Doc

I think that last sentence in parenthesis gives a lot of insight into why there are so many different views or levels of acceptance for any of these restrictive proposals. There are so many different levels of opportunities for hunters around the state. There are also differences in abilities from one hunter to the next. While one guy may be in an area where hunting is pretty much a piece-of-cake, or he may be of an experience and skill level that makes the activity seem relatively easy, the next guy may be from an area that is quite deprived of opportunity, or he may be a relative newcomer to the sport. So while some of us can come up with restrictions about as fast as our imaginations can work, and compile a list of regulations designed to handicap hunters in every imagineable way, it may not always be all that obvious to us that there are others in other parts of the state that may simply be frustrated right out of the activity by the addition of prohibitive new laws and restrictions. That is one reason why I tend to not be in favor of statewide restrictions that totally disregard the conditions of habitat or deer numbers or conflicts with other regulations. I think that more thought and better definition of criteria as to the selections of where these ideas are put into law need to occur before anything is even considered for being put into law. This idea of simply drawing a restriction out of a hat and applying it across the state, without any particular in-depth studies as to whether they are appropriate, is a concept that I am completely against but something I seem to hear more and more of every year.

There is something about continually restricting the harvests that we find acceptable that kind of bothers me. It seems that everytime this subject comes up many are trying to impress everyone else by saying how strict their rules of acceptance are. They also intend to impress with statements that support even further restrictions that everyone else must abide by. I know that everyone has their own reasons and standards for their hunting, and I feel real uncomfortable trying to get laws passed that would force my beliefs on others. In this day of shrinking hunter populations, I really wonder about the advisability of harrassing the hunters that we still have. That harrassment can come either through new restrictive laws, or the constant harping, and criticizing, and measuring, and negative comments, about the harvest that other have chosen. My position is to congratulate a hunter that has taken a deer ..... big doe, little doe, big buck or small buck. I take no pleasure in watching his smile of pride disappear as I criticize the animal that he has chosen to taken. Maybe others don't have that same attitude and enjoy playing the role of the spoiler. Maybe it makes them feel better to draw comparisons between what they take and what other choose to take, I don't know. But as far as I am concerned, I will set my own limits and standards, and it doesn't bother me that others do the same. And I don't feel that I really need any new laws to force others to believe the way I do.

See ....... The lunacy never ends. This country is doomed.

Well, that's good that they have finally put the issue before the legislators. Now the proponents and opponents of the concept can vent their opinions to their legislators instead of filling pages and pages in the internet forums. ............Yeah right ... like that's going to happen ... lol.

Checked on it this morning: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- STATUS: S3929 NOZZOLIO Same as A 5574 Kolb Environmental Conservation Law TITLE....Authorizes hunting in the county of Ontario until October 1, 2015 02/27/13 REFERRED TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 03/12/13 1ST REPORT CAL.184 03/13/13 2ND REPORT CAL. 03/14/13 ADVANCED TO THIRD READING 04/23/13 PASSED SENATE 04/23/13 DELIVERED TO ASSEMBLY 04/24/13 referred to environmental conservation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems like it's been stuck there for quite a long time now.

Somewhere I read that there are significant numbers of people joining the ranks of hunters because they are getting sold on the health aspects of wild game, and also the belief that they should learn a bit more self-sufficiency regarding their diet. Many of these people are coming from odd places such as the more liberal tree-hugging crowd who have had an epiphany about this world and their proper place in it. I tend to encourage anyone who has had this kind of sudden revelation, but it does them no service to sugar-coat the hunting activity. I am awfully glad that I don't have to feed my family with what I get from hunting season. It makes a good supplement, but as a primary source of protien, it just ain't happening. Also, when looking at dollar per pound, wild game is not what I would call "cheap". If I amortize what I spend on weapons, ammo, hours (if you count your time as worth anything), occasional transportation, accessories, special clothing, and for some people .... camps, land, ATVs, etc., etc., the cost per pound is huge. So yes, if a person feels a need to get involved in the elements and needs of nature and the way they fit into it all, they are probably looking at it all in a very realistic way. If you are looking at it as a way to build your family budget around and save gobs of money, it seldom works out that way.

Sure could use a bit more heat, but so far everything is looking good and progressing in an acceptable rate. I wish I could get out there to take care of some of the weeds before they get to be a problem, but that might be a pretty mucky activity .... lol.

Yup, in a perfect world, all this rain could be spread out over a more convenient time frame. In my own personal situation, it is kind of nice not to be worrying about potential well problems. However, it has been so damned unrelenting, that lawn mowing and garden weeding has now become a problem. The good news is that I have not been plagued with a flooded driveway as has been the situation in many other years. So basically, I guess I am not ready to complain ...... yet.

I guess I just get tired of watching people go all ga-ga over every article that comes out with some astounding claim. It seems that the mere mention of a "study" makes people automatically assume validity and god-like truth. And then every so often a study like this one comes along that is so completely difficult to swallow as to put a real strain of the credibility. I do not afford researchers a quality of infallibility and I do believe the term "expert" gets assigned all too easily. I do not worship them as being some kind of keepers of the truth. And I think there is plenty of reason to doubt and question their findings and even occasionally their motives. And guess what .... Even their own colleagues often question those same things and on many occasions reverse the findings. So at times I set my gullibility aside and do question those studies that seem to be particularly weird to me. That's probably something we all should occasionally do.

Here is another one of those "studies" that I think is completely over-exaggerated. Yes, if an animal urinates directly on a plant, maybe it will die ..... maybe. But, let's get real. How much actual coverage does deer urine actually achieve. Just how significant is the result? I guess I just have a naturally suspicious mind, but I hate to see everyone get all excited just because somebody assigns the word "study" to some of these things. Most likely they penned up some deer and found that most of the vegetation in the pen disappeared. But then, nature's deer herd doesn't live in a pen do they? It appears that some of these researchers have to come up with some kind of outrageous findings in order to get their allotment of grant money for the following year. This is likely another case of don't believe everything that the "experts" and "researchers" are peddling. I think there is plenty of reason to suspect this "study".

Is this a normal reaction? You hear gunshots and step out on a porch to check it out? No, she didn't get shot, but it seems weird that anyone would react this way. Anyway, look for the anti-gunners (Obama and his gang) to try to make hay out of this event.

It seems to me that if the government intends to maintain even a show of fair and equal taxation regardless of location within the state, this plan certainly puts an end to that notion. I don't really understand how this is getting any support at all. I have to wonder if there aren't some details that are consistantly being left out of the story or something I am just plain mis-understanding.

Below is an e-mail that I received from Chris Collins, my Congressional Representative, regarding one possible cause for the aggravation of the ammo shortage. Take a look down through it and see what you think of the purchase preparations of 1.1 billion rounds of ammo by the Department of Homeland Security. It sounds similar to another post that I saw here on this forum quite a while ago. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am reaching out to you to let you know about legislation that I voted in favor of last night to protect 2nd Amendment rights. There has been great concern over the past several months in regards to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) soliciting bids for 1.1 billion rounds of ammunition. This purchase of ammunitions by DHS has raised questions and concerns among many law abiding gun owners and sportsmen and women. Representative Mark Meadows introduced an amendment that would delay contracts for ammunition procurement until the cost and need is known by Congress and the American people. Rep. Meadow’s amendment would require DHS to submit a report to Congress regarding these ammunition purchases by the President’s next budget. I was proud to support that amendment. As your voice in Congress, I want you to know that I will always stand up to protect your 2nd Amendment rights. As always, please let me know how I can help you. With Best Regards, CHRIS COLLINS Member of Congress

No, actually a crossbow is it's own category of weapon which lies somewhere between a bow and a gun. But then, who really cares?

Gotta get that cam tipped down a bit. Smaller critters would walk right underneath without tripping the camera. What on earth is that in the background?

I think that anyone who cannot see that a crossbow is an intermediate weapon somewhere between a bow and a gun, is simply arguing for the sake of arguing. It is not a bow, and it is not a gun. And to all that I say ..... so what? Anybody got anymore insignificant meaningless minutia that they feel the need to argue about?

I have never been drawn into this abortion debate before, because the issues involved are so complex and intertwined with personal values and morals that I have pretty much an impossible time coming up with any absolute decision. To me it boils down to when a life is a viable human being. After all, I assume that no one is in favor of murder regardless of where the life taken resides. But I will say that while people should have the right to control what is going on inside their body, no one really has the right to end a life even if it is one that they created. And so the debate will go on forever as to when a living human being becomes a living human being. I'm not in anyway capable of making that decision, so I will continue to let the debate be carried on by others.

Yes, and that's another thing that has caight my attention. It seems like all you see anymore on TV is Cuomo's ugly face and a bunch of campaign rhetoric that sounds exactly like campaign ads. I wonder how legal all that sort of thing is, assuming it is taxpayer money that he's funding these with. What's up with that and why are Republicans and other parties letting him get away with that?

I think it was more like wishing than joking.

That makes you feel real good doesn't it? God, what ails you people? If there is any truth to your story .... if (and that's a big if) ..... that would totally justify the NYB position against crossbows. It would show that they were right all along about crossbows being a threat to bowhunting. And apparently that kind of tickles you ....lol. It kind of points out the anti-bowhunter attitudes of the crossbow crowd. Not really that much of a surprise.

And so I guess it will be up to us who do not live in those college areas to take up the slack on the revenue end of things .... eh? We will have little islands of tax Nirvana and poverty zones in the rest of the state as we contribute increased funds to finance the government goods and services for the chosen few. Little wealth clusters and screw anyone who lives elsewhere. Real good plan Andy. Do you think the ignorant masses will be fooled by all this smoke and mirrors activity? Well, you just might be right. I can just see the voters bowing down to our state savior as they read only the headlines .... "New York State to be tax free". By the time anyone catches on to the details and the final screw-job, you'll be sitting in the Oval Office. I think this guy has the NYS voters pegged pretty good. Nobody ever said he was stupid ..... just dishonest, corrupt and the morals of a bank robber.

I was watching everytime he pulled that trigger, and there really didn't seem to be all that much recoil.

Yeah, every so often I have to come in here and drop off my two cents just to let everyone know I'm still alive .... lol. It's interesting to see just how long all this fighting and arguing can be kept going. It's fun to watch. Besides, there really ain't that much going on elsewhere in the forums. Might as well get in and join the mud-wrestling once in a while .... lol.

People are hoarding ammo because they figure that they may not always be able to get it. Well, think about it. They're right ..... you can't get it anymore, or at least it is not guaranteed that you will always be able to. So people are trying to lay-in a lifetime supply whenever they can get ahold of it. Sure, I see how this is a self-creating crisis, but who can blame them. I just wish that I had done a little more hoarding myself back when I could. The problem a lot of people are having is determining when they really have enough.

I think that is an internal reflection of the sun in the lense system. Direct sun will cause weird special effects with these cameras.