Crossbows OK for - SI, NY
Connecticut
CITY HALL -- While the resrictions are complex and stringent, the State Department of Conservation does issue permits that, if approved, allow the killing of deer on private property -- Staten Island included.
The DEC told the Advance that New York City residents can apply for Deer Damage Permits (DDPs), however, the department has neither issued any permits nor received any applications from city residents.
The DEC said city residents can use crossbows to remove deer but must obey state and city ordinances, which outline a number of strict guidelines including restrictions on using the weapon near public highways, within 250 feet from homes, farms, schools, playgrounds, churches and public buildings.
You also don't have to be a government body or homeowner's association to get a permit, virtually anyone can apply.
Hunting is illegal across the five boroughs, so there are strict stipulations that come with using the permit.
The DEC said city residents can use crossbows to remove deer but must obey state and city ordinances, which outline a number of strict guidelines including restrictions on using the weapon near public highways, within 250 feet from homes, farms, schools, playgrounds, churches and public buildings.
DDP's also allow permit holders to capture and euthanize deer, DEC said.
Now WAIT A MINUTE!! I was told that there's no way ANYONE could kill deer on Staten Island except for Tony from WB, and this came from someone who knows it all (just ask him, he'll tell you). It's far too dangerous, arrows will be flying all over, killing children (it's always about the children), wounded deer running through the city streets, joggers getting stuck with arrows. How can this be possible? Fake news!!
The most irritating part of this article, to me, is that frigging 250 foot set back. Wish we could get one of those up here (Ma)...
I was wondering how long it would take bob to reply...lol
Yup. Still not blanket city-wide hunting access like suggested on this site. Case by case damage permits. So residents can now apply to euthanize deer on private property with a 250' buffer. Is that a good thing? Can you get 250' from anything on private land on SI?
Additionally Bob, WB is not killing deer on Staten Island, remember?
Not me, BBB was first in line.....kinda like a general admission concert back in the day..... maybe not as far back as his though
Crap, we now need the 83.3 yd zero report for crossbows. 90 yds is obsolete.
Boy oh boy. The guy that just got caught poaching must be livid.
This damage program is nothing new. The article basically says that anyone can apply and they have yet to receive any applications from Staten Island. Not sure why it's so newsworthy.
I think this is when bbb hit the big time..lol
https://youtu.be/IoWP97f1gn0
I knew I can count on you, not me. The guy in the green looks like BBB, just with some spectacles and a few more grays. Timeline seems spot on though.
What's news worthy is that you were wrong and didn't know what you were talking about, that's all I need to get excited.
DOC, can you come to the dinner next year ???It would be a blast we can put you and bbb on opposite sides of the table .Steve
Ya man itll be cool...maybe you can explain the shell game better than bbb..
https://youtu.be/NeGRbfN-_08
Bob, I was not wrong. I still contend opening SI to hunting is a super dumb and a super dangerous idea. Despite your claims, WB is not killing deer on SI. Remember, buck sterilization and all that? And, according to the article, DEC has yet to receive, review, or even approve lethal take of deer on private land on SI. So, how am I wrong? The article even states that hunting is illegal still within city limits. It sure sounds like I "don't know what I'm talking about" coming from the guy who, after all we have been through on the topic, thinks WB is killing deer on SI. Give. Me. A. Break.
Doc - “Not sure why it's so newsworthy.” The article speaks for itself........the picture says a thousand words. The picture says “A doe and a buck are stuck in a backyard area”; what the picture shows is three different deer, all bucks ? Doc you have spent the last two weeks counting cougars instead of counting deer on the Davis film, to find those missing 73 deer...... BBB is still waiting for the letter authorizing WB to be used by the CAES (conflict of interest). Much like the picture in the article what you see or are told is not always what you have. Explain to us again how WB gave vasectomies to over 1,000 male deer on SI without over site or photographic evidence.
Doc - you're wrong because you said it's NOT possible for the general public to safely kill deer on SI. The law doesn't allow it. There are too many people. It's way too dangerous. Remember???? You never stated that it is perfectly legal for the general public to kill deer on SI with the permit process, so yes, you were wrong and didn't know what you were talking about, something you should be used to be now.
I gave up on the conflict of interest debate with Doc. He obviously thinks that anything he thinks is OK, is, well OK. Where I worked we had a retired engineer who was capable of making parts for one of our machines. I was not allowed to negotiate with him due to (wait for it) conflict of interest. We were friends. I knew him for years. It would not be ethical for me to negotiate terms and conditions of his contract, but I didn't work for the government where the rules are made up as they go along, and one party strokes the other.
if you can shoot a dart why not a arrow ct doesn't have a distance requirement .And I saw a lot of open space when I was there .
12:14. Glen. What are you talking about? That is clearly an image of an antlered and a shed buck. I count two. Do you count three with a correction factor? Not sure why this image is worth a “1000 words.” I do not know what “over site [sic]” is and I am pretty sure that WB’s contract is not between them and you or them and Bowsite, but between them and NYC. Neither you, nor I, nor Bowsite have anything to do with it so why do you keep harping on it?
Bob. I still contend it is not safe for the general public to hunt and kill deer on SI. I was not aware there was the potential that deer could be killed on SI with a damage permit as I do not work for the state of NY. The point of the article was to inform that is a non-hunting option, but that thus far, no damage permits have been issued or even reviewed by DEC. Let me know when they issue a permit and then we can revisit this conversation. This quote from the article is kind of telling: “The department issues DDPs in situations where hunting does not reduce a community's deer population enough to mitigate the impacts of high deer densities.” Conflict of interest. Give me a break. CAES had contracts with WB long before I started working here.
Steve. Be happy to join you and BBB for dinner next year. And we can go round and round and round in conversation. You are right that CT does not have a distance requirement for discharge of an arrow, but that is not applicable across state lines in NY. There their setback was reduced from 500’ to now 250’ from public highways, homes, farms, schools, playgrounds, churches, and buildings. While you were on SI, I am sure you saw a lot of open space, but that was likely all municipal-owned parkland and former landfills. The damage permits are available for private land only which obviously excludes those city-owned open space parcels. Look at the headline of the article “State allows killing deer on private property, but permit rules are stringent.” How many pieces of private land exist on SI where you can legally discharge an arrow or bolt 250’ away from another building? I am guessing not very many.
SWK. Given all the restrictions and the fact that there are 8,000 people/square mile on Staten Island, I think the only legal way to euthanize deer would be with a cattle bolt or a knife. Or CO asphyxiation as you mention…..
Doc - “12:14. Glen. What are you talking about? That is clearly an image of an antlered and a shed buck. I count two. Do you count three with a correction factor?”
Doc - The spike horn deer does not have an three point rack growing out of his neck. The three point antler looks to be from another deer (photo shopped) ? So the picture would then show three deer. Over site was the SI Parks Department riding alone in vehicle with WB, WB eliminated the ride a longs several days before they started work. WB did include the cost for over site ride a longs in the contract pricing.
Maybe now we can get back to those 73 missing deer on the Davis IR survey film.
3:03. The image is clearly of two bucks. There is no photoshopping. The antlered buck (579) looks to have his left brow tine remaining but the rest of the antler is busted off. I think you mean “oversight.” Again, I have nothing to do with the inner workings of WB. Their work and their contract is between them and NYC. NYC seems to be pleased else they would no longer have a contract. Now we can get back to finding 75% of the deer that Vision Air missed in multiple survey attempts….
Doc - Maybe you can have WB supply the vasectomy photo of deer 579 so we can confirm rack configuration. As to Vision Air FLIR deer survey count on the test sites (1/11/15 - 19 deer filmed). Davis Aviation IR deer survey on the test sites (1/15/2015 - 18 deer filmed). This is a difference of 1 deer for the two deer surveys, completed 4 days apart.
Now all we need to know is what happened to the other 73 missing deer, your CDC ITM survey claimed ?
Can't do dinner with you Doc, afraid I couldn't keep my food down after hearing some of your comments. Now drinking heavily would work a lot better.
Glen. How did Rooster and the Wildlife Director count 45 deer/square mile in Pheasant Ridge area using our methods? He's the one that flew earlier that day in a plane and reported a laughable 2 deer/square mile. I can't believe we are still debating this.
Doc - “Glen. How did Siburn and the Wildlife Director count 45 deer/square mile in Pheasant Ridge area using our methods?“........The answer is ........They didn’t !
Doc you were not on the flight (2/11/2014) with Siburn and director Jacobson........enclosed is what they saw.
On February 11, 2014 the CT DEEP surveyed 4+ square miles in Redding, CT. What they saw averaged 42 deer over the 4+ square miles was 10.5 dpsm. Using the CT DEEP .8 correction factor this is 52.5 deer seen or 13.125 dpsm. How can the CAES justify 42 deer seen (10.5 dpsm), magically becoming 120-180 deer or (30-45 dpsm) over the same 4+ square miles.............Magic ?
Doc - You keep changing the subject and avoiding the question of “what happened to the missing 73 deer on the CDC ITM study”; so I have posted the Davis Aviation IR deer survey film (1/15/2015) for you to review. The film shows 9 targets on White Birch and 9 targets on Pheasant Ridge test sites; yet the CAES and Dr. Scott Williams are claiming 4 times the actual filmed count, 44 and 47 targets. This is your filmed survey Doc and your CDC ITM study....please explain to us how this is possible ?
8:22. Glen. What part of Rooster and the Wildlife Director counted 45 deer/square mile over Pheasant Ridge do you not understand? I was there in the hangar, not in the chopper, but they were flying with my technician, using my equipment, and using my methodology. And I wrote up the report. See attached link that shows that Rooster and Rick counted 45 deer/square mile at Pheasant Ridge. And they didn’t count 42 deer over the 4 square miles as you bogusly report here, they counted 74. And the DEEP flew this with CAES staff and Rooster got a free helicopter ride cause he complained a lot. This was far from an official DEEP survey as you claim and used inexperienced observers, but its point was to show one of your own that there were in fact that many deer on the ground and we were not lying and concocting stories. I think Rick was successful in this venture as we have not heard much from Rooster since. Instead of the Bowsite readership reading your account of my work yet again, why not let them read it for themselves in the attached link to my report for the joint CAES/DEEP/Rooster flight? Again, I do not need to respond to your interpretation of someone else’s work (Davis) in which you make the results line up with the results of the survey you wasted your money on. If as you suggest there are single digit densities in the two areas we did deer removals, how did Rooster help count 45 deer/square mile in one of them? Why are you not paying the same level of scrutiny to the other 2 square miles in Redding we surveyed from the air over snow on three occasions and used Davis to do so on one occasion? Drummer and Blueberry were each part of the ITM study and were surveyed 4 times from the air and you have yet to mention the results from there. And we used the exact same methodology as we did the 2 areas where we removed deer from. So how can our methods be bogus and we and Davis are lying about numbers on 2 areas but on the other 2 areas, using the exact same methods, you seem to have no problem with? How is that logical? Hint, it’s not.
Doc - "I do not need to respond to your interpretation of someone else’s work (Davis) in which you make the results line up with the results of the survey you wasted your money on."
Doc you need to calm down and watch the Davis IR Survey film; this is the photographic evidence of the 18 targets on the two square mile, CDC ITM test sites on 1/15/2015. Like they say Doc....."one picture or film is worth a thousand words".
Don't know what to tell you Glen. Davis provided maps of the locations of the deer in all 4 areas they surveyed. I included those maps in the report I posted and provided to DEEP. See link, again.
I think you mean "duh", or since you remind me of Homer "doe"
If 6 deer just ran across the Hammonasset Connector in front of me, did I see 12 or 3 deer?
You didn't see any, this is a trick question. You're no where near the connector right now, so there's no way you could have seen them.
The Sound was like glass and saw a surf scoter, black ducks, sanderlings, and a redhead. Soccer mom stopped on the Connector to allow deer to pass, all 18 of them.
My friends said there is a dead deer on every corner so much for snip snip
With deer dying from vehicles, and over 1000 sterile bucks, mortality will be up and recruitment low = fewer deer.
Deer on the Hammonasset Connector? Back when I was in High School, about 150 yrs ago, that's where everyone who was into drag racing went to drag race, hardly any traffic at night.
So SI wanted less deer to reduce the deer/car collisions and the results are worse. Could it be as predicted by wildlife biologists that doe would continue to come into heat and bucks continue to chase? It appears so. Good job mayor.
Bob. Don’t you realize this is a political victory? The Mayor is doing something about it, non-lethally so it is accepted by the public. You do understand that the antis also known as “friends of animals” are not really friends of animals. They are anti-killing mentality. So they are opposed to you or I going out with the intent of killing a deer; THAT is what they are opposed to, despite it being a quick, clean, ethical death. They are cool with a deer dying over three days after being hit by a car because it was an “accident,” there was no intent to kill the animal, therefore, it was an “act of God.” So in this case, the Mayor is using taxpayer money to sterilize animals, and as they are killed by cars in an “act of God,” recruitment is reduced due to decreased fecundity. So, the public is happy because the deer issue is being addressed without anyone intent on killing them and deaths by vehicle are an act of God.
Can it be done with a rabbi or is that non kosher
Doc, you've gone too far now!!! I agree with everything you said. Gotta go and make an appointment with my doctor,.....must have had a stroke or something.
