Future of Hunting NY , Per Dirks

[wztirem]

[table][tr][td]

    [table][tr][td]    #

1 [/t][/c][/t]  [table][tr][td]    BigOutdoors      Super Moderator 

http://www.cthuntingnshooting.com/vBforum/image.php?u=8&dateline=1225752375[/img]   

  Join Date: Oct 2007  Location: brooklyn,ct  Posts: 2,442  http://www.cthuntingnshooting.com/vBforum/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gif[/img]  [/t]    http://www.cthuntingnshooting.com/vBforum/images/icons/icon1.gif[/img] Dirks: Managing deer herd is complicated business      Dirks: Managing deer herd is complicated business

"It's not your grandfather's deer herd," goes the classic Dick Henry line when the subject of the deer herd in New York comes up.

Henry, a well-respected and retired big-game biologist with the state Department of Environmental Conservation, spent 40 years of his career up to his neck in big game. He and three other experts recently held court at a workshop sponsored by Sterling Forest State Park.

Jim Gell, wildlife manager at Sterling Forest, developed this particular workshop focusing on deer herd management for a good reason. During the 2009-10 big-game season, the park developed a modified antler restriction plan, designed to protect most yearling bucks from being hunted. Gell's intent was to educate Sterling Forest hunters on the various aspects of herd management in the context of antler restrictions.

In addition to Henry, the other presenters included Matt Ross, Wayne Masters, and Mark Rogers. In the next few columns, I'll share some interesting highlights from this workshop series.

In the absence of hunting or natural predation, a deer herd can grow by 35 percent every year. Henry pointed out that our current deer herd stands at about 825,000 statewide, down from a peak of 1.2 million in 2000. Hunting remains one of the most effective methods of controlling deer herds.

"Every buck out there has a sister somewhere," Henry said. Depending on the season, hunters sometimes feel the ratio of does to bucks is skewed in favor of does. Four decades of field research and experience has told Henry something different. The overall ratio of does to bucks in most game areas remains closer to 1:1. Just because we see more does than bucks doesn't mean that the ratio is skewed toward does.

Hunters typically go through a four-stage growth cycle during their careers. The first, Henry said, is the "shooter stage." This is where beginning hunters are happy to shoot deer without discrimination of size or sex. The "limiting out" stage is when a hunter looks to fill every tag he can find during a season.

At some point we progress to the "hunting method" stage, when we often focus on one particular method of hunting. For example, perhaps bowhunting becomes your preferred method over rifle hunting. The last stage is "participation" stage, when we are just happy to be out in the field whether we shoot anything or not. For older hunters, that seems to fit nicely.

Henry pointed out some data that is not good news for hunters. In 1990, there were about 600,000 big-game hunters in New York between the ages of 16 and 64. By 2008, that number had dropped to 425,000.

If that trend continues, and there's every indication it will, there won't be enough deer hunters statewide to have much effect on the deer herd.

David Dirks' outdoors column appears weekly. Contact him through his website, www.dirksoutdoors.com.  __________________

http://www.bigfishtackle.com/cgi-bin/gforum/gforum.cgi

http://nedisabledsportsmen.com/

NATURES BETTER WITH BUTTER This is certainly food for thought[/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table]

[Doc]

That last bit is some pretty scary stuff .... eh? I've been wondering about that idea of a shrinking hunter force. I know that the DEC still has a lot of tricks up its sleeve in terms of making each hunter more productive, but one has to wonder just what will happen when they feel that hunters are totally incapable of contolling deer populations. One has to wonder how much of that thought enters into their harvest targets today. One has to wonder if some of our privileged seasons that feature "challenge" (bow and muzzleloader) may eventually be considered an inappropriate waste of hunting time. One has to wonder how many of the DEC policies have already been altered with inadequate hunter numbers in mind.

Yeah, there could be some pretty significant changes ahead if these trends continue.And by the way, can anyone think of any reason why that trend won't continue and even accelerate?

Doc

[bubba]

one of their tricks is to introduce new implements and methods, hoping to spark in interest.  Over 35 years ago when I started hunting with a muzzleloader, there were very few. Keep in mind that was before there was a special season.  Now look at the numbers when a special season, and an extra tag was introduced. Not to mention the money that goes into wildlife conservation programs with every muzzleloader that was sold.  Our biggest danger will be loss of finances.  The state gets federal money for every license sold.  That federal money comes from an excise tax on all huntng equipment as started by the pittman robertsn act.  Bottom line, the less licenses sold, the less money we get in the state. When the money goes down, the services go down.  They will come up with a new way to entice hunters and sell licenses.  Do I see the special seasons going away no. I see them increasing to the point that hunting becomes a speciaty like Drs have become.  On the other hand, do I believe all the specialized hunting is good NO. It is a great way for people to fight internally amongst ourselves. I miss the days of going to camp, putting on a drive and harvesting a deer from it. Most of the guys at my families camp had a 30-30, 308 or 300 savage. I hunted with a muzzleloader from the time I was a kid.  We did not worry which bullet had a ballistic tip or was over 3000 fps.  We never had all the latest camo patterns. We wore either red plaid or green plaid wool and no one got shot even when there were more hunters in the woods.  We did not worry about whether the g2's were too short or if the deer was 2 or 5 years old. We harvested them, we processed them and we ate them and we had a lot of laughs in each step.  Now we have made hunting such a competition to get a bigger better deer over having a good time with friends and family.  We all jockey for position as to what implement should be used what day of the week and hell we even argue over what day of the week season should start on.  This type of attitude is killing hunting.  We try to evolve super deer, so we have bragging rights.  In the process of all of this, hunting in general has taken on a demeanor that is not conducive to regenerating itself.  Young peole today watch all the hunting shows on tv and get the mindset that in a half hour you can kill a monster buck.  If that does not happen the first time they are out, they lose interest. No one wants to teach basic hunting skills anymore.  So in concusion, if hunting dies in the next 10 years, the only group to blame is us hunters for ruining their own sport. HUnting is not a sport any more. It is like most professional sports, it is a big business and the whole premise it was based upon is gone. I say make it much simpler. Hunting starts today and ends on a certain day. Use whatever implement you want to use. Buy a tag and have at it.  We need to get BACK TO BASICS.

[Mr VJP]

Sounds like the solution is to allow greater bag limits since there are fewer hunters.  With so many deer out there in the future, why would we limit how many a hunter can take?

[bubba]

and the way they will do so is by selling a tag for bow a tag fo rmuzzeoader a tag for handgun a tag for cross bow a tag for spear and one for slingshot. Lots of deer but each one comes with a price for each specialty tag.

[Mr VJP]

Which is actually counter productive and one of the reasons hunter numbers are declining.  For some hunters it is just too expensive already.

[sits in trees]

That last bit is some pretty scary stuff .... eh? I've been wondering about that idea of a shrinking hunter force. I know that the DEC still has a lot of tricks up its sleeve in terms of making each hunter more productive, but one has to wonder just what will happen when they feel that hunters are totally incapable of contolling deer populations. One has to wonder how much of that thought enters into their harvest targets today. One has to wonder if some of our privileged seasons that feature "challenge" (bow and muzzleloader) may eventually be considered an inappropriate waste of hunting time. One has to wonder how many of the DEC policies have already been altered with inadequate hunter numbers in mind.

Yeah, there could be some pretty significant changes ahead if these trends continue.And by the way, can anyone think of any reason why that trend won't continue and even accelerate?

Doc

i can tell you first hand what the DEC will do to control deer numbers once we hunters can no longer do it anymore. i lived on the east end of long island for years and the problems of too few hunters and too many deer is a problem many small townships had to address decades ago, yes on a smaller scale but nevertheless a pretty good idea of what you could expect to see up here. one very popular method is laying tons of corn in an area over a period of time and slowly move that corn pile over the span of a few weeks to a fenced or corral area with 10 foot wire fencing around it. this area is well lit at night to get the deer used to feeding under lights at night. then they bring in about 10 police snipers one night and shoot as many as 70 deer in as little as 20 minutes. this is repeated numerous times until the herd reaches an acceptable level. often farmers will allow this on their properties or it can also be carried out on state or town properties.

i'm don't ant to paint too gloomy of a picture here but have personally know and hunted these areas and once this process by the state has taken place you can pretty much right off hunting in that area for a long, long time.

[WNYBuckHunter]

They do the same thing in certain areas up here as well, its called bait and shoot. Its very efficient.

[Mr VJP]

I've only seen that sniper practice done where hunting was not allowed at all, like in Princeton, NJ.  It's very expensive and fails to solve the problem anyway.  It's usually employed where hunting has not been allowed to control the herd in the first place.

Fewer hunters require larger bag limits and fewer restrictions to be effective.  Anything to the contrary is an effort to eliminate hunting altogether.

[nyslowhand]

They do the same thing in certain areas up here as well, its called bait and shoot. Its very efficient.

Didn't they do this in Rochester (Irondoquoit) at Duran-Eastman Park a few years ago?

[wztirem]

I've only seen that sniper practice done where hunting was not allowed at all, like in Princeton, NJ.  It's very expensive and fails to solve the problem anyway.  It's usually employed where hunting has not been allowed to control the herd in the first place.

Fewer hunters require larger bag limits and fewer restrictions to be effective.  Anything to the contrary is an effort to eliminate hunting altogether.

The DEC will adjust bag limits to suit their goals.

Take a look at the NCDNR bag limits for the upcoming season. Does the future of hunting in NY include increased bag limits which are similar to other states who are experiencing increased deer populations and lower hunter numbers? Only time will tell but over the past 25 years bag limits in NY have certainly changed to the benefit of all hunters.

[Doc]

Some increases in bag limits may help, but as I understand it, they have a heck of a time getting rid of all the permits they now offer. Also, even after they do issue pocketsful of permits, the percent success is not really all that high which indicates that either hunters aren't that good, or they simply do not try to fill all the permits that are issued to them. So there may be some limits as to what higher bag limits can really achieve.

Doc

[fasteddie]

They do the same thing in certain areas up here as well, its called bait and shoot. Its very efficient.

Didn't they do this in Rochester (Irondoquoit) at Duran-Eastman Park a few years ago?

For a few years , they were using off duty police to cull the herd at a pretty substantial cost . Then they started letting certified bowhunters shoot the deer under fairly stringent rules / regulations and that worked quite well . I think they still do this .

[wztirem]

Some increases in bag limits may help, but as I understand it, they have a heck of a time getting rid of all the permits they now offer. Also, even after they do issue pocketsful of permits, the percent success is not really all that high which indicates that either hunters aren't that good, or they simply do not try to fill all the permits that are issued to them. So there may be some limits as to what higher bag limits can really achieve.

Doc

Doc, I agree, what I would like to see ( as a point of information) is how many filled DMP's were transferred each season. Each year, I am always offered unfilled DMP's from hunters who's season is over. Believe it or not, many of these guys (LOL) ask me to shoot a deer for them. In the past I have filled several of the extra tags and donated the venison to local food banks which participate in the program. In my opinion, enough venison cannot be donated for there are a lot of people in this state who go hungry each day.

[Doc]

I wonder what they do with the venison aquired with the police sharpshooter bait and shoot programs? Anybody know? Do they donate the venison or just trash it?

Doc

[wztirem]

Dirty little secret!

[nyslowhand]

If I recall, the food pantry got the venison.

Maybe eddie knows for sure.

[WNYBuckHunter]

I wonder what they do with the venison aquired with the police sharpshooter bait and shoot programs? Anybody know? Do they donate the venison or just trash it?

Doc

Donated to the same program as Hunters for the Hungry as far as I have heard.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

If I recall correctly I think some of the south eastern states have bag limits of one deer per day. Eveen in as far north as Maryland I think those guys that hunt all over that state can take  something crazy like 20 some deer using all the seasons. Let's face it. They could very easily increase the take with shrinking numbers...but call me a pesimous....I agree with Bubba....the money hungry group will milk the hunters of NY for all we are worth....Why ...because most will pay it.

Say I am a college kid....my freaking license will run me over a hundred bucks this year...who is that benefiting? Not the sport

[bushnell]

The only thing that scares me is: Are my kids going to see deer when they get older to keep their interest in the sport?

[fasteddie]

The only thing that scares me is: Are my kids going to see deer when they get older to keep their interest in the sport?

Since you are in Pennsylvania , they probably won't .........

[bushnell]

I agree. I always said if NY and PA deer seasons came in together I would hunt NY in a heart beat.

[5.9cummins]

DEC will adjust the bag limit but can you eat 20 deer a year? What happens when the yahoos who have what they need in the freezer start to take animals just because they have a permit / tag whatever you want to call it.

That's when the Antis get involved and with fewer #s of hunters to fight them i wouldn't bet on keeping any hunting.

Getting hunter #s up is a good thing any way you look at it.

As for the cost of the Lic - get over it its the cost of doing business. The price of gas, milk, housing, land and every thing will go up so will the Lic. Anyway its still a drop in the bucket compared to all the crap people buy to hunt with. I could buy a lot of licenses for the price of a new Mathews or 300 weatherby but guys have to have it the one they bought two years ago isn't good enough any more.

I was just in Ohio visiting family and when i was at wally world i picked up there game regulation guide. For what i have in NY (a super sportsman) it would cost over 220$. NY still doesn't look half bad to me.

I am just worried about having a hunting future at all let alone what it will look like or cost.

[wztirem]

I wonder what they do with the venison aquired with the police sharpshooter bait and shoot programs? Anybody know? Do they donate the venison or just trash it?

Doc

Donated to the same program as Hunters for the Hungry as far as I have heard.

Unfortunately, in the southern part of the state there are too few processors who participate in the food bank program. In particular, there is one processor listed ( on Long island) and during the season you must call them first to see if they will accept a deer for processing. Its a shame for there are a lot of people out there who are hungry and would welcome the venison.

[Doc]

DEC will adjust the bag limit but can you eat 20 deer a year? What happens when the yahoos who have what they need in the freezer start to take animals just because they have a permit / tag whatever you want to call it.

That's when the Antis get involved and with fewer #s of hunters to fight them i wouldn't bet on keeping any hunting.

Getting hunter #s up is a good thing any way you look at it.

As for the cost of the Lic - get over it its the cost of doing business. The price of gas, milk, housing, land and every thing will go up so will the Lic. Anyway its still a drop in the bucket compared to all the crap people buy to hunt with. I could buy a lot of licenses for the price of a new Mathews or 300 weatherby but guys have to have it the one they bought two years ago isn't good enough any more.

I was just in Ohio visiting family and when i was at wally world i picked up there game regulation guide. For what i have in NY (a super sportsman) it would cost over 220$. NY still doesn't look half bad to me.

I am just worried about having a hunting future at all let alone what it will look like or cost.

There is one thing you will never hear me say about government fees, taxes, etc.  That is, "gee those fees aren't so bad, I could afford a lot more". As soon as you say that ...... POOF! ...... you instantly are paying more. Also, do not assume that everyone has the financial situations that you have. Not everyone is buying a new Matthews or a new 300 Weatherby. If we are going to worry about hunter numbers as in the first part of your message, we can not turn around and say that adding to the fees to hunt is just peachy. It is a known fact that the government can impact behaviors through taxation. If you don't believe it, just ask anyone who has quit smoking recently just what it was that finally made them quit. You want to eliminate something, tax it. If that doesn't do it, tax it some more. That same principle can also apply to hunting. People are not a bottomless well of resources and every time fees go up, somebody out there is making that tough choice in priorities to decide what has to be cut. You are right to point out that everything required for hunting is going up, and in most cases, at a ridiculous rate. That is just one more reason to try to keep the lid on government increases. With everything going up, something has to give. I believe the sliding hunter numbers is part of the proof of that.

My take on it all is to make the government struggle for every penny of increase. Certainly never sit back and invite them to raise fees by saying "gosh I could afford a lot more". They really don't need that kind of encouragement. They think of enough of that sort of thing on their own.

Doc