Doc

My first thought was, why would you continue to hunt there year after year and put up with the abuse. My second thought was that if the guy cut and ran, these clowns would have been successful in doing the illegal harassment activities. That's no good either. He needs to be a little more aggressive in making the DEC enforce the hunter harassment laws or these idiots will just continue to be emboldened and successful in eliminating perfectly legal hunting activity.

If you have a group of deer wintering in a particular area, and a fairly harsh winter, you very well might see scenes like this. I remember a couple years ago, we had two blue spruce trees that the deer almost killed. That went on for about two consecutive years, and the trees sure have a weird shape to them now ..... lol. But no where else was there any sign of over-browsing. So was I witnessing over-population browse lines, or simply a few deer zeroing in on a favored winter food source? So, I'm not really sure that even an isolated picture can prove a point of over-population. I'm not saying that it is not the case in the area of this picture, but I do know that a wintering herd can absolutely make their isolated presence known in the resulting carnage on preferred food sources in small areas. Talk to most farmers and they will usually tell you that any deer is too many deer and they will show you crop losses to prove it. The question is, if I react to something like this one localized instance of over-browsing, and start blasting every doe I see, am I making a proper decision or simply over-reacting to a normal feeding habit of the local deer.

All of these entertainment type elitists certainly have the right to be wrong. And I have the right to criticize them and also to not support their idiot choices by not buying their product.

So, I wonder what really stops every little Podunk Burg from passing these un-Constitutional local ordinances? Are there protections against that?

My comments regard the topic that was being addressed.....The Naples area. And my remarks also address more than just a 1 year blip in the trends of that area.

That vineyard has been out of production for years. One other thing that can happen is that a certain variety can go out of favor. Or the owner croaks, or retires. A lot of things can cause them to rip them out. It will be interesting to see what goes in there. Who knows, they might just plant a new vineyard with some specialty variety ...... or more likely it will become a housing development .... lol. Actually, the wine business in that area has been on the downhill slide, with the demise of Widmers to French's Mustard to Constellation and now the much smaller and condensed Hazlett Wineries. And the industry is area-wide primarily undergoing a conversion to small family owned wineries. Most of what I have heard is that a lot of the reasons for the change is the growth and popularity of the California brands. I have watched vineyard after vineyard get ripped out throughout the entire area. Once in a while a small specialty vineyard will be planted, but for every one of those that you see, several of the old ones disappear forever and usually a nice bunch of shiny new houses take their place.

What is tough to accept is that he can't seem to get any law enforcement to respond. I realize that this may not exactly be the most high profile complaint that they will be receiving all season, but what the heck .... there are laws against hunter harassment, and they have a complaint. I would have called right from the stand when that jerk was walking by honking his horn so the PGC person on the other end could hear the action. What a zoo.

A lot has been said here about the game manager's positions vs. the hunter's position. After a while it begins to sound like a "we vs. they" kind of situation. But in reality, what has to be maintained is a win-win situation between the two entities. Hunters will not be very satisfied in the long run if they fight down all attempts to maintain a healthy deer herd. But the different game management agencies will not be very effective if they alienate the only effective population control that they have .... the hunters. It really is a symbiotic relationship between hunters and those charged with the management of wildlife. So, when we start talking like hunters are the enemy we have to recognize that without hunters, the game management agencies (regardless of what state) would be absolutely impotent. And the other situation is true as well. Without proper management according to at least the basic biological principles, hunters would eventually wind up with nothing to hunt. So the proper answer most of the time is "compromise". Mother Nature does not demand that management decisions always have to be 100% according to the books. Good game management does not demand that deer levels be kept on that razor thin line where a single or multiple set of seasonal problems in a given year result in calamity in the herd and harvest. And here and there, in an effort to satisfy and keep a stable and effective level of hunters some accommodations in deer herd size can be made without catastrophic results. But hunters and other interests should not be so pressuring that they become an impediment to acceptable game management.

I have to admit that I am not a PA hunter, and was only down there a few days back in the early 80's on a quick bowhunt and I'm sure a lot has changed since then. So I really don't have any knowledge of habitat, herd density or anything else. But just based on the numbers in these articles, an 11% drop in the buck take seems like somebody is just thrashing around and managing by trial. I often figured that's what NYS's DEC does. They run all these computer programs to provide a cover story, but really simply wait until the herd gets so big that everyone is whining and then they flood the state with permits for a few years until all the hunters are claiming they can't find any deer and then they cut permits again ..... lol. Yeah I know that's kind of harsh, and is meant mostly tongue-in-cheek, but when you see the population bouncing wildly up and down, you do kind of get the impression that the management style might be more reactionary than pre-planned. The 40% drop over 15 years sounds a little aggressive too. I think I understand why the word coming out of PA is usually negative. At any rate, it doesn't really sound like they do much different from what NYS does other than their statewide AR. I wonder if they have CTF's telling them what their harvest goals should be also.....lol. Are they balancing the herd to the habitat or simply greasing up whatever wheel squeaks the loudest? Sometimes you have to wonder. But I guess the PA hunters have a problem of their own to worry about. But, I won't be just arbitrarily be accepting anymore that story about how PA does such a greater job than our DEC. I'm thinking a lot of that a lot of those comments probably has a lot to do with how the grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence. Most likely both states are doing the best they can, but not near as good as they claim.

So, am I the only one who wonders why cigarettes are still legal? Think about it, Marijuana is deemed a public health risk, so they just flat outlawed it. But for some reason when it comes to tobacco, they never did muster up the courage to simply declare it a controlled substance and make it illegal to own/use. I don't care which side of the illegality of "controlled substances" you are on, But my comment is more about the inconsistency. Because to me inconsistency is generally the hallmark of hidden agendas. Look for the money trail ....eh? Secondly, When did it become the province of our government to use taxation, and public service advertisements, and pitting one segment of the citizenry against he other and other forms of behavioral modification as legitimate ways to create law. Does anyone else worry about how these techniques could be used against any activity that they choose without going through legitimate lawmaking procedures? It would appear that e-cigarettes are just the next target to get this backdoor law-making treatment. Personally, I could care less about any of these products, but the procedures that everyone seems to readily and eagerly accept have potential to be used on anything they get it in their minds that we shouldn't have. Legal processes be damned. If you can convince the public that something is evil (perhaps even guns), they have devised a pretty darned effective way around the system and we all sit around and cheer all that until it is our ox that gets gored.

I'll tell you what, I have a nice scope-sighted .270 that has never failed to cleanly take down a deer. It certainly does a whole lot cleaner job than a crossbow, compound, longbow, or recurve, and it doesn't use any special season either. So, following your philosophy, let's get rid of all those more challenging weapons and only allow scoped rifles for hunting? No, you see there are a lot of us that value that idea of "challenge" in our hunting. In fact for some of us that is the whole point of hunting instead of just going to the butcher.

For those that are convinced that PA has the perfect deer management style compared to NYS, you might want to pick up the latest issue of New York Outdoor News and read the two articles on that subject. Page 6 talks about a 14% over-all drop in the harvest this year, with an 11% decrease in buck harvest. And then on page 11 Oak Duke takes an even longer-range view on what's been happening to the deer population down there. He talks about the harvest changes of 1/2 million back in 2000-01 vs. 304,000 last year (40% drop in 15 years). In NYS such a record would have us ready to lynch someone.....lol. It's some pretty interesting reading that paints quite a different picture from the usual story about how PA always gets it right on their deer management. Check it out. Sounds like trouble in paradise.

Not sure where in Naples you are talking about, but the removal of vineyards is not something new. Being in that area all of my life, I have seen acres and acres of vineyards ripped out. The grape industry is a very volatile one, and while a vineyard is a relatively long term investment, a lot of short term impacts to the industry have to be reacted to. Somewhere I heard that each vine adds to the farmer's property tax assessment. So unless they are making adequate money from those vines, They have to come out. Also, there is a productive life to those vines. They eventually get too old for adequate production. Also, a lot of those vineyards are planted on million dollar views over-looking Canandaigua Lake. The value of that acreage really is in the real estate market not in grapes. Back in the old days those steep hillsides weren't really suitable for anything other than grapes. That's not the case today. Another thing too is just like any other kind of farming, the guys get old and want to retire. It's not very easy to find buyers for a grape-growing operation these days. Sometimes, just like the family farm, there comes a time when you have to walk away from it.

Ha-ha-ha ..... I don't think that body mutilation is what we are talking about when we talk about hunting challenges. Although, I suppose that may be one way that someone might approach putting challenge into their hunting....lol. Personally, I think I'll stick to just dialing down some of the technology to get my hunting challenges. I have a dislike for amputations.

Yes, a lot of the Clinton's shady deals and illegal excursions have been resolved simply by the short memories or convenient disregard of the American electorate. The true source of fear of these kinds of politicians is based on the recognition of the fact that they have a huge built-in base consisting of the recipients of the reallocated resources of actual working and achieving Americans. The whole liberal philosophy is fed by the fuel of dependence. Not too many people will bite the hand that feeds them. And the libs have made entire careers of keeping their dependent voters fed well, virtually guaranteeing their continued re-election. Yes, to me that is a pretty scary self-perpetuating dangerous condition that Hillary is just one of the many self-serving beneficiaries. And what is even more scary are all the apologists for that kind of ideology who are either deluded or a part of it all either as recipients, or perpetrators.

Most of what I find in the woods have nothing to do with booze. Probably the most numerous are candy bar wrappers, and snack bags and wrappings. And then there are those zip-lock sandwich bags. And then soft-drink or water bottles. Things that nobody had any problem carrying in, but for some reason have a real problem figuring out how to carry them back out even with the contents disposed of. Oh and by the way, there seems to be a lot more of that crap along the bike and hiking trails than by hunters stand areas.

Unfortunately, litter is a fact of life. Even hunting, hiking, biking, and anything that promotes use of the land will have that problem. The good news about a target-shooting area is that the litter is confined to a localized area that is easier to clean up. Shooting benches and pavilions certainly is going way above what is necessary, but that would really be a nice touch.

The bad news is that everything you have built up as an inventory of knowledge about deer patterns on the property is trashed. The good news is that new patterns will emerge, and the deer population levels will flourish. For areas where forest maturation is resulting in diminishing herd numbers, often logging is the only way to reverse the overstory sheltering that is eliminating browsable deer food and nutrition for other critters. However, I have seen some of these "rip 'em up" kinds of logging operation, and the damage caused can last for decades. Particularly skidder tracks that go knee deep and cover entire sections of a woods. What a miserable thing to walk across when you are trying to do a little still-hunting, or just walking to your stand. Tops will provide new cover for a while and will rot down, eventually. Some trees will wind up a bit barked up ...... hopefully not too many. In general, it is accepted that as ugly as it all looks, selective logging will result in better deer (and other critters) habitat. It's tough in the short-term, but probably best long term.

I like the concept. It's a basic commuter car for running around town on short trips where weather is guaranteed not to dump too much snow while you are away. It bothers me that I didn't find one word about performance. I mean it isn't really necessary to chew rubber off your tires everytime you come away from a stop light, but it really is embarrassing to be constantly followed by a parade of honking cars because you have difficulty getting up a slight grade ..... lol.

Sometimes you have to look closely at the edges of the image. You might see a nose or a tail of some critter. Birds and squirrels are notorious for tripping the camera, but being fast enough to get out of the frame before the camera actually fires. And yes, a piece of goldenrod can bring up the picture count on a windy day. Also, understand that the critters don't operate on a clock. Days can go by without any movement in the camera area, and then all of a sudden it will look like a herd walked through. That's all just the variability of deer movement. On those days when you get no images, check the trails to see if there are any fresh tracks. Also it is not a bad idea to purposely walk into the image area to be sure that everything is working ok. see to it that you do indeed trip the camera, and that an image has successfully been taken.

To me there is a lot of heritage and history involved in hunting. There is kind of a celebration of old times when people were super-independent and able to subsist from only what they could get from the wild and natural surroundings around them. These were resourceful and skilled people that I have always admired. Although our modern day hunting doesn't look much like the pioneer days version of meat-gathering, the goals are kind of the same and the procedures are (very) roughly the same. It is a statement of independence and self-reliance and a celebration of the culture and heritage that we all came from. And then there is the challenge of us against the critters. Yes, the prey is very good at what they do to avoid our dinner table. And there are damned few critters that I would say offer no challenge at all. So yes, challenge is a huge part of it all. Pitting my skill as a hunter against their skill at confounding my attempts, offers up a huge feeling of accomplishment and achievement when I win. Sometimes my choices in weapons and methods emphasizes the challenge aspect, sometimes it doesn't, but I have never gone afield thinking I was engaging in "sure thing" and I'm darned glad that I don't. Third, there is some kind of therapeutic aspect to just hunkering down in the woods and becoming part of nature. Yes I could do that with a camera, but hunting allows me to become part of the ways of nature. It is a more active role than just sitting there recording what is happening around you. Hunting makes me a participant in the drama of nature. To me that seems like the way it was meant to be. Man was never intended to passively sit along the sidelines like a decoration. And last, it has to be noted that man has always been a predator. And like any predator, there is a love of the chase. Some may try to fool themselves into thinking we have evolved out of that. Others of us recognize and appreciate our predatory DNA and simply understand exactly what we are with celebration instead of apologies.

I guess, if they can't afford a minimal backstopped area for target shooting, I would just as soon that they simply flat out, disallowed all target shooting on public lands. There's no need to be ambiguous about it. simply make it an all inclusive rule that public lands are not to be used as target ranges. There's an awful lot of hikers, bikers, bird-watchers, etc. that have no idea that anybody can decide to set up some targets anyplace they want (back-stopped or not), including places where trails are in the line of fire.

Interesting! I'm not sure how reliable this calculator is, but I did find a threshold where when you plug in a ridiculously high arrow weight (something like 700gr) you can get the energy lessening because of a resulting drop in speed. Apparently there is a sweet spot where the arrow weight with a given set-up will get the maximum energy. So there are limits as to where adding more arrow weight will actually lessen energy. Also, I have to assume that the values given are at initial launch, since there are no distances factored in here. Probably they were trying to eliminate such variables as air drag of vanes and such. But it would have been great if distances had been added into the calculations. I kind of like this little calculator. It gives some interesting stuff.

No, I was not suggesting that they flatten the place and bulldoze it clean .... lol. It is just that when they allow target practice on public land, they are (or should be) accepting some level of responsibility for providing a few of the basic safety features that any other public range would have to provide. Heck, if they want to put in roads or ponds or lean-tos or any number of other constructions, that seems to get those done easy enough.

The problem with that is that sometimes that works, and other times you simply get an inmate number and a dandy mug-shot (suitable for framing....lol). The jails are full of people who thought they could "do what they want". To me that's not an acceptable lifestyle. I don't like owning guns that I can't take out and shoot. I don't really want my guns stored in the walls or under the floor boards. I kind of like to take mine out and shoot them once in a while or maybe even hunt with them a bit without being concerned with how far the sound carries and in what direction. However, a slight word of reality. If Hilary wants to run, there is no way that ALL of the NYS electoral votes will go to any one but her during an election. People, this is New York State. If we had God running as a Republican, he would never carry this state. So we can get as excited as we want about another Clinton in the White House, we can work as hard as we want to defeat her. The results for this state have only one way to go. You know that I am always the one trying to rally the troops for loosing causes, and it always rankles me to give up on a cause before the issue even gets going. But in this case, the odds of NYS going Republican are so far against us that we really had better hope that the Republicans can field a candidate that the other states can get behind, because it just ain't happening here. But just to lighten things up a bit here: