Working Together Might Be Impossible
NY Dove Hunting is the lead organization working to compel the DEC to protect habitat investments and reduce the prevalence of non-hunters interfering with the activities of hunters on public hunting areas.
Every time we travel to Pennsylvania to hunt mourning doves we save the Olive Branches carried by every dove we harvest…. We then extend those Olive Branches out to other organizations, boards, government agencies, and politicians. Some of NY Dove Hunting’s best allies include Camp Compass, Delta Waterfowl, Western NY Retriever Club, the Sportsmen and Animal Owners Voting Alliance, and the New York Farm Bureau.
We fully comport with the Fish and Wildlife Service’s “adaptive harvest management strategy”. As a matter of fact, we cite this to politicians that are concerned hunting will exterminate mourning doves. Last year, for the first time in 30 years, the FWS increased the bag limit on Black Ducks from one to two. Certain organizations, including a new one on the scene, which is an internet forum based waterfowl group from New Jersey; that also opposes Sunday Hunting, Dove Hunting, Pheasant Stocking, and spinning–wing decoys, challenged the FWS’s decision to change the 30 year old bag limit on Black Ducks. The FWS responded that the species has recovered, and estimated that doubling the bag from one bird to two would only increase harvest a little, it would not “double” the harvest as apparently was being assumed by the arm-chair biologists who organized this outspoken and ‘prone to argue and divide’ club.
The FWS is now proposing to reduce the bag limit of Mallard Ducks from four to two. Delta Waterfowl is the lead organization in opposition to this proposal, and with the information currently at hand, NY Dove Hunting also does not see any need or resulting benefit from this pending change.
We will say this however – it would be a grave mistake for the DEC to increase the daily bag of pheasant in Upstate New York and should reduce the bag on Long Island. Two pheasant is plenty from the POV of meat, recreation, and fair distribution of the pheasant resource among hunters. It is also vital to consider hunter motivation and satisfaction. If less avid hunters fail to bag one or two pheasant, they complain and hunter satisfaction with the pheasant program is reported as low. Indeed, some of these hunters are not satisfied because they do not limit out every time they hunt and this results in abandonment. Hunters that leave pheasant hunting become critics of the DEC pheasant program, and that list of critics is alarming. NY has it right, across upstate, with a two bird limit on ring-necks, one would be too few and more than two would be too many. But why then a daily bag of four ruffed grouse? Probably because a tradition of plinking young broods with an air rifle or rimfire (legal in NY) during the early season exists in NY. These are not prototype grouse hunters, but rural people who know grouse and know how good they taste. Indeed it is very possible to limit out on grouse in NY by hunting them as most people conceptualize. But when hunters fail to bag four grouse they are less prone to complain. Owe this to the myth that hunting stocked pheasants is easy – when in truth it is not. More NY hunters limit out on mallards than grouse or pheasant. For some, a reduced bag would result in less satisfaction. For other waterfowl hunters that do not regularly limit out with four mallards, a two bird limit might psychologically encourage them. Two fat greenheads provides a lot of meat, but record populations of waterfowl in recent years, along with the consumption of hunting media, has fostered an expectation of trudging out of the marsh with a heavy game strap. To be honest, hauling out two mallards instead of four next November feels a little disappointing and like the character of duck hunting has changed (again).
Some of the habitat-orientated organizations we have extended the Olive Branch to have indicated to us (what we already knew) that they restrict their efforts to habitat. However, we tried to explain to them, as well as the DEC; that creating habitat of any kind – wetland, grassland, or young forest, without a formal strategy to protect these projects in light of a clear pattern of misuses, is not good stewardship of their donor’s money, nor the public money such as PR funds, which they leverage for their projects derived from hunters, including hunters that are not their members. We also explained that by creating “SINK HABITATS” and “ENVIRONMENTAL TRAPS” instead of “source habitats” through the continued disregard for the need to manage overuse, undermines well-intentioned habitat investments. There are even several existing laws that comport with the stance of NY Dove Hunting. Even upon citing these laws to the DEC, they remain unmoved. When entities are unmoved by the law, the next step is the courtroom and NY Dove Hunting is willing and able to take this matter there.
We advise these habitat organizations, that regardless of your organizations dedication to habitat – if pheasant stocking disappears in NY, so will Pheasants Forever Chapters.
There are also implications to other habitat-orientated organizations. Pheasant stocking is a significant pull-factor in hunter recruitment, retention, and reactivation in the Northeast and other regions (New York, Nebraska, Idaho, Maine, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming). Although NY is third in the nation in hunting licenses (Texas, Florida, New York); our pheasant program is much smaller than Neighboring PA and NJ. NY stocks 30,000 adult pheasant, compared to PA’s 225,000 and NJ’s 50,000 plus 10,000 bobwhite. Loss of pheasant programs would affect the participation in hunting other upland game as well as waterfowl.
The belief a habitat organization can stay out of lobbying for policy governed by politics is not realistic, apparently Delta Waterfowl is ahead of the pack and has already realized this. A prime example is one of the topics discussed this week was the inability for the DEC to accept money directly from a conservation partner because state law requires the DEC to use an intermediate contractor and other conditions that apply. Ironically, this topic was raised a heartbeat after we received a lecture about how XYZ organization stays out of hunting policy to focus on its habitat mission. This requires a legislative change (welcome to NY Dove Hunting’s world) and to affect that change requires getting down in the trenches of Albany and dealing with 213 lawmakers who don’t know a grouse from a partridge in a pear tree. NY Dove Hunting would have considered (if asked, but of course, we are not good enough to assist) assisting with such a lobbying effort, but the NGO rep was quite condescending, despite having little knowledge about not only the political process and realities of NY, (and Michigan and Minnesota)but about habitat and wildlife.
If you are a dog breeder your titles and ribbons and pedigrees will mean nothing to people in the market for puppies if pheasant stocking disappears and in turn participation in upland and waterfowl hunting continues to trend downward.
We also stressed the need for a Quail Unlimited Chapter in the state of New Jersey, were an aggressive bobwhite restoration effort has been ongoing, but the state partners have been Audubon, not sportsmen. Good luck Garden State Sportsmen in reinstating your quail season when bobwhites recover. Your millennium hunters don’t know a bobwhite from a Brittany Spaniel and couldn’t care less. In fact, when the bobwhite season was closed, there was an implied promise that mourning dove hunting would be allowed as a “replacement”. New Jersey effectively reclassified the mourning dove as a game species, thereby making setting a hunting season up to a board of about a dozen sportsmen and farmers, but this has yet to happen or even be discussed since 2012.
The DEC is forming Comprehensive Wildlife Management Plans which address recreation, and is reworking Part 51 of the Wildlife Management Area Regulations. NY Dove Hunting has proposed a number of changes to the WMA rules over the years and we want these issues addressed. Most WMAs, particularly those which are pheasant release sites and/or contain wetlands are not suitable for non-hunting activities including target shooting. Trapping, including beaver trapping, might not be compatible with waterfowl and upland game hunting on some WMAs. Non-hunters are prone to loiter in WMA parking areas and sometimes make the parking crowded. Non-hunters are prone to engage pheasant hunters working cover with their dogs. Non-hunters follow hunters, herd pheasant, and spray perfume over the grass. They sometimes stand on the edge of fields or hedgerows during pheasant season. Littering and illegal off road driving is weakly enforced, if at all. Signage is not descriptive and probably is misunderstood by some members of the public. We have suggested that WMAs be marked as “Public Hunting Areas” or “Open to Licensed Hunters.” Also that “Pheasant Release Sites” are marked as such and where wetland, grassland or young forest habitat projects exist, it is acknowledged by signage. Contact the DEC about Part 51 of the WMA Regulations and the Comprehensive Wildlife Management Plans.
The DEC is to manage 9% of the land area on Wildlife Management Areas in a condition that would favor grouse and woodcock. Public hunting is allowed on most Wildlife Management Areas. Such management requires large vehicles. On at least one site (Oriskany Flats) the DEC had indicated a road and a stream bank alteration was essential to interest logging companies.
Please refer to online google maps and the DEC Young Forest Initiative (Oneida County). Note that the upland area is used by pheasant hunters and is less than a half mile wide and already has a hard-packed road. Also note that this road comes very close to the stands selected for management. You can also see several man-made wetlands. Hunting these wetlands would be affected by another road, and during the off-season, wetland wildlife would be affected. Pedestrians with dogs, hikers, cyclists, target shooters, illegal motorized recreation, and “curious onlookers” along the existing road already interfere with upland game and waterfowl hunters on this property. A second road, more or less through the center, would exasperate this situation, possibly to the extent to which hunting is precluded. Please contact the DEC and tell them: A second operations road on Oriskany Flats WMA is unnecessary, will negatively impact upland game and waterfowl hunting, and will undermine efforts to enhance wetland, old field, and young forest habitat.
The DEC has an ongoing wild pheasant restoration effort. Conserving wild pheasant increasingly lacks public and political support. This allows antis to develop a following to their story-line and support for reduced funding. The DEC’s Ten Year Ring-necked Pheasant Conservation Plan expires in 2020. This revision will include a public input phase. During reevaluation of the plan it may be compromised or have its funding reduced. Sinking numbers of pheasant hunters and lack of passion for pheasant hunting is a prime excuse for deep cuts to the pheasant program and eventual abandonment of the effort. New York also has an impressive pheasant stocking program. However, pheasant stocking is done for hunting purposes, not as a means to build a population of wild pheasant. This arm of the Pheasant Plan is always under threat just as wild pheasant conservation is. If stakeholders do not participate in the public input phase, the state will be emboldened to make cuts or eliminate all pheasant-related efforts. Action must begin now, because information does not travel fast among hunters and bird hunters are poorly organized. We urge you to learn about the situation, engage and organize others, and make sure your voices are heard.
New York sportsmen are prone to ruminate about the political advantage held by democrats who they regard as anti-hunting. However, NY Dove Hunting is the first and only organization to approach this problem through the Environmental Conservation Committee (ECC). Forget about “getting rid of all the democrats”; standing committees have a set number of republicans and democrats that by rule does not change. Who is on the committee may change, but not the number from each party.
You probably are unaware that most members of the Conservation Committee are from NYC and oppose hunting. This situation exists because the antis and organizations such as the Humane Society ask them to get on it. Sportsmen have never caught on to this (until now); and hunting – friendly lawmakers might shun conservation law because it is broader than hunting and fishing and covers pollution and other “green” issues they themselves, nor their upstate voters do not necessarily care about. Nevertheless, in order for lawmakers to represent our interests related to hunting in Albany, more of them need to be on the ECC.
Committees are reassigned every two years and in between when vacancies occur. Lawmakers have a good chance of an assignment to a particular committee just by asking the senate leader or assembly speaker. Lawmakers ask to sit on committees if constituents (that means you) request they do. Repeat: Lawmakers can get on the committee by just asking. Lawmakers ask because people like you ask them to.
Ten Assembly Lawmakers have cosponsored 7778A. However, seven of them are not on the ECC. NY Dove Hunting told them that their constituents want them on the ECC. We cannot do this alone, contact them and request they seek a seat on the ECC to better represent your interests as a hunter in Albany. Those Lawmakers are: Assemblywoman Woernor and Assemblymen Stirpe, Magee, and Jones (Billy); Crouch, Brabenec, and Barclay.
Only one of the three Senate Lawmakers who sponsored 7202 is on the ECC. Also contact Senators Razzenhoffer and Seward and ask that in order to best represent your interests as a hunter in Albany, that they pursue a seat on the ECC.
Every time we travel to Pennsylvania to hunt mourning doves we save the Olive Branches carried by every dove we harvest…. We then extend those Olive Branches out to other organizations, boards, government agencies, and politicians. Some of NY Dove Hunting’s best allies include Camp Compass, Delta Waterfowl, Western NY Retriever Club, the Sportsmen and Animal Owners Voting Alliance, and the New York Farm Bureau.
We fully comport with the Fish and Wildlife Service’s “adaptive harvest management strategy”. As a matter of fact, we cite this to politicians that are concerned hunting will exterminate mourning doves. Last year, for the first time in 30 years, the FWS increased the bag limit on Black Ducks from one to two. Certain organizations, including a new one on the scene, which is an internet forum based waterfowl group from New Jersey; that also opposes Sunday Hunting, Dove Hunting, Pheasant Stocking, and spinning–wing decoys, challenged the FWS’s decision to change the 30 year old bag limit on Black Ducks. The FWS responded that the species has recovered, and estimated that doubling the bag from one bird to two would only increase harvest a little, it would not “double” the harvest as apparently was being assumed by the arm-chair biologists who organized this outspoken and ‘prone to argue and divide’ club.
The FWS is now proposing to reduce the bag limit of Mallard Ducks from four to two. Delta Waterfowl is the lead organization in opposition to this proposal, and with the information currently at hand, NY Dove Hunting also does not see any need or resulting benefit from this pending change.
We will say this however – it would be a grave mistake for the DEC to increase the daily bag of pheasant in Upstate New York and should reduce the bag on Long Island. Two pheasant is plenty from the POV of meat, recreation, and fair distribution of the pheasant resource among hunters. It is also vital to consider hunter motivation and satisfaction. If less avid hunters fail to bag one or two pheasant, they complain and hunter satisfaction with the pheasant program is reported as low. Indeed, some of these hunters are not satisfied because they do not limit out every time they hunt and this results in abandonment. Hunters that leave pheasant hunting become critics of the DEC pheasant program, and that list of critics is alarming. NY has it right, across upstate, with a two bird limit on ring-necks, one would be too few and more than two would be too many. But why then a daily bag of four ruffed grouse? Probably because a tradition of plinking young broods with an air rifle or rimfire (legal in NY) during the early season exists in NY. These are not prototype grouse hunters, but rural people who know grouse and know how good they taste. Indeed it is very possible to limit out on grouse in NY by hunting them as most people conceptualize. But when hunters fail to bag four grouse they are less prone to complain. Owe this to the myth that hunting stocked pheasants is easy – when in truth it is not. More NY hunters limit out on mallards than grouse or pheasant. For some, a reduced bag would result in less satisfaction. For other waterfowl hunters that do not regularly limit out with four mallards, a two bird limit might psychologically encourage them. Two fat greenheads provides a lot of meat, but record populations of waterfowl in recent years, along with the consumption of hunting media, has fostered an expectation of trudging out of the marsh with a heavy game strap. To be honest, hauling out two mallards instead of four next November feels a little disappointing and like the character of duck hunting has changed (again).
Some of the habitat-orientated organizations we have extended the Olive Branch to have indicated to us (what we already knew) that they restrict their efforts to habitat. However, we tried to explain to them, as well as the DEC; that creating habitat of any kind – wetland, grassland, or young forest, without a formal strategy to protect these projects in light of a clear pattern of misuses, is not good stewardship of their donor’s money, nor the public money such as PR funds, which they leverage for their projects derived from hunters, including hunters that are not their members. We also explained that by creating “SINK HABITATS” and “ENVIRONMENTAL TRAPS” instead of “source habitats” through the continued disregard for the need to manage overuse, undermines well-intentioned habitat investments. There are even several existing laws that comport with the stance of NY Dove Hunting. Even upon citing these laws to the DEC, they remain unmoved. When entities are unmoved by the law, the next step is the courtroom and NY Dove Hunting is willing and able to take this matter there.
We advise these habitat organizations, that regardless of your organizations dedication to habitat – if pheasant stocking disappears in NY, so will Pheasants Forever Chapters.
There are also implications to other habitat-orientated organizations. Pheasant stocking is a significant pull-factor in hunter recruitment, retention, and reactivation in the Northeast and other regions (New York, Nebraska, Idaho, Maine, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming). Although NY is third in the nation in hunting licenses (Texas, Florida, New York); our pheasant program is much smaller than Neighboring PA and NJ. NY stocks 30,000 adult pheasant, compared to PA’s 225,000 and NJ’s 50,000 plus 10,000 bobwhite. Loss of pheasant programs would affect the participation in hunting other upland game as well as waterfowl.
The belief a habitat organization can stay out of lobbying for policy governed by politics is not realistic, apparently Delta Waterfowl is ahead of the pack and has already realized this. A prime example is one of the topics discussed this week was the inability for the DEC to accept money directly from a conservation partner because state law requires the DEC to use an intermediate contractor and other conditions that apply. Ironically, this topic was raised a heartbeat after we received a lecture about how XYZ organization stays out of hunting policy to focus on its habitat mission. This requires a legislative change (welcome to NY Dove Hunting’s world) and to affect that change requires getting down in the trenches of Albany and dealing with 213 lawmakers who don’t know a grouse from a partridge in a pear tree. NY Dove Hunting would have considered (if asked, but of course, we are not good enough to assist) assisting with such a lobbying effort, but the NGO rep was quite condescending, despite having little knowledge about not only the political process and realities of NY, (and Michigan and Minnesota)but about habitat and wildlife.
If you are a dog breeder your titles and ribbons and pedigrees will mean nothing to people in the market for puppies if pheasant stocking disappears and in turn participation in upland and waterfowl hunting continues to trend downward.
We also stressed the need for a Quail Unlimited Chapter in the state of New Jersey, were an aggressive bobwhite restoration effort has been ongoing, but the state partners have been Audubon, not sportsmen. Good luck Garden State Sportsmen in reinstating your quail season when bobwhites recover. Your millennium hunters don’t know a bobwhite from a Brittany Spaniel and couldn’t care less. In fact, when the bobwhite season was closed, there was an implied promise that mourning dove hunting would be allowed as a “replacement”. New Jersey effectively reclassified the mourning dove as a game species, thereby making setting a hunting season up to a board of about a dozen sportsmen and farmers, but this has yet to happen or even be discussed since 2012.
The DEC is forming Comprehensive Wildlife Management Plans which address recreation, and is reworking Part 51 of the Wildlife Management Area Regulations. NY Dove Hunting has proposed a number of changes to the WMA rules over the years and we want these issues addressed. Most WMAs, particularly those which are pheasant release sites and/or contain wetlands are not suitable for non-hunting activities including target shooting. Trapping, including beaver trapping, might not be compatible with waterfowl and upland game hunting on some WMAs. Non-hunters are prone to loiter in WMA parking areas and sometimes make the parking crowded. Non-hunters are prone to engage pheasant hunters working cover with their dogs. Non-hunters follow hunters, herd pheasant, and spray perfume over the grass. They sometimes stand on the edge of fields or hedgerows during pheasant season. Littering and illegal off road driving is weakly enforced, if at all. Signage is not descriptive and probably is misunderstood by some members of the public. We have suggested that WMAs be marked as “Public Hunting Areas” or “Open to Licensed Hunters.” Also that “Pheasant Release Sites” are marked as such and where wetland, grassland or young forest habitat projects exist, it is acknowledged by signage. Contact the DEC about Part 51 of the WMA Regulations and the Comprehensive Wildlife Management Plans.
The DEC is to manage 9% of the land area on Wildlife Management Areas in a condition that would favor grouse and woodcock. Public hunting is allowed on most Wildlife Management Areas. Such management requires large vehicles. On at least one site (Oriskany Flats) the DEC had indicated a road and a stream bank alteration was essential to interest logging companies.
Please refer to online google maps and the DEC Young Forest Initiative (Oneida County). Note that the upland area is used by pheasant hunters and is less than a half mile wide and already has a hard-packed road. Also note that this road comes very close to the stands selected for management. You can also see several man-made wetlands. Hunting these wetlands would be affected by another road, and during the off-season, wetland wildlife would be affected. Pedestrians with dogs, hikers, cyclists, target shooters, illegal motorized recreation, and “curious onlookers” along the existing road already interfere with upland game and waterfowl hunters on this property. A second road, more or less through the center, would exasperate this situation, possibly to the extent to which hunting is precluded. Please contact the DEC and tell them: A second operations road on Oriskany Flats WMA is unnecessary, will negatively impact upland game and waterfowl hunting, and will undermine efforts to enhance wetland, old field, and young forest habitat.
The DEC has an ongoing wild pheasant restoration effort. Conserving wild pheasant increasingly lacks public and political support. This allows antis to develop a following to their story-line and support for reduced funding. The DEC’s Ten Year Ring-necked Pheasant Conservation Plan expires in 2020. This revision will include a public input phase. During reevaluation of the plan it may be compromised or have its funding reduced. Sinking numbers of pheasant hunters and lack of passion for pheasant hunting is a prime excuse for deep cuts to the pheasant program and eventual abandonment of the effort. New York also has an impressive pheasant stocking program. However, pheasant stocking is done for hunting purposes, not as a means to build a population of wild pheasant. This arm of the Pheasant Plan is always under threat just as wild pheasant conservation is. If stakeholders do not participate in the public input phase, the state will be emboldened to make cuts or eliminate all pheasant-related efforts. Action must begin now, because information does not travel fast among hunters and bird hunters are poorly organized. We urge you to learn about the situation, engage and organize others, and make sure your voices are heard.
New York sportsmen are prone to ruminate about the political advantage held by democrats who they regard as anti-hunting. However, NY Dove Hunting is the first and only organization to approach this problem through the Environmental Conservation Committee (ECC). Forget about “getting rid of all the democrats”; standing committees have a set number of republicans and democrats that by rule does not change. Who is on the committee may change, but not the number from each party.
You probably are unaware that most members of the Conservation Committee are from NYC and oppose hunting. This situation exists because the antis and organizations such as the Humane Society ask them to get on it. Sportsmen have never caught on to this (until now); and hunting – friendly lawmakers might shun conservation law because it is broader than hunting and fishing and covers pollution and other “green” issues they themselves, nor their upstate voters do not necessarily care about. Nevertheless, in order for lawmakers to represent our interests related to hunting in Albany, more of them need to be on the ECC.
Committees are reassigned every two years and in between when vacancies occur. Lawmakers have a good chance of an assignment to a particular committee just by asking the senate leader or assembly speaker. Lawmakers ask to sit on committees if constituents (that means you) request they do. Repeat: Lawmakers can get on the committee by just asking. Lawmakers ask because people like you ask them to.
Ten Assembly Lawmakers have cosponsored 7778A. However, seven of them are not on the ECC. NY Dove Hunting told them that their constituents want them on the ECC. We cannot do this alone, contact them and request they seek a seat on the ECC to better represent your interests as a hunter in Albany. Those Lawmakers are: Assemblywoman Woernor and Assemblymen Stirpe, Magee, and Jones (Billy); Crouch, Brabenec, and Barclay.
Only one of the three Senate Lawmakers who sponsored 7202 is on the ECC. Also contact Senators Razzenhoffer and Seward and ask that in order to best represent your interests as a hunter in Albany, that they pursue a seat on the ECC.