Doc

What you have stated is exactly what I read in New York Outdoor News when the Sullivan County ruling came down. Have they made the law changes? .... I doubt it or somebody would have mentioned it. What is the hold-up? .... I have no idea.

Unfortunately, there is no shortage of pictorial and video evidence to the contrary in magazine articles and TV programs where if you look real carefully off to the side near some of these monster bucks, you might spot the feeder that put these deer in front of the box-blind or whatever. Unless there is something extremely unique about NYS that makes our big bucks a lot more cautious than anywhere else ..... lol. I don't know about the "3 counties over" qualifier, but yes, feeders attract deer in from other properties. And of course they attract a lot more does and young bucks than mature ones simply because there are more of them. As a side issue, I have read about states where feeding/baiting is legal where guys are feeling compelled to maintain bait/feeding stations just to level the playing field with surrounding neighbors. A lot of this activity amounts to "deer hoarding" where hunters are attempting to draw the deer away from their neighbor's land. Who the hell needs that going on in your hunting area. Again, the mentality behind all of these kinds of things is to modify wild deer behavior to facilitate the baiter's success. Real good deal for manufacturers who sell bait-stations and commercial deer food. Not all that good for guys that are just barely able to afford what licenses and the hunting equipment they have now.

And yet all last summer, I watched the same sets of deer come and go daily getting flashed at everytime they passed and apparently totally un-concerned by the flash and never altering their patterns. Not so with the IR cameras. I did frequently have to relocate the IR cameras after each of the areas eventually went dead. Not so with the white-flash camera. These are all random observations and I really haven't put a lot of time into trying to make any sense of it all. But I do find these things interesting and do think there may be more at work here than we understand.

I have a peculiar hang-up about conditioning (training) wildlife to modify their behavior to suit my ease of harvest. Don't ask me why I choose to pick that particular limit. I don't really know other than it begins an endless string of activities that I don't believe have any place in hunting. I have always felt that I should hunt the critters as I find them in the wild rather than trying to modify the wildness out of them for my convenience. Yes, that's some pretty rigid thinking, but that is just a personal limit that I have imposed on my idea of hunting.

Amazingly enough, I even had fewer pictures of deer staring at the camera with my white-flash camera (yeah, the one that got stolen). I can't explain that, but it is one thing that struck me as being a bit weird. Also, it is strange that the deer are always "already" staring at the camera before it actually triggers. So I would conclude that it is not the functioning of the camera that has drawn their attention, but rather a drift of scent or just the view of something strange that wasn't there before.

I'm not sure how I feel about the increase in bear populations locally. It's kind of neat to have another species resident to the area, and it does make the woods seem just a little bit more natural and complete. But I have to admit that it has changed the way my mind works on that dark walk to my stand early in the morning armed only with my puny bow and arrow .... lol. Oh yes, that amazing imagination can go into over-drive in the pitch black trip through the woods. Any of that based on any form of reality? .... Not a bit. Does that make a difference? ..... Not a bit.... ha-ha-ha.

I don't see the connection between inadvertently breaking a speeding law and mentioning to someone in a store that the material they are buying is illegal to use. There's a lot of people (as witnessed in this forum) that are completely unaware or confused on the feeding/baiting laws. I really can't see any reason why just because I may have broken a law, that I cannot converse about the contents of another law. No, I'm sorry, but it is very likely that if I see someone buying that stuff, I will also mention to them that using it is illegal. It may very well be likely that I violated some traffic law on the way to that store but, that is not an excuse for not tipping the guy off that just because something is for sale in the store does not mean that it is legal to use.

I understand the attitude that says let the guy remain ignorant. After all, whatever trouble he gets into is his tough luck and nothing to me. I understand it, but don't agree with it. I can see someone innocently buying some of this stuff and never realizing that they will be committing a violation if they use it, especially after noting all the confusion on these laws right here in this forum. And all that confusion is added to by the fact that local stores are selling these materials that are illegal to be used in NYS. Why is it wrong to try to do the guy a favor and give him a heads-up on the law? What I can't understand is the reaction of the customer and some of the wacky statements he made.

Yup, the mud bottom of the crick was full of them. But back then we never thought much about it .... Just pull them off and then head home ..... lol. Yeah, today it would be a traumatic event.

I have countless face and nose pictures as well as those "stare-down" shots, so I always knew that I was not getting away with my spying activities without any notice by the deer. However, I never had the video to show the results after the picture and how disturbed these guys get at that little black box sitting there harmlessly stuck on the side of a tree. Who would ever guess that an inanimate object could cause such trauma. Needless to say these situations can cause one more dead spot in woods where those particular bucks will never visit again. That's not really our intent, is it? I do wonder whether it really is the vision that gets their initial attention, or whether there is some airborne scent that leads to them seeing the camera. I know from interactions with deer, that if you remain motionless and the wind is in your favor, deer can be fooled and walk right by without ever knowing you are there. But when the wind is not in your favor, you will never fool them.

Did you get out of your car and pet him ...... lol. We do have a growing population in the area, but still it's not always that easy to actually see one here. My closest encounter was one night when a bear decided to bend down the iron pole on our bird feeder and drag our garbage can about 50 yards up into the woods leaving a trail of garbage along the way. He did make a permanent change in the way we do things now. The garbage is kept in the shed and the feeder is now an overhead "tram" arrangement that is about 12' off the ground.

It has nothing to do with "high horses" or minding someone else's business. None of us passed the law and as far as I know, none of us are responsible for enforcing the law. However we all should be aware of the law, and I would expect that we are all interested in respecting the game laws of our state. Maybe we don't understand the reasons for the laws and maybe we have some kind of problem with that law, but the right way to solve that situation is to work on getting it changed within the system. What I have noted from many similar threads is that there is an awful lot of ignorance about this baiting/feeding law. Sometimes a comment like Eddie's might just save someone from an arrest. Instead of getting all exercised that someone saw fit to educate this guy, it should be viewed as an attempt to keep the guy out of trouble. If he takes offense to that, well, that's really his problem. But at least now if he's going to break the law, he definitely knows that he's doing it. Then it is between him and the encon officers and he gets whatever he deserves.

Excellent video! So, how much damage are we doing to our hunting by some of these cameras? Sound like we had better be thinking a lot more than just wandering around strapping cameras to trees. I have to admit that I didn't really expect that the visual thing was a big deal. A simple small box on the side of a tree, who would think that would alarm them so much. I always thought that there would be a scent problem, or a sound tip-off. Well, live and learn. Elevation seems to be the key.

A lot of these people when they start losing an argument begin to fly off into a little fantasy world where they all become Jean Claude VanDam leading a righteous crusade against tyranny and all of the world's evil forces ..... lol. What can you do? .... Just simply laugh at them. But you are right. Other people hearing those kinds of jackass comments do start wondering just what kinds of guns really should be available to wackos like that. And since he is going off over a hunting issue, we are all implicated by default.

I personally do not know any military personnel that are contemplating mutiny or treason over the NYS gun law. And law enforcement people value their jobs and positions within the community too much to be sucked into any radical subversive activities. If anyone intends to take on the U.S. government, they had better be ready to organize their own little rebellion. And if this is a direction that you favor, you might contemplate what kind of mess you would have left over if any such activities were ever to become reality.

It doesn't matter. Let me repeat that ..... "It doesn't matter". I don't care what they say. I only care how they vote. The point that will be made and must be made is that a vote for gun control has consequences to the legislator's career. It is a fear factor that has to be put back into the career path of politicians. They must be re-educated to the fact that they work for their supporters and must vote in accordance with the fact that they are our representatives. It is a message that has made the NRA the powerful voice of gun owners for all these years. Politicians feared our gun lobby, and that fear has to be put back in their minds if we are to keep this anti-gun steamroller off our backs. My suggestion is not really anything radical. It is simply making the vote work again to restore representative government. This is not a call to arms or any of that other wacky stuff. It is simply using the system as it was intended. Very simple ..... you want to vote anti-gun, you have a huge block of voters to contend with. You can use them as support or opposition ..... your choice. There is no politician that will risk any votes, not to mention an organized, dedicated, unified significant percentage of the voters in their district. The draw-back to all this ...... gun owner apathy. We have many that don't vote at all let alone voting as a single issue force. Can it be done? I think it can with enough anger and passion whipped up by the pro-gun organizations and we as individuals. How important is this issue to us? Maybe after the next election, we may find out. But I will say that those who do not vote against these known anti-gunners really should have nothing to say about any problems they encounter with gun issues. By the way, I intend to publish that voting record of the NYS Safe Law as soon as I figure how to cut and paste an Excel spreadsheet on this forum. I tried and so far the formatting on this forum is very unfriendly to spread sheets .... lol. I'm working on it.

And that is a problem that can be laid at the feet of the apathetic NYS voter. At some point we have to band together as "single-issue" voters that vote out every legislator that vote for pro gun control bills. The next elections are as good a time as any to start. Yes we are the minority, but it is hard to defeat a dedicated and unified minority. We have to re-ignite the anger over this law at a time when votes count. We have the voting record and that should make election decisions easy.

Is there some anti-hunter out there inventing these new diseases?......lol.

I think if I were a legislator, that tactic would instantly signal my opposition vote, no matter which side of the aisle I was from. It's the best signal to flag the fact that some sort of sneaky, unpopular, issue is being steam-rolled through. That automatically means to me that more time is required to thoroughly read and understand the bill and to get as much public comment as possible.

Good luck with that ... lol. Have you started organizing your headquarters and barricaded compound and staffing it with militia? When do military maneuvers begin?

It seems to me that those that are concerned with the handicapped and aged and infirm would have made that their first priority and crafted their first round of legal incursions into bow seasons limited to taking care of that problem by itself. I won't predict how NYB would have reacted to that kind of bill, but I will say that nearly all of the opposition from rank and file bowhunters would have disappeared had the bill simply been written in that fashion alone. But I think that crossbow proponents use the handicapped issue only as "sympathy" side issue to push their real agenda. Frankly, if someone had posed a bill that allowed the handicapped and aged to use crossbows in bow season, I would not have written even one letter opposing it. I suspect that most bowhunters are of the same opinion.

We used to swim in the local creek across the road. When we got finished, we would get busy pulling all the blood-suckers off out feet and legs. That would absolutely gross me out today, but back then we didn't think anything about it. By the way, that picture looks like there should be some good fishing there.

Are there really people that are such poor hunters that they have to rely on something like baiting? I have read magazine articles that tell about deer being conditioned to the extent that when the timed feeders go off, the deer come running as a response to the sound. It's like Pavlov's experiments with dogs ..... lol. Is it really necessary to train the wildness out of the deer to make them easier to hunt? When I look at all the different crazy things that we engage in, simply to remove challenge, I have to wonder what "hunting" has turned into and why.

Imagine if the illegal drug trade went by those rules ..... legal to buy and sell but illegal to use. Those drug laws would become a nightmare to enforce wouldn't they? Well, I can imagine that same kind of thing makes the enforcement of the feeding/baiting laws just about impossible as well (especially on private and posted lands).

Andy is getting quite comfortable with the "message of necessity" clause. I was just reading in the paper where he used it again on some rather unexciting law which I can't remember right now. But anyway, it is beginning to look like he can (and will) thumb his nose at public comment periods on just about any law that he wants to cram through the system. So basically, he has been able to take public input and discussion right out of the legislative process. There is some really strange stuff slipping around the constitution that we are not always knowing about. Prior to this gun law, I never heard of this "message of necessity" nonsense. When did that get implemented and by who? And what is the supposed purpose of it?