Doc

I have a copy of the "Environmental Conservation Law of New York". I spent a significant amount of time on stand this morning trying to find some mention of a law regarding disabling a bow or emptying a gun during hours outside of legal hunting times. Yeah, I know ...... that's a heck of a way to hunt .... lol. But I did frequently stop and scan the area for incoming deer. As it turned out, the wind was blowing like a hurricane, and I suspect the deer were all hugging the ground. Anyway, the only references to disarming that I could find regarded the use of lights or transport in motor vehicles, and had nothing to do with hunting hours. So, I came to the same conclusion as above that this idea of a requirement to lock bows and empty guns is pretty much something that somebody made up and maybe thought might make a good law. If somebody can point out the exact section number and paragraph designation of such a law, I will stand corrected. But until that time I have decided that the disarming requirement is pretty much BS.

I'm not too sure what the deer think about absolutely dead quiet surroundings, but I will say that I am not too fond of those conditions. I always feel so darned vulnerable. Kind of like every breath I take, or movement I make stands out to any deer within range. It's nice to be able to hear and see a deer from a long distance, but they can hear and see everything that you do as well. I prefer a little cover-breeze. Not a howling wind, but just enough to get a few leaves moving, and cover at least some of those subtle sounds that you make when you re-position yourself and draw your bow. A little breeze also keeps the scent direction just a little more constant too.

I keep picturing myself coming out of the woods in complete darkness with my bow (arrow knocked or not), and having someone accuse me of hunting ...... lol. Shooting at things that I can't even see is not something that I have practiced a whole lot, but I'll bet it probably can't be done. Well, the law is the law even in situations where it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

My guess is that as long as you don't violate the 500' law relating to buildings, or any local ordinances that prohibit discharge of firearms or bow/arrows, You can hunt that spot. Anyplace where you " see deer constantly" is certainly a good candidate for a hunting spot.

Apparently the environmental conservation law places a very wide definition on the term hunting, and I would assume that any law or regulation that applies to hunting (such as legal hunting hours), would be interpreted using this definition of "hunting" The term "hunting" is defined in the Environmental Conservation Law of New York, volume 1, section 11-0103, item 10, (page 11-6) as: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Hunting" means pursuing, shooting, killing or capturing (other than trapping as defined in subdivision 11) wildlife, except wildlife which has been lawfully trapped or otherwise reduced to possession and includes all lesser acts such as disturbing,harrying or worrying, whether they result in taking or not, and every attempt to take, and every act of assistance to any other person in taking or attempting to take wildlife. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's quite a mouthful, but is out of the 1984-1985 book of Environmental Conservation Law of New York. Most likely this definition of "hunting" has not been changed since this printing of the law. It's not the easiest thing to read, but as near as I can figure, the term hunting takes in a lot more than just killing an animal. Anyway, make of it what you will. This is just something that I found that relates to the discussion here. So anyway, I would say that this is what the ECO's are required to to use in determining whether or not you are hunting outside of legal hours.

Have you ever tried to theorize just what this continent would really be like if Europeans had simply stayed home .... lol. I mean the common picture of all these native people living in perfect harmony with nature and each other is mostly mythology ..... right? They really had quite a warrior society which had the same kinds of squabbles, battles and conquests that any other race of people have. From what I've read, the notion of indians skipping merrily through the woods waving and tipping their head-dress to neighboring tribesmen is really a fair-sized misrepresentation, isn't it? I also would assume that given enough time, the population levels would have them at total odds with ecology and their habitat. How much game would it really take to support a burgeoning Indian population that lived entirely on what nature was able to supply? How long would the critters and edible wild plants of the woods really last? Interesting thing to contemplate.

I don't see the choice as having anything to do with respect. Lol .... there is no real way of hanging a deer up with it's internal organs removed and the body cavity spread open for cooling, that could ever indicate respect, or lack of respect. I never even factored that thought into my decision as to how to hang a deer. Maybe we are getting a bit carried away with this "respect" thing? Well it might be a bit tacky to put a hat on it and sunglasses and stick a cigarette in it's mouth ..... lol.

Lol ...... I have done similar things. Last time was my release. Yeah, I ususally throw a tantrum and depending on what time of day, I may decide that it is too late to try again. Man, that is aggravating!

Yeah, I think that just because an animal is in the wild, unattended to, does not mean that they are free to shoot. I'm pretty sure that special permissions have to be arranged before anyone can shoot escaped critters.

I'll bet that everyone who sees that, associates it with a hunter.

Actually farmers have a lot cheaper places to buy feed than Dicks. The stuff sold at Dicks, Gander mountain, Bass-pro, etc. are strictly designed and marketed for hunting/baiting purposes.

So what do the experts say? Anybody ever notice how carcasses are hung in a slaughterhouse? I've never been in one, but maybe someone here has. It would be interesting to see if they have any reasoning behind whatever way they choose. I have always hung them by their hind legs, but if you were to ask me why, I really have no reason for it other than that is the way I was shown and that's just the way I have always continued doing it.

Actually that was done in less than a minute using an Excel spreadsheet that I designed 8 years ago. So calculation time was instantaneous. The required inputs are: Deer speed (fps) Walking =3.5 - 4 (I used 3.5) Running =35 - 40 Arrow speed (fps) Distance I am not trying to convey right or wrong. Just providing info for educated decisions.

I was thinking the zip-ties also. Aluminum signs with two slots cut along the sides. Thread the zip-ties through the slots and around the trees, and you probably have nearly a lifetime installation. No nails at all.

We definitely got into some heavy wind yesterday. The trees were bending over and a lot of leaves were coming down. However, for most of the immediate area, there are still quite a few leaves still hanging on the trees. It kind of made me wonder just how much such a heavy wind might affect impact points on a target (or deer). I have to admit that over all these years, I can't recall doing much shooting in super-high winds. I probably should have flung a couple yesterday to see what they do. It would have been a good "cross-wind" to my arrow flight.

Yeah, back to the topic ... lol A deer average walking speed is 3.5 mph - 4 mph. If a deer takes a step or two while feeding, that is likely its forward speed. If you assume that to be the speed that he moves, that is 61.6 inches per second. If you shoot a 50 yard distance with a super fast bow that is much faster than almost all of the hunting bows in common use (I used 400 FPS), the arrow over that 50 yards will be in the air 0.375 seconds. And that assumes no deceleration during flight (for calculation simplicity). So over that 0.375 seconds, if the deer takes a step or two at time of release, the deer will have moved 23.1 inches by the time the perfectly shot arrow gets there. So add that one more little factor to the many other errors already mentioned, that are magnified as shot distances grow. Look, I am not saying what other people should or shouldn't do in terms of shot selection. I only know that the list of variables in long shots are many and they all seem to grow significantly as the distance grows. So that simply is the reason why I treat the bow as a short-range weapon and limit my shots severely from my personal capabilities. I can control my own abilities, but there is no way I can control what the deer does. Everybody has to make their own choices. I am simply conveying thoughts as to some of the variables that occur to me, and why I voluntarily limit my shooting distances. I'm sorry if that caused someone to lose their mind, but these things are my own opinions which I believe is what internet forums are mostly all about.

The one thing that is probably true of any general rule of thumb regarding Ma Nature is that for every rule there are a jillion exceptions. And of course, I can easily come up with one example of a badly wounded deer that ran away from water, up hill ... lol. Probably could come up with a bunch more if I sat and thought about it a bit. I can only remember one deer that died near the water (actually in the water) and that one was simply because she was crossing the crick heading toward the hill. She just didn't happen to make it past the water. Actually, a good rule of thumb is that a deer will go somewhere, and that probably will be away from the hunter that shot them.

Yes there are still a lot of smokers left, until you compare the number today with what there used to be. Once the government decided to change that particular behavior of its citizens and put the full force of the government against that activity, it really was wildly successful. And the result is a very tiny, insignificant minority of people that engage in smoking anymore. When the government decides to decimate an activity, they certainly have discovered the means of doing it. And they have figured out how to do it without actually outlawing the activity. So if they decided to use the same practices on guns and ammo, we can all get a peek at just how effective that could be. And all without any tampering with amendments and such.

You know, everyone will simply ignore this post and instead talk about how impossible a repeal of the second amendment is, but I would like to mention that it doesn't take a repeal of any amendment to effectively eliminate guns and ammo, as ants' reply mentions. Case in point is cigarettes. They are still legal to purchase, so supposedly everyone has the right to purchase those products. However, look at how effectively the government has put a hurtin' on the tobacco industry through citizen behavior modification, via taxation. If they decide to tax guns and ammo to death, how is the 2nd amendment going to stop that? If you have a renegade, 2nd term, nothing-to-lose, president who now feels politically free to push his anti-gun agenda, I guess he can probably figure out a way around a pesky old Constitution. It's not like there's no precedent.

I have an aerial photo that I usually go over with my wife to point out exactly where I intend to hunt and my intended route to get there. She is very familiar with the hill, so when I mention landmarks up there, she knows exactly what I am talking about. Also, I check to make sure that my phone is fully charged. I also give my bow a quick look for any problems before I even take it out of the house. For gun hunting, I always hunt defensively. That would involve adequate amounts of blaze orange. Also, I generally sit at the base of a very large tree with my back totally covered. I am always on the look-out for approaching hunters and when one is in sight, I keep my eyes fixed on him until he is out of sight. Here is one of those things that falls into the category of do what I say, not what I do ..... go hunting with somebody. There are a lot of situations that you may not be able to handle by yourself where having someone expecting to see you or hear from you can provide more timely help than just a panicky 911 cell-phone call to someone that has no idea where you are or any of the location descriptions you are trying to explain. Also, for some of us older hunters, dragging a deer can be a lot safer with some help. Also, radios (walkie-talkies) probably are not all that bad an idea for hunting partners, with the intent of periodic pre-planned contact times.

It's been a few years since I smoked, but I can tell you that I have killed quite a few deer where I had to butt-out the cigarette before shooting. Certainly smoking does not help your odds of success, but you either have the wind right or you don't. However, Having said all that, I do believe that cigarette smoke is is a strong scent that goes out in a dense configuration and hangs together for a lot longer distance that the usual human scent. So bearing in mind that wind directions are not always consistant and that it is normal for wind to cycle back and forth, there is always the possibility that the strong scent of the smoke may adhere to vegetation and such if it blows to the trail that you are watching. That can't be good. I would add all that to all the other line-items on a list of good reasons to quit smoking.

Deer make a whole variety of sounds including a very low gutteral bleat which maybe could be described as a "gargling sound". Regarding the arrow, you say there was no blood. How about other things like fat, grease, or any other material other than the normal finish? Ha-ha ..... I guess I'm probably a little late with the questions. By the time you get back on the computer, you probably will have just finished taking your deer home.

Actually, when you think about it, with access from my driveway, probably locks and cables wouldn't have prevented this theft since they could bring in whatever tools they needed to do the job.

I'm not sure it was a "fellow hunter". The more I think about it the more I'm getting convinced that the point of access was right from my driveway. If you saw the density and the surrounding acres of multiflora rose, I really doubt that anybody came in from the state land side. Also, there is a 6' long tire mark in front of my driveway where somebody spun out. My guess is that it was somebody in a hurry to get the heck out of there. That means it could have been anybody. Could have been a delivery truck driver that spotted it and came back later, or just one of the many people that come up our driveway by mistake, or just somebody that pulled up in there to relieve themselves (lol ... they do that a lot). That is one of the problems with having such a long driveway without any visibility to most of it. But anyway, the thief may not have been simply a wandering hunter.

It sounds like it was a freak accident. Some how he got the harness tangled around his upper body. That is a deadly situation because of the pressure on the lungs. I hope they do a bit of a study on that and publish some recommendations. It may turn out that such a thing could happen with any make and model of harness. It sure would be good to know. It seems like there may be some important things to be learned from that accident.