Doc

Ha-ha-ha, I knew where you were trying to drag this thread. I was just pulling your chain ..... lol. But honestly I am not motivated by antlers, and I am a firm believer that the worse thing that ever happened to hunting was when we all decided to measure success by the inches of antler that our kill has. Yes hunting today is a whole different world where everyone seems to be intent on impressing their peers. And they even came up with a scoring system because just plain old hunting wasn't enough. Its kind of comical to watch sometimes. Now hunting has become some sort of agricultural enterprise .... lol. Yup times change, but they haven't changed me. I still appreciate a good buck, but it doesn't drive my hunting. If a big buck was to step into my line of sight, I would be thrilled as much as anyone. But I don't hang my head and feel like the entire season was just trashed when it doesn't happen like so many others who learned their hunting appreciation from the Saturday morning hunting shows. I don't approach my hunting like it was a career. To me it is still recreation and I really have no need to impress anyone but myself with my hunting.

Well, maybe not always. I did see one that someone thought they could head-shoot. He had his entire lower jaw swinging in the breeze. not exactly lethal, and I always wondered just how long that critter lived until it finally croaked. Had another one on the other side of a steep, deep ravine that was wheezing like one of those anti-cigarette commercials that they show at supper time on the TV. I figured that was a severed wind pipe. There's a heck of a lot non-lethal meat for those head and neck shooters to hit.

Yeah, I ashamedly have to confess that I actually like venison. What do you do? ..... throw the meat away? And so far all of my deer have been legal and brown although I wouldn't hesitate to take a piebald if the opportunity arose. And yes they have all gone down when I shot them. I try real hard to make that happen. Yeah, and fortunately, so far, we do have a few choices left. Ain't America great!

Ha ha... I do understand that we tend to put forward an image of delusional prowess sometimes just to impress readers, but I tend to take a more honest and realistic view of things. In terms of what makes me decide what deer to shoot, it generally relies on an instant decision based on whatever deer offers a good ethical, high percentage, shot and contains an adequate amount of meat to make my time worthwhile. Oh, and of course it has to be a deer that is legal for the tags that I have.

And I never said that they intended to. But their new "buck management" scheme is based on the new 9 unit zoning of the state, which is a less accurate, redundant zoning system overlaid on the existing WMU divisions, (and you were worried about extra tax burdens .... lol). So why wouldn't you use the existing finer broken down, system of management units (which by the way all of the NYS statistics history is based off of) rather than diluting your statistics with larger more diversified areas. Larger areas do make it easier to over generalize results. It also makes it easier to pass inappropriate regulations because of all the additional land being lumped together. Larger areas do not allow for incorporation of unique habitat or population densities? Larger units do not account for changes in hunter densities that impact buck harvests and pressure. Whether it is bucks or does that you are managing, I cannot think of one good reason to manage bucks on a larger area basis and I haven't heard anyone else offer a logical explanation either.

Did you ever try to figure out exactly how many squirrels or rabbits or game birds you would have to kill in order to equal the amount of meals from just one deer. Hunting for deer is simply a more efficient way of meat-gathering. Bigger animal - more meat. From a sporting standpoint, the deer (any deer) is a whole lot more intelligent than a lot of other game. There is a challenge component to it all. That is also one of the big draws to predator hunting. Anyone who is trying to imply that shooting a deer lacks challenge is either delusional, dishonest, or lives in an area that has a whole lot more deer than we've got. Or maybe there is something in the water there that makes their deer stupid. So yeah, there is a whole lot more challenge and accomplishment in shooting a deer vs. shooting a squirrel. Anybody want to argue that point?......lol.

And so, my fellow animal serial killers, there you have it. The rhetoric of the animal rights people. The images and words of these people have got to have impacts on those not involved in hunting. They have to be gathering supporters, and more money to wage these kinds of campaigns. Given that we hunters are a documented shrinking minority in society, can there really be any doubt that these people are a formidable force to be reckoned with? We tend to paint them as wackos, extremists, and people that no one ever takes seriously. Somehow those images comfort us and make us feel that no one really takes them seriously. Those rationalizations make us feel that it is unnecessary to join and support any pro-hunting organizations. We find it difficult to imagine a society that would outlaw or force impractical limits on our sport hunting. Well, right or wrong, I can imagine it. These people are organized, single-minded, and dedicated. They do not engage in in-fighting and bickering. Once they have been convinced by videos such as this, they become part of a force that makes our paltry, half-hearted defenses and campaigns pretty much a joke. These people are politically connected and know exactly how to become a huge thorn in our side. I take them very seriously. Yes, I do consider them whackos, extremist and a bit deluded. But you will never find me calling them harmless and no threat to hunting.

Super-handy! I used to have to go out to the shed, hand-carry the wood up some steps of a long sidewalk, into the front entrance, up a 1/2 flight set of stairs (raised ranch), through the living room, and over to the wood stove. Talk about failure to plan ..... ha-ha. Getting rid of the ashes was kind of the same process in reverse.

I have a nifty little .22 Hornet Winchester. It's a pretty little guy that I keep around for sentimental reasons (used to belong to my father). However, it sits in the cabinet, and never gets used except once in a while I take it out for target practice. I have been trying to figure out what it really is suitable to kill. I have a .223 for varmints, a .270 for deer, a .22 for squirrels ....... everything seems to be covered, leaving the Hornet not really doing anything that the rest of the guns don't do better. So, for you fans of the .22 hornet, other than target practice, what do you use it for?

Deer bowhunting first. Squirrel hunting second. Deer gun hunting third. We have no birds, and the rabbits are kept pretty well knocked down by hawks, foxes, and coyotes, so while I would like to include those two critters it isn't practical to go out specifically for them. I also have to stir in my annual hunts for predators ..... that can be darned exciting.

I like the arrangement. You've provided a generous distance between the wood pile and the house to eliminate any migration of wood-munching bugs. I really hate to see firewood stacked up on porches against a house wall. Sooner or later something ugly is going to move into the house. I assume that there is a door somewhere nearby for ease of transport. That is one sturdy looking beginning, and I think it will look great when you get it all done.

That is true. They are simply overlaying another less explicit system over top of the existing system just to make sure nobody can follow what they are doing. I'm sorry, that is cynical and probably not exactly fair. But I see nothing that is accomplished by this new redundant system of buck management zoning that is not already being done better by the WMU boundaries system. It's not micromanagement, but instead diluting buck management by using larger zones for that purpose.

When it comes to subdividing management zones, there is no money saved by making them larger than what will be effective. We have a WMU system in place that advertises itself as being designed to accommodate habitat and land use variations. That is in place, and staffed and costs whatever it costs. I get the feeling that they are trying to dazzle us with footwork, with no real positive change taking place. we can't manage things with all the WMUs, but somehow mysteriously we will do a better job by glopping all these divisions together into only 9 areas. It feels like someone is trying to slip something past us by pretending on one hand to be doing something wonderful and then implementing all that in a less effective zoning than what we currently have. Where is the logic? I do not argue the point that the DEC is structured completely wrong, but I truly hold out no hope at all that we will be seeing those kinds of changes. And maybe that is what should be talked about, but it is not what is being talked about. My comments are focused on the original theme of this thread. But since the subject of costs and effectiveness have been brought up, I have to note that if you think that it is expensive maintaining the WMUs that we currently have, brace yourself before you begin thinking about the expense of re-structuring the entire department. I have seen the restructuring cost of corporations. I would expect the restructuring of an entire state agency would be no less and likely much higher. If you want to worry about elevating taxes ..... now you are talking some real dollars. I'm simply concerned that we will be losing a more closely controlled existing zoning system (WMU system) for another band-aid that is by design worse and less finely married to habitat and local conditions than what we already have. How on earth does that make any sense at all? I'm not a big fan of smoke and mirrors, and that is why I have to ask how a huge expansion of management zones is either saving any money or doing the management job better by combining diverse habitats and varied land uses and population profiles. There's a dance going on that I really don't understand. By the way does it only bother me that the entire system is built on statistics, and every single year something basic and fundamental is being massively changed thereby destroying all the history that these statistics are built on (just a little side-thought)?

I truly believe that there is an attitude of anti bowhunting that is prevalent in the DEC. I'm sure that they feel that a very good productive hunting period and opportunity to whack deer populations is being squandered on this specialized and very ineffective (comparatively speaking) weapon. I fully expect to see more and more incursions of guns into bow season for as long as this paranoia about deer populations and the political pressure to soothe anti-deer interests continues. We all think that the archery lobby is a powerful force and that it takes great brass balls for the DEC to take on bowhunters. But the truth is that the organized bowhunters are effectively broken and don't really offer serious resistance anymore. There is some real crazy stuff going on in these plans that are clearly showing the attitude of the DEC toward bowhunting. Some of it is starting to get real obvious. There no longer are any safety concerns about mixing guns with bows in the DEC. They are feeling confident with previous experiences that have been forced into the season without incident. I don't think that safety is much of a concern with them anymore. Frankly what they are doing to bow seasons has got me thinking that maybe it is time to call it quits on an activity that has been a significantly major part of my life for many decades. Maybe it is time.

And less effectiveness and accuracy. Why bother with the activity at all if you're not concerned with it accomplishing exactly what you're trying to accomplish. The old adage still applies, "a job worth doing is worth doing right".

There is almost universal agreement that if anything, WMU size is too big to handle the diversity of deer numbers, and all the different habitat conditions, for proper management. So what does the DEC do? .... They establish a mere 7 management areas when it comes to buck management. Somebody want to explain to me the logic behind that? I don't get it.

Easton XX-75 aluminum.

So is there any game warden who will ever be able to tell the difference between a wound from one of these slugs and an arrow? heck even your average deer processor probably couldn't tell the difference. So for those interested in getting an early start on their gun season during bow season, these things will have some obvious benefits.....lol.

We all know that more gun laws will not impact the rate of gun violence. It hasn't happened yet and there is no reason to believe that it ever will. BUT Every one of these mass killings produces more and more people hardening their philosophy against gun owner freedoms. You are all aware that polls show the repeal efforts for the Safe Act do not really fare well with the general NYS population. I think there is becoming a panicky mentality that is struggling for a solution. I don't believe there is necessarily any logic involved in that frustration and panic but I do believe that we are going to see changes that we will be very uncomfortable with. I also believe it is only a matter of time before average hunting weapons and ammo are impacted, and I don't think there will be anything we can do about it as long as these senseless killings continue. It doesn't really matter what logic and numbers tells us. get enough regularly occurring mass murders, and public opinion will turn on us and run us over.

Oh damn ... there has to be a pill for that. Isn't there a pill for everything that ails us?

Truly a great thread! My thoughts? .... I doubt a deer would even know what that stink really is. It might move them along just because of the overwhelming nausea that they feel coming over them. But as far as identifying the source ...... I doubt it. Now the sound may be something different. Especially one of those long drawn out flutter-style farts that seem to go on forever. They get a bit of extra time to focus those ears to determine direction.

What a great Alfred Hitchcock style movie that would make. Instead of "The Birds", you could call it "the Beetles". Flesh eating beetles ..... it kind of gives me the creeps just thinking about it.

Damn! What a bad guy I am .... lol. I don't count deer. I don't consider myself any sort of game biologist. I don't make up any rules for how many deer I will shoot or what I believe others should or should not shoot. I couldn't score a deer rack if next years tags depended on it. I don't believe that I have the knowledge or ability to attempt to balance the gender ratio. I don't do any culling or any of those grand and wonderful deer management things that it sounds like most do. I just take whatever tags are handed to me by the DEC, and go deer hunting. No fences, no plots, no secret scents and manufactured scrapes. No special scent-lok suits. I guess some of us are just bad hunters .... ha-ha. But I always have good legal venison in the freezer and a whole pile of hunting stories to tell anyone that wants to listen at family gatherings and visits with hunting buddies.... ha-ha. I'll probably finish out my years exactly the same way, hunting the deer as I find them and not trying to manipulate the herd in any way. I just want to enjoy my hunting, not make a life career out of it. I guess we are all different in what we want to get out of our hunting. I'm pretty easy to please .... lol.

Oh, I must have missed it.

A word about getting legal info: Do not use the telephone. You have no legal record of what was told to you. Inquire using e-mail or written letters so that the replies form a written document that you can keep.