Doc

The guy loves to get his butt kicked. It's pretty funny.

Another crying whining compost from the whimpering left. It is turning hilarious as this guy has become so distraught to the point of being broken and obsessive. It is truly comical to watch.

Total isolation is a great condition of hunting. It is few that can arrange absolute isolation from other hunters (Actually Damn Few). There are many who think because they are on private posted land that they have the land all to themselves. I have enough tightly posted land of my own so that occasionally I get those feelings myself. But tracks in the snow and occasional random confrontations have taught me that for my hunting lands that is merely an illusion. Those blaze orange images that can unexpectedly pop into the moving scope image are still a distinct possibility. But I do accept that there are places and conditions where other hunters are unlikely. Those are fortunate hunting conditions indeed. However my hunting habits are developed for the unexpected, and they are habits that are so ground-in that they apply regardless of the differences in hunter populations.

I have to say that my goals have changed over the years. When I first started, being able to tag-out was the goal. Back when I started, the herd was such that any deer taken was quite a feat especially with a bow. Next phase was consistently getting a buck or two every year. Then I moved on to wanting take a good mature buck, and was willing and had the endurance to do that. Now comes the later years where I start thinking a bit about the drag back home, and limiting my hunting range based on that concern. Now I am down to the realization that I really do prefer a good angus roast and we really only need one deer for some variety in our red meat consumption. And that deer doesn't have to be a big buck or even a buck at all. Yes throughout the years, the grand prize always was some ungodly huge slob, but only for a short period of time did I ever obsess on that. About the time that people started measuring their success with a tape measure, I started going the other way. I began to see how with many hunters it was beginning to become antler measurements at any cost. I watched some guys become so obsessive that all other aspects of the hunt faded away and recognized some of that in my own hunting. That is when I began to reassess the goals again. The harvests requirements underwent a relaxation and more emphasis has been put on the quality of the hunt itself. I have backed off on the frenzy of the hunt, and concentrated more on the entire totality of the experience. And that is where I am at now. I know that my hunting years and abilities are now starting to see limitation. And yes if I were to drop some huge monster I would be thrilled, but there is no necessity or urgency to do so anymore. So if someone were to proclaim no bucks, I would likely be right out front hollering, "Rip-off" as loud as anybody. But in reality, I would survive it just fine.

I know that me and rapid-fire running shots are pretty much useless. So the likelihood of me making any kind of "Hail-Mary" running shot through the woods really is a complete worthless attempt. I am completely converted to scopes on all my deer guns, and I am now used to looking through a scope and accepting the greatly reduced field of vision and understanding that as I swing that little circle of view through the woods, it is unlikely that I am actually doing a very good job of checking out the area behind or around the fleeing deer that I am flinging lead at. I would never want to be swinging that little sight-picture through the woods and at the last minute seeing a sudden flash of an orange suit at the same time that the trigger finally goes off. I don't know, that is just a personal limit that I put on myself. I put everything into that first steadied shot and assume that I have delivered a lethal shot. Unless the deer stops for another carefully executed shot, I am afraid that my tracking skills will have to finish off the job. Others may have better developed skills at running shots, but for me, "a man's got to know his limitations". And for me the limitation is that a running shot is a wasted chunk of lead unnecessarily flying through the woods.

Nobody wants to kill anyone's pets. But there is a need for people to grow up and accept the fact that pet ownership does indeed come with some responsibilities. I really don't think that is a very difficult concept to understand ...... for most people.

I have to be honest, I am completely ignorant on what does or doesn't cause or promote CWD. So I am willing to let those whose business it is to be up on such things establish policy. I know there are plenty of people who have cherry-picked their own studies and resources and whoever will back up whatever position that might favor their own personal agenda. Since I haven't the time, energy, resources or ability to conduct my own study, I will let the real scientists and biologists fight it out among themselves, and hope that those charged with the responsibilities for administering policy take those responsibilities seriously. Frankly, I don't have any reason (real or theoretical) to think that they don't.

So the topic got extended beyond what it would have otherwise been. And a point was made that there are real reasons for those dogs not to have been allowed to become "free-range" pets. I will take responsibility for going off in that direction and pointing out indeed some of these incidents happen because too many pet owners refuse to accept the responsibility of pet ownership. And yes there are perfectly good reasons for proper stewardship of your animals. Not really trying to excuse this guy's actions, but merely pointing out that these dogs would likely still be alive if they had been properly controlled. And yes the discussion did move into why animals should be controlled....Which shouldn't bother anyone unless they are bothered by the responsibilities of animal ownership. Yes, these topics do grow and evolve beyond the original post. That is completely natural, expected, and normal for forum topics. It is what allows a discussion to mature and be examined from more than one standpoint.

Unfortunately, that is a question that we will never answer. We will never know how the addition of all these recent new legal rifle counties have impacted deer takes or safety numbers. None of that kind of info is being collected by the DEC. I guess they don't want to know.

Understand that at the time, the sheep represented a good chunk of our family income, and that it was dogs allowed to run loose and uncontrolled that forced us out of business. I think attempting to salvage the family business was worth a week of effort. You also need to realize that we were not into a "revenge" mode, but simply trying to salvage some small part of what was left of our business. That is the problem with people who never give a second thought as to what their fuzzy little pets that they have turned loose on their neighbors are doing as they belittle the potential consequences to those around them. These are people who either callously don't give a damn, or think that their pets are incapable of the instant personality change that can come over even the most obedient and loving dogs. I should also point out that taking a nice picture of the offending dogs does very little to stop the carnage. You will not find any sheriffs deputies these days that can or will go door to door across the county with a picture of some dogs trying to locate them. It is far more practical to anchor the offenders right there on the spot and put an immediate end to the threat.

It is amazing how wild some of these "house-pets" can be when they get out from under the control of their owners. The dogs that got into our sheep did so a couple nights in a row. And so we spent the next week with rifles up in the hay-mow, and they never came back until the very night that we gave up. These "house pets" had little trouble reverting back to their historical predator instincts. We were damned irritated that some thoughtless, irresponsible, S.O.B. put us in that position. But yes, we had every intention of shooting these "house pets" that had owners who thought it was great idea that there dogs had the freedom to run free and engage in their carnage on our flock, in the fenced-in barnyard on our property. No we didn't get a chance to end the situation ourselves. As it turned out we didn't have to. Another farmer had better luck than we did. So yes sometimes I do come off as a hard-case when people attempt to justify irresponsible dog ownership. I have no blame to assign to the dogs themselves because they are just doing what they instinctually do. It is a shame that the animals have to pay for the lack of responsibility of their owners.

Do the Ozonics people have any published studies or tests? I am curious as to the methodology that people would suggest. What would prove the effectiveness conclusively? If you have deer consistently coming up to you from a downwind direction after enough trials, you might be able to declare success. If they consistently still get your scent and spook when coming in downwind, I suppose that tells you something too. I like your study so far.

If your dogs are completely out of your control then they have not been adequately trained in obedience. I owned dogs for most of my life, and one rule that I always enforced was that they come when I call them, and that technically put them always under my control (leash or no leash). If you don't even have that level of control over your dogs, you really have no business turning them loose on neighboring properties. You apparently are confused as to where your rights end and where your neighbor's begins. And so I repeat, there is no acceptable reason that your dogs or anyone else's dogs should be allowed to run free and uncontrolled on any property that they choose, I don't give a damn what activities they are engaged in. I have had experience with pet owners who thought it was a great idea to let their household pets run free. And of course those dogs decided (several times) that it would be fun to have a romp through our sheep taking enough hunks of meat out of each one to kill them or leave them in a condition where they had to be destroyed. Their owners also felt it was great for their dogs to run free and uncontrolled. Well, there were some other farmers that disagreed and the problem eventually was solved. But not until we were driven out of business by these free roaming dogs. I have also seen deer brought down by pets who had owners who decided that their pets should be allowed to "run free". It isn't a pretty or necessary sight to witness.

I suppose that if you had a motor added on to that walker, it would be illegal to shoot from it. But a little modification of that scabbard like turning it into a revolving turret, you would have one heck of a killing machine!

It sounds like the way they are approaching sports in school these days. It's meant to soothe everyone's self-esteem by making sure everyone gets a trophy. Isn't that nice ..... lol.

You just answered your own question. Just because you are hunting with dogs, that doesn't mean that your dogs are free to run completely out of control. YOU are responsible for your dog ..... period. You exercise that responsibility by training your animal to obey commands and to hunt specific target animals and it is your responsibility to ensure that you have permission to use other people's property for your hunting activities. It is not the random responsibility of all landowners to allow dogs or you to trespass without prior permission, and it doesn't matter what species you are trying to hunt. For some reason people assume that because they are hunting with dogs, they automatically have free reign to use everyone's property and have some unwritten right to everyone else's property. Well, you don't.

Dogs should not be allowed to run free under any circumstances. That is not responsible pet ownership.

I hunt deer ......bucks, does, big, little ..... using guns and bows. I don't hunt just for antlers, and I set my own challenges. And what I really hate is hunters that would put mandatory restrictions of all kinds, selfishly imposing their standards on all other hunters. All I ever here anymore is the constant calls for every perceived buck problem being solved by some kind of new restrictions. We are constantly driving hunters out of the activity with all the petty arguments and the constant search for heaping as many specialized regulations as possible in a quest to make the entire hunter population fall in line with the latest pop- management scheme. And all this is aimed at shrinking the available legal segment of the deer population just to make it easier for those that measure their hunting success by the number of inches of antler.

I can picture all kinds of hunter-friendly add-ons and accessories. How about a gun scabbard? And maybe some clamp-on gun rests. I think a rain-hood would be useful too. I can see a whole line of hunting accessories for some one to offer and get rich off of.

And that's why we need a blaze orange law. There really are people in the woods who seem to need protection from themselves.....lol. Probably the same kind of people who use their firearms to warn people off their land. There seems to be some pervasive contempt for the principles of safety that some people take a weird perverse pleasure in having. It's kind of like taking pride in defying safety. I don't really understand such attitudes, but having such people in the deer hunting woods may be yet another reason why the hunter numbers are on the decline.

Perhaps the publication editor or owner was the guy that was being written about ..... lol.

Depending on where you are hunting, there may come a time when you may be dependent on using your rifle for signaling. We don't go out expecting to get lost or hurt, in areas without accessible phone towers, but sometimes things don't go per plan. So, those people who seem to be packing more ammo than necessary might just be glad they have it some day.

There has been so many times that I have been made aware of a hunters presence simply because of a flash of orange. In almost every case, that orange alerted me that a hunter was coming my way long before I could even recognize them a person. I have also moved on from a stand location because that orange told me that we were hunting too close to each other to be a safe situation. That sort of thing happens all the time. But also, I have approached guys that were dressed in full camo and got right next to them before realizing there was somebody there. There is no doubt in my mind that hunter orange is a highly effective safety feature in gun season ..... Highly effective! There is no doubt in my mind that it is unreasonable to even question that. It is important to be seen by other hunters, and as far as I can imagine, there is no situation where the hunter orange is a liability unless you are a poacher or a trespasser. Will blaze orange stop bullets? ..... absolutely not, but the likelihood that it will keep that bullet from being launched in the first place is pretty darned high. No, blaze orange does not improve the mentality of anyone. It just gives them a chance of knowing there is a hunter over there. Nothing else in the woods can do that for you. No other safety feature can do this for you, and if you still get shot, then somebody should open an investigation as to whether it really is a homicide.

I've heard the same nonsense theorized about coyote introduction .... lol. And if anyone ever gets to display proof of such activities by the DEC, then by all means, lets see it. But if anyone is simply posing the theoretical possibility, I guess I won't get emotionally distraught like I have seen some people react .... lol.

Well, of course no one wants to see these kinds of stories, and for the most part most dogs are harmless lovable creatures and do not deserve destruction merely for romping through the woods. But I have seen another side of these pets when they are owned and handled irresponsibly. I have seen the results of dogs getting into sheep and running from one to another just doing enough damage to kill one before moving on to the next. I also have witnessed a deer torn apart by two dogs in our front yard until I broke up the carnage. I tracked the deer the following morning and found it dead, finally succumbing to dozens of bites to the flanks suffered over an obvious long distance. I performed a mercy killing on a buck that had huge chunks of meat torn out of its rump to the point where it couldn't even get up to escape. It was a pretty pathetic sight. I have heard people who were moving to the country thinking out loud about finally having a place where their dogs could run free. I have owned dogs, and so I feel as strongly as anyone about enjoying loving companion animals that are responsibly cared for and controlled. But I am also aware that not everyone accepts that responsibility. I'm not sure that any of that was the case in this situation, but I am just reminding everyone that pet ownership does carry some pretty heavy responsibility that I hope everyone is as passionate about as they are about this guy that in my opinion used very poor judgment. As important as it is to make an example of this guy, I also think that those that do not control their pets should be dealt with equally harshly.