Antler Restrictions - What are your thoughts?

[Fairgame]

Thank You!

Never tried pushing it on anyone, just trying to say the difference it has made.  For someone to say that it isnt working and never hunted the areas and is only looking at the report their own way is wrong.  I support it and I am happy to have it in our area now.  Opportunity for a legal buck is higher today than before from what I see.  These reports dont say why the harvest is 300 less than before.  Could it be that more people are holding out for the bigger buck they have been seeing?  I know I am reguardless of tag soup.  I know the opportunity is there thou. 

[Fairgame]

Not that I dont read them,  I ignore them.  The only horses azz here is probably you for not understanding.

[SteveB]

Obviously you read the last one but had trouble understanding it. If you did you would see it was not directed to you.

Thanks for making my point. ;D

[Fairgame]

So it was directed in a way toward Most of us correct.  Thanks for proving my point.

[SteveB]

Nope - direct reply to TheHunter. I can't help you feeling guilt.

[burmjohn]

Just to clarify its 77% of the people that responded to the random survey that hunted in 3H or 3K.  None the less, it would be great to see a survey done this year, with a larger sample set of people. 

[Doc]

Just to clarify its 77% of the people that responded to the random survey that hunted in 3H or 3K.  None the less, it would be great to see a survey done this year, with a larger sample set of people.

AR aside, I will always have a problem with taking tiny samples and extrapolating the results out to supposedly represent 100%. Sampling size is just one of the criteria to successful statistics, but an important one. When you start dealing with nearly insignificant sampling sizes, you always run the risk of unique situations or conditions of those surveyed that can skew results and make them meaningless. In fact, I have done that here locally in just striking up conversations with different hunters and landowners from different parts of our valley. There seldom is any real consensus on the state of the herd here. It's all a function of location and habitat and hunter patterns. So if you wanted real accuracy you would have to take opinion samplings from strategic spots throughout the valley to ensure you have the proper representation of the area and situation.

There is another potential wrinkle to surveys. Some of the respondants are likely to answer favorably because they don't want people to think they are lacking in their hunting abilities and not able to see what they should be seeing. That comment is not aimed at anybody here, but simply meant to show that surveys that rely heavily on statistical enhancement can be skewed by a number of different factors and always have to be looked at with a fair dose of healthy skepticism.

These are all just random thoughts and suspicions that run through my head anytime I review statistical data whether it relates to AR or whatever subject. There are so many things that can effect the accuracy, and the smaller the sampling the greater the ability to skew the results. Also, the more subjective or opinionated the topic, the more attention to details of the survey and to survey techniques and sample selections that have to be applied if the results are to be believed.

[TheHunter]

Animal husbandry is in fact a science, and there is no reason not to apply sound breeding practices to our free ranging herd of white-tailed deer in NY. In many areas hunters often observe fewer deer than meets their satisfaction and it’s easy to blame this on a number of things. We must not overlook the fact that every time a NY hunter pulls the trigger or releases an arrow, he or she is making a decision that will determine the herd’s characteristics for the next season. When a poor buck-to-doe ratio exists, we will experience a trickle rut. A breeding chronology that is extended as it appears to the case in some areas of NY is something that hunters can control. Only our stubborn adherence to outdated hunting traditions that results in annually clear-cutting the yearling buck population prevents us from refining deer breeding ecology.

Yearling bucks are capable breeders, and DNA analysis has shown that in white-tailed deer populations with a well-balanced age structure, yearlings will breed about 1/3 of the does. However, in unbalanced herds such as NY and other northeastern states with a poor buck age structure, yearlings by default are forced to conduct the bulk of the breeding over an extended period of time. This immature age class of male animals with the smallest physical stature, the poorest stored fat reserves, and the most inept breeding behaviors are forced to be the primary breeders over a needlessly long breeding season. It defies the basic logic of animal husbandry practices, yet is a time-honored scenario that currently plays out every fall, to the chronic long term detriment of overall deer herd health in NY.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

While I appreciate your argument, it is flawed. To compare animal husbandry to AR is apples and oranges. AH is controlled with the specific genetic characteristics selected prior to insemination. AR is still leaving it to mother nature with no guarantee the desired effexts will be reached. If your goal is large racks then true genetic manipulation woould have to occur as in AH.

The other flaw in your statement...you appear to suggest the age of the breeding buck would effect his genetic make up. The truth is....if that 1.5 year old breeds now or when he is 6.5....he will be passing on the same genetic code. Age has no bearing on that make up. To take you argument one step further. If you premise were true...you want the mature bucks breeding...wouldn't logic say to remove the smaller bucks. In a true AH situation you keep the mature breeding bull and cull the younger bulls for processing.

[Fairgame]

In order to reach an older age class you cant shoot most of the yearlings. ARs is protecting alot of the year and a half old bucks to reach an older age which helps the age structure of the herd.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

There is one other point you made that really frosts me. You say our outdated traditions are a detriment to the whole states herd. You took exception when I said you wanted to impose your views on others and commented it was just your area. The areas of the state I hunt...NZ and SZ have none of your claimed herd issues. 12+ mature bucks on an 80 acre parcel is no problem....you sound as though you are entitled to a big buck. Your attitude is one that is running out of control like wildfire in our society today....whether we are talking about big bucks....jobs...or food stamps....the sense of entitlement is nuts.

You mock the traditions so many hold dear....my advice to you nd others is get back to those traditions...the important ones. Perhaps you are new to this...or were never shown what is important about this sport...or maybe yiu just forgot...but try it. You will find it more fulfilling than any rack.....sorry...1 week with no cigarettes

[TheHunter]

There is one other point you made that really frosts me. You say our outdated traditions are a detriment to the whole states herd. You took exception when I said you wanted to impose your views on others and commented it was just your area. The areas of the state I hunt...NZ and SZ have none of your claimed herd issues. 12+ mature bucks on an 80 acre parcel is no problem....you sound as though you are entitled to a big buck. Your attitude is one that is running out of control like wildfire in our society today....whether we are talking about big bucks....jobs...or food stamps....the sense of entitlement is nuts.

You mock the traditions so many hold dear....my advice to you nd others is get back to those traditions...the important ones. Perhaps you are new to this...or were never shown what is important about this sport...or maybe yiu just forgot...but try it. You will find it more fulfilling than any rack.....sorry...1 week with no cigarettes

Mocking tradition? Hardly.  Our tradition is strong and healthly, 60+ years of hunitng in my family and nothing has changed from the fun we have at camp to the stories and harvesting of deer.

Entitlement is not my argument.  I never said AR is the end all cure, however it works by allowing 1.5's to survive, and giving everyone an opportunity to harvest a more mature deer in addition to allowing the maturing of the herd.

Your argument is whats flawed, in YOUR area you say there are mature deer and a healthly structure.  In my area there was not.  I am not speaking for YOUR area.  I'm going based on facts from our area's observations and harvesting.

[Doewhacker]

".... however it works by allowing 1.5's to survive, and giving everyone an opportunity to harvest a more mature deer in addition to allowing the maturing of the herd."

Except for the part where the overall buck take is down, meaning less people have the opportunity to take a buck. And what about the hunter satisfaction rate sitting at @50%...what about that?

[burmjohn]

Is it down? I posted this on the other thread...

Here is the buck harvest data from the DEC for the 3H WMU, its all the data they offer on the site. 2006 was the first year of AR in WMU 3H, which probably accounts for the drop in harvest that year.

Year    Bucks

2006    876

2007    1181

2008    1127

2009    1245

This is 3K

Year    Bucks

2006    656

2007    655

2008    701

2009    569

This is 3C

Year    Bucks

2006    508

2007    490

2008    433

2009    514

This is 3J

WMU    Year    Bucks

3J    2006    712

3J    2007    679

3J    2008    684

3J    2009    797

[Fairgame]

You being the mathematician .  How does letting more bucks survive to an older age give you less of an opportunity?  Does that make sense.  Letting some some of these bucks survive to an older age gives more of a opportunity.  If the hunter wants to hold out for a larger buck they can, and that could be the reason for a lower buck take , cause people are waiting for the larger buck they have been seeing.  As for having an opportunity at a legal buck it is greater from what I see, but I dont want to shoot the smaller buck because I have seen the larger ones around.  At this point the hunter has a bigger choice to make, Do I shoot this 5 or 6 point that I have in front of me or should I hold out for a bigger buck cause I have seen them around?  That is up to the hunter.  I choose not to shoot, but that is my choice.  Everyone has a better opportunity at a legal buck today in our area than before ARs from what I have been experiencing and others I have talked to in my area.

[Doewhacker]

Hey fairgame you might want to sit this one out me and BurmJohn are disscusing facts not fellings. ;D

Any way I am more confused than ever as to why a chart would show a drop in buck take but the numbers show something else...

These are Adult Buck take numbers state wide by year...they seem to go up and down with the rest of the deer take numbers.

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2009[/td]  [td]102,057[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2008[/td]  [td]105,747[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2007[/td]  [td]104,451[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2006[/td]  [td]96,569[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]  2005[/td]  [td] 89,015[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2004 [/td]  [td] 88,733[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2003  [/td]  [td]107,533[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2002[/td]  [td] 128,292[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2001[/td]  [td] 127,084[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]2000[/td]  [td] 140,857[/td][/tr][/table]

  [table]    [tr]  [td]1999[/td]  [td] 125,392[/td][/tr][/table]

Again these are not broken out into age class just adult male. It is also important to note the Fawn male take has stayed about the same for a looong time, maybe that should be more important?

[TheHunter]

WMU 3H is the largest unit in the current Antler Restriction program with 554 square miles. It also shares the majority of its borders with other antler restrictions units and states. This increases AR effectiveness.

Current buck harvest is within 10% of the buck take prior to implementation of antler restrictions three years ago.

Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective-Yearling buck harvest is down 70%, 2.5 year old buck harvest up 86% and 3.5 year old buck is up 167%.

After Antler Restrictions the harvest is comprised of only 18.6% yearlings. The majority of the harvest (54%) is 2.5 year old bucks, and 3.5 year old bucks comprise a full 25% of the harvest.

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%.

[steve863]

http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/27663.html

In order for a comparison to be done, you need to get the buck take numbers from these units BEFORE 2006 when AR's were implemented.  Posting numbers since 2006 don't tell us much.  I don't know if such figures could be found, but the link above states and shows a graph that the overall buck take since 2003 is considerably DOWN since AR's were put into effect.  Yeah, a few more 2.5 year olds or older have been taken, but not many more from prior to AR's.  You guys can try to spin it any way you like, but these AR's are NOT giving too many more hunters those 2.5 or older deer like you guys are trying to make everyone believe.  In the meantime the guys who would be happy with any buck are getting the shaft, thanks to your hokus pokus theories.  And in at least a couple of those AR regions they can hardly get a doe permit to boot! 

Harvest in the Pilot Antler Restriction Units (WMUs 3C, 3H, 3J and 3K)Harvest data (2003-2008) from the pilot units indicate:overall buck take is reduced;

• bucks 2.5 years and older make up a greater proportion of the buck take; and
• the number of 2.5 year old and older bucks taken with antler restrictions is slightly more than prior to antler restrictions.

[Doewhacker]

WMU 3H is the largest unit in the current Antler Restriction program with 554 square miles. It also shares the majority of its borders with other antler restrictions units and states. This increases AR effectiveness.

Current buck harvest is within 10% of the buck take prior to implementation of antler restrictions three years ago.

Antler Restrictions are accomplishing the objective-Yearling buck harvest is down 70%, 2.5 year old buck harvest up 86% and 3.5 year old buck is up 167%.

After Antler Restrictions the harvest is comprised of only 18.6% yearlings. The majority of the harvest (54%) is 2.5 year old bucks, and 3.5 year old bucks comprise a full 25% of the harvest.

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%.

You forgot to put on there A CASE STUDY when you cut and pasted that one from the web site

http://www.nyswmc.com/conservation-facts/

Those are their numbers and studies not DEC's

[burmjohn]

Unfortunately it seems the DEC doesn't have the historical data by WMU on the site anywhere that I found,  it only went back to 2006.  With out seeing the actual numbers, its hard to come up with any kind of analysis.  Buck take was DOWN for quite a few years after the high numbers in 2003 statewide. 

year    Adult Male    Fawn Male    Adult Female    Fawn Female    Total

2009    102,057    19,710    84,330    16,701    222,798

2008    105,747    20,000    79,953    17,279    222,979

2007    104,451    21,096    76,367    17,227    219,141

2006    96,569    18,336    60,102    14,101    189,108

2005    89,015    16,373    61,179    13,647    180,214

2004    88,733    21,022    80,196    18,455    208,406

2003    107,533    26,883    94,376    24,296    253,088

[burmjohn]

You forgot to put on there A CASE STUDY when you cut and pasted that one from the web site

http://www.nyswmc.com/conservation-facts/

Those are their numbers and studies not DEC's

Regardless of where he cut and pasted that from, those appear to be the same DEC numbers from the study / survey the DEC did...

[Doewhacker]

No I don't think it is DEC info, no where is it noted as such. Other places on there they say where it came from but that section in void of any such title.

You know what else, we put alot of faith in these reported numbers, and we all know the reporting rate is like 45% so who knows if we are even close to being accurate. Then again what else do we have to go off of.

[TheHunter]

You guys can try to spin it any way you like, but these AR's are NOT giving too many more hunters those 2.5 or older deer like you guys are trying to make everyone believe.  In the meantime the guys who would be happy with any buck are getting the shaft, thanks to your hokus pokus theories.  And in at least a couple of those AR regions they can hardly get a doe permit to boot! 

Where do you hunt? Oh thats right, your speaking from zero first hand experiance.  Doe permits were over exteneded in the years prior, as the DEC stated they over shot their goals and needed to reduce the DMP's to get back within targets.

Hunter Satisfaction increased... Yup

Majority of 1.5's protected from harvest... Yup

Biologic reason for AR... Yup

Proof in PA that AR works long term... Yup

Majority Support... Yup

Buck Harvest as burmjohn showed is clearly all over the place since 2003 statewide.  There was a huge drop in 2003 to 2004 statewide.  So the conclusion you came to is useless.

Nearly every single person here that is for protecting the 1.5's and pro AR has seen an improvement in their hunting experiance.  Majority of you that are against it have zero hunting experiance in these AR zones.  Thats shown clearly by those who posted in this thread here: http://huntingny.com/forums/index.php/topic,916.0.html and the absense of negativity shown there.

Regardless, AR's are not going away in our WMU, regardless of how much you spin it.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Fairgame....you are saying that because of this AR there are more bucks now than before?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Hunter...looking back at your lengthy post...I can't quote because I am on my phone....either it was you or an article you posted as yours...clearly you are talking about the herd health across the state...clearly...and based on the data I found that shows what a small sample your BIG 77% number represents...I put no faith in any of you assurtions. Basically...all the numbers I see in this thread mean nothing....the data is not available to make a true analysis....you know....keep talking about the veiw of hunters down there and their satisfaction level....if you believe this and your veiw is not based in selfish gratification....why don't you lobby to get a mandatory...full....survey done of all big game license holders in those areas....maybe then 2% won't be speaking for 14000