I think point restrictions can work quite well if done right, but I agree that spread is a better way to go to get mature bucks. Better to do something that will improve age structure than to vote no change. Which by the way would only add you to the ranks of the people included if your DNR say's hunters like things the way they are and "don't want a change". Just be part of the solution and press to get the best AR's possible.
Just for reference there are 4 bucks from PA in the contest score thread right now (8 years after AR's were put in place). Nov 10th. 117" 103" 97" 86" I'm not asking you guys if you are better off then you were 8 years ago.........what I am more concerned with is if you had it to do all over again would you do it the same...................or do you see the improvements as minimal and there is probably a much better way to go about making hunting better.
Too much to ask "avg joe" to guess at spread...........they'll never do it. They tried an "outside the ears" program near me (hunted there many times) it failed so badly they just did away with it completely. Man, I couldn't disagree more..............change comes so SLOWLY in NY that we simply can't afford to swing and miss. Voting for change simply for change is about the worst thing you could do IMO..........the country is learning that lesson the hard way as we speak. Change is coming and we can't afford to make the wrong choice............because it will be decades before we get another chance like this.
I know where you are coming from. It doesn't come any slower than in Michigan. I didn't say make a change simply for the sake of making a change. I'm saying get involved personally to help come up with the best AR's your going to get and then vote for it if they can make a positive difference. If everyone is only willing to vote on exactly what they want then you may miss your window of opportunity. Check out the current P&Y entries vs pre AR's if you want to get an idea of how their AR's are working.
AR's are use by deer biologist to more balances buck herd with age. AR's from a bio point have done just that. As for bigger bucks just check the record books.
What I wanna know is this .... will the amount of deer increase with a 4 point one side antler restriction? It seems to me there are more DEER in alot of these MW states ... not just bigger racks... I Zwanna see more deer and see them acting the way they are supposed to act
Atlasman..this may answer some of your questions: http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/...ting_-_antler_restrictions_-_v13_20090806.pdf
Maybe you should try quoting and reading the parts of people’s posts about seeing more big bucks AFTER AR’s been introduced. I’ve stated it 2x already myself. Rick James, and others have as well. As with any of your debates, you choose to pull out the parts that will put your “spin” on the issue, rather than what is being told to you. We told you it got better, but you still expect people to shoot even bigger bucks than we do now. Before AR’s I saw exactly 2 bucks in 15 years that would break 100” while hunting. In the 7 years since, I’ve seen at least 10 that I can think of off the top of my head, and killed 3. The 2 years I’ve killed bucks just under 100” was not for the lack of seeing/having anything bigger to shoot, I just felt like shooting those particular bucks. The 2 years I didn’t kill a buck, I passed on 3-4 that would have cracked the 100” mark. Will AR’s turn NY into OH, no. Will they make it better…undoubtedly, from the sounds of things they CAN’T get any worse. PT, AR’s probably won’t make you see more deer in general. Your doe harvest is going to control that. You are likely to see more bucks, because more will be alive at the end of your season. What really gave AR’s a bad rap here initially, is that at the same time they were introduced a massive effort to reduce the overall deer numbers went into effect as well. So guys weren’t seeing ANY deer in many places.
They put a 3 point on one side restriction at this public pay to hunt place a few years ago and already I am seeing improvements in the quality of deer taken out of there. Yea alot of people will shoot the first legal deer they see but its not a 1.5 yr old spike or 4 point its a 2.5 yr old 6 or basket 8. But the number of mature bucks (3.5 or older) taken out of there in the last two years probably totaled the number taken in the 10 yrs before that. A buddy of mine took a 10 pt. this year during archery that went 163 live weight and that is a big deer for FL and there were other deer taken in archery and muzzleloading that were over 150 live weight. Three years ago there would be 1 maybe 2 deer all season including general gun and dog hunters that weighed that much. So its made a big difference down here.
And they used to be near the bottom of the heap! (I'm not counting the tiny states in the north east.)
In 2001 they were ranked 26th. One spot above West Virginia and one spot below Georgia Three spots below NC and seven spots below NY in 2001 FYI's.
I was going to refrain from participating in this because most folks want to engage in the same practices and yet expect to see different results.As always Ryan comes through with intelligent and well thought out comments about his practical experiences. Are AR's the answer or the only answer? No of course not! Earn a buck programs,in area's with significant deer populations,reduce the length of the fire arms season from a month if you include inline muzzle loaders and why wouldn't you,they are for all practical purposes a single shot rifle,down to two weeks total,one week of rifle one week of muzzle loader as an example.Limit the buck harvest to one per hunter per year all weapons combined. I would agree the 3 point on a side is not sufficient to give enough 1.5 year olds the pass they need.Antler width while likely the best method is not simple enough for the vast majority of hunters.Make it an eight pointer or better and let the exception to the rule bucks who never become an 8 point or better die of old age,statistically they would not be of any significance. Quite honestly I don't believe you will ever see meaningful change in NY there are to many polarized interest's and to much diversity in the quality of hunting through out the state.What can some guy in Steuben county know about the hunting in Ulster county,and the reverse. All I know is if you keep doing what you have always done you will keep getting what you have always got.That much is certain!
WTF is wrong with you guys lately?? Are you retarded or are your egos so fragile that you can't even discuss something without feeling threatened. You all need to get your collective panties unbunched.and relax. NY is up for change soon........it's coming and we have a choice to make. When I hear a guy like Rob say PA hunting "sucks" and no real evidence on the boards of any significant improvement 8 years post implementation it certainly seems like a reasonable question to ask. You morons act like I am hoping PA's changes fail...........I couldn't care less other then what happens in NY if we choose to follow along. You'd think I insulted someones mother. Time to unclench fellas
Well those #s don't lie .... I suppose deer numbers COULD increase, as some guys I know wont shoot does ... I am for a balanced herd .... BIG antlers are just a bonus .. I want to experience what I did when I owned land next to a farmer that had 800 acres that they maned ...8 points or better .... the deer population was awesome ... the bucks actually grunted!!! They responded to calls and ran does around during the chase phase .. my brother took a 130 class buck of my property .. I saw a 140 class on the farmers property .... it can be done ... Atlas, what do I have to do to get MY voice heard?
Statewide, the AR's have helped... the major change though is the herd reduction. The first several years the deer numbers were higher and the bucks were getting another year or two under their belts... needless to say, those years were great for hunters and there were alot of big bucks around. Now after 8 years, the herd numbers are dropping dramatically in some areas and staying consistant in others. The areas with the drop in herd size still have big bucks, but there are simply less of them because there are less does having less fawns. As far as 3 pt areas vs 4 pt areas.... I mostly hunt in 2E and it is 3 pt. The AR's have helped, but it isn't very dramatic in my area simply because it has always had a good number of larger (for PA) bucks. Most of the 1-1/2 yo bucks are legal so it really isn't protecting many bucks. In the north central part of the state where the deer have less food the AR's have helped out a little more. My buddies family farm is in 2D and it has a 4 pt restriction... I can say without any question that there has been a HUGE increase in antler sizes as well as hunting quality. After running my game camera over a scrape on the 190 acre farm, we got photos of around 30 different bucks... several large bucks and several more that have been spotted on the farm and havn't show up on camera. AR's aren't a "fix all" for the hunting and weren't truly meant to produce big bucks... they were used to promote the herd reduction.... flash a 150" rack toa group of PA guys and tell them if they lower deer numbers and put in a herd reduction program then they could be shooting these.
Okay, the major thing that the PGC wanted to accomplish was to dramatically reduce the herd size.... knowing most PA hunters wouldn't want any part of this (too many "brown its down" hunters)... they had to use something to get the PA hunters to go along with it... thats where the big racks came into play. Dr. Gary Alt held up a spike and a 150" 10 point rack at one of the meetings he was speaking at while trying to get the Herd Reduction/Antler Restrictions started and asked which one the hunters would rather shoot.
AR's were meant to save 50% of the 1.5 old bucks. Which really when you think about it, isn't going to do a ton to make truly big mature bucks. But it will make more nicer bucks, and a few of those turn into really big ones. Alt did use racks of varying sizes to help promote what could be, if bucks were left to grow. BUT to make room for those bucks, more does needed harvesting becuse much of the state was in poor conditions regarding habitat. Northern & central mountains mostly. Killing more does & less bucks was to help also bring the buck:doe ratio closer and make for a more intense rut & better fawn recruitment. At the time everything was going on, many people overlooked the fact that more deer killed means less deer in the woods. Some places needed it, some maybe not so much, but nearly all places got it.
