  Not ONE of them had anyone ever ask them anything about AR's so who exactly are the 67%?  Are they 67% of some mysterious "sportsman's" club who fed this info to anyone who wanted to listen??  Well, I wrote my letter to the DEC telling them that no one had polled me or any of the people I know and spelled out our opinions on AR's and why they shouldn't be implemented.  Not that my letter had anything to do with the DEC shooting down AR's in these units, but at least if there were other similar opinions expressed also it got the DEC to see the reality of some of the nonsensical statistics that were being thrown around on how many people out there actually might be true supporters.  The reality is that most hunters want to get a deer, any deer.  If it happens to be a big buck, fine, if not, most are still very content to get anything.  THESE are the hunters who make up the majority in the state and NOT the guys pushing for AR's.

[TheHunter]

Neither I or the 29 other Hunters in 3J and 3H that I know were polled either, however all 27 of them support it and 2 of them are on the fence.  So it goes both ways, they did not poll every single person, and if they did, the %'s would be +/- 2-3%.

[Doewhacker]

"Christ, I've posted nothing but FACT"

Yea from your sportsman group, to bad none of your non-sense has any affect on the DEC and what they do.

 

"Analysis of time series data also revealed that 28% consistently reported being satisfied all years and 26% reported being consistently dissatisfied. About 22% had decreasing levels of satisfaction over the 3 years whereas 12% had increasing levels"

">50% of hunters from both areas were satisfied with their overall deer-hunting experiences during the 2007 season (35% from both areas were dissatisfied)."

"Response rates were 62% (283 of 456 deliverable) for WMUs 3C-3J and 42% (199 of 463 deliverable) for WMUs 3H-3K "

    " In 3C-3J, >40% noticed an increase in number of hunters complying with restrictions, and >40% noticed no change in: buck age ratio, deer sex ratio, number of older, mature bucks, total number of deer, and number of hunters in those WMUs.  o In 3H-3K, >40% noticed an increase in: buck age ratio, number of antlered bucks of any age/size, and number of hunters complying with restrictions; >40% noticed no change in number of hunters in those WMUs. " 

"Despite substantial dissatisfaction and (as of yet) unmet expectations for desirable levels of many impacts in both pairs of pilot WMUs, most hunters still want antler restrictions to be continued." 

[Doewhacker]

There's more than 283 hunters in these WMU's right? All of these numbers and surveys are based on 283 people that took the time to respond, these 4 units are heavily hunted and only 62% of the 456 responded. Thats probaly less than the amount of members of one sportsmens club.

[TheHunter]

Yea from your sportsman group, to bad none of your non-sense has any affect on the DEC and what they do.

Nope this is from the DEC.  Stop skewing the truth, majority support it and AR works in MY WMU, based on FACT, end of story.

[WNYBuckHunter]

See, the DEC could stop all of this bickering and just have people take a 5 or 10 question poll when they buy their license each year. They could ask everyone the same set of questions each year and change up what questions are asked from year to year. That would be the one and only way that they could get a true feeling for how the hunting community really feels about certain subjects. If done correctly, all of the data could be broken down by WMU that the people live in and many other ways.

[Doewhacker]

"Since inception of the pilot antler restrictions, about one-third of hunters in both pairs of WMUs believed their overall deer-hunting satisfaction had increased, and about one-third believed their overall hunting satisfaction had decreased "

  "Slightly less than one-half of hunters from both pairs of WMUs reported that they were satisfied with their buck-hunting experiences during the 2007 hunting season, and 37-44% from either set of WMUs reported being dissatisfied (Table . The percentage who reported being satisfied did not differ between pilot areas (X2 = 1.416, p = 0.234), nor did the percentage "

  "A majority of all respondents from 3C-3J reported that five of eight possible positive aspects of hunting (all related to antlered bucks) were "too low" for them to be satisfied "

  "However, majorities of hunters who were satisfied overall reported that the number of mature bucks they saw, and the naturalness of the mix of older to younger bucks were "too low" for them to be satisfied"

  "Most hunters’ expectations have not been met for changes in the number of older bucks or big racked bucks seen in WMUs 3C-3J (Table 15). Prior to the pilot program, DEC had informed hunters that their chances of shooting an antlered buck likely would decrease under antler restrictions, but that their chances of shooting an older, larger-antlered buck likely would increase. Hunters from 3C-3J reported that the changes they experienced in their chances to shoot an antlered buck in general and a large-antlered buck specifically both were lower than expected. Very few hunters from 3C-3J indicated that their expectations had been exceeded for any of the six variables we examined"

  "Indeed, more than one-half (52.1%) consistently believed (over all the years for which we had data) that the pilot program should be continued..."

  "Two indirect indicators raise questions about the success of the pilot program. First, hunters in 3C-3J observed fewer bucks with smaller antlers per day of hunting than hunters in the broader area. Second, hunters in both pairs of pilot WMUs perceived a buck age ratio with fewer larger-antlered bucks than did hunters throughout the southeastern region."

[Doewhacker]

Nope this is from the DEC.  Stop skewing the truth, majority support it and AR works in MY WMU, based on FACT, end of story.

Really...52% is a slim majority, and I don't skew anything by mixing in data from a sportsman group like you did.. nice try.