A Pennsylvania Hunter Writes

[Altjaeger]

Just a few paragraphs extracted from an article on pg 82 of the September 2009 isue of the American Hunter magazine published by the NRA. They contrast hunting in Pensylvania in the 1990s and today.

"If a casual observer witnessed my first deer hunt, he would've seen the rifle across my lap and been fooled into thinking I had a reasonable chance of killing a deer. He wouldn't have known that various elders--mainly regulars at the taxidermy shop my father liked to hang out--had convinced me that killing a deer was a practical impossibility.Therefore I was just happy to be in the woods, finally old enough to hunt with Dad. Much to my surprise, however, a doe appeared shortly after first light. Of course, this was Pennsylvania in the early 90s, so the doe was followed by about 20 more does and---glory be--a 4 point buck! I ackwardly searched for it until I had it somewhat in the crosshairs, then squeezed the trigger, gently at first, then increasingly harder until I tugged on it with all my 12 year old might. Funny thing about those Model 70-style wing safeties: Merely flipping them to the middle position won't allow the gun to go BANG."

"Some of my friends got deer that day, but most of us just enjoyed a day off school. You see, deer hunting is such a way of life here that most rural close for the first day of the firerms season."

A few paragraphs later it picks up again.

"Turn-of-the-century deer populations were in such dire straights the Pennsylvania Game Commission stocked1,192 whitetails from 1906-1925. The herd nearly doubled every two years. The boom was so great that a ban on killing does was lifted, enraging many hunters. By the late 20's the PGCs focus shifted to managing the herd rather than growing it."

"Enter an era that endures today. Deer grow largest and are most prevalent in the southwestern corner's agricultural belt, but are populous statewide, even in the northern teirs mountainous hardwoods and central Pennsylvania's reclaimed strip mines"

We have those who plead that Texans don't know anything about Pennsylvania and should listen to residents. Here is a Pennsylvanian who is saying the same thing that Texans...and the majority of Pennsylvania hunters seem to believe. Maybe we should listen to those Pennsylvania hunter's sorting the perpetual complainers from the knowledgable.

[Laturkeyhtr]

By the late 20's the PGCs focus shifted to managing the herd rather than growing it."

Doesn't seem like they got it right however until the infamous Dr. Alt appeared on the scene. :D

Altj, I am guessing that the last paragraph was your comment. Surely it wasn't a part of the original article. hehe

[Altjaeger]

Doesn't seem like they got it right however until the infamous Dr. Alt appeared on the scene. :D

Altj, I am guessing that the last paragraph was your comment. Surely it wasn't a part of the original article. hehe

Ys, that is why the last para is not in quotations. :D

[venado]

That is "Herr Doktor Alt" for you uninformed...!:rolleyes:

[Renegade]

Seems to me that I've met a few Texan's recently that know alot about Pennsylvania.
Side note: Do you guys find it odd, or maybe you do it as well, that we in Pennsylvania refer to it more commonly as Pee-Aye? I mean verbally, not typing abbreviations.

[Altjaeger]

Seems to me that I've met a few Texan's recently that know alot about Pennsylvania.
Side note: Do you guys find it odd, or maybe you do it as well, that we in Pennsylvania refer to it more commonly as Pee-Aye? I mean verbally, not typing abbreviations.

As an outlander talking to outlanders I generally use Pennsylvania. However, the use of PA does not seem odd and if it is used in a thread I find it easy to fall into that usage as well. Same with short cutting to PGC and USP.

[BILL K]

Seems to me that I've met a few Texan's recently that know alot about Pennsylvania.
Side note: Do you guys find it odd, or maybe you do it as well, that we in Pennsylvania refer to it more commonly as Pee-Aye? I mean verbally, not typing abbreviations.

Lol, just the opposite are those poor folk from the northwest corner of our country who must use fifteen letters to declare their statehood so as not to get mixed in with the chuckleheads from a city in the east with the same name!

"Where ya from?"
"Washington State, how about you?"
"D.C."
:D

[Sabre]

I'm even starting to like PA's deer management plan. Why ? Because it's become a shining example for NY of What NOT TO DO, that's why. Seems PA's license sales have dropped by somwhere in the neighborhood of 16% since it's AR and HR plan went into effect, while NY's license sales have only dropped 3% during that same time frame. We've used that information as part of a very successful campaign to block further expansion of AR's into 8 new DMU'S in central NY again this year. Survey's done by the Delaware County sportsman's federation and the NYS conservation council also proved hunter dissatisfaction with Pa's AR program and NY'S expirimental AR program implemented several years ago in 3 southern NY DMU's has risen steadily and dramatically over the years. Thank's PA for giving us good ammuntion to use in our fight to defeat implementation of AR'S in New York.;)

[venado]

Seems PA's license sales have dropped by somwhere in the neighborhood of 16% since it's AR and HR plan went into effect, while NY's license sales have only dropped 3% during that same time frame.


Sabre, I dind't readily find license sales for all states for an extended period at one source so that I could confirm an apple/apple comparison, perhaps you can direct us to that.

I did find a list from the US Fish & WL Svc. that showed PA with a 1.2% drop between 2004 and 2005 and NY with a drop of 8.6% between the same two years. The national average was a drop of 1.4% which is greater than PA and far less than the drop in NY.

Since 2004/5 is right in the middle of the reduction of deer in PA it would seem that the drop would have to accelerate considerably for the final results to be only a 3% drop for NY vs a 16% drop for PA as you stated. Perhaps you can show us the numbers that you used to support your opinion, say from 2001 through 2008 as the period for comparison.

Regardless of what those numbers are, this is exactly why a careful study of what game management has taken place in PA is very important to the northeast and though less so for the rest of the range of the WT. I would hope that all game managers would look at what is/was done in PA and make decisions based on the similiarities and end results desired.

[Sabre]

I did find a list from the US Fish & WL Svc. that showed PA with a 1.2% drop between 2004 and 2005 and NY with a drop of 8.6% between the same two years. The national average was a drop of 1.4% which is greater than PA and far less than the drop in NY

Venado, Sorry, that should have read NON RESIDENT DEER LICENSE sales. The big drop in NY's NON RESIDENT DEER license sales between 2004 {33,340} and 2005 {29,803} was expected and coincided with the discovery of CWD in our herd. Since '05 sales in NY have dropped at a much lower rate from 29,803 in '05 to 29,440 in '06 and 28,767 in '07. Pa's numbers for the same years are 90,990 {'04} 83,174 {'05} 79,144 {'06} and 75,966 {'07}. As you can see from these figures, Pa's license sales continued to plummet at an alarming rate in '05, '06 and '07 while NY'S slowed to a crawl after the CWD scare.

[venado]

Thanks for the clarification Sabre. I think it makes sense with a reduced herd that the non-resident licenses would drop. I doubt that really is a significant problem to PA as long as the overall licence sales are maintained in PA at a level that is not significantly different from the rest of the nation. Do you know how NY compares on that basis?

[Renegade]

Well let's see AR started in 2002 when we had 1,017,154 sales and in 2008 we had 926,892, that's an 8.87% decrease (926,892 / 1,017,154 = .91126 - 1.0 = .0887 or 8.87%) or a drop of 90,262 in licenses.

In 1990 we had 1,160,780 in sales. By 1999 it was 1,033,315. A drop of 127,465 or 10.98% ....... with no AR's

In 1980 we had 1,295,005 in sales. By 1989 it was 1,156,891. A drop of 138,114 or 10.66% ...... with no AR's

So the numbers don't bear your claims out. We not only lost a higher percentage before, but more hunters as well. If AR was the cause of those losses, what was the cause for the loss in the past 2 decades?? However, we are due in a few years to loose a large number of hunters because the average age of hunters in PA is something like 51, so unless recruitment picks up we are set to lose our older hunters at a higher rate.

And also for your knowledge, it's not even close to debatable that the new AR is favorable to the majority. Herd reduction is what has some upset.

[Sabre]

Well let's see AR started in 2002 when we had 1,017,154 sales and in 2008 we had 926,892, that's an 8.87% decrease (926,892 / 1,017,154 = .91126 - 1.0 = .0887 or 8.87%) or a drop of 90,262 in licenses.

In 1990 we had 1,160,780 in sales. By 1999 it was 1,033,315. A drop of 127,465 or 10.98% ....... with no AR's

In 1980 we had 1,295,005 in sales. By 1989 it was 1,156,891. A drop of 138,114 or 10.66% ...... with no AR's

So the numbers don't bear your claims out. We not only lost a higher percentage before, but more hunters as well. If AR was the cause of those losses, what was the cause for the loss in the past 2 decades?? However, we are due in a few years to loose a large number of hunters because the average age of hunters in PA is something like 51, so unless recruitment picks up we are set to lose our older hunters at a higher rate.

And also for your knowledge, it's not even close to debatable that the new AR is favorable to the majority. Herd reduction is what has some upset.

Those are total sales, not non resident sales. Bottom line is you are full of crap. I'm on the phone right now with the man most responsible for studying and putting together the data to fight implementation of AR's in NY. He is the region 4 alternate director of the NYS conservation council, a NYS conservation council board member, councilman for the Delaware county sportsmans federation and one of my best friends since high school. He just told me to tell you to go find the survey study done by pa university in 2008 regarding hunter satisfaction with your AR program. I can get more information if you wish but it isn't going to make your position or your states management program success look better I can tell you that for certain.

[Sabre]

Thanks for the clarification Sabre. I think it makes sense with a reduced herd that the non-resident licenses would drop. I doubt that really is a significant problem to PA as long as the overall licence sales are maintained in PA at a level that is not significantly different from the rest of the nation. Do you know how NY compares on that basis?

Non resident license sales are very important to the state because a non resident license costs three times as much as a resident license and non resident hunters also dump ALOT more money into the states economy though motel rentals, meals etc. etc. than resident hunters.

[Sabre]

And also for your knowledge, it's not even close to debatable that the new AR is favorable to the majority. Herd reduction is what has some upset.

Just got off the phone with my friend. It's late, I'm tired and I just got hit with massive bombardment of data so I'm not going to try to post any exact figures from memory but this is a general overview of the crux of the conversation............ Independent surveys done by Pa university have shown hunter support for the AR program falling steadily and by a large percentage over the past few seasons. Surveys of hunters in the NY pilot area show dissatisfaction with the program growing rapidly there as well and now stands at about 60% dissatisfied and wanting to abandon the program. After much review of all of the available data from pa and the pilot AR area in southern NY, it was concluded by the NYS conservation council big game committee and NYSDEC that the AR program is failing miserably in both places. Further, it was projected that both the PA and the NY pilot area AR programs will most likely be abandoned eventually due to massive hunter dissatisfaction. After tedious review of all available data and careful consideration given to the fact that both the NYS farm bureau and the Delaware county sportsmans federation both voiced strong opposition to the program, consideration for expansion of the AR program in NY has been abandoned by the NYDEC... YAHOOOOOOO !:D:D:D

[postoak]

I don't know why anyone would even try to argue that ARs and HRs don't reduce hunter numbers. A lot of the AR proponents even consider this a feature.

[venado]

Thanks Renegade for the actual numbers. We still have not seen comparable numbers from Sabre to determine if NY has or has not had comparable drops in hunters over the same periods. (BTW, part of the problem in comparing numbers from different sources stems from the subtle things that are included or not included.)

My guess is that NY drops will be similar to those for the entire region and that ARs/HR in PA has not been a major factor in hunter numbers at this point except in the Non-Resident group which I contend is relatively insignificant in the overall. Were Non-Resident numbers to remain constant in PA it would further put pressure on the herd and reduce Resident hunter success.

Since hunter success in PA remains high vs most of the northeast, AR/HR does not condemn what has been done in PA. Perhaps a state like NY would want to reduce Non-Resident hunters so that their own hunters could have a higher success ratio. Then again logic and subsequent action are often at odds.

[GF.]

It sure would be nice to have some really thorough data on all o' that.... There's 60% of 'hunters', and then there's 60% of hunters surveyed who chose to respond...


My gut tells me that it's possible that the PA changes have been in effect long enough that most folks have accepted them as just the way things are, and aren't highly motivated to voice their feelings on the matter, whereas you can always count on a strong response from those with an axe to grind. Sample size doesn't mean much if the participants self-select along a philosophical fault line such as this....:rolleyes:

And one other hunch... I'm gonna go out on a limb and suppose that license sales have dropped quickest among those least committed to the sport. Nothing real profound there, of course, but - to borrow a page from Lamplighter's and/or Sabre's book of rants ( ;) ) - one might surmise that these least-committed hunters are the ones to whom the ability to fill a tag with very little effort probably means/meant a great deal. The hard-cores are going to be out there regardless of herd size, antler restrictions and all o' that crap, because they love The Hunt, and they fully understand that there's a lot more to it than dressing up in designer camo, firing a few shots, and pounding your chest as a Mighty Hunter. And the more ego-gratification these guys were getting from being able to punch tags almost at will, the more they're gonna blame their decision to quit on someone or something else...

But even if the real reason they gave up hunting was to be able to coach Little League (which is perfectly honorable, IMO), they're apt to talk a good game of having quit because of the 'stupid' regulations, because they actually thought that they were pretty hard-core, and the days of plenty had them convinced that they were actually pretty damn good at this whole hunting deal, so if they're now failing to tag out, it couldn't possibly be because they don't know what they're doing....:rolleyes:

Again, just MODO (my own damn opinion), but it's one that was formulated based on more than a few conversations overheard at various 'sporting goods' store gun counters.

Realize, too, that I'm walking a pretty fine line here.... Fact is, my own whitetail hunting has become more like shooting fish in a barrel on private land, and - full disclosure moment - I did in fact give up on public land firearms hunting out here after just one modest effort during the CT late-season ML hunt, with its 4% annual success rate. Given the distance I had to drive, the cost of gas and the fact that I didn't see so much as a rabbit, squirrel or even a tweety-bird on the public land that I hunted, it just wasn't worth the effort & expense for such low odds of tagging a deer, and I couldn't find the time to turn the balance in my favor.

On the other hand, I'm gonna give myself odds just slightly better than those of the proverbial snowball of tagging an Elk next week, and it's costing me a whole lot more time & money to do that - but I get to hunt a few days with my brother, visit for a few days with my dad, and spend a week running myself ragged at 10,000 feet above where I'm sitting right now, so it's a whole different kettle o' fish. Whitetails are groceries; Elk are a dream vacation.:D

So anyway, I'd credit (or blame) a lot more than the antler restrictions with any decline in tag sales. Hunting is getting away from the '2 weeks in camp' experience that a lot of today's old-timers may have seen as kids. Nowadays, we tend to squeeze in our hunts on afternoons and weekends; it's a solitary time that we carve out away from jobs and family - not one of gathering with old friends, old stories and just enough just-old-enough scotch to keep the stories flowing.

A lot of those old stories from camp are probably about the days when only a few of the guys would hunt past opening morning because, after all, tagging a deer wasn't really the point of the exercise. But for a generation that just can't handle a pre-dawn to after-dark tree sitting expedition with no-one but one's self to talk to, the focus of hunting has drifted (IMO) more and more toward inches of bone and numbers of tags filled. It has gone from relational to transactional, you might say, and a lot of what hunting was all about is falling by the wayside, IMO....

[Sabre]

Thanks Renegade for the actual numbers. We still have not seen comparable numbers from Sabre to determine if NY has or has not had comparable drops in hunters over the same periods. (BTW, part of the problem in comparing numbers from different sources stems from the subtle things that are included or not included.)

My guess is that NY drops will be similar to those for the entire region and that ARs/HR in PA has not been a major factor in hunter numbers at this point except in the Non-Resident group which I contend is relatively insignificant in the overall. Were Non-Resident numbers to remain constant in PA it would further put pressure on the herd and reduce Resident hunter success.

Since hunter success in PA remains high vs most of the northeast, AR/HR does not condemn what has been done in PA. Perhaps a state like NY would want to reduce Non-Resident hunters so that their own hunters could have a higher success ratio. Then again logic and subsequent action are often at odds.

It was determined in the DEC/conservation council meetings that non resident deer license sales were more relevant than resident sales because a high percentage of resident license sales are "sportsman" or "super sportsman" licenses and that includes small game, turkey hunting and fishing priveledges so it's impossible to tell exactly for what or why residents are or aren't buying those licenses. On the other hand, most non residents come here to deer hunt and buy a specific non resident DEER HUNTING LICENSE so you know for sure they are buying the licenses specifically to deer hunt. Any information you would like on NY license sales is available on the NY DEC website. OF course, all of the available data used to determine that AR's are failing to reach their objectives in the NY pilot area and in Pa. were only evaluated and results determined by the EXPERTS of NYSDEC and the NYS conservation council, which I'm sure means they aren't nearly as relevant as any conclusions reached by you, Renegade or GF.:rolleyes: Yeah, right:rolleyes: Get a clue.

[venado]

Sabre, please help us by posting up the overall numbers for NY in the same format that it was done by Renegade for PA. I am not familiar with the NY site and the information was not obvious to me when I went there. It will be an easy task for you and then we will have the numbers in your own text on here to consider in the discussion.

[Renegade]

So let me get this straight Sabre. The NYDEC and some citizens on an advisory council are a reputable, legitimate, and honest source for the truth and all matters of fact; BUT the PGC and the members of their CAC's are not to be given that same status. I can see how this is going. PA has done it and has the data for it, but yet NY hasn't done it and somehow an old highschool friend who is a member of a sportsmens club already has the answers.:confused:

Well my earlier post was made before your clarification that you meant only non residents. So I guess then you have no problem agreeing that when all license sales for PA are taken into account, we aren’t loosing hunters at any extreme rate and in fact had lost them at a faster rate before the new AR went into effect.
Now that you’ve shrunk that inclusion, which I’m not sure what it has to do with anything, since your comparing two states but using other states to do it with. Seems like an apples to lug nuts comparison, but I’ll bite since I also have those figures broke out as res. and nres.
In 2002 we sold 64,923 Non-resident licenses, in 2008 it was 54,674, a 15.78% drop or 10,249 licenses.
In 1990 we sold 80,002 NR and in 1999 it was 66,506, a 16.86% drop or 13,496 licenses.
In 1980 we sold 79,282 NR and in 1989 it was 78,473, a 1.02% drop or 809 licenses.

So again, what accounts for the larger drop off in non-resident license sales in the 90’s (when we had many more deer and a much lower antler restriction) before the new AR’s?

As for the AR study claims, could you get me an exact title to this study you speak of. Because the wing of penn state (psu) that studies deer is the PA Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit http://pacfwru.cas.psu.edu/ which lists current and completed study summaries on their site. The only one similar to your friend from New York’s mention is one entitled “Effects of Antler Restrictions on Yearling Buck Survival, Buck Harvests, and Hunter Satisfaction in Pennsylvania”, which has been there for a couple years and is about the collared buck study.
However, the PGC does yearly reports, one of which is about their annual game surveys. Here is some quotes from the latest for July 07 to June 2008.

ABSTRACT We compared deer hunter survey results from panel members who filled out a series of 6 surveys (n = 718) and panel members who began the series but did not complete it (n = 576). We found significant differences between the two groups in their responses to five questions chosen a priori, indicating a bias in the panel group. We also used responses from these groups to compare support for antler restrictions before their start and support for them after three years. About half of surveyed hunters had the same level of support for antler restrictions pre- and post implementation, but about 41%
were less supportive of the deer management program. Based on previous survey results, we conclude that antler restrictions were not the cause of decreasing support for the deer management program. Final analyses on deer hunter surveys need to be conducted to complete the final objective. A final report is expected in 2009.

RESULTS
No final analyses on hunter survey data were conducted in 2007-08.
We found differences in attitudes between panel members who completed all six surveys (n =718) and panel members who did not complete the surveys (n = 576) (Table 1). Of five questions chosen a priori to test for differences, four were different (p<0.05) between groups. Sixty-five percent of panelists supported a statewide antler restriction, while 54 percent of panel dropouts supported statewide antler restrictions (Table 1). Because of the bias detected between panelists and panel dropouts, we have concluded that trends based solely on responses of panel members will also be biased and therefore affect any inferences to the general hunting population.
About half of our respondents (6-survey panelists and dropouts who completed initial and final surveys) had the same level of support after 3 seasons of antler restrictions as before the initial season (Table 2). About 41% of hunters were less supportive of the deer management program after 3 years of antler restrictions. However, because our preliminary analyses found that hunters approved antler restrictions by a 2:1 margin (Wallingford et al. 2006), we do not believe that the reduction in approval of the deer management program was related to antler restrictions. It is important to note that this
analysis only indicates direction of approval or disapproval, not their level of support.
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/pgc/reports/2008_wildlife/21009-07Z.pdf

And from the 2006 reports results:
Results of the preliminary analysis of survey results were provided as a draft manuscript to the Board of Commissioners at the January 2006 meeting (Appendix 3). The proportion of hunters supporting a statewide antler restriction varied between 56% and 65%, which compares favorably with the survey conducted by Luloff et al. (2002). Hunters who hunted in the 3-point area had slightly higher levels of agreement (62% to 72%) with antler restrictions than those who hunted in the 4-point area (53% to 61%). In both areas, support was significantly greater than opposition to antler restrictions, in most cases by more than a 2:1 margin. Additional summary results from the 2002-2005 deer hunter survey, and a comparison of selected questions from the 1995 and fall 2002 survey are found in Appendix 3.
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/pgc/reports/2006_wildlife/21009-05.pdf


But since your speaking on the he said / she said level with just an average Joe off the street. I speak to lots of people in my travels, though these would all be actual PA residents; when you ask “so what do you think of deer hunting in PA?” You overwhelmingly get a response that usually starts with “I don’t mind the antler restrictions, but…” or “I don’t have a problem with the antler restrictions, but…”


Or, if you look at any poll, though admittedly unscientific, you’d be hard pressed to find one that didn’t favor the new AR. For instance: http://www.pasportsmenportal.com/category/hunting/ look at the polls on the right hand side. Every time you reload the page a new poll will come up.
Poll
Do you agree with antler restrictions?
•Yes (81%, 557 Votes)
•No (13%, 89 Votes)
•Some Aspects (6%, 39 Votes)
Total Voters: 685

[Sabre]

So anyway, I'd credit (or blame) a lot more than the antler restrictions with any decline in tag sales. Hunting is getting away from the '2 weeks in camp' experience that a lot of today's old-timers may have seen as kids. Nowadays, we tend to squeeze in our hunts on afternoons and weekends; it's a solitary time that we carve out away from jobs and family - not one of gathering with old friends, old stories and just enough just-old-enough scotch to keep the stories flowing.

License sales were far from the only thing looked at in determining AR's are failing miserably to meet their objectives in the expirimental NY pilot area and in Pa. Surveys of hunter satisfaction with the AR program proved support for the program continues to drop drastically with each passing season in both NY and PA... Buck take figures from the first year of the program until the present were also used. As expected and predicted, buck take numbers fell by 30% the first year of the pilot program in NY. It had been predicted and expected that the buck take would recover by the second or third season to near pre-AR levels but that simply hasn't happened and the buck kill numbers were still down by 30% last year. Of course I know all of you arm chair experts are much more qualified to determine what is or isn't happening than the stupid folks from NYSDEC and the NYS conservation council.:rolleyes:

[Sabre]

Renegade, I have to get back to work now so don't have time for a lengthy response. Suffice it to say that Dan is far fronm just a member of a sportsmans club and has worked alongside DEC in many management and regulation matters over the past 20 some years. He did tell me last night specifivcally that with careful study PGC's own numbers are self contradictory in many instances and that their numbers just don't add up under careful scrutiny. DEC official's agreed on this. Of course, PGC is going to try to paint their management program as a raving succes and try to make themselves come out smelling like a rose even if it takes a bit of fraudulent number juggling to do so. Who would've ever thought any STATE AGENCY might do such a thing.:rolleyes:

[Renegade]

And there you have it. NYDEC is an honorable agency only capable of total honesty and should be elevated to a pedestal above all others, yet the PGC is pumping out deceit and falsifying reports at every turn. Pretty amazing, usually it's the government run dept. that is corrupt and the independent agency run by sportsmen that is truthful. Go figure.

After looking at DEC site is appears that DEC won't be expanding their AR's but it doesn't say, unless I missed it, that they'll be doing away with the current program, and it did say "DEC will pursue further dialogue with hunters to promote greater awareness (education is key) of the potential outcomes of antler restriction programs.". Which sounds as though they will continue it in those 4 units. Especially when they ask the following question of those units:
Should the antler restriction program continue?

* WMUs 3C and 3J: 60% of respondents said the program should continue, 29% said it should not continue, 11% had no opinion.
* WMUs 3H and 3K: 77% of respondents said the program should continue, 14% said it should not continue, 9% had no opinion.

So to me, being an outsider and not claiming to know the intimacies of NY's deer program past or present, it would seem that those opposing the restrictions come from the other 88 units that haven't tried the new AR and are generally opposed to any change. It was the same way in PA till the second or third year. If NY got a 2/3rd's to 3/4 approval of AR in those 4 units in only 3-4 years, who's to say it wouldn't happen in the other 88 units?
And something else that strikes me as odd. It seems as though the DEC is managing by popular vote instead of by what's best for the resource and by letting science guide them. We went by popular vote kind of for decades and look at the problems it created for PA.

"Of course I know all of you arm chair experts are much more qualified to determine what is or isn't happening than the stupid folks from NYSDEC and the NYS conservation council."
So which side do you fall on? I could say the same thing about PA.

[venado]

Sabre, based on your response and what you claim to be the actions of those in the "know" in NY, it appears they are not overly concerned for their Resident hunters success as opposed to their apparent concern for Non-residents. Strange but maybe a NY thing.

I haven't seen any evidence by biologists in PA that show opposition to either HR or AR for their herd. Renegade has made his point clearly and to support his position, ARs in TX are also generally supported in those counties where they have been implemented. They were originally initiated by hunter demand in a few counties (BTW, and opposed by the TPWL at that time) but after a few years they have been embraced by TPWL and have been expanded to a significant part of the state. If Renegade's numbers for approval in NY are correct for those areas in NY where the ARs are applied, I would have to agree with his conclusion as opposed to yours. Of course that might also be because I do not consider Renegade a moron.

[GF.]

You know, Sabre, I'm not sure that you even began to grasp the point I was making there, but whatever... I just think it's a little simplistic (and quite possibly self-serving) of anyone to claim that antler restrictions are the whole problem behind declining license sales, especially when you look at the overall economy and - in particular - the price of a gallon of gas over the past 5 years.

Especially if you're talking about sales to non-resident hunters....:rolleyes:

IIRC... The NYS deer biologists used to figure that something real close to 90% of the 1.5 year-old buck crop was getting bagged every year. That's pretty darn high.... Do you have any data on what percentage of the pre-AR harvest was of a class that got protection under the restrictions?

I'm just thinking that since the removal rate was so high, letting a large number of additional small bucks pass through to breed could really skew the local genetics, and if the majority of the bucks get cropped off just as soon as they pass the AR minimums, then no, you wouldn't expect much in the way of bigger antlers coming through.

And the 'walker' bucks must be learning pretty quick, or your harvest numbers would have come back by now; it's very likely that last year's spike will be this year's 6-point, but the chances of the 6 being as dumb as he was a year ago just aren't that good.

I think maybe a fair number of people got on board with the idea of ARs on the assumption that they'd be as successful as ever, just on bigger deer. I don't know that they counted on 2.5 YO bucks being harder to track down. And since they're not seeing them or shooting them, they might just be convincing themselves that these 'older' bucks are all ghosts....

[Sabre]

Sabre, based on your response and what you claim to be the actions of those in the "know" in NY, it appears they are not overly concerned for their Resident hunters success as opposed to their apparent concern for Non-residents. Strange but maybe a NY thing.

I haven't seen any evidence by biologists in PA that show opposition to either HR or AR for their herd. Renegade has made his point clearly and to support his position, ARs in TX are also generally supported in those counties where they have been implemented. They were originally initiated by hunter demand in a few counties (BTW, and opposed by the TPWL at that time) but after a few years they have been embraced by TPWL and have been expanded to a significant part of the state. If Renegade's numbers for approval in NY are correct for those areas in NY where the ARs are applied, I would have to agree with his conclusion as opposed to yours. Of course that might also be because I do not consider Renegade a moron.

But that's just it Venado. The subject came up and was discussed at great length at the meetings and the overwhelming consensus was that NY hunters in the proposed AR expansion area DON'T WANT NEW YORK TO END UP ANYTHING LIKE TEXAS. Right now it's still relatively easy to get FREE PERMISSION to hunt on private land in central NY. The whitetail hasn't been elevated to the cult trophy status that it has attained in Texas. The Texas style lease system hasn't been established and farmers in the area still tend to view the deer largely as an agricultural pest. Start managing the herd specifically to produce more trophy class animals and the cult trophy status and Texas style lease system is as sure to follow as night follows day. It happens EVERYWHERE big antlers are specifically managed for and big bucks are known to roam. It sounds the death knell for free private land hunting access as surely as thunder follows lightning. You boys have already crapped in your own sandbox as far as ever having free access to private land hunting is concerned and PA seems determined to follow in your footsteps just as fast as it can but NY hunters in the proposed AR area were smart enough to read the writing on the wall and stop your kind from ruining their hunting here.

[GF.]

Gotta say, that's an interesting angle on it.....

How big is a typical private land parcel up there?

[Sabre]

You know, Sabre, I'm not sure that you even began toAnd the 'walker' bucks must be learning pretty quick, or your harvest numbers would have come back by now; it's very likely that last year's spike will be this year's 6-point, but the chances of the 6 being as dumb as he was a year ago just aren't that good.

I think maybe a fair number of people got on board with the idea of ARs on the assumption that they'd be as successful as ever, just on bigger deer. I don't know that they counted on 2.5 YO bucks being harder to track down. And since they're not seeing them or shooting them, they might just be convincing themselves that these 'older' bucks are all ghosts....

GF, the truth is there are and always were a good number of nice 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks running around out there. The good, ambitious hunters have been taking them consistently for years. I've personally got 8 very respectable 2.5 and 3.5 year old 8 and 10 point bucks on the wall behind me right now. The largest is a 10 point with an 18" spread, 21" main beams, 4" brow tines and 8 & 9" G-2's. His field dressed weight was 184 lbs. and he was aged at 3.5. My buddy Dan, the conservation council chairman who I mentioned in a previous post, has several very nice 8, 9 and 10 point bucks mounted on his living room walls. My Brother has a 9 point monster with a 22.5" spread and 13" G-2's mounted above his fireplace. My neighbor has 9 bucks of 8-10 points mounted all around his living room and adds another similar to his collection almost every single year. I could go on and on like this but you should be getting the picture. The truly good hunters aren't complaining about the deer hunting in NY as it stands. The one's complaining and clamoring so loudly for AR's are generally the fat, lazy wannabe's who couldn't find their ass with both hands in a room full of mirrors and have visions of big bucks behind every tree if they could just get AR's expanded all across the state.

[Sabre]

Gotta say, that's an interesting angle on it.....

How big is a typical private land parcel up there?

Most of the farms in my area run 150-400 acres.

[Renegade]

Sabre, the level of restriction imposed, 3 points on one side- 1" min., is not at a level to produce "trophy" buck. You want to grow "trophy" buck you better go with a spread restriction or a higher point count. Pa's AR is not designed to grow trophy buck. It's not even about growing large antlers, but they just happen to be a by product of age. Our AR is about adding 1 age of life to the average buck. We used to have harvests made up of 75-90% yearlings. And with such a low restriction we were shooting a disproportionate amount of males and a low number of females. That ended up leaving a herd full of soon to be yearlings for the following year, perpetuating the cycle again and again. NY may not have that issue due to having less hunters.

Any loss of private land in addition to the normal consumption of land is more likely due to herd reduction, not AR. Unless you own huge tracts of land your not going to maintain your own private herd, contrary to the misguided beliefs of some. PA probably has more private land than most states, but unlike NY (from what I hear) we don't have any stringent trespassing laws that can get you shot! Unless that land is clearly posted, you have a leg to stand on should there be litigation. It's very common in PA for there to be private land holdings open to the public for hunting, without permission. It's just a holdover from days gone by.

[Sabre]

Sabre, the level of restriction imposed, 3 points on one side- 1" min., is not at a level to produce "trophy" buck. You want to grow "trophy" buck you better go with a spread restriction or a higher point count. Pa's AR is not designed to grow trophy buck. It's not even about growing large antlers, but they just happen to be a by product of age. Our AR is about adding 1 age of life to the average buck. We used to have harvests made up of 75-90% yearlings. And with such a low restriction we were shooting a disproportionate amount of males and a low number of females. That ended up leaving a herd full of soon to be yearlings for the following year, perpetuating the cycle again and again. NY may not have that issue due to having less hunters.

Any loss of private land in addition to the normal consumption of land is more likely due to herd reduction, not AR. Unless you own huge tracts of land your not going to maintain your own private herd, contrary to the misguided beliefs of some. PA probably has more private land than most states, but unlike NY (from what I hear) we don't have any stringent trespassing laws that can get you shot! Unless that land is clearly posted, you have a leg to stand on should there be litigation. It's very common in PA for there to be private land holdings open to the public for hunting, without permission. It's just a holdover from days gone by.

It's very obvious you don't know jack about NY. We don't have anything that could even remotely be called "stringent" trespassing laws. In fact, land has to be legally posted with visible signs spaced every so many yards {forget exactly} apart and signed and dated by the landowner in order to be legal and for an offender to be prosecuted. The fine for an offender that is caught on "legally posted" property is generally 75.00 for the first offense and if the land isn't legally posted, the only thing a landowner can do is tell a trespasser to leave.

[Renegade]

I already told you I'm not familiar with NY and it's only what I heard, why the aggression?

[Sabre]

I already told you I'm not familiar with NY and it's only what I heard, why the aggression?

Not trying to be aggressive at this point Renegade, sorry if it seems so. Why are you so in favor of your states AR program ? NY's management program is dedicated to keeping our herd within carrying capacity of the habitat and in most area's they've done a pretty good job of that. DEC has done many studies over the years into the general health of our herd and found it to be quite healthy despite the lack of significant numbers "older age class bucks". Our fawn survival rates are high as are our successful doe breeding rates so NY's herd stands as living proof that you don't really need "diverse age structure" or many "older age class bucks" in order to have a healthy herd. To me the old saw repeated so often by QDM and AR proponents that those management strategies are intended primarily to produce a better age structure and promote a heathier herd are just bogus lies used by closet wannabe trophy hunters.

[Sabre]

It's very common in PA for there to be private land holdings open to the public for hunting, without permission. It's just a holdover from days gone by.

Could be for now but if your AR's work too well and word gets out that there are a good number of real nice bucks coming out of PA you'll watch that old tradition disappear like a wisp of smoke in a blizzard during your lifetime. Think not ? Name me one state that's known as a trophy haven where a "Texas style" pay to hunt system hasn't been established and "free access" to private land is still a living tradition ? Is that the legacy you wish to leave your children ?

[Renegade]

One of the premises about implementing a QDM strategy is that you manage the herd according to the desires of the landowner(s) and within the habitat constraints of said lands. It doesn't recommend a one size fits all strategy. But it usually promotes a protection of young buck via some type of selective harvest strategy, and a liberal taking of surplus does in order to keep things in check, population wise. It's not about "trophy" deer unless you elevate the methods to achieve that should that be your goal. It's not in PA and IMO it's not in NY either.
Maybe it's not right for NY, I don't know. I'm defending the practice itself and also the results in PA that I am very familiar with. Which isn't always easy to do if you can't separate the effects of AR from those of HR. And because it's not right for a certain state doesn't make QDM a bad thing. However I think you'd get a different opinion from some Steuben(sp?) county folks.

Why am I so in favor you ask. Well I've been in the woods ever since I was a kid. When it came to deer sightings, you would see deer, sometimes a lot, but not many were buck and very rarely did you see a decent buck. More specifically for a case in point, my family has had a camp since 1968. We didn't hunt from it as we had another one my dad belonged to for that. It's only 3.5 acres and has several of similar sized lots/camps in the area with a couple having full time residents. It is mountain ground with the nearest ag lands probably 4-5 miles away. I used to spend most of my summer there and even a good many weekends during the winter. I never seen many buck in all those years and I can't ever remember seeing one larger than a 6pt. Since AR's went into play in 2002 I'm seeing large buck every year. By that I mean 8's,9's, and 10 pts. One I've been seeing for at least 3 years who has a split ear so I know it's the same one. I haven't seen him yet this year though so he may have been shot.

Also, in my scouting excursions in other areas I've seen an increase in rubs and in my travels when I see deer, at least one of them being a buck is very common. I've also seen an increase in decent buck among the local buck contests. The local paper prints a flyer out every year that I keep and just browsing thru older ones compared to the newer years you can see the difference.

The head of the PA taxidermist assoc. has also said overall they've seen an increase in the numbers brought in. No one gets a spike or 4 point mounted, but when you get an 8 pt. or better, you tend to get it mounted.

I gotta run now, hopefully I can continue with some more thoughts tonight.

[Sabre]

Why am I so in favor you ask. Well I've been in the woods ever since I was a kid. When it came to deer sightings, you would see deer, sometimes a lot, but not many were buck and very rarely did you see a decent buck. More specifically for a case in point, my family has had a camp since 1968. We didn't hunt from it as we had another one my dad belonged to for that. It's only 3.5 acres and has several of similar sized lots/camps in the area with a couple having full time residents. It is mountain ground with the nearest ag lands probably 4-5 miles away. I used to spend most of my summer there and even a good many weekends during the winter. I never seen many buck in all those years and I can't ever remember seeing one larger than a 6pt. Since AR's went into play in 2002 I'm seeing large buck every year. By that I mean 8's,9's, and 10 pts. One I've been seeing for at least 3 years who has a split ear so I know it's the same one. I haven't seen him yet this year though so he may have been shot.

Also, in my scouting excursions in other areas I've seen an increase in rubs and in my travels when I see deer, at least one of them being a buck is very common. I've also seen an increase in decent buck among the local buck contests. The local paper prints a flyer out every year that I keep and just browsing thru older ones compared to the newer years you can see the difference.

The head of the PA taxidermist assoc. has also said overall they've seen an increase in the numbers brought in. No one gets a spike or 4 point mounted, but when you get an 8 pt. or better, you tend to get it mounted.

I gotta run now, hopefully I can continue with some more thoughts tonight.

Funny thing is I used to drive through Susquehanna county PA on a weekly basis back in the 1990's and remember drooling over all the nice bucks I'd see out feeding in the farm fields. I have pictures from right here in non-AR New York of buck rubs on cedar trees as big around as a large mans thigh. I hear similar sob stories of never seeing any good bucks coming from AR proponents here all the time, yet I see several very nice bucks every year all over the place around here. I just saw a real bruiser of a 10 point in an alfalfa field three weeks ago in Delaware county NY {no AR's} that was 20" wide if he was an inch and he had G-2's that were easily a foot long. His two companions at 8 points apiece and 15-16" wide were nothing to sneeze at either. Going back just as far as the 2000 season I managed to take bucks of that class {8 points each and 14-16.5" wide} here in the non AR area of NY in the 2000, 2001, 2003 and 2005 seasons. I also took a couple of nice 2.5 year old 6 points {14 and 14.5" with no brow tines} in 2002 and 2004. My brother killed his 22.5" mega buck in 1999 and my buddy Dan killed a beutiful 19" wide ten point just last season. I have little sympathy for the complainers.

[Renegade]

Well then like I said, NY may not be a candidate for a statewide AR. But you don't have the hunters that we have either so more of your buck are able to make it thru their younger years. That right there eliminates a large part of the problem we had. Even in our counties where the deer grow larger due to a better diet we were still slaughtering the buck. Don't base your perception of the state of PA be based on only one of it's 67 counties, especially an agricultural one.

When PA was deciding on where to set the point restriction at, they contacted several states who had a point restriction in place. The consensus was that it needs to be at a point level that will protect 50-75% of the yearling crop. Using harvest point data they settled on 3 pts. to a side and in the counties(10) with better habitat that produced slightly larger yearlings it was set at 4 pts. on one side.

When you compare the age data, which is what the goal is to increase, we had 2.5+ buck making up about 18-20% of the harvest, the rest being yearlings. Sure, we still had some nice buck around to be taken, but they were few and far between. Word was that only one buck in a hundred was 4.5 or older. Now when you look at the harvest age data, 2.5+ buck make up 50% of the harvest. (jr hunters can still harvest under the old restriction)

So there's little doubt that our AR in PA has helped reach it's goal. And as for AR working too well and turning PA into a trophy state.... ain't gonna happen. Our AR aren't designed to grow monsters, they're designed to increase the adult male component in the breeding ecology of our herd, while letting the yearlings concentrate on growing their muscular and skeletal structures instead of wasting their energy chasing a large amount of doe. That improves health.

[Sabre]

I have the figures here somewhere for what our percentages of different aged class bucks taken stood at last season but haven't been able to locate. Going from memory though, I'm sure the figures were real close to 55% 1.5 yr olds, 30% 2.5 yr olds and 15% 3.5 and older. This is a big improvement over what the numbers were just ten years ago when they stood at roughly 85%, 10% and 5% and this shift was completely voluntary on the part of NY's deer hunters as more willingly pass on younger bucks as time goes by. This is how DEC officials stated they'd like to keep things going {voluntary on the part of hunters} at the AR meetings and is what the comment on the DEC website about educating hunters as to the benefits of passing up yearling bucks is all about.

[Renegade]

See that's the crux of the problem here. We have close to a million deer hunters (compared to NY's 721k), who are hunting a 2,400 sq. mile smaller chunk of land. It would be great if our hunters could have that kind of self control, unfortunately we don't. And we also have a huge poaching problem due to having minor penalties for committing such an act. We are efficient at shooting lots of deer and the mentality that "if I don't shoot that spike the next guy will" runs rampant. Last year we took 353,840 deer compared to NY's 222,979. I don't know if we can compare buck and doe accurately because PA breaks them down as antlered and antlerless, whereas NY does it by male and female

It sounds like your age class structure isn't in too bad of shape. Our antlered harvest last year was 52% yearlings and 48% 2.5's or older. Ten years ago ours was 80.6% yearlings and 19.4% 2.5's or older. So we reached relatively the same point by taking 2 different paths. But we couldn't wait to see if hunters could voluntarily do it on their own, not that I think they could have, but we had to reduce our herd bigtime (a whole other entire discussion) and if we'd have done it without protecting some of our buck we'd really be hurting for males!

[GF.]

Damn you guys! :mad:

You done went and turned a perfectly good argument into a polite conversation? Where's the sport in that???

:D


I'm gonna agree with Renegade here, and say that some modest antler restrictions aren't going to turn your state into a trophy hunting mecca any time soon. And even once you start imposing some very serious restrictions on this farm or that, dealing in hundreds of acres just won't cut it until you've fenced them all in... After all, the acreage of Texas outfits very typically runs into 4 and 5 figures.

Admittedly, it has been 20 years since I sat in a classroom alongside a bunch of future wildlife biologists, but the point that Renegade just raised about having an objective of substantially increasing the proportion of 2.5 YO bucks in the herd makes a hell of a lot of sense to me. And of course, I'm all in favor of that happening through voluntary restraint instead of via antler restrictions. Provided that it works.

Long and short, though, I've gotta agree with Renegade that there's a big difference between antler restrictions that should raise the average age structure and trophy deer management - call it TDM, maybe - and in fact, I think ARs are really just the opposite of good TDM and arguably the opposite of even natural selection, because you're selectively cropping off the biggest, healthiest, largest-racked 1.5s, who will go on in the following year to prevent the 'best' 1.5s from breeding before they get (preferentially) shot out of the gene pool.

So really, the best of all possible solutions (IMO) would be voluntary culling of the least promising 1.5s (and preferential shooting of does over any sort of buck) - basically what most of us regulars here are doing anyway. You can't achieve that through ARs, though - you can only do the opposite.

At least until somebody figures out how to apply a slot limit....:D

How about that? Statewide regs requiring hunters to shoot bucks that have either at least one spike or which meet some reasonable standard that assures that the non-spike harvest will consist primarily of animals 3.5 and up? :cool:

[dave-t.]

MO has a 4pt on one side rule that started in 30+/- counties, annd now has spread to 2/3's of the state. It was pitched by the conservation dept as a way to focus the deer kill on does (doe tags went to unlimited $7 each), reduce total population numbers, and letting the younger bucks get another year or two older.

Horse feathers. It was for producing bigger bucks.

That said, I'm for it.

My father inlaw lives 1/2 mile from a public hunting area, and there were years that he didn't even try to hunt his own land because the deer just werent there. When 17+ deer were seen (by him) taken out of just one access point to that public land, it was clear that unlimited doe tags were not a great idea across the board for all lands in the state.

His area is now in an expanded 4 pt AR zone, and he couldn't be happier. It will give a chance for the deer to mature even in hard hunted areas. No downside to that, imo. The unlimited doe kill needs to be reigned in on some hunting areas though. That type of thing needs some micro management otherwise you get 20-30 hunters killing 20 deer out of a 1sq/mile of public land, and decimating the herd for the next 3+ yrs.

There is nothing wrong with meat hunters taking does in reasonable numbers, and everyone having the chance at a 2-3.5+yr old buck.

These AR's may be forcing thee hands of some people, but after the first year or two, the number of legal deer available should be roughly the same as before the restrictions. The only differences are that you have to know before you pull the trigger how many points a buck has, and now you should have many more 4+point per side bucks out there to hunt.

Also, if 2/3's or more of a state is under AR's, how does that increase the desire to lease up, or block access to land? All of the properties in that 2/3's of the state should be gaining buck/antler growth at about the same rate. You didn't increase demand for leases/blocked access in one small area, you've improved buck potential over a huge area, and improved access to older bucks in all of it. Heck I'd rather hunt public land where AR's are in place, than hunt private land in the non-AR areas.

As a side note, in MO the SE portion of the state has horrible genetics, deer distribution, and a real poaching problem. That is the area that was left out of the AR plan. I grew up in that part of the state, and very very few people ever even hoped to see an 8pt or better buck. My uncle killed a 13-14" wide 8pt in that area of the state one year, and not only did he get it mounted, but he was the talk of the town for many years do to that 'big' buck. That was 15+yrs ago though, management ideas and hunting practices have come a long way in that time.

[Renegade]

Sorry GF :) You don't see that on too many sites do ya?:cool:

To address your concern about what is essentially "high grading". With our restriction before (for several decades) we were protecting bucks with both antlers being under 3" (at least one had to be 3" or more), which could potentially be A: a yearling with poor nutrition but otherwise good genetics. B: a yearling with poor genetics. or C: a fawn with great genetics. And we were shooting those with at least one antler 3" or more which could potentially be A: a yearling with great genetics. B: a yearling with average genetics. C: an adult with poor genetics. or D: just about any male in the herd.
So the way I see it we were high grading for years and years but now we've limited that a bit by protecting some of the good, the bad, and the ugly, so that we could see what they would become. A bucks antlers don't express their genetic potential till their 2.5 year antler growing season when their skeletal growth is pretty much done and nutrients are directed elsewhere. Which I'm not telling you anything new here I'm sure.

Now being one year older some other factors come into play. These older buck are now more wary and "street smart" and can elude us nimrods much better, mainly by moving mostly at night when the honest guys don't shoot. So if we had a certain percentage able to survive the gauntlet under the old rules and become 3.5's and 4.5's, I would think it's safe to assume that an even larger percentage are able to do the same thing since they now have an additional year of life experience under their belt. It's not like they get easier to shoot, although I do think the pressure on them gets extended some by hunters not being able to shoot the first buck that comes along.

Another thing is that we still have junior hunters, disabled with a permit to hunt from a vehicle, and any active military service personnel, who can still shoot buck under the old rules so it's kind of a culling factor or it has the potential to do some culling of "the bad and the ugly".

But as far as breeding goes, we still have enough yearlings that they are doing some of the breeding. If we had a larger proportion of 3.5 and older buck they would probably curb that somewhat which in an ideal herd or a trophy herd that would be desired. There's also the female component to consider. They contribute half the genetic makeup and we don't selectively harvest those. I've always read that it's nearly impossible to alter the genetic makeup of a free ranging deer herd over just a couple decades. So if we were altering the males, the females are re-altering them. Plus the majority of our harvest of bucks is done after the breeding season, so they've already sowed their seed.

[Laturkeyhtr]

Hey Renegade, I see you said:
However I think you'd get a different opinion from some Steuben(sp?) county folks.


I have a friend in Steuben cty, would you care to elaborate what is going on there?

Thansk!

It is nice to see that we can have good discussion with such diversely different opinions. :D

[GF.]

Dave had a good point there, and it almost slid by under the radar....

If a large portion of the state is under ARs and the individual holdings are small, you're just not gonna have much of a shot at creating pockets of land with great trophy potential. That pretty well limits the potential for everything getting locked up under leases and bought for private hunting purposes....

OK, yeah, if one 400-acre farm has one big dude holed up on it, then one lucky hunter (per year? every few years?) will be able to tag the old hoss. But if that ol' boy is doing much of the breeding, then his subordinates are gonna have to go off the reservation to find a girlfriend; and if the rest of the area is under pretty good pressure (meaning there are few 2.5 and up bucks around), then they'll probably find enough good opportunities to breed that that will keep them out there long enough to get shot.

This assumes, of course, that they get hunted during rut....

[Renegade]

"I have a friend in Steuben cty, would you care to elaborate what is going on there?"

Well just winging it from memory so correct me where I'm wrong. Steuben county is like the QDM mecca of the northeast. I believe they have the highest deer density of anywhere in the state and it's due to Charlie Alsheimer and the co-op they've put together surrounding his farm. It caught on and I believe they have a good bit of the landowners in that county practicing QDM, so much to the point they have a big gathering every year which I believe is like a big outdoor's seminar / discussion / cookout.
I believe Craig and Neil Dougherty (sp?) are from up that way too but maybe not the same county.

I'll do some searching here once I have some time.

[Sabre]

Renegade, I tried to call Dan several times over the course of the evening last night and couldn't get ahold of him. I want to get the information he has as I'm positive he did say he had results from a recent pa university survey that isn't on their website yet. He also said he has a recent survey of hunters in the NY pilot AR area that does show hunter support for the program has fallen dramatically. Dan is a straight up guy and I know if he says he has this stuff he does have it. Another thing I'd like to address is your previous comment where you said it seems like DEC is managing the herd based on what hunters want and not on science. That isn't the case at all. Yes DEC is very interested in what NY hunters want to do as far as the AR program is concerned. They do want to keep our hunters as happy as they can because they know that the hunters buy the licenses that pay their salaries and foot the bill for all conservation programs in the state. They have repeatedly told us that whether or not we have AR's in NY is up to us { NY hunters} as there is no real need for them here because our herd is perfectly healthy as it is.

[Renegade]

Just a follow up to my earlier comment. I did some searching and Neil and Craig are from Steuben county.
"When it comes to habitat management (not just QDM) Craig and Neil Dougherty, of North Country Whitetails, come to the table with 10 years of "hands on" experience. Their education on the subject of habitat improvement was earned deep in the nooks and crannies of their New York State, Stueben County, property, called Kindred Spirits. We’ve seen this 500-acre parcel of heaven on earth, which serves as a living museum of successes and set backs. Kindred Spirits is Mossy Oak Biologic’s northern research facility. All manner of cultivars are being grown, observed, and consumed in this fantastic outdoor living library!"

This is from huntsteubencounty.com
"Steuben County has the highest deer population per square mile of any NY county. Pre-season total of 43 per sq. mile, more than twice the New York State average. Nearly 21,000 whitetail deer harvested annually. More than 4,000 acres of privately owned land available for leasing, including over 8,000 bucks."

And here is the history of QDM in Steuben county.
http://www.charliealsheimer.com/ca/articles/art_can_qdm.html

[GF.]

And there you go.... "More than 4,000 private acres available for lease..." :eek:

So maybe Sabre's not so paranoid after all :confused:

[dave-t.]

4,000acres for lease, and 8,000 bucks????:rolleyes: If they allot 1/2 acre for bucks, how much land do the does get?;)

[Laturkeyhtr]

Renegade, here is the response I got from my friend in Stueben Cty.

Charlie Alshiemer is indeed the QDM guru locally and owns a sizable property near here...It's only about 30-35 miles away.. I don't know many details about his local co-op, but it would make sense for him to control as large an area around his property as possible... Many landowners have thier own little QDM programs..Billy Arnold have tried to encourage it on the little co-op we belong to, but it's been difficult because the properties are not contingent, and we have neighbors all around who either shoot everything, or still insist on shooting ALL bucks and no does..

Steuben County nearly always leads the state in buck kill and total deer kill, although thier are some other smaller counties ( Yates comes to mind) that higher kill per square mile stats.. Actually the genetics, feed and minerals are good here for raising big bucks, but few of them live long enough to grow good racks, except in controlled areas like Alshiemer's properties..

To my knowledge, there has NEVER been a B&C buck scored from Steuben, although some have come close...I saw one a few years ago that was killed by a young fellow I know that netted 167 and change.. It was the fifth largest buck taken ( or rather scored) in NY that year...The biggest ones usually either come from the Adirondacks or from the fertile farmlands in the Lake Plains areas ( Lake Ontario)...

In a phone conversation a few days ago, I think (but not sure) they is something brewing, but no details have been let out yet.

[Sabre]

And there you go.... "More than 4,000 private acres available for lease..." :eek:

So maybe Sabre's not so paranoid after all :confused:

Exactly, and I hate to tell all you guys I told you so buuuuut-------I told you so !;)

[GF.]

Yup.... You can't do much on small, scattered parcels, but once somebody gets the critical mass going, you could be in for some trouble that way :(

It'll start out with the A-team guys in the core area getting some good money for lease rights, and then the B-team guys on the edges will sell their neighbors on the deal so that the B-team landowners now have a buffer of 'managed' land around them and can charge more and it'll just ripple out until there is enough public land around that all of the private land consists of small, scattered parcels again, which - unless you've got an awful lot of state land somewhere along the way, will occur somewhere west of I-25....:rolleyes:

I guess it just depends how big a market there will turn out to be. Sooner or later, we'll run out of hunters or the hunters will run out of money.... I sure hope.