Antler Restrictions - What are your thoughts?

[adk3006]

Whats even more interesting are the numbers of 60% and 77% supporting...77% sounds like more guys than 60% right?

77% represents 158 guys and 60%=169

I agree, I'd like to see what the %'s would be from the total # of hunters from these WMU's.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

OK...I just pulled license sales for Sullivan and Ulster counties for 08-09 season...Best I can tell it approximates the area of AR. total license sales that would have had a big game tag associated with them:

Sullivan-6786

Ulster-7368

Includes resident and NR

DO that math percentage and you tell me if they took an adequate sample of the hunting public. An as a matter of principal---if there are state land tracts in those areas I have a say in opposing AR there---because I PAY for that say.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

SO to be totally accurate---2.3% want AR....that is not true but just as true as saying 77% want it...lol

[woodsdweller]

i guess i need to ask why is harvesting a 1.5 old a bad thing? or is it that you guys are having trouble harvesting these smarter, mature bucks so you need to increse there numbers to help you succed in your quest for a wall hanger.

[steve863]

i guess i need to ask why is harvesting a 1.5 old a bad thing? or is it that you guys are having trouble harvesting these smarter, mature bucks so you need to increse there numbers to help you succed in your quest for a wall hanger.

It's NO different than taking a 2.5, 3.5 or any other age.  The state wants deer shot and they could care less what the age of the deer is as long as a certain number of deer get taken out every year.  It is only important to those who consider antlers the most important part of hunting.  The AR/QDM proponents have paid biologists to come up with these schemes and theories on how they think it would all improve the herd, but none of it has been proven in any shape or form.  The state of PA along with others after a number of years with AR's have come to the conclusion that AR's will not benefit the deer OR trophy potential, so then how could these AR people have any leg to stand on as to it benefitting the herd or trophy potential?  It is all wishful thinking on their part.  Give it enough time and it will be proven ineffective in NYS, just as it was elsewhere.  The regions in NYS have now had it in effect for several years so as the monkey said when it's tail was cut off.  "It won't be long now"!!

[Fairgame]

I love all the assumtions with no observations or experience.  Talking from experience is one thing, talking out of your A_ _ is another.

[Fairgame]

Doewacker,  If your going to use a calculator use it on the correct numbers.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Funny Fairgame, I have seen a lot of assumptions and that type of talking from the AR proponents in the thread. not much from the opponents. I have seen boasts of 77% support based on 2% of the hunting public in that area.

I do not dispute that letting the bucks walk will result in older bucks. I do have a problem with imposing restrictions on the hunting public based on flawed information and herd ebnefits that fly in the face of logic. Hell, even the NYS DEC says the benefits are inconclusive on there site.

So if we are tallking out our a-- at least our heads aren't so far up that our mouths cant move ...like the AR proponents seem to be....

Hey if the majority of the public thought bow hunting was cruel and inhumane.....should we follow that crowd too? bet I could take a 2% sample and get any results I wanted.

It is about imposing your will on others. AR do that and I know a few guys that are for it statewide. I would never invite them to my camp. not because of that but because their values don't reflect mine. The experience is what I am hunting for. The venison in the freezer is a bonus...the horns are like a picture... a reminder. No one or group should dictate how we choose to have that experience...within the limits of the law..of course

[Culvercreek hunt club]

How about my numbers...got a problem with those?

[Fairgame]

I wish ARs werent needed as they are not in most of the state from what I hear from others.  In the area I hunt which we all know is an AR zone, was it fair for the hunter that wanted to shoot a bigger buck but never had the opportunity to cause they really werent around?  I use to shoot smaller bucks and was kind of upset when these restrictions were coming to the area but after a few years of experiencing the difference in the deer we are seeing older and bigger bucks.  For the person that the rack doesnt matter the opportunity is still there to shoot a 5 or 6 point 1 1/2 year old deer.  Honestly there is alot of them around now.  I really believe the the opportunity to shoot a legal buck has increased but many people in these areas are holding out for the bigger one as I do now.  That is up to the hunter now in these areas.  It really isnt a bad thing.  I can only talk from experience in my hunting and from fellow hunters in the area.  I never tried to convince you guys that you should have it in your area only trying to say that it has improved the hunting in these areas.   

[Fairgame]

Your numbers are correct but the 2 percent wasnt needed cause they only asked a percentage of the AR zone and not the rest of the hunters.  If 77 percent of the people responded were for it in that area, How much do you think it would change if everyone in the area had to respond?  + or - a few percent?  I doubt that their percent error is more than that if everyone in these areas had to repond.  These numbers are all proprotional to each other.

[Doewhacker]

Doewacker,  If your going to use a calculator use it on the correct numbers.

Maybe you should read the report and find out that I am right. 77% of 199 is 158 and 60% of 283 is 169, that is the total number of responses to the surveys you two are boasting about.

[Fairgame]

Go and read all of your other calculations.  You are using all the wrong numbers.

[Doewhacker]

Go and read all of your other calculations.  You are using all the wrong numbers.

nope I'm right

[Fairgame]

What numbers are you using here. The entire state?

  yea roughly 566,000 hunters in the state and we swear the 327 responses (or .0005% of hunters) to a survey are all we need to go on. Let me go a little further, in 3J+C that is .00029% of total hunters and in 3H+k thats .00027% of total hunters.

A state with over 19 million residents and 327 is the best they can do.    Read what you wrote. Dont try making people look like an idiot when you dont know what your talking about   

[Fairgame]

Isnt the 327 the numbers of people that answered in these AR zones?

[Doewhacker]

Yup, I'm still right, those numbers come straight from the DEC.

[Doewhacker]

No thats the number that are for AR's, Sorry I confused you.

[Fairgame]

Forget it its going WAY over your head.  Not even worth it.

[Doewhacker]

No its not going over my head...482 people responded to the survey, out of that 327 approve of ars, there are roughly 566,000 hunters in NY. What else are you missing here?

[Fairgame]

The fact that they only asked the people in the AR zones..  What else you need an explanation for?  If 77 percent of those people im my AR zone Were for it.  How much more of a difference would it be if they asked everyone in the AR zone and had to repond.  Numbers are proportional to each other.  + or - a few percent.  What else?

[Doewhacker]

Actually for some reason they asked people that didn't hunt in the AR zones all the time..how dare they! I don't need any explanation, I know 77%.. or 158 guys from your area like AR's.

[Fairgame]

So you do understand that 77 percent of the entire 3h and 3k is not really going to change but plus or minus a few percent?  Reguardless if its 327 or everyone in these zones.  The percentage cant change much

[Culvercreek hunt club]

And that is an honest from thw heart reply that I can expect. I get a little fired up when folks make quotes and state facts that aren't true or are misleading. Thanks for the honest response

[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? ??? ??? ?

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!

Either you have not been reading my posts or you have a well defined ability to not understand them. This allows you to look like a complete horses azz when you call me a brown and downer and/or a spike shooter. Last buck I killed was 6 years ago - a 7pt that would would be legal with AR but was only a 1.5. Now waiting for something that is mature now - not the 2.5 or 3.5 that turn your crank and the majority of the AR whiners.  I just don't believe my goals should be forced on others - especially for the vodoo science claims that AR will solve a problem that does not exist - unless the problem is hunters needing it easier to smoke those 2.5 trophies with 10lbs more meat. If they truly believed the need to alter the age structure for the benefit of the herd was real, they would not be shooting any buck less then 4.5. And if the support was as high as claimed there would be no need for AR unless the majority of the alleged supporters are too hypocritical to follow the guidlines that want voluntarily.