Doc

Ok, we don't stop these idiots who cry about bowhunters by taking wide swings at all gun hunters either. While I think the anti bowhunter thing may be growing (That's just an impression I get from listening and reading opinion based media), that doesn't mean that it is a good idea to escalate the conflict by returning fire. In fact, I participate in both seasons, so to start badmouthing gunners as a total general group, I wind up taking a personal hit too.

Thanks. So far it's been a great day, but of course at 6:00 in the morning it usually is .... lol.

I don't think you will find the anti-bowhunter comments coming from those that are real "gun and bow" hunters. Some may own a bow, but that doesn't mean they really use it or even know how to use it .... ha-ha. But I think you will find that the number of big-game licenses sold far outnumber the bow licenses sold. So there should not be any assumption that all deer hunters are dual-season hunters or even close to that.

You know, you will never have the gift of those damning ATV tracks again. They are better than trail-cam pictures that have to fire at precisely the right time to catch them in the act, and likely will not really be pictures of anything happening. I hate to see people getting away with things like that. In fact they may assume credit for making you move and turn around and do it to your remaining relative trying to get him to move out. It just seems to me that you would be one pissed-off guy ready to see somebody pay for attempting to do you in. I know I would be, regardless of whether I was vacating the property or not.

I used to have a hunting buddy that called these "parachute deer" because they seem to have just simply dropped in out of the sky when he was looking in a different direction. POOF! they just suddenly were there .... and often standing there staring at him.

Yes the NYB bashing does make a good rallying cry for a few gun hunters who simply are envious of the fact that through effective organization and lobbying, the bowhunters today enjoy prime season times, durations, and bag limits. Yes, that is what it is all about. Just straight-up "envy". And now that bowhunters are beginning to enjoy success, all of their advances have brought some attention to themselves. And the envy grows until now you have open warfare from a handful of these guys who jealously look at what bowhunters have accomplished over the years. Yes, I have heard and read all the bitter comments about how the bowhunters are killing off all the good bucks before gun season even opens, and how the bowhunters are getting all the advantages of the rut, and all the other endless nonsense that really is just lashing out at all the benefits that bowhunters have worked long and hard to accomplish.

Anybody ever watch any of those game warden shows that sometimes show up on The Animal planet channel? I watch them everytime I find them. Good shows! Anyway, I can recall at least two of those where the investigation was begun because of a post on internet forums or Facebook or some form of social media. These were guys who were bragging on the internet about hunting violations (even with pictures). They never said whether the fish and game department monitored the internet sites or whether a complaint was sent to them by somebody finding these confessions on the internet. But anyways, arrests resulted. The point being, that it probably is not a very smart thing to admit to any law-breaking, publicly, on the internet. I don't want to get involved with any sort of aiding and abetting activity (lol), but I will just say, "Don't be so damn stupid".

Why is this not available to the general public? Is there a cost issue involved? I don't know anything about webinars in terms of how they work or what costs that might be involved to the DEC for large audiences. But unless there is an impracticality to opening participation to the general public, this sounds like it might be of interest to a lot more people than just a few hand-picked individuals.

This guy is not alone in his opinions. In fact I occasionally pick up on some of that attitude right here on this forum. It has been going on for quite a while ever since bowhunter success rates have crept upwards. A few published pictures of some dandy wall hangers has suddenly woke up a lot of gun hunters as to the fact that bow hunters do actually harvest deer and sometimes some pretty nice ones. For years, we were not taken very seriously, and so everybody just shrugged their shoulders when additional weeks were added to the bow season. There was a whole lot of "who cares" when we picked up more and more goodies as far as seasons and bag limits. This guy is a jerk, but he is really just putting into public words, the thoughts that more and more gunhunter-only people are thinking. It is occurring to more and more of them that we are not out there with just recurves and longbows any more. Ha-ha.. apparently the DEC is even beginning to buy into some of this attitude as they now think that bowhunters can handle the entire population control in some WMUs ... lol.

It all depends on the weather. I have a lighted 80 yard archery range marked off in 5 yard increments. And a 50 and 100 yard shooting bench for the rifles. But I will not drag my guns out in snow or rain conditions. I also have a 15 yard indoor range in my basement. I no longer belong to any kind of club ranges or indoor shooting facilities. To try to figure out a shooting frequency would be impossible because it winds up to be a frequency based on opportunity.

Actually, the intent of the thread was obvious and even directly stated in bold print: "My question is: What do you think of people that go out and hunt for no other reason than to kill something?" My reply addressed exactly what was being asked. I realize that a lot of people feel uncomfortable about addressing that point, but in spite of the fact that we don't like to talk about that, that is a very common practice and here was a thread that dared to directly ask the question. Woodchucks, rats, crows, carp, etc., are simply killed as living targets with almost nobody even trying to eat them. So instead of shame-facedly running from the question, I chose to address it directly and without apology.

Ok, ya got me. I have to confess to killing rats at the dump and not eating them. I also have shot woodchucks and left them. We used to bowfish for carp and not eat them. I know there are those that hunt crows with no intention of eating them. Out west there are those that actually shoot prairie dogs, and I doubt they are particularly prized for their good table fare. I have trapped all kinds of animals, selling the fur and throwing away the carcasses or in some cases using them for bait. I did kill a coyote with no intentions of eating him. I have called and shot foxes .... again, no intention of eating it. I guess I further have to confess that I did all of that in a cold-blooded way without a shred of remorse. But then, we humans are not the only ones that do that. Back when I was a kid, we lost 22 head of sheep to some local dogs that simply went from one sheep to the next killing them for sport and never eating a one of them. I have seen the same thing with dog-killed deer. Our cat does the same thing with mice only she tortures them to death. Apparently the world is an evil place. Look, hunting is a nasty business anyway you look at it. We have justified it as claiming it is done strictly for meat, as if any of us are reduced to hunting for survival. We talk about hunting to balance animal populations, but I can't remember the last time I heard somebody say, "Well, I'm going to go out and control the deer herd now". There is something in all of us that enjoys the hunt and the kill. We are predators. And by the way, I'm not justifying illegal action as in the case of the pheasants. And I have always eaten every squirrel that I have ever shot if that serves as brownie points for forgiving my other wanton acts of killing. But I am not going to sanitize the act of killing wildlife by conjuring up excuses, and I am not going to try to come up with any kind of justification of shooting those rats at the dump. It I something that my primal ancestry coded into my DNA, and it is what it is.

IT'S NOT FUNNY!!!! ................... Well, maybe it does sometimes make me crack a smile ..........Actually there are times when you just have to sit down and laugh ................... there are other times when it is flat-out hysterical ...

For decades, I had a 2x Leupold topping my Ithaca 12 ga. I believe that I should have had more magnification, but still, I did amazingly well. My .270 has a 3x-9x variable which gives me a much better magnification. It spends most of its time at 9x. That's real crappy for offhand shooting, but when rested on some part of my stand or on my Primos bi-pod, it is deadly.

I can (and have) gotten out of my chair and walked into another room, standing there wondering what in the heck I came in there for. That's sad.

And yet here is crappy old Gander Mountain somehow keeping their doors open. Well anyways, now there are no shortages of big box outdoor stores. The competition is fast and furious and we hunters are the beneficiaries. We do still have crappy old Gander Mountain, and soon a brand new Bass-pro, and the great Field & Stream store, and Dick's now over here in Western NY. Life is good!

Great Video!!!!

I try real hard not to be lured into taking any "quick shots" or any kind of shots where I feel pressured for time. The scope forces me to do that. Whenever I hear the phrase "quick shot" being used, I think of scenarios of "jump-shooting" deer like rabbits with such speed that things in the background tend not to be looked at with enough scrutiny to ensure safety. Among other undeniable benefits, I see the fact that things are forcibly being slowed down as the biggest benefits in the realm of gun safety. It is just possible that one of the main reasons for the vast improvements in NYS's safety record is the proliferation of scopes in the deer woods. Not only do you automatically slow down the shooting, but you also get a magnified clear view of what's behind the target with the only vision obstruction being the thin crosshairs. I'm a big fan of scopes not only for my use, but also for those around me that are shooting in my vicinity.

Damn! Can you imagine being attacked and killed by coyotes. What a nasty way to go ...... one bite at a time. That' a disgusting thought.

I have never had an accuracy concern with my Ithaca Deerslayer, but that 12 Ga. was never something I would call a pleasure to shoot. By contrast, I spent an hour up on my range "playing" with my .270, just loving every shot and seeing what kinds of tight groups I could get. It was truly recreation, and a familiarization process that I wish more deer hunters could (and would) experience with their deer guns. Compare that with the typical annual 5-shot verification group that I would painfully go through with that old 12 ga. Why 5 shots? ... because beyond that I would begin to bruise. Hopefully at the end of the 5-shot group I would be satisfied with the group, because anything after that involved increasing flinching and I would be in for an ugly re-sighting process that was absolute misery. That 12 ga. has not been out of the closet since they legalized rifles in Ontario County, and I haven't missed it for a moment.

I and several others on this forum have seen a lot of change of this sort, and it is indeed sad. What's even worse is the realization that nothing will ever slow down this hunting land development and "lock-up". It's a process that you can only look at and do nothing about.

I always thought that once these guys were in proper combat gear, they might break a bone or two, but nothing too life-threatening other than an occasional aberration or two. This movie opened up a whole other aspect to the effects of the constant head-pounding that these guys take. Personally, you couldn't pay me enough to take that kind of abuse and potential permanent cranial damage. The movie based on true events showed the extent that the NFL would go to cover up the dangers from the players and the public. However, when it ended, all the findings became public, but there was no indication that anything really changed other than the players understanding that they are playing mental Russian Roulette. But at least they have the knowledge of what is at stake and can make their own minds up about whether they want to take the risks or not. I have no problems with competitive violence and trauma when the facts are all laid out in front of the players. The movie itself was kind of different. It was done in a way that kept you a bit on edge, and contained all the appropriate drama for entertainment. But the introduction of history, facts and figures, kept the integrity of the documentary aspects of it too. Well done, and Will Smith was perfectly cast and brilliant in his performance.

And of course to all this the DEC would say, "Halleluiah, we need more coyotes". And while we are into the "truth uncovering mode", somebody want to redo that silly study that claims that the more coyotes you kill the more they increase. I'm still having a real problem with that one.

Well, I have no doubt that an air-rifle that can take down a water buffalo, probably is powerful enough to do in a deer. But my impression is that there is a wide variety of these things from B-B guns to some beastly thing capable of killing a water buffalo. It sounds like they had better do a damn good job of describing minimum requirements, or there is the possibility that there will be people out there using all kinds of under-powered, unethical weapons. Even with gunpowder powered deer rifles, I don't believe that the DEC did an adequate job of defining minimums. Let's hope they do a better job on air powered rifles.

I just saw the movie "Concussion" yesterday. It kind of gave me quite a different perspective on football. I had no idea what kinds of things those guys put themselves through and what the end-results can turn out to be.