Doc

Yeah, I'm no lover of coyotes, but I do suspect that perhaps the campaign against them has gone a bit beyond reality. I should qualify that by saying, "in our area". I hesitate to make sweeping statements about what may be going on in other parts of the state. I can hear all the irate replies now .... lol. To me the coyote is simply another furbearer who has a fairly generous hunting season already. My suggestion to those that want to see fewer of them would be to get out there during the current coyote season and actively hunt them .... hard! Then skin the critters, sell the furs, and put the money in your pocket to pay for the gas and ammo. You want to be even more effective, get your trapping certificate and a couple dozen traps and good trapping book and set out a trap-line. By the time you get done, you won't be wanting to see those critters wasted with summertime hunting either.

Obviously. I agree with all that but playing devils advocate for a moment, I have to point out that the demonization of coyotes among deer hunters and turkey hunters is nearly complete. I think there would be an awful lot of support among nearly all hunters if anyone were to suggest that coyotes be targeted for extinction or at the very least a all year hunting season .... lol. I think the arguments have already been made ... to the point where it wouldn't be all that difficult to pass that year around season for coyotes, logic and facts be damned. Ha-ha ... the little guys get a free pass. The foxes, coons, possums, mink, weasels, etc. have not been the subject of the massive hate campaign so the pressure is off them.

I hear all that, and I sure do hope you are right, but all I am saying is that if even one little incident occurs, the residential public will be all over that in a way like you could never imagine. I have heard from some of these people in local town forums and phone calls and e-mail, and even talked to a couple of town supervisors that were against the change, and I'll just say that there are a lot of people who simply are looking for one shred of ammunition. A lot of this has been conducted completely under the radar. Not purposely being a stealth law, but simply because it hasn't hit any significant level of notoriety yet. Opposition supervisors were not successful in stirring up their constituents against the bill. Let's hope that nobody gives these people credibility with some bone-head incident. I know they would not hesitate to elevate the issue and stir up opposition that so far has not materialized.

See, that's what makes me crazy when it comes to the subject of baiting. Deer are apparently quite easily domesticated, or at least semi-domesticated, as per your experience with feeding. Is that the kind of thing that we think is right in the name of hunting? For some reason that just rubs me completely the wrong way. Maybe it shouldn't, I don't know, but it just does. I keep thinking that if a guy can't get his deer without changing the wild nature of the critter, what the hell does that say about his hunting ability? And if the mature bucks that come into bait are fewer in number, it occurs to me that that may simply be a case of there being a whole lot fewer of them. And of course as you pointed out, nobody says that those involved with baiting are really after the trophy animals. In most cases (according to harvest records)any deer will do. Just pick out a nice fat one .... lol.

No, I haven't heard anything about this. Frankly, it isn't a big issue with me. I really don't think you would see a whole lot of guys flocking out to hunt them. Hell there's hardly anyone hunting them in the season they have now, and there is an added incentive of prime fur prices during that season. I honestly don't think there is a whole lot of interest in coyote hunting, and I seriously doubt that opening the season year around will have any change in the population at all. As for myself, I have no interest in shooting them and leaving them to rot in the woods. It's probably the trapper in me coming out that hates to see any natural resource wasted. Yes, I realize that there are places in the state where it is theorized that coyotes are having a severe negative impact on the deer population. And I will admit that if we had that condition in my area, I would most likely have a much different attitude.

I'm not sure what the big deal is for these critters when it comes to minerals, but I do remember as a kid almost getting trampled to death each time I had to dump the minerals in the trough for the sheep. They really didn't care what or who was in their way when I came in with that stuff. In fact it was pretty tough just trying to get to the feeder. I guess I wouldn't be too surprised if deer didn't have the same appetite for those same kinds of goodies.

Sorry ..... I'm not buying it. Yes, just like any strategy in hunting, you can always find a few examples of those that don't know what they are doing. So what? That still doesn't mean that it isn't effective and an huge advantage. As far as it being more effective in one state and not in another, that makes a nice sounding theory but it is not terribly believable or convincing.

If during the trial period, there is even one single incident of a rifle bullet entering a house, or any kind of close calls involving residents, or any such similar incident, fatality or not, even if the same thing could have happened with a shotgun, I would fully expect that that would be the end of rifles in the county forever. Any fatalities that have a look of "long distance" to them, I will guarantee would also have the same result. There are people who have gone along with this only because they had no data of any sort to effectively oppose it. So let's just hope that nothing foolish happens. It won't take much to turn the tables on all of this. Believe me, we who actively supported this change are in a tiny minority. It is only happening because of the usual apathy among those who are either neutral or opposed to the idea. Let's hope that nothing happens to energize that majority.

I'll bet you won't be the only one that holds off on rifle purchases. For one thing, a lot of people don't have the money to just run out and buy a quality deer rifle. The other thing is that there may be some that can't even find ammo for their rifle. Also, a lot of people won't even be aware that they can use rifles. And then there are the people who just recently bought a shiny new shotgun and will be trying to get some of their money's worth out of it. I wonder how long even after rifles are legalized before there is a significant percentage of the hunters that have converted. Personally, I can't wait to squeeze off that first round at a deer. I've been ready for a long time now.

Place looks like a jungle .. lol.

Yes, I should have said "trails" instead of "areas". And I can't say that I have any idea why it was the IR cameras that this happened to and not the white-flash ones. It could have been coincidence, or any number of other potential disturbances. Like I said, these are just observations not conclusions.

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.