Doc

Re: NY\'s deer season for souther tier Actually, the safety issue is a valid one. There is no way that I am going to be out there hunting with any firearms deer hunters unless I am completely decked out in lots of blaze orange. And I have serious doubts about any form of success for a bowhunter who is expecting to get within 20 -30 yards of a deer while he is glowing and flashing like a bonfire. It could happen and probably occasionally does, but the odds of success are pretty darn slim. Another gunhunting fatality just occurred yesterday where the victim was not wearing blaze orange. That's not a very good excuse, but unfortunately, it certainly is a reality of firearms hunting. While these kinds of fatalities have never happened between bowhunters, that incident could just as easily been a muzzleloader as a shotgun. Yes, I think they are making a proper call when they say that it would pose safety problems and I'm glad that someone spoke up for that point of view. The other thing is that as soon as we accept the mixing of firearms seasons with bow seasons, we can expect many more intrusions into our bowhunting time. Heck, if muzzleloaders can coexist with bowhunters, why not regular shotguns? That is one precedent that I am very glad wasn't allowed to be set. Doc

Re: VT\'s new \"proposed\" deer hunting regs! Boy, those are pretty sweeping generalizations. Those that don't support AR are the type of person that "really has no sense of ethics, community support or even overall morals"? Also, they are the kind that "don't care about the quality of our deer heards as long as they get to kill a deer and hual it around town for a week strapped to there car and let the meet go bad"? Wow, those are some pretty bad dudes, and so many of them too. You're probably right. If AR drives those kind of people out of the sport then That's ok. We'll manage without them somehow. Let's leave the sport to only those individuals that can live up to our standards and think exactly the way we do on every issue, and the heck with the rest of them. I hope you recognize the attempted sarcasm of my remarks. I don't, for a minute, believe that AR opponents are comprised of the people you describe. The point is that when we start to judge people's opinions in this fashion, and totally disregard the power of numbers, you are setting the stage for more and more losses of political power that is necessary to safeguard the sport. The power of numbers is being graphically demonstrated here in NY with the bowhunters. Our percent of the hunting population is quite insignificant when compared to firearms hunters. Next year, bowhunters will be giving up one of the prime hunting weeks to the muzzleloader hunters. Many of the bowhunters are quite upset by this move, but because they have absolutely no political influence, they are going to lose this battle and any others that pit them against the gunhunters. Don't be so quick to judge people with opposing opinions. Judge the issues based on the value of those issues instead of the perceived character of those that back the opposing side. That's what is really better for hunting, no matter what state you live in. Doc

Re: New Jersey Bear Season Cancelled!!! I hope everyone gets a chance to read this post. How many times have I read here on these forums that "this will never happen" or "that will never happen"? Far too many times! Boy how that irritates me when hunters cop that attitude and basically turn their backs on the problems that the anti's pose for us. Well, you people....PAY ATTENTION!!! Not only can these things happen, but it already HAS happened. Wake up and pull your head out of the sand or whatever dark place that you have it buried in. If you care anything about hunting, start helping to fight these anti-hunting imbeciles. That old saying is never so true as it is here....." If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem! Doc

Re: Today was my last day hunting with my Buddy Back in my younger days, I used to be a whole lot more tolerant of hunting partners and most of the times it cost me. Sometimes it takes years to find a really good reliable hunting partner that inspires and motivates instead of discouraging and interfering with your own hunting. I must say that in all the years, I only found one partner that fit the bill, and we hunted together for about 20 years, and then he got transferred to Thunder Bay in Canada. I've been hunting by myself ever since. I must admit that it is not nearly as much fun, and I do have a problem now getting my butt out there early in the morning. I would suggest that people be just a bit careful with hunting partners until you get to know them real good. It always helps avoid some rather ugly situations. I've had hunters that started inviting all kinds of other people to hunt my property without even asking if it was ok. I have hunted with people that saw no problem with helping themselves to my stands. I have hunted with people that would leave me waiting for hours for them to show up. There are many ways that invited hunters can be a complete pain, so I eventually didn't invite quite so many people down to my place until I knew them real well and knew that our hunting ethics and practices were compatible and that they were reliable people. It sounds like your friend is no great loss as a hunting partner, but I would continue looking for a new one. The hunting experience is so much more enjoyable when you've got somebody to share it with. Doc

Re: Tag sharing? There are times when game management departments almost appear to be panicky about their perceived inability to control the deer herd numbers. Whenever they receive any news that indicates that license sales are down, they begin worrying about their main tool for population control.....the hunter. They worry about a time when results will fail no matter how many permits are issued. I'm sure they are experimenting with schemes to ensure that every tag that gets issued, gets filled. Tag sharing is just another way of achieving that goal. Agreeing with the practice or not is kind of a moot point. If they convince themselves that it is necessary, they will do it. Doc

Re: New York Deer Management He is a retired federal wildlife agent. Normally he isn't quite so wacked out, but perhaps old age is catching up with him. Or perhaps some of his DEC friends have been helping him along with his opinions. He hasn't always been a mouthpiece for the DEC, in fact I remember many years back he was taking them on about some other deer population issue and wasn't all that tactful about it. Perhaps somebody sat him down and had a talk with him. Doc

Re: Question for Pa. Deer hunters You people all talk like the entire state can be treated like a hunting preserve. Do you honestly believe that the state can manage trophy deer as well as a private hunting ranch. Remember, these ranches have complete and absolute control over everything that a any guest does on their property. Now imagine a ranch that is the size of PA. How well do you think an underfunded game commission that is always fighting for scraps of budget can do. From many of the posts on this forum, It sounds to me like they have their hands completely full just managing the size of the population. What makes anyone think that they can take on the additional duties of creating trophy deer throughout the entire state? Doc

Re: VT\'s new \"proposed\" deer hunting regs! [ QUOTE ] I am not too worried about loosing a few to disinterest or lack of potential if they do not get to shoot their spike deer... More for the rest who stick it out. [/ QUOTE ] I hope you really didn't mean this. I could go through all the reasons why it is important for us to keep our numbers up, but you know them all already. Doc

Ok, it has started already. The outdoors editor for our local paper has apparently gotten some preliminary info from somewhere relative to this year's area deer take, so far. Unfortunately, the article is very poorly written and gives no sources. I'm assuming that the DEC has leaked a bit of preliminary info to try to soften the blow a bit. Anyway the take is down again this year so far. No estimates were given, but this outdoor writer assures us that there are still "lots and lots of deer out there". Whether that is just his opinion or whether that is based on some kind of reliable data, he doesn't say. Like I said, the article is very poorly written. In a few replies on another thread, I was talking about excuses. Well, this guy has concocted a beauty. Just listen to this: [ QUOTE ] "What happened on opening morning?Why were there not more deer taken on that day, which is traditionally the heaviest deer harvest day of the entire season? Well, I am not totally sure, but I believe sunrise on opening day occurred right in the middle of the normal "down" period of deer (and almost all other wildlife species too). Every species of wildlife has certain periods when it is active, and others when it is resting. For deer, the downtime period is often used for "chewing their cuds". As Ungulates they need to re-chew their food to facilitate digestion. They most often do this an hour or so after they have finished eating. If you remember, there was nearly a full moon the night before opening day. The skies were clear and deer and other wildlife species took advantage of that bright landscape to feed. Then as the sun was about to rise, they moved into their resting cover. They remained in their beds as hunters were looking for them in the more traditional hunting areas." [/ QUOTE ] Folks, I hope this wacko fairy tale was not inspired by any of our DEC personel. I REALLY don't want to hear this kind of crap from them when they begin commenting on the season results. Their excuse last year when they blamed the lowered take on the weather was lame enough, but a story like this would be just too much to take. Here is another excuse that he has offered up: [ QUOTE ] "Another condition that may be hurting hunters is ironically enough, The Conservation Reserve Program. CRP pays landowners to leave a portion of their land fallow, a boon for lots of wildlife species. the landowners are required to mow one third of that land but nothing else. On three different occasions this fall, I have watched groups of does move into these weed field and disappear. Once they lay down in that thick stuff, it would almost take a division of marines to move them out. [/ QUOTE ] So there you have it folks. Another poor soul grasping at straws to explain away the obvious fact that deer are being over-harvested with ridiculous, silly irrelevant theories. I will absolutely flip my lid if I hear either of these two asinine theories advanced by anyone from the DEC. After last year's excuse blaming the weather, they promptly turned around and issued another huge gob of permits for this year and started talking about season changes designed for taking more antlerless deer. When they start ignoring their own statistical indicators of herd size and start concocting sorry excuses as to why they can ignore bad news, one has to wonder just how far they will go with this policy of deer extermination. What on earth is their motive. When deer take numbers start going down, why not take the heroic stance and declare success for a program well developed and executed? Why make up excuses as to why the numbers shouldn't be believed? Perhaps they are not ready yet to unveil their population density targets to the hunting community. Is that news that bad? It kind of makes you wonder, doesn't it? Doc

Re: It\'s now or never today.... So..............How did you make out????? Doc

Re: Nuisance Permits This is just yet another sign of the DEC leaning heavily toward the anti-deer lobbys. They speak...the DEC jumps! Farmers, insurance companies, etc., they are all getting a pretty good say in deer herd size management. Doc

Re: Half Hearted Muzzleloader Success You did what I would have done. Doc

Re: VT\'s new \"proposed\" deer hunting regs! [ QUOTE ] As for the average weekend hunter. Yes your right, it will most likely mean he/she may not get their deer that season, or next, but sooner or later they will. When the herd grows and has potential for larger bodied deer and quite possible larger racks, it will be that much more satisfying a hunt. [/ QUOTE ] Unfortunately there may be areas where the herd never does grow because of sub-standard habitat or over-aggressive herd thinning by the game management people. I just hope that in these kinds of areas, hunters don't decide to quit out of frustration. We seem to be losing numbers nationally without trying to thwart their efforts for whatever they perceive as success. I know the past few years, with a near non-existant deer herd, has caused me to feel a lot less motivated. If I had antler restrictions to contend with as well, it is possible that by now I might have found another pastime. And I have always been a completely dyed-in-the-wool, fanatical hunter for the past 40 years. I suspect it would take a lot less to discourage the casual, occasional hunter. Doc

Oh boy, are you going to get a lot of argument on this one. I'll bet for every reply that agrees that the herd is at an all time low, you will get the same number of people claiming that there are deer everywhere. You know what? You will all be right! I think the current game management philosophies across the country are to keep whacking on the herd until they have a nice uniform tiny herd everywhere. Doc

Re: NY\'s deer season for souther tier [ QUOTE ] How can you try to keep a tab on a deer herd when it changes from every 30 miles or so. [/ QUOTE ] I am not a wildlife manager. I don't even play one on TV. But, I have been hunting the same couple hundred acres for 40 years now. I can count. I can see. I can write. and I can recognize deer poop when I see it. I also can recognize a deer track when I see it and I know what rubs and scrapes are. Somehow, I feel like an excellent resource that is just going to waste and is not being properly utilized by the DEC. I also have a feeling that I am not alone with these abilities. I'm getting a bit old, but I think I still have quite a few years of scouting and observations left in me. For example, my scouting and exploration goes on year around. I am constantly observing trails for sign, observing locations, quantities and size of deer droppings. My eyes are still good enough to note actual deer sightings and record data relative to those sightings. Some of the horrible deer hunting results that I have been hearing are not really all that surprising to me, because I have seen the reduction in sign, on the very property that was being hunted, in a "year-around" fashion. I don't have to rely on after-the-fact data to know exactly what the situation is on the land that I hunt. And my observations are not the result of averaging any data over a huge area (WMU). The point is that any management that relies solely on statics without any "on-the-ground" information gathering is always destined to fail. Statistics can take you way out on the limb before it finally breaks. Without any touchy-feely data to confirm statistical conclusions and results will move the destructive value of errors toward total disaster. We have a virtual army of data gatherers out there called "hunters", Some more uniquely qualified than others. Each walks the very ground that the DEC is trying to manage. Most are fairly intelligent, responsible, articulate people who can observe and report if only they were given instructions about what to observe and report on. Not only that, these people would be eager to help if they were properly approached. Best news of all is that they are absolutely FREE! It seems to me that all these fine minds that brought us WMU's, Antlerless permits, etc could certainly figure out a system for effectively using this free army of volunteers as a supplement to their computer projections and statistical game management programs. With this kind of manpower, they may even find ways to properly manage smaller parcels and balance herds within each WMU instead of applying broad-brushed averages to each of the huge WMU's. I've got a feeling that the deer take numbers for this year in certain areas are going to highlight the need for more comprehensive techniques of keeping the DEC in touch with each locality. Perhaps then they will see the value of finding a way to utilize hunter input. Doc

Re: DEC\'s Cluster Bang 2004 [ QUOTE ] I am OK with the Oct 1 Opener statewide, but think of it this way. Last year I got TWO opening days; the first in the 'Dacks with some great guys....and the second the usual Oct 15 starter at home. I will still be at the Smackdown in '05, regardelss of when the home seasson starts - you can't put a potential harvet at home over a few days in bear/deer/beer camp with great freinds! The only concern I have with the new proposal is th eweek long ML season smack dab in the middle of archery season! I don't think I waould mind at all if I was still allowed to bowhunt during that week, but that is not part of the proposal . I dont have a ML, I have no plans to get a ML. Check the signature below! -------------------- Hey NYS DEC - Keep Muzzleloaders and Crossbows out of our Archery Seasons! [/ QUOTE ] Couldn't have said it any better, except I might have changed the signature line to: Hey NYS DEC - Keep $#@!** Muzzleloaders and &^**#@$ Crossbows out of our Archery Seasons! Doc

Re: No dice in New York It has to be a real pain to be the DEC and be confronted with private property. For one thing, they cannot even mandate that those properties even get hunted at all. Believe me, there are significant areas that are owned by people with anti-hunting ideas and I'm sure the deer that are in those areas probably don't even know what a hunting season is. However, spraying around gobs of permits everywhere else is not going to solve that problem. Education along with incentives is the only hope for busting open that land. The moose is a different matter. I don't think they really compete with the deer for the same kinds of browse and probably don't offer much of a problem in that respect. You would know better than I do about that. We don't have a significant moose population and over here in western NY, there are none at all. But, I have read that there is some kind of a brain worm that can be passed from deer to moose or vice-versa. It is benign in one species and deadly to the other. I'm not sure which direction it goes, but that probably makes shared habitat kind of risky for one of the two species. It is still the DEC's responsibility to first recognize those problems and then begin working on the solutions. That's what they are chartered to do. Again, the game management buck stops with the DEC. If they handle it fine....they get congratulations and the ability to feel like they earned their paycheck. If they fail, they deserve all the criticism that comes their way. These people work for us and it is no different than any business. Success gets rewarded....failure gets criticised (or worse). Doc

Re: VT\'s new \"proposed\" deer hunting regs! [ QUOTE ] The guys who are undecided or against it seem to be to ones who dont really want to hunt, just go out and shoot the 1st deer they see and get there meat. But then again they do not want to shoot doe either because its not "manly" enough to brag about. They are not for herd improvement if they feel it might decrease there chance of getting a deer every year [/ QUOTE ] That's one thing we learn early on, is that everyone out there hunting has a different idea of what it's all about. That doesn't make them wrong and us right. They too have paid the same money for their licenses that we have, and absolutely are entitled to have a differing opinion of what they feel they should get out of the sport. We want to be careful about judging other hunters motives. You may be absolutely correct about what kind of hunters they are, or you just may not know their whole story. I'll bet you have some, maybe even many, areas of questionable deer habitat that have a pretty miserable deer take every year. In other words very low deer population density. I'll bet there are people who try to hunt those areas too. If during their past hunting experiences, they seldom see any bucks of any age or size, and then someone comes along and tells them that it is likely that any buck that they see in the future will most likely be illegal to shoot, I'll bet that hunter would not be real warm towards that idea. Those kinds of areas are not likely (hopefully) going to be issuing a lot of antlerless permits either. So what are you telling this hunter he has left to hunt? Most area conditions are not as well defined as I have layed out above, and run the entire gambit, but you can readily see where some areas with some of those conditions could have people who are not as eager to have new additional restrictions as you are. Add to that, people who's busy lives do not afford them as much time afield as others, and real antler restrictions could pose some real hardships for them ever shooting a buck again. Here in NY, we have some of those situations and currently our locality is going through just such a drought in deer population with no relief in sight. I personally would hate to have someone tell me that I am unlikely to ever harvest a legal buck again because the rest of the state decided to put restrictions that are totally unreasonable for our situation. Unfortunately it is also unreasonable for the DEC to recognize what areas are suitable for such restrictions. So far they have been unwilling or unable to recognize that their policies are resulting in an over harvest of our area, as well as many other areas of the state, as they are continuing to arm every hunter with pocketfuls of permits. I have absolutely no faith in their ability to identify proper areas for implementing AR. I'll bet your state is no different in that regard either. Doc

Re: VT\'s new \"proposed\" deer hunting regs! [ QUOTE ] However its having resistance with even that little amt of restriction so trying to push a higher point limit may not pass at all. [/ QUOTE ] It sounds to me like, if there is that much resistance, the whole idea of AR is trying to be crammed down the throats of hunters who don't really want it. I'm not so sure that this is the proper thing to be doing. They are trying to fool people into accepting additional restrictions that hunters don't want. Is that a proper and ethical way for a government agency to be acting? There may be some good legitimate reasons why those hunters may not want to have these restrictions forced on them. Doc

Re: Question for Pa. Deer hunters Well. there ya go! You can't please everyone eh? People that live in areas where deer have become a scarce commodity probably couldn't care less about AR. They are probably happy to get a buck of any size once in a while. People that are over-run with deer have probably reached the point where they just can't understand why anyone would shoot at a 1.5 yr old buck. Applying AR randomly across the state probably probably is guaranteed to make a signicant number of hunters very unhappy. That kind of stands to reason. For a guy that has never gotten a buck and due to low population, is not likely to ever get one in the future, a 4 point looks like a mighty fine trophy. Not everyone shares the same goals. That's what makes the world go around As far as AR making a healthier herd, I think the jury is still out on that theory. As far as whacking the deer population down, I must say that it has been a long time since I have seen any browse-lines or huge winter yards of starving deer. In fact it's been a long time since I have even heard reports of such things. The early 80's was the last time I saw such things. I suspect the desire for smaller herds has a lot of other factors being entered in besides carry capacity of habitat. Doc

Re: VT\'s new \"proposed\" deer hunting regs! [ QUOTE ] Antler restriction in 3 WMA of "2 point on one side or more." vs. state wide. [/ QUOTE ] That is one strange limit for antler restrictions. It seems as though a 2 point per side is kind of a waste of time and good legislative ink. Around here, most of the time, a 4 point is still only a 1.5 year old buck. I am no real fan of AR, but this sounds like a placebo. Doc

Re: Gary Alt Where are all the deer at in Pa. [ QUOTE ] You can't make broad brush statements about a state as large as PA and maintain credibility. To say there are no deer in PA is absolutely untrue. [/ QUOTE ] Well that's just a case of a hunter getting over-excited about crappy conditions in his particular locality. However, the point should be made that he is just one more voice saying that all is not well everywhere. Enough of these voices and pretty soon you have to start asking if there might not be a spreading problem. Perhaps those who are feeling quite smug about the excellent conditions in their area should be paying a bit of attention to these growing voices. The problems that they are experiencing might just be heading your way in the near future. Doc

Re: No dice in New York [ QUOTE ] Two yrs ago my father found 4 or 5 dead deer on his property that had starved to death and he only has 35acres.I also found a number of deer carcasses that Spring. [/ QUOTE ] I assume that you all did autopsies on those deer and that's how you know it was starvation rather than predation, disease, poaching, or some other cause. Generally, starvation deaths of any magnitude are the result of too large a deer population for the carrying capacity of the habitat. If that's the cause, then the DEC would be correct in issuing more permits. Coyotes and poaching are certainly very real local problems for the deer population in some areas, however if these are factors for a particular WMU, and the DEC recognizes that, why do they continue issuing more permits? Whatever the reason for low deer populations, the answer is not to arm every hunter with multiple antlerless permits. It sounds to me like you are saying the same thing as I am. The herd levels are down and the DEC is not recognizing the fact and is still issuing TOO MANY PERMITS. That's the real reason the herd is continuing to plummet. When you take all the factors that you mentioned and then compound the problem by giving hunters the tools to decimate the herd even more, the real excuse for low deer takes gets real obvious. Now if you are experiencing all those problems, and the DEC has cut the number of permits in your WMU to compensate, then I will agree that your area is being managed as effectively as possible. In that case no excuses are needed. Otherwise you fall into the same category as the many people that are complaining here and the true excuse for the results is the fact that the DEC has and continues to go too far with their herd-cutting efforts. [ QUOTE ] I think it's to easy to put all the blame on the DEC. [/ QUOTE ] Your right, it is easy, because when it comes to deer herd management, the only agency that is charged with properly performing that task is the DEC. You've heard the term, "The buck stops here"? Well when it comes to herd management, the buck stops with the DEC. They are not a volunteer organization. We pay a lot of money and hand over a lot of power for this service and I think we deserve to have the job done right or at least hear the correct reasons when their efforts go astray. And if some of us call them to account, I think it's reasonable to expect that we should not hear a bunch of lame excuses. Last year, they blamed the low deer take numbers on bad weather on certain key hunting days. With that excuse completely bought by the public they continued issuing massive numbers of antlerless permits. Did it ever occur to anyone that the deer take was down because there are more than a few areas where the deer population has simply been over-hunted because of their failure to identify areas where permit numbers should be cut?. I just don't want to hear any of these bogus excuses this year. To me it is an insult and I want them to do more than simply reviewing weather reports and forming conclusions from that. I think the system is showing signs of failing, and I want the people charged with herd management responsibility to react with the proper sense of urgency and find out why it is failing and how to fix it. That's what they are being paid to do, not concoct excuses that allow them to carry on in a "business as usual" fashion. Doc

Re: Question for Pa. Deer hunters [ QUOTE ] but what im saying is this i have seen nice 8s an up for the last 4 years on this property an theres a ton of doe out there to [/ QUOTE ] That is very nice for your particular property. That of course gives no indication as to what is going on in the rest of the state or, for that matter, it doesn't even give an indication of what is going on a few miles down the road. Doc

Re: No dice in New York [ QUOTE ] Hey...is NY really that bad or are we NY'ers just abunch of whiners??? LOL I don't see everyone else complaining about thier hunting.... [/ QUOTE ] seriously.........I don't think there is anything about NY hunters that makes them more likely to be whiners other than the fact that most of us have seen the "glory years" of high deer populations and have perhaps been spoiled, and are not real happy with the prospects of maintaining herd levels far below what they consider to be adequate. Actually, if you follow some of the PA threads that are on here, it sounds like they are complaining just as loudly and just as often about the very same subject. I have also noticed some rumblings from Vermont as well. [ QUOTE ] I agree deer numbers are down but I don't blame it all on the DEC.The last 2 winters have been real hard and the population of coyotes has increased. I know of dairy farmers getting alot of nusiance permits [/ QUOTE ] Ok, enough with all the excuses already. The DEC can conjure up enough of them all by themselves. Frankly I am getting tired of the old "bad weather" excuse. As far as I know, there were no records set in the past couple of years regarding worst seasonal snowfall or temperatures. There is nothing unique about this year that we haven't experienced many times before. How about this........How about, there are some areas where they are and have been giving out too many darn permits? I'll even bet there are some localities where they are giving out too few! In fact I'm sure that both scenarios exist at the same time within most wildlife management units. This is a believable cause for herd imbalances around the state. Antlerless permits were designed to have immediate impacts on deer numbers. Past data shows that the system is very effective in doing just that. Why would I go off blaming everything else under the sun for wild variations in herd numbers. I'm sure that the DEC will welcome all assistance in coming up with plausible excuses, but lets keep our eye on the ball and focus on the real causes for population increases or declines. Doc