Doc

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:

Ok, it's been a year or two since we trotted out this oldie but goodie, and we do have a crap-load of new members, so let's get updated. Why do you hunt?

Ok, I make it an absolute habit to pick up any trash and litter that I find in the woods, shove it in a pocket or my pack and haul it out. But, I will draw the line at picking up a dirty diaper. That just ain't going to happen.

It's pretty much a non-issue for me. Of all the guns that I have, the only one that doesn't have a scope is my Model 94 30-30 Winchester with the top eject. I love scope, and whenever I am costing out a new gun, mounts and scope are all part of the cost. Of course gun manufacturers are not tailoring their gun features after my wants and needs, so I have to assume that my preferences have become the norm. I will say though, by not even having the mounting features for a front sight, you certainly have eliminated the versatility of having iron sights if one has their heart set on that alternative. Why not at least mill in the dovetail so that a front sight could be put on for those that want one?

I'll tell you another form of litter that is getting more and more prevalent with each year. Those stupid mylar party balloons that everyone gets so happy seeing floating off into the wild blue yonder. Where the heck do they think those will wind up. Do they think that just because they can't see them anymore that they evaporated or instantly decomposed. Well, they don't evaporate and they don't decompose. They come down in the woods as litter.

By golly, they are a pretty healthy looking pair. All we have around here are mangy looking things that you wouldn't want to touch even with rubber gloves......lol. I have seen a couple of them that I swear don't have a single hair on their tail. So what do you all think? ...... Are they really a scourge of the turkey population? Do they really actually catch all that many? I know they would likely eat eggs just like about all of the critters out there, but as far as actually snagging down a live turkey, anybody ever see some actual evidence that they are real efficient at doing that?

I think a good guess would be coyotes. They will not hesitate knocking off even a full-grown fox if they get the chance just like they will eat the family pooch. A den of fox pups would be like stopping off at Dunkin Doughnuts for a snack. The lower jaw bones are a bit of a mystery. There's not much real meat on the lower jaw. In fact probably more fur and bone than meat, so I can see it being left behind.

Inside my house is myself and my wife, and in the early years, there were two kids. Those are pretty valuable to me. And then there is the value of an early detection set of devices that brings you out of a relatively helpless state of sleep and allows you a few extra minutes to grab your home defense weapons and perhaps place a call to 911 to put the cavalry in motion for some potential assistance as a last line of defense. I don't doubt the value of such measures, I just have to learn to ditch my procrastinating ways. But I sure do applaud those forward thinking people who take the appropriate steps.

When I was a young-un, I worked at Olympic park at the golf ball driving range. I learned about getting wacked with a golf ball when I tried retrieving some of the balls while we were still open. I would have been a lot happier if they had been knocking out Ping-Pong balls ..... lol. Some of those guys were pretty good at hitting what they aimed at when they had a live moving target out there. I am a quick learner, and never repeated that stunt.

You can watch weeks of work (planting, weeding, thinning and other assorted versions of back-breaking work) destroyed, and removed, whole rows at a time in just a couple nights, courtesy of old Mr. Chuck. You can also see foundations undermined by their digging habits, and if you have a tractor or livestock, the holes in the fields can be murder, including bent up leg-parts if you happen to step into one of their holes. That's why farmers have a constant battle with the prolific fat-ass critters and always welcome you with a big broad smile on their face when you express an interest in shooting them.

Ha-ha-ha...I have no doubt that a lot of muzzleloader deer are taken illegally with other weapons. But don't forget that there are small game hunters out there legally blazing away at bunnies and such. That may give the impression that there is a lot more poaching than is actually the case. As a side question that is asked purely out of ignorance since I do no use a muzzleloader, but, is there any telltale features of a muzzleloader wound that looks any different than a shotgun slug wound, or is that just some wishful thinking? I don't know but I was just wondering if maybe the DEC enforcement guys might get a break in catching some of these poacher-types that may be out there.

Yeah, back when arrow speed became the altar at which archers worshipped, this argument had its heyday. All the armchair physicists came out of the woodwork and began calculations and tests and eventually decided on the archery truth that the heavier arrow penetrated more than the light fast arrow. It's not immediately obvious because speed gets involved too in the energy fomulas. But in spite of that, it is the mass weight that rules the day on impact and penetration. Proven both mathematically and empirically. Of course if you really want to get into it all, there are other factors at work such as broadhead design, bow and arrow tuning, and bow draw weight and other factors. Don't expect the old Browning serpentine broadhead to help out penetration. And don't expect an arrow that enters at an angle to the shot direction to help penetration a bunch. And don't expect a 35# draw weighted bow to deliver as much penetration as a 60 pounder. Ha-ha ..... flu-flu fletching won't max out your penetration either .... lol.

Re-reading the article, I see they are limiting the details of the legal status of the deer strictly to those animals and animal parts that are the subject of a case involving poached animals. My first mistaken take from scanning the article was that the change was a whole lot more broad in interpretation of animal ownership. It does appear to be limited to ownership of "poached" animals. Perhaps it can be argued by some talented lawyer years down the road to have more widespread meaning regarding wildlife ownership .... I don't know. But all I could find in the article and the article linked within, was that it was a very specific case involving a very valuable state record set of poached antlers (worth a pie of money), and the proper way to legally dispose of ownership of those antlers.

We have a chunk of state land that I hunt that is constantly being used as a shooting range. Unfortunately, there are no designated areas or back-stops or anything that makes it safe. And also unfortunately I have seen guys set up arbitrarily with no consideration about what is behind where they are shooting. I have even seen them shooting into areas that have switch back public access trails that run a few yards beyond where these guys had set up their targets. So there is the problem with being so damn confusing and secretive about the rules of target shooting on state lands. Unless posted in big obvious letters, people will use state land as unofficial shooting ranges. The free access, and ready access will always make them preferred places to shoot. The DEC should stop pussy-footing around the issue and take a bulldozer in each parcel and bulldoze up proper backstops and cleared out areas to serve as safe places to shoot and make any target activity confined officially to those spots. It becomes a win-win situation for everyone, and all the confusion goes away.

I don't think there really is any significant opposition to using a crossbow as a hunting weapon. I think the controversy comes into what seasons they are allowed to be used. And that is a controversy that will likely still be here long after I am gone. There are still those that think that compounds should never have been allowed into bow seasons. When I consider the element of legal precedents and how that single inclusion has the potential to tear down all limits to what is included in bow seasons, there are times when I agree with them ..... lol. I remember the objections to compounds back in the day when they were being pushed, and the "precedent" argument was the primary crux of the opposition. Yes, I was one of those young whipper-snappers who mocked and ridiculed those crazy-sounding predictions and grabbed up one of those miracle "pulley-bow" machines for myself. Standing here today and looking back, it appears that those old-timers were probably right after all. Even the idea of having firearms deer hunting during an active bow season (which used to be an absolute no-no) seems to not be as absolute and concrete as it once was, as inroads are being explored and implemented there as well. It's all about sport evolution and precedents begetting more precedents. Times, they are a-changing as they say, as bowhunting continues to lose it identity. Nobody wants it to be about the weapon anymore as hunting emphasis continues to march toward less challenge and more instant gratification. You cannot go against a cultural or attitudinal evolution that values ever-changing motives and goals. Likely we should simply eliminate all special seasons and lump all weapons together and save decades of arguing and painfully slow evolution toward exactly the same result.