TO BE OR NOT TO BE
that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles
that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles
Some fathom me as a troublemaker. Some ask me why stirring the pot comes so easily. Others cant their heads and endeavor to understand my predilection for the fight.
The cause, my friends, is just!
When I take umbrage to the inane (sometimes insane) positions of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation concerning deer management, it is a labor borne from my passion for the animal and the hunting tradition. I have met and spoken personally with many of the men and women who are charged with this responsibility. For the most part, they are wonderful souls who have dedicated their lives to science and education. They seem to be as passionate about conservation issues as I am, and they obviously have the educational credentials (that I don’t) to back their positions. So here I sit, wondering what is wrong with me? Why have I become so skeptical of the machine that drives the conservation bus?
Because, I believe that these people are too ensconced in the rhetoric of a failed system.
Because, I believe that these people are too ensconced in the rhetoric of a failed system.
On April 19th, representatives of the DEC were present at the NYS Conservation Council Spring meeting of the Big Game Committee. They took this opportunity to further announce that they have begun working on a new five-year plan for deer management. They explained that, “deer management has not changed much in decades”. My initial thought was “finally”. Finally someone is realizing that deer management in New York State is just a myth. Finally, hopefully, someone has realized the mere survival of the specie (odocoileus virginianus) is not, and should not be, the only goal of deer management. That thought, was a fleeting one! I raised my hand and asked, “Will this plan be broken down into regions?” The response was, ‘No, that this plan was a broad perspective for the needs of the whole state’. It is there, at that point that I began shaking my head. My mind begins racing, I remember thinking to myself, “this is bullshit!” Once again, the DEC does not have a clue as to what they are doing. Is it me? Am I the only one who realizes that the stench of bullshit was raising its ugly head again? Let me explain! Let me qualify my response. I was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York. My father was a police officer in NYC for over 27 years. I spent 20 years on the same mean streets as a police officer and sergeant doing “god’s work”. I qualify as a bullshit specialist. I heard it. I saw it. I see it! I can smell it from a mile away! So, when someone tells me that deer management can be done from “models” or by virtue of the state’s big picture, the hair on the back of my neck stands at attention! Its bullshit!
Remember, only two things have remained constant about New York deer hunting in the past few decades. “It” has gotten worse and hunter numbers have declined dramatically over the last 30 years. The state of the herd is that it is alive. That is the best and only real assessment that can be derived. Deer management in this state has become oxymoronic. No real management plan calls for the inclusion of 30,000 mistakes (button bucks and fawns killed annually) as management. No real management plan would include an age specific gendercide!
There is no age diversity throughout the majority of the state’s deer herd. Depending on where you are in this state between 65% and 80% of yearling bucks are harvested annually. Does that reflect deer management? When the DEC wastes its time, energies and resources proffering multiple hunter satisfaction surveys on the same issue (antler restrictions), does that tell you something? This is the group mandated to manage for healthy deer and the proliferation of deer hunting as the only real management tool. When antler restrictions were postured as a viable solution to the age diversity problem. They set a “super majority” goal as an unrealistic affectation, believing that they would never see it attained and in effect would never have to deal with it. When, 67% percent of those in the target area responded that they were in favor of antler restrictions; as a means to yearling buck protection. The DEC chose to side with the “negative” responders, even though 14 percent of the negative responses were from outside the targeted areas for implementation. Is that deer management? What other industry or management scheme gives more credibility to a tainted minority sampling than it does to a super majority?
There is no age diversity throughout the majority of the state’s deer herd. Depending on where you are in this state between 65% and 80% of yearling bucks are harvested annually. Does that reflect deer management? When the DEC wastes its time, energies and resources proffering multiple hunter satisfaction surveys on the same issue (antler restrictions), does that tell you something? This is the group mandated to manage for healthy deer and the proliferation of deer hunting as the only real management tool. When antler restrictions were postured as a viable solution to the age diversity problem. They set a “super majority” goal as an unrealistic affectation, believing that they would never see it attained and in effect would never have to deal with it. When, 67% percent of those in the target area responded that they were in favor of antler restrictions; as a means to yearling buck protection. The DEC chose to side with the “negative” responders, even though 14 percent of the negative responses were from outside the targeted areas for implementation. Is that deer management? What other industry or management scheme gives more credibility to a tainted minority sampling than it does to a super majority?
The loss of hunters can be attributed to a lot of reasons. Certainly, all the adages of the new technologies attracting our youth away from our once proud tradition are true. Certainly, hunter access is a huge part of it, but lets be clear about one thing. Deer hunting is lousy in a majority of this state. It is lousy because there is no age diversity in the herd. Antlers, the target of most hunters cannot be achieved without healthy habitat and older animals. To go to the woods with no expectation of seeing (nevermind harvesting) an antlered buck has been a huge detriment to the hunting population. That truth is as plain as the nose on your face. To increase hunter participation one must have a salable commodity. That salable commodity in this case, is a healthy large racked buck. One must be able to at least dream that there is a big-racked buck around the next corner. In this state that idea amounts to a pipedream. It is a fact that with the advent of age diversity comes more “rubs” and “scrapes” in the woods. These precursors to the rut can rile the hunter’s imagination and satiate a “need” to believe that a monster buck is out there. If nothing else, these signs are the equivalent of free advertisement.
The DEC knows this and yet has failed to recognize the needs of the hunting tradition. They have done nothing to advance or entice hunter participation. They refuse to acknowledge antler restrictions as a deer health issue because as they say, “there is no critical biological need”, well, I don’t think they would dare say the same about hunter retention and recruitment. There is definitely critical need and common sense dictates that bigger antlers are good for hunting. There is a very simple equation to be understood here: Healthy deer + age diversity = better hunting experiences. Better hunting experiences equate to a manifestation and proliferation of the tradition. Its that simple!
My skepticism is further exacerbated. This 5-year plan is scheduled to be unveiled at the Fall meeting of the NYS Conservation Council meeting in September. What does that mean? I look at it as prelude to further disaster. This plan will be in effect starting in 2011. That is a huge “leap of faith” on the part of the DEC considering that November 2010 is an election month. There is a real expectation of a change in this state’s government. New governors mean new commissioners and new directors etc. etc. There is a good chance that these people will not be in place to see the “plan” go into effect. Their legacy will be one that reflects their inability to initiate change in a timely manner and/or one that will reflect their failure to further implement antler restrictions as their single biggest mistake and regret.
I will go out on a limb here and state the obvious. To me, it is evident that further implementation of antler restrictions will NOT be a part of this year’s management scheme. Too many things have not happened to expect their inclusion. Another year wasted! One step further, I don’t see them being an integral part of the “master” plan. Unless the plan includes a micro-management of at least several sizable regions or present legislation comes to fruition. We have bore witness to the further malaise we will refer to as the “Grannis/Riexinger years!
Believe me when I tell you that I hope the state proves me wrong, but until I see change – real change – its all two-faced bullshit mixed with tears for effect!
And so I say unto you, beware the light,
Its reverence is veiled beneath the shade.
Underneath the smarm;
Lays the roots of truth!
--- M.T. Mc Donnell
Posts
