Doc

You're going to be a fun Granny. Congratulations!! Nice thing about grandkids is that you can spoil the hell out of them and then simply send them home. It's great!

Frankly I don't give a damn what hunters are thinking. All I want right now is for the DEC to be working on perfecting their methodology for controlling deer populations relative to localized habitat. I don't want them wasting one more minute or dollar worrying about how to get older deer, or bigger racks, or any of that meaningless crap. I don't think that anyone including the most deluded DEC employee believes that they have maximized deer population control (which is their prime directive), and here we are running around talking about NYS becoming a trophy state, and whining about 1-1/2 year old bucks being taken. Somehow we have to get our priorities straightened out. So they can run all the polls they want, whether it is some supposed wonderful Cornell scientific poll/survey or some newspaper running a just-for-fun poll. It all means nothing as long as they still cannot perform the most basic management function....population control. Get the fundamentals perfected, and then maybe it's time to worry about adding a few bells and whistles. Hunters are not the management agency that we pay the big dollars for, and since when do we rely on hunters as being the college trained biologists that should be running the DEC. Who the hell is running the show anyway? I hate to see our taxes and fee money going to an agency that relies solely on polling hunters to determine wildlife management and what directions that management should be heading. How about they make their own decisions for a change based on what they were taught when they got their degrees in their fields of expertise. That's what we pay them for.

Anyone wondering what instinctive archery is ....... That's it, done as well as you will ever see it done. It does make me wish that I had never put that damned first sight pin on my old recurve. It was all downhill from there. Berger buttons, Flipper rests, more exotic sights, aluminum arrows, and then my first compound bow. There was no stopping all the gadgets, trinkets, quest for speed, and all the craziness that followed. And now to see this guy who is just a beautiful thing to watch, makes me wish that I had not taken archery to where I did. Of course I would never have gotten to this guys level of skills. You have to have some serious born-in talent and one powerful drive to excel. But to be able to shoot a weapon that is simply an extension of your body and mind with none of the help from gadget-manufacturers, is indeed a skill to be proud of. But there is a point I believe when your eye-hand coordination is totally ruined my all the crutches used over the decades. I don't believe there is any going back. Oh, and as far as all that jumping around and bouncing off the walls ...... forget it! I haven't done anything like that in a couple decades .... lol.

That is the problem. No one is content just to hunt in their own fashion anymore. Everyone has a crusade where they want to control how you hunt and what you can take. Yes, I know that we have always operated under some constraints, but now the trophy quest has moved from controlling your own activities, techniques, and goals to increasingly forcing that mentality on others. It is almost getting militant. Huge arguments are now promoted and passionately and aggressively pursued to force one group's opinions and needs on the other. Yes, I can see how hunters might tire of their casual, relaxing pastime (hobby) being turned into constant warfare with all the pushing and shoving and belligerence. Who the hell needs that. It truly begins to look like one group trying to push the other group out of the sport so they can have things the way they want them, and I believe its working. Yeah, it all does get tiresome, and I can see where it would drive a lot of hunters away from hunting and into other hobbies.

Splitting an incoming arrow is probably the one trick that he does that comes closest to "Magic". I love these guys. I once attended a Stacey Groscup show, where he was shooting aspirins and other flying targets out of the air, shooting the bow from a prone position, and shooting it with his feet and a whole bunch of other insane tricks with a bow, knives, tomahawks, and blow-guns. I was rightfully impressed, but this guy is way beyond all that and is truly unbelievable.

I have yet to see a gun shop that's worth its salt that is or was empty. They generally are a pretty lively hub of commerce. There never really seems to be a glutted or saturated market. But the proof is in the pudding. One trip to the Bass-pro shops, the new Field and Stream store, Beikirch's where there are times that you can hardly find a place to stand, shows how frenzied the gun and ammo sales really are. Rows and rows of guns on display, and who knows how many hundreds back in other rooms as well as people walking out the door with them, tells me there absolutely is no shortage of demand. But look at all the empty shelves where ammo used to be, and you can see a problem. It's not a shortage of demand, but a shortage of product. Big box chain stores can gut there way through, but for the small mom & pop gun stores, every aspect of the business becomes important. And failure to sell ammo, and become lethal for them. And then too I wonder how many gun shops were stuck with product that Andy and Co. arbitrarily made illegal. That probably didn't help the bottom line too much. And what you call a fad (tactical guns) was just simply a positive design response to a huge demand, very much like the advances in archery equipment that works so well and are essential for bow shops. Tactical guns did not disappear because of consumer disinterest. That market was swept away by the arbitrary stroke of a pen by NYS legislators. Not only was the market swept away, but it appears that we have also lost a huge production facility (and jobs) because Andy and cohorts felt that they know what's best for us.

Beikirchs has been a real surprise and disappointment to me since all this shortage stuff started. Yes, I can see them getting caught with their pants down when all this "shortage" stuff first began. But of all the firearms and ammo suppliers around, I would have expected them to be the first ones to recover. I do have to wonder how much of their stock is heading to their PA store instead of the East Rochester store. And I have to wonder just what future plans they have for their NYS store ..... or not! If they go under or move out of state it will be a huge victory scored by Cuomo and his anti-gun crew.

Quote: "The investigation, dubbed “Operation TIP Works,” is the result of numerous complaints from the public to the Minnesota Turn In Poachers program." So, whenever we hear on these forums about neighbors or others that "we just know are poaching", NYS has a TIPP program also. Make a call. It's all anonymous if you want it to be, and shines a light on illegal activity. The DEC can't be everywhere, and that's what these poachers count on to get away with their crap. They also count on some hair-brained notion about being afraid to be a "rat", and actually get away with stealing from all of us because of that crazy mentality.

I will say that gun and ammo sales from smaller guns and ammo stores in and around Rochester may be in big trouble for another reason (in addition to Andy's safe act). We now have a real big-box outdoor store that is actually serious about selling stuff, and another one coming soon (Bass-Pro) in Victor. Take Andy's BS and the new heavy-duty competition, and it has to be getting pretty ugly for the smaller independent shops. What I worry about is losing some of the good gunsmiths that rely on gun and ammo sales to supplement their businesses.

It goes deeper than just an underestimate of casual hunter numbers (And I totally agree with you on that point), but there is an accompanying arrogant disdain for hunters that are not rabid fanatics as though they count for nothing. But every year as hunter number continue to dwindle, and we drive these guys out of the woods, we will be seeing how important their numbers were.

I can find those people too, and I can also find people that are sick of having restrictions, regulations and more damned screwy laws and complexities added to their hunting, faster than the stinking regs can be printed. Everybody has more crazy fad-management ideas than you can even keep straight anymore. One buck limits, EAB, ARs, ..... I'm sure I have left some out. And now they are talking about things getting so complex that in addition to Regions, and WMUs with all their pages of verbal descriptions to keep track of, they will be needing yet another set of areas complete with yet another wall of verbiage to describe their boundaries. Where does all this nonsense stop so that people can just relax and hunt? How many people are starting to bail out because of all this craziness.

I'm not sure "good deer management" is what runs the ship anymore at the DEC. My suspicions are now going to the goals of the DEC are being driven by short term political directives. Polls, surveys, public meetings, all seem to be the current tools for "management". Of course it is necessary to keep hunters involved and engaged as long as these "popularity contests" don't start taking the place the good basic biological principles. I'm beginning to wonder. One year their head biologist is saying that there is no biological purpose or benefit to ARs, and the next year they are implementing several AR units, and talking about adding more as long as it shuts up those nagging pressure groups. Then too you have the CTFs determining deer density targets also. It just seems that more and more, the responsibilities of performing wildlife management is being turned into a series of opinion polls. I hope I'm wrong, but every year that seems to be the direction the DEC is taking.

As long as this isn't starting to mean that the bowhunter population density isn't approaching the circus-like gun hunter populations of the past. That may be great for whacking on deer populations, but the price may very well be a reduced quality of the bow hunt. No, those that own or control their own hunting grounds won't have to worry but those that use public or open private land may find bow hunting to be changed in a very negative way.

Yeah, I had 7 pretty good sized deer wandering across my yard the other day. But I'll bet there are a whole lot of guys in other parts of the state that really don't want to hear about how many deer we have all over the place .... lol. Sorry guys, I know things are not great everywhere. I know that many times there are towns that border each other that don't have the same or similar population situations.

That's "millions of dollars in bribes and kickbacks". I guess if you're going to be a crook ..... do it right. I have a feeling that he may get quite a bit more than just a slap on the wrist. His influence is gone, and he has the Feds after him. They don't usually leave any loopholes in their cases. Here's hoping anyways.

I have seen a few, but the population has taken a beating over time, and I have no idea exactly why. I also sense some statewide concern by the DEC in some of the articles that I have read.

Do not confuse "enjoying fighting" with standing up for your own interests. I will tell you that if we all cower into a corner and allow issues involving hunter concerns to only be presented and lobbied for only by non-hunters, we will get exactly what we deserve. There is no one that will stand up for hunting use of public lands other than hunters themselves and their advocacy organizations. We have to recognize our minority status and understand what some of the last bastions of hunting access could turn into if we do not use the principles of lobbying using whatever means we have at our disposal.

Well unfortunately this product is out of stock at Dick's and I had to settle for a higher price tag. I was a little slow to decide to get one for my MQ-32 Mathews. I went to FS Arrows, and it's on its way.

Re-reading my reply, perhaps it did sound like I have no appreciation for a good set of antlers on a older buck. That's not exactly accurate. As illogical as using antlers as a yardstick may be, I think we all appreciate a good set of antlers as part of nature's art. And truly if for some weird reason, bucks were declared illegal to harvest, I definitely would feel like something had been lost, and indeed an important option (choice) would have been eliminated (nothing I would ever be in favor of). But back to the original question, I know that even without a buck option, I would still enjoy the hell out of my deer hunting and be out there excited about getting a doe or whatever is legal to hunt. At my age with deer season having become such a huge part of all those years, I have to be on the hunt, antlers or no antlers. Yes, I also would be working my tail off to get the buck option restored, but while that was going on, I would be enthusiastically hunting the does.

About 5 years ago, I dug through my ancient collection of broadheads and refurbished a half dozen of my rusty of Bear Razorheads, and took a nice doe with one just for the sake of satisfying some nostalgic need. Yes, they could be the one broadhead that has taken the biggest percentage of deer of all the broadheads ever invented. But anyway, the old Razorhead was the workhorse of bowhunting for a whole lot of years and still is a very capable broadhead.

Oh you probably are right, but it still makes absolutely no sense or logic. There are some pretty amazing animals that are hunted and far more cunning than deer, and yet we don't drool over some body-part that they have....lol. for example, if you really want to test your woods-lore and hunting prowess, old Wiley Coyote really would be a great yardstick for self-measurement. Try hunting them in a one-on-one basis with no dogs or callers if you want to measure your hunting prowess. And yet there are no record book entries for coyotes. There are probably dozens of other examples that I'm not thinking of too where the challenge and demonstration of hunting prowess is much greater and yet no one has developed a trumped up score keeping system. The logic just doesn't hold up. But I agree, many people can't seem to enjoy hunting as a recreation. There seems to be some reason why we have to keep score and turn it into some sort of competition with other hunters instead of just keeping the competition between ourselves and the quarry. Something psychological going on there that I just really don't follow. But anyway the original question was a great one and opens up some insight as to why we have so much infighting within our ranks. We all have different goals and purposes for our hunting, and they don't all have the same ways to achieve the satisfaction and fulfillment that we each need individually. For me, hunting is an entire experience, and competition with other hunters or even myself doesn't really enter into much of it. And so, a system of score keeping doesn't have any part in my hunting mentality. I think that is why AR and such doesn't pique my interest at all. It doesn't add a thing to my hunting experience or any of the reasons why I hunt.

Actually, if you want to learn more about what people are the biggest influence on deer management issues, refer to: http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7207.html But don't be thinking that game and habitat management do not have political influences beyond the DEC. And of course if our (hunter's) money does not subsidize environmental conservation, then I guess I want my Pittman-Robertson contributions back, and my license fees returned, or some investigation conducted to see just who has absconded with that money. Nobody is saying that all these activities are 100% funded by hunters, fishermen, and trappers, but the amounts of cash that we do send their way certainly is something that is not insignificant. And if that selfishly buys us some influence, then I say more power to us.

You wouldn't believe all the different weird anomalies that my cameras have come up with. It seems to be more prevalent in the IR cameras. In general, a bright object (such as eye reflections) can kick up some random ghost images. Also, different cameras can react differently to the same kind of images.

Just to pause for a moment and get back to the original question (which I thought was a great one) : "If they stopped all buck hunting would you continue to hunt at the same level and desire?", it kind of makes me wonder why if antlers are end-all and be-all of hunting why is it that only the cervids are valued in that fashion? We continue to hunt and enjoy preying on all kinds of other animals that have no means of counting or measuring or otherwise manufacturing some bogus means of "keeping score" and we still enjoy the hell out of hunting. So why is our total enjoyment of hunting locked to these pointy things that are primarily unique to the male deer? There really is no logic or rationality to trying to measure the success of hunting by such a ridiculous criteria. So the proper reply to the question should be, "Why not!"

I don't think that a decision not to back AR really needs meat quality as a reason. For me the decision is formed by the potential impact to a sport of already faltering numbers. That's really what it all about. I don't really want to see another regulation added to the jillions already existing that doesn't have a good significant, scientific, biological, reason for being hung around the necks of hunters. With so many off-the-wall fad-management ideas trying to be forced down the throats of hunters, I worry that these notions of fixing things that really aren't even broke will have the effect of teaming up with other existing reasons for the struggle of hunting and accelerate the decline of activity.