|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
I haven't changed my mind NO!
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
I'm a native of Upstate New York who lives in NC. I spend two weeks every fall on my friend's farm in Steuben county, and the last two years I've shot two bucks that had horrible racks (but tasted great!). We have practiced a fairly sound herd management system on this land (380 acres) for the last 22 years by taking 8-point or better and numerous does, with the exception of taking large, mature (2 1/2 years and up) bucks that have poor racks. This culling of the inferior bucks has resulted in a very healthy and large herd. So, I guess my answer would have to be NO... Counting tines is not the answer to a healthy whitetail population!
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
I know its hard to change tradition, but AR is notabout trophy snobs ideals. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Let me expand on my earlier post...When I said "horrible racks", I meant stunted, or mis-shapen. For example, this past season I shot a buck with 4-points (short, more like molars)on one side and a "cow-horn" on the other. The single horn was not broken off, just skinny and twisted. Also, these antlers looked like sheds that had been laying on the ground for years!
Looked great in the freezer though! |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Let’s look at it this way and be logical about it. Where there are really big deer, they some sort of QDM.One of the most basic QDM principals are limiting the harvesting of deerby regulating the rack sizeandnumber of points...they let the little ones go.This means letting the deer mature. In NY, 90% of the 1.5 year old bucks are taken every year. This is a bid concern, especially in a state that has early 800,000 deer. By enabling better management, our heard can absolutely be better.
Without some limit of rack points or size (thus age), we will never see thenumber of trophies that a state with over 800,000 deer should see. I think that a limit of 3 points or better will still allow a hunter a reasonable opportunity to harvest a buck. In PA, the numbers show this to be true. The majority of bucks in that state that were taken this year were between 2.5 and 3.5 years old. After a 2 to 3 year adjustment period, the harvest numbers for buck should be the same as current numbers. I think it would be great to have a chance to get a deer above 120 on a regular basis. How many of us really get 120-140 class whitetails in areas like the Catskills? Not many I believe. It’s a once in a lifetime deer to even see, let alone harvest a buck this size. In a lot of states that have the deer population that we have, a 120 is not even a “shooter”. I can almost cry when I see that on those hunting shows. Hunters in area 3 have begun to implement this 3 point rule. I think that is great. I would be in favor of this as well. There are most likely just as many hunters that hunt for meat as for racks. We should and can address both types of hunters with this plan. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
I live in Ulster County, pretty much where the three point rule is in effect. I hunt in area 3C and 3J. This is the DMU where the three point rule is in effect. I fmyself was and still am in favor of the three point rule. I will tell you, there were more tickets issued this year for some hunters not obaying the rule. Weather one agrees with the rule or not, we must obay the rule. I for one was dissapointed to hear of all the tickets issued. This gives us a black eye. We sportsman have enough issues to deal with: anti hunting groups, no where to hunt etc. We must set the example for our young hunters. The last thing we need is for anti who or what ever to say "they dont even follow their own rules"
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Here`s a link to a website of the guys trying to pass AR in 7F,7H and 7J. There was an article in yesturday`s paper.
WWW.cnywhitetails.com |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
stretchhunts,
Thats a great proposal. I am in 4N and I would support it 100%. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
If you read the proposal, it presents a strong agruement that points based AR do not work as intended. As is with most all such AR proposals it is about trophy management thinly disguised as "healthy for the herd". One of the authors says he has shot a lot of small bucks - now he wants to shoot bigger ones. Since his neighbors are still happy to hunt the way he did in the not so distance past, he wants to force them to change to the way he hunts now. What happens when he and others decide more 2 1/2 yo are not enough? Do we change again to meet his desires?
Any discusion by supporters of AR is dominated by talk of "shooter" bucks and scoring potential - in other words, better "trophys". Why does deer hunting have to have a score? Those who seek to be trophy hunters wish to control all other hunters goals so that their can be more easily met - nothing else. The number of QDM or AR supporters who actually care about the health of the herdare extremely rare. The majority are in it for the "score". |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: SteveBNy If you read the proposal, it presents a strong agruement that points based AR do not work as intended. As is with most all such AR proposals it is about trophy management thinly disguised as "healthy for the herd". One of the authors says he has shot a lot of small bucks - now he wants to shoot bigger ones. Since his neighbors are still happy to hunt the way he did in the not so distance past, he wants to force them to change to the way he hunts now. What happens when he and others decide more 2 1/2 yo are not enough? Do we change again to meet his desires? Any discusion by supporters of AR is dominated by talk of "shooter" bucks and scoring potential - in other words, better "trophys". Why does deer hunting have to have a score? Those who seek to be trophy hunters wish to control all other hunters goals so that their can be more easily met - nothing else. The number of QDM or AR supporters who actually care about the health of the herdare extremely rare. The majority are in it for the "score". Steve, I do agree. I really hunt for meat. I love eating it and making jerky. If I shoot a buck that "scores" it`s a bonus. I just don`t know about the wider than the ears AR. That`s a judgement call really. I`ve shot spike horns that were wider than the ears. The 4 point I shot this yr was wider than it`s ears but was only 1 1/2 yrs old. I just hope it doesn`t turn into a "rich mans" sport. We`ll see where it goes. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Stretch - that is my biggest fear with AR and this proposal - that we will make deer hunting either too hard or too expensive for most.
The authors of the proposal suggests much of CNY could offer the bucks of the mid western states. Go to Pike county and see how many locals still can hunt there compared to 10 years ago - not many. The trophy hunters control most all of it and high dollar leases or hunts are the norm. I would hate for that to happen here. Steve |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Steve,
With the skyrocketing cost of land upstate, I think it is a likely scenario. The taxes are also going up as well. While I am a landowner, I do invest a lot of time in planting nut and fruit trees and fruit bushes to help the wildlife as well as attract more deer to my property. While I would never harvest any animal that I would not intend for food, I would also really love a nice 120-140 size rack. I think most would. However, I think that the herd is in very bad shape. The buck to doe ratio must be dealt with ASAP. Taking more does and having limit on bucks will be the only solution to balance the herd. There is no other way that I can think of. Well to do that, you issue more DMP’s and this will reduce the number of does. Then we need toincrease the number of bucksby limiting the harvest.You canlimit the harvest of bucks basedon restrictions of a natural characteristics like antler size or points. I cannot see any how a three point rule will limit hunting. There simply is no evidence that this is a factor. I am from the Midwest and let me assure you that farmers that sell hunts on their land are doing it because it helps pay the bills. It’s a new and highly profitable source of income.They limitaccess becauseit effects their income. Nothingis for free these days.Many of these hunter/clients that go to the Midwest are East Coasters from NY and PA. We are the ones creating the demand. If we could get 120 to 150 class bucks in NY and the NE, then I would bet there would be much less demand for Midwest hunts and the farmers would be less restrictive of access. So what is the cause of the land access restrictions that you mentioned? Here in NY, for example, the farmers are selling their farms off to developers. The restriction of land access is due to the real estate market and the high demand for acreage. Lots from 5 to 10 acres are in tremendous demand. In the Catskills, this land was less then a $1000 an acre 5 years ago, today it can get $5K to $20K per acre. These new land owners do not hunt and are posting there land. This is where I see the restrictions that is becoming a crisis for those that want to hunt private land. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Please don't take this the wrong way, but every question you ask I and others have addressed at least twice in this thread,. If you read the whole thread and feelI have not answered one, then please let me know.
Steve |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Steve,
I dont think that I am asking any questions for you to answer. I am providing a different perspective. I dounderstand your points on the subject and they are valid. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Killing does in my area sure worked. now that we dont have any does, the bucks are not here and nothing to breed.
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
It would take some years to make the herd ratio more balanced. A mandated restriction of bucks would need to be implementedso the buckpopulation can increase. This does work. So many ranches in the miwest and texas do this and as a result have high deer populations, balanced herds and many mature bucks as a result. They all cant be wrong.
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: NYSHunter It would take some years to make the herd ratio more balanced. A mandated restriction of bucks would need to be implementedso the buckpopulation can increase. This does work. So many ranches in the miwest and texas do this and as a result have high deer populations, balanced herds and many mature bucks as a result. They all cant be wrong. Also, the goal of NYS is not to grow trophy bucks like the private ranches are, with high deer population numbers. It is more concerned with biological controls, and a comfortable carrying capacity, with a competent number of bucks ranging through the age classes. Having a 1:1 with mature bucks jumping out every woodlot simply is not their goal. The balance you speak of theoretical. 1:1/1:2 is this number created by hunters/managers. What evidence is there that proves this ratio has been or would be realized in a natural state ever in recorded history, or future? Remember the DEC is concerned with management, not balance alone. They want a herd categorized as healthy on a whole. Balance is micro-management in their terms (which they do best by their DMP's). A herd can still be "healthy on a whole"with a ratio beyond 1:2 in biological context. It has been for years, with the up's and down's associated with any given species. As long as the ratio does not get to alarming levels (I believe at one or two points in the 20th century it did, but that was not from hunting pressure if I remember correctly), carrying capacity will remain the main focus, and ratio a secondary consideration. Putting ratio ahead of carrying capacity is simply not good science when the numbers suggest the ratio is generally healthy on a state level. Good points on both sides. *FYI. I think the recent season had a harvest ratio of 1:3. That is directly comparable to the "great" years of 1999-2003. That alone implies the herd has remained in balance over the time, and hasn't changed dynamics much, even through the crap years (04/05). Rather, it is simply smaller due to enviornmental conditions (from yotes to winters to food to disease), and hunting. However, the hunting harvest numbers haven't changed hardly at all ratio-wise. With that said, I'll look for your response, and read it in serious consideration. Although I wouldn't expect a response, as I'm saving my gunpowder for April/May/June when all of us hunters are going to be at each other's throats when this issue rears its ugly head in earnest. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Phade,
1:1 ratios are the natural state. All deer that are born every year are 50% does and 50% bucks. As part of the Catskill Forest Association you do get the opportunity to meet with the DEC and other land management professionals. During these meetings, the DEC does state that they do in fact desire the ratio be closer to 1:1. Hence this is why the DEC changed the regulations for WMU 3C and 3J to require that bucks taken are to have at least three antler points on a side to be legal. The only reason this past was to bring the ratio closer to 1:1. This is a fact and you can ask the DEC yourself. \When you discus harvest numbers and base your opinion on that you forget one point. DMP’s were down 40% this year. Every one gets a buck tag…not everyone gets a doe permit. If there were no restrictions the ratio would not be the 1:3 that you claim. This ratio is strictly controlled by the DEC With all due respect, when was the last meeting you attended with the DEC? I have attended two in the last 8 months and have never had them dismiss ratio's issue. They acknowledge is out of balance. Hunters desire opportunities to harvest deer and DMP’s allow hunter that opportunity. I would absolutely agree with you that they work the DMP permits are mostly based on the capacity of the land (food, water and shelter), that is a basic strategy that the use to manage the herd. The DEC will tell you that as well at their meetings. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: NYSHunter Phade, 1:1 ratios are the natural state. All deer that are born every year are 50% does and 50% bucks. As part of the Catskill Forest Association you do get the opportunity to meet with the DEC and other land management professionals. During these meetings, the DEC does state that they do in fact desire the ratio be closer to 1:1. Hence this is why the DEC changed the regulations for WMU 3C and 3J to require that bucks taken are to have at least three antler points on a side to be legal. The only reason this past was to bring the ratio closer to 1:1. This is a fact and you can ask the DEC yourself. \When you discus harvest numbers and base your opinion on that you forget one point. DMP’s were down 40% this year. Every one gets a buck tag…not everyone gets a doe permit. If there were no restrictions the ratio would not be the 1:3 that you claim. This ratio is strictly controlled by the DEC With all due respect, when was the last meeting you attended with the DEC? I have attended two in the last 8 months and have never had them dismiss ratio's issue. They acknowledge is out of balance. Hunters desire opportunities to harvest deer and DMP’s allow hunter that opportunity. I would absolutely agree with you that they work the DMP permits are mostly based on the capacity of the land (food, water and shelter), that is a basic strategy that the use to manage the herd. The DEC will tell you that as well at their meetings. On your point about me going to meetings? My experience with the DEC is pretty thick. I've interacted with DEC officials, biologists, records dept. etc. on a weeklybasis. Shoot, right now I'm discussing the very matter with several DEC biologists. So please, before you speak about someone not being involved, think a bit more. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
maybe in some parts of the state there are needs for an antler restriction...but in others i dont think that its necessary
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
"All deer that are born every year are 50% does and 50% bucks"
Not true. as a doe gets older she tends to only have does. I never believed this untill I`ve seen it for a fact. Since you guys "work" so closley with the DEC please read the thread Atlas started about the NYS DEC STINKS. We`ve asked for meeting with them and haven`t gotten anywhere. Let`s put your pull to the test. :D:) Here`s a link to the thread. http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=1319859 |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
"All deer that are born every year are 50% does and 50% bucks" As a doe gets older she tends to only have does. -------------- The simple facts is that deer like most mammals produce more male offspring than female offspring under normal circumstances. Individual states or areas may vary, however on average throughout their range whitetail deer produce 106 malesfor every 100 females born. There aretwo major exceptions to this rule. One occurs in areas where the herd has not reached carrying capacity of the land and the females are exceptionally well nourished. Inthis case the whitetails does will give birth to a proponderence of female fawns. The other exception is where the herd is on a starvation diet and not surprisingly the does give birth to a preponderence of buck fawns. In New York State most habitat would be considered less than ideal in terms of population carrying capacity vs current population. This would likely skew the ratio further toward more buck fawn production if in fact there is any skew at all. Further adding to the ratio of buck to doe fawns in areas where the overall buck to doe ratio is very low, is the fact that does that are bred late in last stages of their estrous cycle are more likely to give birth to buck fawns. In summation...The ratio of buck to doe fawns actual favors the production of moremale fawns than females. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Folks,
I do agree with your positions here, I am on the same side as you and do not mean to offend. I am just discussing withyou what we were told by the DEC in meetings with the Catskill Forest Association. I don’t see where we really disagree here. My point is that the herd needs to be brought down to as close to 1:1 to 1:2ratio as possible. By limiting the buck harvest and increasing the doe harvest, this would be possible. From what I gather the DEC’s point on this process is that many hunters will not support limiting of buck take and it would cause a lot of problems for them. That buck take limits would in fact decrease license sales and thus hunter participation. Hunter are the main methodfor control of the herds populations. With hunter numbers on the decrease, they have to be very careful. Regarding the birth rates and herd sex ratios, here is a very good study from Westfield State College that gathered data of birthing rates. http://biology.wsc.ma.edu/biology/students/posters/popmodel/deer/ |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: jcchartboy "All deer that are born every year are 50% does and 50% bucks" As a doe gets older she tends to only have does. -------------- The simple facts is that deer like most mammals produce more male offspring than female offspring under normal circumstances. Individual states or areas may vary, however on average throughout their range whitetail deer produce 106 malesfor every 100 females born. There aretwo major exceptions to this rule. One occurs in areas where the herd has not reached carrying capacity of the land and the females are exceptionally well nourished. Inthis case the whitetails does will give birth to a proponderence of female fawns. The other exception is where the herd is on a starvation diet and not surprisingly the does give birth to a preponderence of buck fawns. In New York State most habitat would be considered less than ideal in terms of population carrying capacity vs current population. This would likely skew the ratio further toward more buck fawn production if in fact there is any skew at all. Further adding to the ratio of buck to doe fawns in areas where the overall buck to doe ratio is very low, is the fact that does that are bred late in last stages of their estrous cycle are more likely to give birth to buck fawns. In summation...The ratio of buck to doe fawns actual favors the production of moremale fawns than females. FYI JCC, I wish I could give a firm number with evidence, but I remember hearing from a few biologiststhat roughly 30-40% of NY is good habitat for deer (namely the farmlands of WNY, and some sections down towards your end of the state), another 30-40% is not ideal (adirondacks). The remainder is in the middle. I think the mix balances the state as a whole, which the biologists made a point of at last year's seasonal change meetings relating to DMP numbers. The birthing habits of does is extremely interesting believe it or not. I'd venture to say there is as much information (and misinformation) on that subject that any other facet of deer biology beyond the rut. JCC found some good info there. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: stretchhunts "All deer that are born every year are 50% does and 50% bucks" Not true. as a doe gets older she tends to only have does. I never believed this untill I`ve seen it for a fact. Since you guys "work" so closley with the DEC please read the thread Atlas started about the NYS DEC STINKS. We`ve asked for meeting with them and haven`t gotten anywhere. Let`s put your pull to the test. :D:) Here`s a link to the thread. http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=1319859 A large partof the reason why I am against A/R. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Regarding the birth rates and herd sex ratios, here is a very good study from Westfield State College that gathered data of birthing rates. http://biology.wsc.ma.edu/biology/students/posters/popmodel/deer/ Is that information supposed to be included in this piece? |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
The birthing habits of does is extremely interesting believe it or not. I'd venture to say there is as much information (and misinformation) on that subject that any other facet of deer biology beyond the rut. The Deer of North America By Leonard Lee Rue III.. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: jcchartboy The birthing habits of does is extremely interesting believe it or not. I'd venture to say there is as much information (and misinformation) on that subject that any other facet of deer biology beyond the rut. The Deer of North America By Leonard Lee Rue III.. Another one to check out is Ozoga. He put out some good info in an article in D&DH within the last two years that broke up my longtime stance on doe birthing. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
I'm familiar with Rue's work. Do you know the last revision of that book? |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Table 1 states that their count for their particular sample in PA the 52% male newborn. Tbale 2 shows male newborn at 15,129 and female newborn at 13,965. Statically, it means about 50/50 because the sampleing must have some error rates, but its one study and a particular sample. By no means does it state that all fawns are 50% buck and 50% does. It was just some reasearch that I though some would like to review.
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: NYSHunter Table 1 states that their count for their particular sample in PA the 52% male newborn. Tbale 2 shows male newborn at 15,129 and female newborn at 13,965. Statically, it means about 50/50 because the sampleing must have some error rates, but its one study and a particular sample. By no means does it state that all fawns are 50% buck and 50% does. It was just some reasearch that I though some would like to review. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Phade, Ask that question to any statistics professor that and they will disagree with you. 52% of a sample within a prescribe error rate supports 50/50. If you want to discuss the Z score and standard deviation formula we can at great length. I did just buy "The Deer of North America" by Leonard Lee Rue and on page 250 he discusses the ratios of the sex of fawns. He suggests that sex ratios are determined by the quality of the habitat.His ratios were never 50/50, even statically. The swing in higher buck birthing rates or higher doe birthing rates is quite pronounced. Very interesting reading. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: NYSHunter Phade, Ask that question to any statistics professor that and they will disagree with you. 52% of a sample within a prescribe error rate supports 50/50. If you want to discuss the Z score and standard deviation formula we can at great length. Read Lee's stuff, but keep your mind open to all the other info, including your previously cited study. I think the real truth on thsi matter is going to be a combination of many people's theories. I don't think one person has yet been able to definitively put their finger on birthing rates with a certainty. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
ORIGINAL: NYSHunter Phade, I did just buy "The Deer of North America" by Leonard Lee Rue and on page 250 he discusses the ratios of the sex of fawns. He suggests that sex ratios are determined by the quality of the habitat.His ratios were never 50/50, even statically. The swing in higher buck birthing rates or higher doe birthing rates is quite pronounced. Very interesting reading. For example in good conditions the studies you are discussing suggest that the ratio was 43% males and 57% females. In bad conditions the studies found 72% males and only 28% females. Notice that good conditions only result in a small decline in buck production. However, in bad conditions the ratio of buck to doe fawns explodes signifactly higher. As far as the statistical discussion is concerned, Phade is correct on that one... |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Iccharetboy,
I am not sure what point you are validating about the ratio's. Its a small percentage were talking about. Can we agree the current ratio is somewhat undesirable? On the statistical question, you and Phade are both wrong, you may agree with Phade, butyou are both wrong. If the sample of 100 deer is collected and 52 are one sex and 48 are the other sexwith a 3% error rate that PHADE suggested, that is a statistical dead heat within the prescribed error margin of 3%. I will not argue the point. This concept is called themagnitude of relations between variables. Once again, ask any graduate student and I assure you that I am correct The question is do Ithink we shouldhave antler restrictions?Theanswer is yes, I do. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
Sorry NYS,
Although it clear that you have some understanding of the statistical concepts involved the one thing you do not seem to understand is the fact that your thesis is relying on false assumptions.... You make the statement..."the sample of 100 deer is collected"...This is an incorect and faulty assumption. Thedata we are discusing is represented by the author as representativeof the ENTIRE POPULATION of whitetail deer. Therefore your discusion of "magnitude of relations between variables" is not applicable to this situation. The stated 52% buck ratio in no way can be "rounded" to equate a 50/50 buck to doe fawn ratio.... (If you were correct, the author a noted biologist, with an extensive background in statistical analysis would not have represented the data as indicative of supporting a statistical bias toward the production of male whitetail offspring in the overall whitetail population in the first place.;)) This should help clarify the concepts and its applications.. How to measure the magnitude (strength) of relations between variables. There are very many measures of the magnitude of relationships between variables which have been developed by statisticians; the choice of a specific measure in given circumstances depends on the number of variables involved, measurement scales used, nature of the relations, etc. Almost all of them, however, follow one general principle: they attempt to somehow evaluate the observed relation by comparing it to the "maximum imaginable relation" between those specific variables. Technically speaking, a common way to perform such evaluations is to look at how differentiated are the values of the variables, and then calculate what part of this "overall available differentiation" is accounted for by instances when that differentiation is "common" in the two (or more) variables in question. Speaking less technically, we compare "what is common in those variables" to "what potentially could have been common if the variables were perfectly related." Let us consider a simple illustration. Let us say that in our sample, the average index of WCC is 100 in males and 102 in females. Thus, we could say that on average, the deviation of each individual score from the grand mean (101) contains a component due to the gender of the subject; the size of this component is 1. That value, in a sense, represents some measure of relation between Gender and WCC. However, this value is a very poor measure, because it does not tell us how relatively large this component is, given the "overall differentiation" of WCC scores. Consider two extreme possibilities:[*]If all WCC scores of males were equal exactly to 100, and those of females equal to 102, then all deviations from the grand mean in our sample would be entirely accounted for by gender. We would say that in our sample, gender is perfectly correlated with WCC, that is, 100% of the observed differences between subjects regarding their WCC is accounted for by their gender.[*]If WCC scores were in the range of 0-1000, the same difference (of 2) between the average WCC of males and females found in the study would account for such a small part of the overall differentiation of scores that most likely it would be considered negligible. For example, one more subject taken into account could change, or even reverse the direction of the difference. Therefore, every good measure of relations between variables must take into account the overall differentiation of individual scores in the sample and evaluate the relation in terms of (relatively) how much of this differentiation is accounted for by the relation in question. |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
I don’t want to post to this thread any longer. This is a thread about antler restrictions, not statistics. I have enough degrees on my wall to understand these concepts. I respect your position. I sincerely appreciate your book suggestion. I ran out and bought a copy today at a local bookstore. It looks like an excellent book. Thankyou again.
|
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
NYS,
No problem on the book... P.S. Don't go to far away...your one of the few mature/logical members adding significantly to this thread....;) |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
I do not think we should have antler restrictions.
I have 20 acres in the catskills and spend weeks setting up my food plots and tree stands forthe 3 deer Itake to last a year. I do not have any mounts and not every deer are even photographed but don't get me wrong I love the thrill of the hunt (bow,rifle,handgun and muzzleloader ). My family and myself like the younger deer when ever possible becausewe think theytaste better. Wild Venison is also antibiotic and hormone free which is a great plus over store bought meat . Not everyone requires a trophy . |
RE: NY do u think we should have a antler restrictions?
This would be an easy thread to reply to if it was "Will western NY ever have antler restriction". The answer would be "NO" and go against one of the easier steps (but not total solution) of having a more mature deer herd.
I heard 67% hunter approval will have ARs instituted. This state is all about revenue with everything it does. Sorry for the pessimism but i have seen both sides of the DEC; where they arent lacking their support is. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:07 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.