Antler Restrictions - What are your thoughts?

[SteveB]

  One more thing those who claim they let small bucks walk most of you don’t. You can see it in the buck take the percentage of 1 ½ year old in the take has stay almost the same for the last 20 years there doesn’t seem to be a lot of support for AR’s if there were you would see a reduction in the buck take coming out of the 1 ½ year olds in the take.    :'(

I have seen this point made several times over the lives of these AR threads, and I have never seen anyone rebut it. It seems there is something really wrong with the notion that AR is such a popular concept when apparently so few actually practice it. Why is there never any response to this point?

Simple Doc - no one answers because they cannot. The numbers spreak for themselves. If 59% of the hunters support the concept of mandatory AR and only 18% strongly oppose, who is killing the all the 1.5 bucks!!!!!

[SteveB]

Maybe it was this part that Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective-Yearling buck harvest is down 70%.

Try the real numbers. If you use the report to claim success, use all the report and do not

accept some numbers, but dismiss others.

Overall buck kill is down aprox 300 total

1.5 is down just under 400.

Means 2.5 and 3.5 kill is only 100 more.

Where did the other 300 1.5 Bucks go? ??? ??? ?

[wztirem]

The anti ARs and the dec is making the assumtions.  I'm going by what I experience.  And yes THEHUNTER  we are seeing many more older deer after a few years in place

Personal experience and preference you say,Education is the key and  not mandatory enforcement. On the other hand, perhaps you and your cronies will be willing to to personally fund a statewide AR program. Have you any idea on how much money a program such as statewide AR will cost?  Where is the money coming from? I certainly do not want to pay for it!

I am sure that you believe that a statewide AR program will be money well spent on a program that the DEC says has zero biological benefit to the deer herd in lieu of earmarking limited funds on more important issues such as habitat improvement and public land acquisition.

Where is the hard data which supports your argument for the need for mandatory AR (opinions, personal experience and preference do not constitute hard data). It is obvious that for personal reasons you fail to take into account what the ramifications of the implementation of AR entail.

[Larry]

Thehunter you hunt in a AR zone and you have taken the option of killing any buck away so your numbers are skewed. If you still could shoot any buck even with 72% saying they are in favor of AR’s you would have a harvest rate of about 70% 1.5yearolds.

[Larry]

fairgame witch one the 2009 harvest report or the AR report I've read both

[solon]

Here is what I don't understand - everyone here is a supporter of the 2nd amendment - which stands for freedom - yet many want to impose restrictions on the way I can hunt

Dont Tread on Me

[WNYBuckHunter]

Here is what I don't understand - everyone here is a supporter of the 2nd amendment - which stands for freedom - yet many want to impose restrictions on the way I can hunt

Dont Tread on Me

Freedom doesnt mean anarchy (no regulations or laws). Just sayin...

[Fairgame]

Its funny how people that dont hunt the area and are against it are telling the people in the area that hunt it that its not working.

Easy math

1+1=2

2+2=4

2-2=0

1-1=0

If you let them go they will grow

[Doc]

Its funny how people that dont hunt the area and are against it are telling the people in the area that hunt it that its not working.

Easy math

1+1=2

2+2=4

2-2=0

1-1=0

If you let them go they will grow

Don't put down a little good ol' fashion skepticism  . I have seen so many cases of people being such rabid fans of something that they simply assign the wrong reasons for observed results. Also, I have seen perceived results skewed for completely unintended reasons simply because we tend to see what we want to see. Probably the absolute worst kind of "proof" that has the least amount of credibility are the comments of hunters and fishermen .... lol. I think those asking for some actual data are not being totally unreasonable. If it were a subject that had some real importance and some actual standing in terms of priority, I could picture you asking for hard data too in order to be convinced. Can you imagine anyone designing and implementing a game management system or supporting such a thing based on the observations of a handful of people on a forum? You wouldn't accept that would you?

Look, I've got no idea what you people have going over there. For all I know, you might even be understating what you are seeing. But I've got to say that when somebody tells me that AR works, they better be coming at me with some confirmed, officially obtained, hard numbers. Maybe I'm being a bit over-skeptical, especially on a subject that has pretty low priority with me, but I completely sympathize with those that refuse to take a few anecdotal observations as gospel.

Doc

[SteveB]

Simple math:

1000 minus 300 = current buck kill vs old buck kill.

400 less 1.5 while increasing 2.5/3.5 only 100.

Missing = 300 bucks

[WNYBuckHunter]

Could it be that those 300 were antlerless bucks? If I remember right, you could possibly report your antlerless kill as a buck in the reporting system.

[Doc]

Yes, we go back and forth with competing articles, and conflicting stats, and all kinds of crazy interpretations of facts and figures, and my take is that probably none of us are equipped to understand any of it. In addition, it doesn't seem like anyone of any credibility really is interested in giving us something that is simple and definitive. There's probably reasons for that.

However, what I can understand is that there is not unanimous opinion on AR among those that do have some level of credibility. So, the real question is why is there so much disagreement among those who really should understand all of it, those who make their living understanding such things, those who invested quite a few years of education so they could figure out what works and how and why? How come AR is not a universally accepted concept. In fact, why is it that most states do not have AR (even some of the noted Big Buck states)? What is the problem with this science that it encourages so much dissention among the experts? Is the science mature or not? It's certainly not a new concept.

Personally, I think the DEC has a lot bigger, more important, things on their plate than worrying about antlers. I have always said that I believe that AR is a concept that sits way, way, way, down the list of priorities. I have seen nothing to change my mind about that. If the DEC has some extra money laying around, AR is probably one of the last things that I would like to see them spend it on.

Doc

[Fairgame]

Doc,

I agree that the ARs are probably not a priority to the DEC in areas that dont have them.  But I also believe that they are looking at hunter satisfaction in the areas that do have them.  If a majority of hunters werent satisfied they would of taken them away.  In these areas there is a high support for ARS.  There wouldnt be a high support if the hunters in these areas wouldnt of noticed a difference for the better.  Hunter satisfaction is a priority for the DEC. 

[burmjohn]

Maybe it was this part that Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective-Yearling buck harvest is down 70%.

Try the real numbers. If you use the report to claim success, use all the report and do not

accept some numbers, but dismiss others.

Overall buck kill is down aprox 300 total

1.5 is down just under 400.

Means 2.5 and 3.5 kill is only 100 more.

Where did the other 300 1.5 Bucks go? ??? ??? ?

Smarter, Older, harder to kill maybe?

[Doc]

I need a bit of a refresher on how the AR test areas came about in the first place. Was it a DEC decision, or was it some kind of legislative act? I'm afraid I wasn't paying a whole lot of attention back then and I just can't remember the particulars of how it all came about. Anyone remember?

Doc

[wztirem]

Doc,

I agree that the ARs are probably not a priority to the DEC in areas that dont have them.  But I also believe that they are looking at hunter satisfaction in the areas that do have them.  If a majority of hunters werent satisfied they would of taken them away.  In these areas there is a high support for ARS.  There wouldnt be a high support if the hunters in these areas wouldnt of noticed a difference for the better.  Hunter satisfaction is a priority for the DEC.

If what you say is true, we have a problem! The priority should be the wildlife habitat and the critters who depend upon its preservation.

[Fairgame]

Ztirem,

The only problem you see is because you are against it.

[Fairgame]

Where do you see a problem with the habitat? and why is it a problem with letting more bucks to 2 1/2 years old live and control the population with the does.

[Fairgame]

Doc, this is what I found from the DEC website

The antler restriction program was initiated in 2005 in WMUs 3C and 3J and in WMUs 3H and 3K in 2006 based upon strong local support among hunters. DEC is evaluating the impact of the pilot antler restriction by monitoring changes evident in the deer harvest and by monitoring hunter attitudes through survey work conducted by the Human Dimensions Research Unit at Cornell University

[Buckstopshere]

As I recall, the mandatory AR notion was floated as a trial balloon through legislative pressure on the DEC, through heavy-duty campaigning through the NYSCC in a couple of the downstate DMUs. Its genesis - not from the DEC and science, but politics.

[wztirem]

Doc, this is what I found from the DEC website

The antler restriction program was initiated in 2005 in WMUs 3C and 3J and in WMUs 3H and 3K in 2006 based upon strong local support among hunters. DEC is evaluating the impact of the pilot antler restriction by monitoring changes evident in the deer harvest and by monitoring hunter attitudes through survey work conducted by the Human Dimensions Research Unit at Cornell University

Show us the most recent survey!

[Fairgame]

This is what I pulled off the DEC website.  READ!!!

[TheHunter]

Maybe it was this part that Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective-Yearling buck harvest is down 70%.

Try the real numbers. If you use the report to claim success, use all the report and do not

accept some numbers, but dismiss others.

Overall buck kill is down aprox 300 total

1.5 is down just under 400.

Means 2.5 and 3.5 kill is only 100 more.

Where did the other 300 1.5 Bucks go? ??? ??? ?

They were probably shot up by brown its down people like you.

Ever think the 1.5's turned into 2.5's and became smarter more mature deer? More aware of their surroundings, hunters, and other things.  No matter what you say, what you spin, those who hunt in AR zones know the results.  They see and shoot bigger more mature deer.  They see more younger deer, they see more deer period. 

Keep shooting those spikes!

[Doc]

As I recall, the mandatory AR notion was floated as a trial balloon through legislative pressure on the DEC, through heavy-duty campaigning through the NYSCC in a couple of the downstate DMUs. Its genesis - not from the DEC and science, but politics.

That's kind of what I thought I remembered, but it has been a while and like I said the whole thing didn't make much of an impression on me at the time. So I was a bit fuzzy on my recollection.

Thanks for the info guys. Sorry to interrupt the discussion.

Doc

[Doc]

They were probably shot up by brown its down people like you.

Ever think the 1.5's turned into 2.5's and became smarter more mature deer? More aware of their surroundings, hunters, and other things.  No matter what you say, what you spin, those who hunt in AR zones know the results.  They see and shoot bigger more mature deer.  They see more younger deer, they see more deer period. 

Keep shooting those spikes!

I'm not sure just who you guys are trying to convince and why. You are starting to sound like someone who is frantically trying to persuade people not to take away your AR. I'm not sure what your so afraid of. It sounds like the whole thing was a politically contrived arrangement, and it's not likely that the DEC has the stomach for going up against that sort of legislative pressure again. So as long as you keep your QDM lobbyists happy and strong, there is not likely going to be any movement to rescind AR in areas where it is currently. You can relax ..... ok?