Doc

Actually, this is not really all that bad an idea. There is some value to maintaining the primary theme of the site. It is useful and even necessary to have access to topics that relate to political aspects of hunting and outdoor issues, but we have seen how that can be abused and taken over by only a couple of members turning the whole thing into discussions of political ideology and party politics. I have to agree that that sort of thing has absolutely nothing to do with the outdoor theme of this site and probably should not be forcibly injected into this site the way it has been. Yes, in fact we do censor and limit content all the time. It is a natural part of any forum management. I would completely support a change that would limit political discussion to outdoor issues only, leaving the ideology and party politics to other sites that sort of thing as their theme.

There is information in the political forum that describes just who did and who didn't vote for the safe act. There is information where to find out who your legislators are and what district number you live in. There is info on how to get registered to vote. All of these things while under the general category of "politics", are also extremely important this year in terms of voting gun issues and other concerns of outdoor people. They are also essential when contacting your reps on hunting issues. Yes they are hunting subjects, gun subjects and political subjects that might not be available to members if we didn't have the political forum. The political forum was also very useful in keeping up with the Safe Act, and all the activity fighting the act. So in answer to the question asked in the title of this thread, the answer is "yes" on both counts, it is a hunting and political site and it serves the gun, bow, hunting, trapping, fishing, and other outdoor activities in an effort to keep our members in-the-know in terms of what the heck is going on around us and how our activities are impacted by the politics and political figures involved. I think that is essential to any outdoor site.

Frankly, I don't know who you know and what you know about requesting a site change, nor do I care. I'm telling you that if you are as upset as you sound, there is a procedure and a person to contact, to get the issue resolved (if in fact you are serious about getting the issue resolved). Nobody is saying you have broken any rules. I'm just suggesting some common sense positive action to scratch your itch. Seemed like a logical step to me. Certainly nothing to get all indignant about.

Yes, and then you have the people who don't want their "Most Recent" list clogged up with camping, or fishing, or ATVs, or the non-hunting sale forum, or you name it somebody doesn't like it. It's pretty damn arbitrary no matter how you do it unless you don't allow exceptions. But again, I say simply take your request to the guy that will have the final decision. This site is not a "majority rules" style of site management. We have a site owner, and I suggest that rather than clogging up the most recent post list with polls and such, simply run it by the one who will be making the decision. Make your arguments there.

Ha-ha, how many times has this thread clogged up the "Most Recent Topics" list. Sorry, but I understand the importance of the part of hunting that is political, and believe it is important not to hide it or run from it. As an aside, with all this attention to the "Recent Topics" list, it should be pointed out that unless you are on this site all day long, if you are limiting your reading here to only the 5 posts or so that happen to be up on that list when you sign in, you are likely missing out on most of the new discussions that took place since the last time you were here. Your decision of course, but personally I check out whatever forums I am interested in to see what new comments may have been added since I was last here.....not just the last 5 posts that were added.

The "recent topics" list complaint has not been the core of this thread. Up to this point the complaints have been about having a "politics" forum at all on a hunting site. I have merely pointed out that forum use is a member preference thing and there are plenty of forums on this site where hunting topics can be accessed. Choices to visit the political forum is a member decision. If it is the mechanics part of the site construction that you are complaining about, I would suggest that you contact the one (and only) person who can help you out on that issue. That would be the Owner of the sight, Burmjohn. Personally I wouldn't change that Recent Topics list at all. It is exactly what it says it is..... a compilation of the most recent posts on the entire site. But if you want to suggest going down the path of picking and choosing what forums deserve to be included, you know who you need to take that subject up with. My opinion on the change that you want to make (for what it is worth) is that we currently do not try to steer anyone toward or away from one forum or another by biasing the selection available in the "Recent Topics" list. I think it should stay that way.

A guy I used to work with used a propane torch. The only thing is that it is a surface attack rather than from the roots up as Round-up claims.

Yes, Bubba and I have had some pretty wild battles, but in this issue of working within the system with positive action, and doing what is necessary to help the system work, I'll be the first to give him all the credit in the world. I have heard enough whining and defeatism from some on here to last a lifetime, and to his credit, Bubba is having none of that. Keep up the good work Bubba and don't be worried about what the whiners have to say. We need more guys on our side that do more than just cry about what won't work and what can't be done, and how everyone should simply give up and accept whatever comes our way in terms of government ( or run to another state). Win, lose, or draw, at least you will know that you have done all that you could do and that it was 110% more than almost all gun owners are doing. You have my deep respect for your efforts.

Those little fawns are the dumbest things. Just little baby goats. But they'll get it all figured out.

This will be the magical year when it all pays off. I would imagine that since you are a member here, you probably will be looking at a NYS record. It takes a while for all that knowledge to be absorbed.

Ha-ha ... Almost makes it too easy ............ almost. I had the pleasure of dragging two does at once opening morning. Now there is a treat. Drag one deer a ways ... stop ... go back and drag the other one ... stop ... go back and get the gun and pack ... stop ... repeat over and over until home. I sure didn't miss my bruised shoulder from beating it into hamburger with that stupid Ithaca12 gauge. You know the timing couldn't have been better. I was just starting to get pump mis-feeds with the old beater. Of course I've had it since 1969...lol. I wonder just what the number of deer is that I've taken with that old-timer. I know its real big number.

I knew what you were saying. I guess I speak I-phone .... lol.

"Yo Mom! Come on out here where the grass is good. Why are you hiding back in there?"

No, I take that to be one very encouraging data point. Let's hope that it is followed by a lot more years with the same success. By the way, did I understand correctly that all these rifle laws come with a one-year trial period before they become actual permanent law? It seems as though I heard that with the Ontario County rifle law.

I can't disagree with any of that. There is no doubt that the problems are multi-faceted and definitely need to be attacked on all fronts. Our life as gun owners sure would be a whole lot less stressed if decisions regarding the insane had been handled in a more responsible and forward-thinking manner.

Somebody had a whole lot of fun..... Great fish!

Weird .... A month or two ago I was saying that there didn't seem to be hardly any rabbits left and all of a sudden they are literally everywhere. And boy are they brazen. I almost have to kick them to get them to move. But why is it that when the season opens up they are all missing. I think the hawks, foxes, coyotes and such knock the population down pretty quick.

Well, the stats won't have lot of meaning until some significant time has gone by. Give it a decade or so, and I think we will have enough data to draw some conclusions. And I am not making any predictions one way or another....lol.

What amazes me is the number of people who hunt but don't want to be bothered by the politics that threaten the activity. I know it's all a pain in the neck, but the future of hunting and the tools that we use for hunting are directly tied to politics whether we try to avoid eye-contact with it all or not. It ain't going away even if we refuse to face up to it. I think this forum is a vital part of the site. It's a shame that it has been corrupted by so many non-hunting posts and replies. Perhaps it would be useful if issues that do not pertain to hunting, fishing, trapping and other outdoor activities were weeded out of this forum, since some of those are starting to look like filibustering .... lol. But seriously, any forum based hunting site has to have a political section.

We have 41 forums on this site, and numerous sub-forums within some of those. We have one forum of all of those that is devoted to political discussions, and a lot of that discussion is relevant to hunting issues and the survival of our main hunting tool .... guns. Unfortunately much of that political forum has been corrupted with non hunting/gun issues, but the forum still serves a function critical to hunting and outdoor activities. So if that forum has overtaken the other 40+ forums, it tells me that the opportunities to talk all forms of hunting and hunting/outdoor related stuff are exactly what they always were, but people simply are voluntarily choosing not to use those. In other words, the resource has not changed, but the use of it has. And that is a member driven choice. So let's not blame the site for choices made by the members.

I went around the fence of the garden with round-up to get rid of the weeds the tiller doesn't get. I didn't feel any wind, but I did manage to get two hills of squash killed. Apparently it doesn't take much of it to do a lot of damage. Gotta watch what's going on all the time when you're using that stuff. Not only that, but while I was edging the driveway with the stuff, I apparently stepped in some of the treated areas, because I now have a couple of perfect shoe prints of nicely browned up grass.....lol. Question: is there anything that can be used for weed killing besides Round-up? I was looking at the price of a large bottle of concentrate and got hit with sticker-shock ..... $109! I do use quite a bit of it each year and buy the big bottles, but that price is getting just a little bit pricey. I did see another brand (I don't remember the name) that was only $69 which I think is a little more reasonable. I compared the two side by side, and it seemed to use about the same proportions for the mix.

Only future history will tell how wise the adoption of rifles in more populated counties has been. I'm sure that people will massage the stats to show whatever they want them to show, but meanwhile I will continue to enjoy deer hunting with my new rifle here in Ontario County for as long as I still can lift it up. I also congratulate Livingston County for having joined the rest of us and hope that the rifle adds as much enjoyment to their season as it has to ours.

Absolutely, and we have 40 forums on this site as well as numerous sub-forums within some of those that are doing exactly that.

Sorry.... I don't, unless somebody is planning on handing me some donations.

I haven't the resources for that kind of effort, but would certainly support anyone who does. I think it is a great idea that probably should have been done by any of a number of pro-gun organizations that have the resources of membership, dues, etc. But even with that done, a media blitz that reaches all or most of the gun owners of the state is still required. Something is required to put the info in front of the faces of voters and then something is needed to MAKE them read it and act on it. That is the more difficult part of the problem. How do you incite all these people to once again become involved and activated? Will a survey do it? I don't know. It can't hurt.