Doc

I look at charging anything for doe permit applications in a different way. I don't really care whether it is an easy expenditure for me? That really isn't even an relevant issue. The fact is that the government has proven over and over that the way to modify individual behavior is to tax it. It really doesn't matter how much. Just the fact that they have in fact taxed doe hunting in any amount will have the effect of diminishing the activity. It is an example of the DEC talking out of both sides of their mouths by trying to convince us that not enough does are being taken while taxing the activity at the same time.

What the hell is that monster in the background in pictures 2 and 3? It looks like he has a Christmas tree on his head. Maybe you had better start planning on that critter for next year. Maybe get some stand locations picked out. That deer should not go ignored.

Oh man! I really don't like that deer's reaction to the camera. But it doesn't look like he is reacting to the camera going off. It has already turned and is taking off before the camera actually went off. What do you think? ..... scent spooked it or what?

Ha-ha ..... leave it to me to step in and break up this love-fest. I do have objections that go beyond the mere standard of legality. When the DEC steps in and lays muzzleloaders all over the bow season, I will be the one that everyone calls "selfish" or "elitist" or all the other favorite emotionally-charged buzzwords that are so popular for those that choose to stick up for the preservation of bow season. Yes, shortly we may very well find that firearms have been legalized for bow season, it already has been done in the Northern Zone. Shame on me, but I will not speak well of that perfectly legal DEC maneuver and I will not be a supporter.

I believe the average is somewhere around $25 for local coyotes. And according to the article, the DNR is looking at $25 for the bounty, which then makes you wonder how if they are getting that same amount for coyotes through fur prices, how is this equal bounty an incentive to hunt coyotes. The only answer is if they can come up with a process that marks the pelt and then it is handed back to the hunter for fur sales. Then the hunter/trapper gets double the money or $50 ..... $25 (avg) for the sale of the pelt and $25 for the bounty. Perhaps that would provide an incentive for people to get out there and try to harvest some coyotes. This is an aspect of the bounty law that may not be public yet and perhaps not even thought of yet, but could be the determining actor as to whether it would work or not.

I carry a military Kabar style knife whenever I head up into the woods. It does a good job of gutting deer (even splitting pelvic bones if wanted), to even skinning squirrels. It is virtually unbreakable. It can almost double as a machete for hacking limbs. It is probably the most perfect knife steel I have ever found that can easily be sharpened but yet holds an edge even through abuse and misuse. The only modification was made for safety after cutting a finger, was to grind off the sharp edge that they put on the top of the blade. Working elbow deep in the body cavity of deer, it is not nice to have that extra, unnecessary cutting edge in there.

I wish I could dispute any of that with any kind of conviction, but it is true that our individual vote is so diluted, that it is almost meaningless. And if you want an exercise in futility, try being a Conservative in NYS. Your vote pretty much has been relegated to a very quiet protest. On the other hand, if you don't participate in the system, I would have to say that you really have no business offering up any political opinions. It would seem that by opting out of the system of voting that we have, you are pretty much forfeiting whatever credibility that your opinion might have ever had. I have no answers, but I will say that occasionally I do see some surprising changes and political results that just simply were not supposed to have happened. Those are the little victories that tell me not to give up yet, and to keep on trying to use the system. The alternatives to that are too terrible to even contemplate.

BSH- That may be a spot (or somewhere nearby) to check out for sheds. All that pushing and shoving might just loosen up some antlers, or knock them off right there. Wouldn't it be great if you got a picture showing one of the antlers flying off ....Lol. One in a million odds, but it sure would be a great picture.

Let's not assume that the warm weather was the reason that harvests were down. It may or may not be the case, but I have not seen any credible proof that deer react any differently in weather that is 3 or 4 degrees warmer than normal. Lets face whatever temperature records that have been broken were only broken by a couple of degrees, and on only a few days, so lets keep all this stuff in relative perspective. Were those couple of degrees enough to drive the feeding and the rut and daytime movements into a nocturnal state like we have never seen before? Maybe, but I doubt it. I have done plenty of bowhunting in my short sleeved shirts many years. Also, I am reminded of all the states that are south of us with a whole lot warmer temperatures than we have ever seen here. Do they have to hunt only at night because all the deer are waiting until then to move about?.....No.

That is a question that I have been wondering about. The answer will come from the details of the proposal in terms of what the taker is allowed to do with the hide after collection of the bounty. If they are able to claim the bounty and also sell the hide then in affect they will receive $50 for each coyote, which would double the incentive. If the state takes possession of the hide, then they better tack on something more than initially proposed if they want to motivate any new hunters. But again, it all depends on the details, which may put me into the "Not in favor" column. It has to incent hunters to get out there or save your money, PA.

I also let those antlerless weeks go without hunting, for the same exact reason. Well, there may have been a slight touch of rebellion stirred into that decision also ..... lol. But the point is that the lack of intelligence behind this antlerless-only fiasco may have provided exactly the opposite harvest results that they were publicly proclaiming. On the other hand, if the intent was to force failure by the bowhunters in order to justify the inclusion of the muzzleloader into bow season (which they have publicly stated they wanted for the past decade), then maybe their brilliant plan worked perfectly.

Ok, with much difficulty, I think I got the gist of this post. And, I believe that I might even agree with it. However at the risk of being called the "spelling and grammar police", I have to say that a little time re-reading some of these posts probably would have avoided a lot of head-scratching. Seriously, I got totally lost a few times as I struggled more with the wording than the topic. I still have not figured out what the thought was when the word "dump" was thrown in to several sentences. What the hell does that mean? I am not trying to claim perfection in the English language, but I do try to make my posts readable. And I do that by re-reading the message before poking the "Post" button and fixing some of the glaring confusion.

I see the coyote in NYS and PA to be a predator at the top of his food chain. As such, being so naturally prolific, I see them as something that requires some form of population control just like any other species. I try to keep the image of cute little puppy dogs out of my thinking when it comes to letting an efficient predator explode in numbers without any other control. Hunting has been justified in society primarily because it is recognized that hunters have a necessary place in the food chain that can help regulate animal numbers. I believe that the same justification can be applied to coyotes. However, it appears that since coyotes have no value as table fare, and the fur prices are not motivating hunters to become that population check, maybe a little cash incentive in the form of a bounty might insert hunters back into the food chain to control numbers of a species that currently has no control. So if for no other reason, I would like to see them go ahead and treat this bounty program as a lab experiment to see exactly how effective (or not) such a program can be here on the eastern side of the country.

So whenever you think you have problems, along comes a story like this one that shows you how trivial your difficulties really are. My sincere sympathies go out to all those affected by this senseless tragedy.

Every year the ground rules change significantly. How do you ever compare apples to apples when that is going on? How do you come up with reliable statistics that have no factual history to base it on? Just askin'

And it sounds like the slump in muzzleloader sales kind of backs up that line of thought.

Perhaps the fact that they have a year around season and it is not working in PA might be an answer to those that think that is the solution for us. I guess the question boils down to whether or not cash is a motivator. I do see trappers that are motivated by cash. I'm guessing that hunters really aren't all that different. So what would it really cost to run a short trial program to put actual numbers to that question.

That is a bit like saying that rising fur prices do not impact motivated trappers in a statistically significant amount. And yet trapper numbers move proportional to the fur market. I have no idea how much of a motivator a bounty might add to a hunter pulling the trigger on a coyote when they see them. I have no idea what a cash motive might have on getting people out actively hunting coyotes, but apparently the PA. DNR thinks there is some merit to the idea. Perhaps doing bounties on a one or two year trial basis would answer those questions. The one good thing is that there would be no harvest reporting difficulties and real numbers would be available for study .... lol. Frankly, I hope they do it, and we'll see if a bounty system really works or not. What they learn might be directly applicable to NYS as well. I'm always up for getting paid to hunt.

Yes, I think there are a lot of people that are beginning to get suspicious about this declaration of catastrophic deer population levels. Sure, there may be pockets here and there of population excesses, but I wonder if the motives for crying about the sky falling may be more motivated by the political concerns of the moneyed interests that are constantly butting heads with deer. Perhaps it is not the deer population that is out of control, but rather the new setting of population goals established by the CTFs that makes it all "look" like things are out of control. Also, the DEC has a history of wanting muzzleloaders and other more efficient implements stirred in with bow seasons. And what better way to make that happen than to trump up some emergency condition to convince everyone that "special challenge seasons" like bow are insufficient to handle some declared population disaster. It sounds like they have found a way to cram firearms into bow seasons.

Well, first of all I have never said anything about what gun hunters shoot or don't shoot, and it is getting difficult for a lot of bowhunters to say anything about gun hunters since so many of them are also gun hunters as well. But I am sure that just like some bowhunters, there are gunhunters who pass on does, convinced that a buck will come trailing along. A doe only situation would coax them into dumping that mentality at least during doe-only days. Of course it is always possible that the doe-only seasons won't work regardless of what season you force it into. Maybe the whole idea of trying to force any hunters into just shooting antlerless deer is simply wrong-headed and doomed to failure.

I assume you have had a sit-down with whoever will be responsible for security, and are feeling secure that they take their responsibilities seriously, and know a bit of something about watching over youngsters. Perhaps you have been able to assess first hand and in person the mindset and maturity of the "watch-dogs" of the program. And of course the number of years and the experience that the people running the program have had. Maybe even a few questions about the facilities and security provided can add to your confidence.

I would agree if it wasn't an idea that so many apparently feel can be refuted so easily. I'm not sure I really buy that thought. As was pointed out, there is a public aspect to all of this that I'm sure the DNR wouldn't really want to find themselves in the middle of unless they thought they could back up their position. And as far as them being driven by hunters, that I not the impression I get after hearing all the years of outcry over their severe attack on the deer herd down there. I get the impression that they are determined to do what they think is the right thing (as they see it) regardless of how it plays among the hunters. No, I think this is genuinely supported by whatever coyote management research they could dredge up. If we say they are all screwed up about this idea, then we have to put the blame where the buck stops. This is not something that can easily be blamed on hunters.

And yet these guys refuse to even mention any doe only seasons during the regular gun season where it might have a real impact. Their take on it is that bow season is the place to manage deer populations. If their agenda of cramming muzzleloaders into bow seasons is not clear to everyone by now, then I don't know what to tell you. Now they are so desperate to cover up bow season with muzzleloaders that they are even foreshortening their antlerless season trial and jumping right into what they really wanted to do for the past 10 years.

Another observation is the fact that the coyote in eastern parts of the country are for all practical purposes at the top of their food chain. So am I hearing that a species with no predators other than automobiles and disease should simply be allowed to multiply totally unchecked? I'm not sure just when or if the "bounty card" should be played, but it does appear that hunters and trappers are not really doing much of a job on them in some parts of the state. I'm guessing that the PA. DNR is feeling like there is a lacking of motivation to hunt coyotes. If they are correct, extending the season to year around probably won't have much of an impact. I really do not know what the answer is. I guess that's why I asked the question.

So, are we saying that PA. Department of Natural Resources does not understand coyote management and frankly are incapable of reading scientific papers, studies and research. After all, this is a DNR backed idea. I really don't know. I don't have any dealings with them, so I am just asking. If bounties don't work, one would think that they would not be proposing such a thing. If killing coyotes does in fact make more of them pop up, why do you think the PA. DNR has never come across that info. Or is it possible that they have actually found contrary studies that debunked that notion. Again, I am just asking if these guys are simply inept, or might they have better sources of coyote management data and research than we do.