Doc

Why does that white dog look like he about to rip somebody's face off?

Yee-hah!!!! ............Anybody ready to crank up the crossbow threads again for the 12th time .... lol. How about some good-ol' AR stuff or maybe a baiting/feeding thread or two?

Nope. They'll just repeat their policy of, "You hunters get out of our way and let the professionals take care of the situation ..... someday".

Oh my ..... Good ol' Early has been taking a whuppin. But then, that's what he/she/it comes here for, isn't it? ..... ha-ha. Stir the pot and get thumped .... lol. I'm sorry, but I really can't get into this discussion too easily since I have never really watched a complete episode of that program. And if it weren't for this thread, I would have never even known this guys name. Also, I don't see this as a free-speech issue, since obviously when you work for somebody else, they do have the right to monitor and control how you represent them and to take punitive measures if they feel you are not following their corporate policies. Having worked for a major corporation, I was constantly made aware of that fact (through actual training) as I'm sure a lot of you have. But anyway, carry on. Reality shows have nothing on some of these threads .... lol. And this one is about as entertaining as they come.

Ha-ha ..... This topic is swirling down the bowl. Is everybody having fun yet? You all getting your daily ration of insults and hate ..... lol. Hey, I guess this site serves everyone in different ways. What ever you need out of life, we aim to please.

I honestly have all kinds of mixed feelings on "zones". It seems like we've got the old "belt and suspenders" kind of thing going on in this state. We have both the zone system and the WMU system. We see some crazy things like one zone requires back tags, displayed in a very distinct way while the other doesn't need back tags at all. For years we had one zone using rifles, and the other relegated to shotguns for deer hunting. Each zone has their own seasons even though it is hard to see why the individual WMU requirements wouldn't do that even more precisely. So should we add more areas for that kind of arbitrary rule-making? I don't know. What would be the criteria for new zones? My thoughts are, leave it all alone and let the WMU system handle population and climate and habitat variations. Seasons, rules, regulations are already complex enough without adding more.

The purpose of this thread was not to provide a forum for animal rights activists. I was soliciting info about the Sea World controversy.

d-bone - Don't be trying to make up my thoughts to suit your animal rights accusations. You have no idea whether I believe there is such a thing as animal cruelty or not, do you? You just kind of make it up as you go along. As a matter of fact if you were actually interested in anything truthful, and actually took the time to read any of the thread, you would have seen my statement just a couple of replies ago where I said that I do not support animal cruelty. But I will say that your reply sounds just like the wild mindless accusations that are common among animal rights activists. Your friends at PETA would be proud of you.

Well, here's a thought. Supposing a guy gets a buck during bow season. Is he likely to pass on gun season completely because he has no chance of getting a gun buck? Might he not harvest does that might have otherwise been taken during his gun season had he been lured out there with a possibility of taking a buck? I don't know, I'm just posing questions of potential unintended consequences of a one buck rule. personally I am in favor of it, but it does raise a few questions.

Interesting article. So I guess my original synopsis of the situation was pretty close. It all sounds very similar to the attempts to close down the Ringling Brother's Circus every time it comes to town....lol. The most telling sentence came right at the end of the article: "If you are not already an animal rights activist, this film may well convince you to become one". Thanks for the link.

What the heck ..... is that some kind of foreign country or something? No weekend hunting? That's un-American!! I know that is the excuse that the DEC always uses for being so late getting the harvest data out. They always claim they are waiting for the L.I. season to conclude. I never understood that as an excuse. After all, all they have to do is survey 25 hunters and adding in their statistical formulas and factors and guesstimates and a few constants and poof! .... out comes a perfect harvest tally....lol. Anywho, thanks for indulging my off-topic question with the answer.

I am quite surprised.

Gun has been super-cleaned and put back in the case. Hunting clothes are hung back up. Packs have been unpacked. And several meals of venison have already been eaten. Deer hunting has been put away. Now it is time to get serious about reloading bullets, and putting my predator hunting stuff together.

When does the season on L.I. actually end? Is the long Island season the last deer hunting in NYS?

What do you mean? What is the general reaction there?

Yeah, it wouldn't have taken a whole lot to make it crystal clear. You know for people with tons of legal education and lawyers that are supposed to be great word-smiths, these guys that actually compose laws sure do get it wrong an awful lot of the time.

You know there is hardly a law that you can look at where you don't come away shaking your head with a whole bunch of brand new questions in your head. What they need is a few more whereas's and therefore's and hence-forths, and thereby's .....lol.

Political power is a numbers game. The more potential voting hunters that a politician has in his district, the more he is likely to vote favorably to issues friendly to that demographic. And then there is the benefit of maintaining license purchasers simply from the aspect of greater DEC resources. Other than those two factors, I probably fall into that attitude of "who need them?"....lol. But those are two very powerful factors that makes their continued participation important to me.

Ok, forget that stupid caption. How about the picture itself? I don't think there is anything wrong with taking a few minutes to clean things up and make the picture just a bit more artistic and presentable. However, I do have to admit to having taken a few careless pictures over the years that weren't exactly posed in the most tasteful situation. My bad! But a major difference is that I do not publicly post those pictures and actually no one other than myself ever gets to see those pictures. As much as I may prize the kill, if the picture does not reflect that pride of accomplishment, it isn't worth showing.

That may be, but I hate to see them hurried out the door. Sometimes the longer you can keep one of these fence-sitters around the more opportunities that have to get re-motivated by friends and other hunters or other life circumstances.

And again, there are ways to handle those considerations, none of which should involve the kinds of tactics being used here. If there is a legitimate case of animal abuse (and I did purposefully use the term "if"), there are legitimate ways of going after those abuses. This idea of accepting internet campaigns that ignore legal avenues is really a Pandora's box that we may some day find ourselves on the wrong side of.

Here's the problem ..... The people responding to this thread are members of a hunting forum, and probably more into hunting than a lot of people that are not here to respond. Those are people that may just vote their displeasure with what they may consider to be over-regulation, by bailing out of the sport. Yes, some people will say so-what, but a little thought will answer that question.

What the heck is the point? What is going through a guy's head that makes him think that sort of thing is acceptable or funny. Like any group of individuals, we do have our share of strange personalities. And like it or not, these kinds of shock pictures with asinine comments attached do reflect on us all. It's just irresponsible, totally unnecessary and acts to make hunters and hunting look pretty ugly.

Is it therefore inhumane to keep cheetahs, lions, tigers, bears, primates, etc. in cages in a zoo? Are we prone to pick and choose what critters we get all teary-eyed over just because of their public relations benefactors have been more successful in building sympathy. I mean, we have been sold on the intellect of these things to the point where we think they are almost human in emotions and thought processes. I guess there are no people romanticizing the intellect of other animals. Look, I am not supporting animal cruelty, but we have laws and organizations to watch-dog over those situations. If laws need changing, let's do that by all means. But to start up an internet campaign against third-party individuals and groups conducting their craft is in my opinion a tactic commonly used by animal rights groups, and a tactic that I personally don't like to see them having successes with. It lends legitimacy to these kinds of tactics, and we should not be surprised if our support of that sort of thing some day comes back to bite us in the behind.

I have a Bushnell that does exactly the same thing.