Doc

Here's the problem with buying land based on verbal or written agreements regarding carcass recovery permissions. You can have a change of ownership take place the day after you close on your property and find an unfriendly new owner that essentially turns the property into "useless" for hunting. Particularly with a bow where you are almost guaranteed that the deer will run a ways before plopping down.

Don't you just love the way these laws are written up ..... lol. Go ahead and shoot, and we will determine on a case by case basis whether we will arrest you or not. Hope you guessed right, Bunky.

Yeah, we might even find out that there really was no basis for the confiscation at all....lol. How about a real wild piece of speculation that opens the possibility that a neighbor was irritated by the sound of his constant target practice and conjured up a bogus report. How about the report was called in by a disgruntled ex-wife ..... lol. Or maybe it was one of those "dishonorable firemen" who placed an anonymous phone call. We all know how they are. My point is that we can speculate all we want to, but until and unless more details come out, we are stuck with the original story.

It might cost some jobs ..... great for Managers trying to balance the ever shrinking DEC resources. Or perhaps it might free up some of the talent for more jobs aimed at their actual training and education rather than simply being used as data collecting clerks.

That certainly is the implication of those replies that insist that there has to be something that has been left out of the story that would show that the confiscation was justifiable. Kind of like unjust confiscation is simply incredibly unlikely. Sometimes a news story is exactly all there is to a story.

Interesting bias that you have there against those people that have chosen an occupation where they put their life on the line for others. Kind of blindly all-encompassing and extremely ignorant, but interesting.

You are free to vote on anything that you feel you must, but keep in mind that this forum is not a democracy. Be careful what you ask for. You too might find yourself on the other end of that kind of vote.

Or maybe the story is exactly the way it was written. Why do we automatically assume that if a confiscation took place, it must have had some level of justification. That is like a juror being asked the question, "Can the fact that the police made an arrest keep you from rendering an impartial decision in this case?" That question is frequently asked for the very reason that often perspective jurors do believe that an arrest indicates wrong doing by those arrested. I find that same mentality is prevalent among a lot of people. I generally side with law enforcement, but never say or even suspect that they are infallible, especially when it comes to the enforcement of a brand new law that few really understand the details and legal assumptions involved.

Actually, there can be temporary acceptance of the law. After all it did pass and currently is part of the legal system. That of course does not mean that it is not still viewed with outrage. However, I do understand your point. The demonstrations have all disappeared. The New York State Outdoor News has gone silent on the issue. This forum has gone silent on the issue. All of the updates on whatever legal activity pro-gun groups have in the works have gone silent. I sense a gun-owner mood of having been beaten into submission. For some reason we believe that because Cuomo survived the election that we failed and were beaten. There is a strange effect of all the doom and gloom becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. We seem to have overlooked the fact that local races that excluded the impact of NYC, were by and large won by pro-gun forces, and a lot of gun control Politian's were sent packing. Does that mean that the battle is won or lost? No, this election should be viewed as a shot across the bow for legislators who might be considering further attempts on gun rights. Watching their buddies taking a hit for what they wrongly assumed was a penalty free action, I think has been shown to only be a safe gesture within NYC and other bastions of liberalism. Our outrage peaked a little early relative to the elections, or perhaps we could have gotten Cuomo too. But I will, for the time being, accept the changes of the face of NYS legislative make-up as being the first in what is hoped to be series of victories that will eventually lead to the gutting of the Safe Act. Yes, I am concerned that gun-owners feel defeated and beaten into submission. I am also unhappy that the issue has lost momentum and attention. I'm not sure how to re-kindle that fire. It also is not clear just what the next-steps should be. This is where we need some guidance from our gun advocacy organizations.... the brain-trust of the pro-gun movement.

I suspect that a few years from now you will look back at it all and say, "Thank-God". I pulled the plug myself on the long commutes and the crappy attitudes toward long-standing employees. The way I hear it, people no longer get a job with expectations of retiring from that same place. The object today is to get a cheap new employee and use them up until they start making too much money then it's time to be replaced by as cheap a new hire as possible ....quality be damned. It is happening everywhere and is now engrained as a true business culture change. Even knowing all that, it still always comes as a very unpleasant shock. It sounds to me that you have spent some preparation time and you should do just fine.

Again, I do not see how changes in that area would improve the integrity of the harvest reporting system. It probably is going over my head, or I'm misinterpreting something.

Even if there was some way of cramming all that coded info on those tiny little tags, the question still remains, "Why"? There is nothing about buying truckloads of scanners that makes people report. In fact since they now have to get in their cars and go somewhere to make reports, an argument could be made that the reporting rates would actually go down. understanding that there is there is nothing about scanning or any other way of collecting data that prevents falsifying reports, I see no reason to throw the baby out with the bath-water when that is not really necessary. We have all the hardware and most of the software already existing that does a great job of recording all the kill info in an already paid-for, unmanned, way, and almost all of it is already in computer just waiting for software additions and rules changes and someone at the DEC to hit the "on" button on their computers to churn out whatever info they need and even more if needed in the future (surveys and polls easily added to this style of reporting system if that is ever deemed useful). I have read nothing that provides any practical way of eliminating falsification. So why not change (add) some software, revise the reporting requirements and flip the switch. Save money, get nearly 100% compliance, keep our biologists from ramming all over the countryside checking this place and that for input and then taking more time to input that gathered info into computer-useful format, and then making statistical guesses at how many people broke the law by not reporting. I see big dollars saved in the process and almost complete compliance. Now, if they want to run some random spot-checks to see if data falsification really is a problem, that could be done. However, understand that that is a different side issue completely separate from the problem of non-compliance with mandatory harvest reporting laws. Perhaps cranking up penalties and making a few examples of those that are found voluntarily perjuring their reports, might just make that problem go away if in fact it is found to really be a significant enough real problem.

Anyone who is intent on falsifying hunting results can do that no matter what system you use short of in-person DEC road checks. And even with road checks, you are counting on hunters loading the deer onto their cars and carting them who knows how many miles just to perform a harvest report. If we are concerned about people illegally falsifying reports, imagine how many new instant home butchers would be created ... lol. So, there is really nothing guaranteeing that whatever you are scanning in has truthful info on it either. The real question is, "is lying on reports really a statistically significant problem". If so, there is no system that is sabotage-proof. Actually there is no way that a hunter can enter dates, gender, antler points, townships of kill, and all of the other info that we supply in bar-code form or even filled in dots. The forms would have to be huge to allow all the different variations of responses. So someone still has to read that hand-printed info from the scan and manually type it into computers for every report submitted. That is significant man-hours of labor, whereas, all of that info can currently be inputted directly into computer-useful ones and zeroes in current phone or computer hunter reports. And all with no expenses of purchase and maintenance of additional equipment, or any requirement that the hunter get in his car or even leave his home. As far as hard-copy receipts being a requirement for buying next year's license, remember that a lot of people receive their licenses through the mail without any face-to-face contact with a licensing agent.

Yeah, what's up with that? It can take a couple of inches of new snow and turn it into white-outs and drifts across the road. Not to mention the wind-chill effect when you're trying to do something outdoors.

Sometimes, a message with your phone number attached, pinned to the billboard of a local Laundromat or convenience store or supermarket entrance can be the most effective way to reach the locals that might have what you re looking for. It certainly is worth a try. Make up a bunch of copies and take a trip.

Not necessary. We have automated reporting systems that turn your voice or your computer inputs into ones and zeroes that require no manual computer inputting by DEC personnel. That's an ideal way of eliminating man-hours of labor and potential duplication errors. The systems are already in place and in a computer friendly format. All we need is incentive to comply.

I have already explained how to solve almost all of the compliance problem. No estimates, no guessing, just simple computer programming and rules changes.

This was probably the first time I ever watched the accompanying advertisement all the way through. But the NASCAR ad was funny so I let it play. Also, even though I have already seen this guy shooting in a previous post, I was still amazed, and watched it all the way through again. Really .... splitting an incoming arrow in two in mid air? ...... Grabbing an incoming arrow and shooting it back? How the heck are these things even possible? Deer jumping the string are absolutely nothing compared with what this guy can do. If you can grab an incoming arrow out of the air, what's the big deal about ducking it? .... lol.

OK .... I GIVE!!!! Enough already. I'm getting too old for this crap. Maybe it's time to act my age and go south....lol. Man! Cabin fever is setting in early this year. This is not the coldest and snowiest year that I have ever endured by a long shot, but it seems to getting harder and harder to deal with every year.

That is why I said that the first response by the DEC when their computers find a tag that didn't have a report, might be to send out a warning letter asking for the report. So you get an additional chance to report or re-report if an error had occurred. A period of time is allowed for your response, and then a ticket is sent out. Remember, the offense is not reporting the results of your license or permit. The proof is, you either did or you didn't, and the computer has the data on that.

Ha-ha-ha .... Yes we always hear about these people who break this law and break that law, but when somebody asks, "What did the DEC do to them when you turned them in?", the answer always comes back, "Well gosh I didn't do that." But anyway, we cannot base wildlife management policies using these kinds of anecdotal statements and perhaps even imaginings. The fact is that we have absolutely no idea how prevalent these violations are. We have no clue as to whether any of that is even statistically significant. If we suspend all attempts at managing wildlife because here and there we find game law violators, my guess is that there shortly wouldn't be any wildlife to manage. We whine and cry about the terrible job that the DEC does and then we shoot down all attempts to do that job better. If those DEC guys develop an "attitude" when it comes to hunters, I think I am beginning to see why that might happen.

And those people are voted in or out by the residents, so the fate of such projects still is in the hands of the residents. It is all explained in a couple of sentences of your post ...... "I have some land in an area that was targeted for wind turbines. It all ended up getting shot down".

In this day of the internet, there is no reason for anyone to be uninformed about any of these kinds of threats to any community .... even rural ones. It is simply a measure of the will of the people. There are many townships who have successfully put regulations in place that effectively exclude windfarm exploitation, so the argument of the poor little community being steamrolled by the giant energy corporation does not fly. If these things get into a community against the will of the residents, it is purely apathy that allows it to happen.

Ha-ha-ha ..... And speaking of "trolls", this topic is covered with troll-tracks .... lol. Sorry, I'm not biting on this one. The bait is a bit too transparent.

You're dealing with people that have an existing system to defend. They maybe don't want people rocking their boat. To me what they are saying is that they want to maintain the status quo. If they admit that there is a crack in any part of their system, they leave the door open for the whole thing to be questioned and upset. It is frustrating. I understand how they might set up a defensive posture. Nobody likes their methods questioned. Perhaps had it been pointed out how such a system would save the DEC time effort and money they might have had a bit more interest ... lol.