Doc

I will say that you guys do appear to be encountering more wussy fawns than we've got. Around here, whenever I have spooked a "family" group, the fawns have no problem leaving the doe in the dust. I never see them stumbling around whining and looking for where ma went. They already know exactly what to do and it's up to ma to keep up.

If somebody made snake-bite boots that zipped up over your head, maybe I could get a little more interested in the south. But really, who the heck wants to go wallowing through neck high grass with a bunch of angry, nasty snakes ready to inject nerve paralyzing, skin decomposing, venom into you. Who really needs that. And yes, little tiny toy deer. You need a half dozen to get any meat. And oh yes ..... the bugs. I can't stand the ones we've got here, and certainly would sign up to feed the miniature helicopters that they have down there. And yes we do have a variety of seasons that cuts down on the boredom. Maybe the winters are longer than I would like them, but that's what keeps those snakes and bugs down south. No we may have some wacky politics and some burdensome taxes, but when you tally it all up, NYS has its good points.

This is a tough subject. Like SteveB said, if you shoot any doe, the odds are pretty good that you have shot a mother of a fawn or two. Also as has been mentioned, it is a necessity in order to control deer populations. There simply is no other way of doing it. But I have to admit that after a summer of photographing and watching does and fawns, you do get a sort of attachment and concern for them. However, let little sons-of-britches eat another shrub or mow down more expensive plantings, or mess with my fruit trees and I not only shoot the mother but wipe out the fawn too .... lol.

Generally speaking, I have a hunting philosophy that says that I hunt deer (and other critters) however I find them. That means that I do nothing that tries to condition the prey to be more available for killing. If I find deer using ag crops, fine. I'll take advantage of that. Apple trees .... no problem. But I don't pile or plant anything with the intention of luring them onto my property, or conditioning them to stay on my property. To me part of hunting is the discovery (scouting) of what the deer are feeding on, not creating it. That is just a personal little batch of rules that I have always applied to my hunting and is likely unique only to myself. I have never seen deer as a farming venture and don't use any kinds of agricultural activities in my hunting. Nothing grand or wonderful about that, it's just a personal slant that I have always applied to my hunting. I have no problems with other people doing what they think they must for the deer or to the deer in the name of hunting. In fact having been raised on a farm, I find threads about food plots to be kind of interesting. But it's just not something that I want to incorporate into my hunting. The only time I might say something negative about the practice of food plotting is when it is done specifically to lure deer from neighbors, or when the intent is to "hoard" the deer and draw them away from other hunters. That motive does kind of rub me the wrong way some and puts a bit of a negative slant on the activity. Somehow that doesn't seem quite right.

I suppose that in the strictest definition of the word, food plotting could be called baiting. No, not in a DEC legal sort of definition, but in a dictionary sense. Certainly most of the food plots being produced do have as an intention, drawing deer to the area. That probably is a pretty good definition of baiting. Yes I know all the hue and cry about how individuals are only investing their huge amounts of time and money only because of an over-whelming concern for the health of the herd. Yeah, ok, who am I to say that that isn't the case. I have a rough time swallowing it, but I am not ready to call anyone a liar over it .... lol. However, underneath all this crap was the question of why the DEC allows one and forbids the other. I believe it is relative to concentrating deer into mouth to mouth, saliva to saliva, body wastes to body wastes, kind of contact. Somebody throwing out a pile of corn, pretty much guarantees that kind of intimate proximity. Food plots on the other hand are generally big enough to scatter deer feeding in the same field so that they are not swapping body fluids. The benefits of that are obvious. I think the DEC definitions of baiting are also tied in with their laws against feeding deer. They are basically the same thing except for motives. Feeding/baiting both involve unhealthy close contact between deer. There is also another unhealthy similarity between baiting and feeding. Both concentrate deer and cause them to become reliant on the artificial food source. Many people think it's a great thing to feed deer until they are faced with the ever increasing numbers of deer that show up each day and the ever increasing cost of feeding them at which time they simply stop and leave these super-sized herds loose on local habitat, sometimes destroying them for years to come. Bait piles have the exact effect. Here today .... gone tomorrow. And then there is the practical problem of trying to legally phrase the differences between agricultural fields vs. food plots. How practical would it be to outlaw hunting in all farms. The DEC is charged with controlling deer herds not establishing huge safe zones for them. There definitely are huge differences between piles of bait/feeders and food plots in the eyes of the DEC. They have simply set up their definitions in a way to eliminate the more harmful practice of the two.

Occasionally it is good for us armchair game mangers to understand that not all things are possible. Well, yes I suppose all is possible as long as we are not the ones charged with the responsibility to do them. And a word about hunter cooperation. It has to be acknowledged that without it, the DEC would be left without any population control at all. So if they bend over backwards to keep their population controller happy (and plentiful), it probably is not really a bad thing. We also might want to acknowledge the hunters financial role in keeping some cash in the DEC's pocket to handle all these fancy management schemes that there seems to be no shortage of. Look, it is quite well known here that I am not a DEC apologist and have been known to criticize some of there policies and methods just like we all do from time to time. But I also understand the various massive raids that past and current governors and their willing accomplices, the DEC commissioners, have perpetrated on the agency over the past few years. So at this point, I am willing to cut them some slack and grant that they cannot be all things to every game management wannabe that pops up with an opinion. Also if they want to maintain alliances with their most valuable population control tool, I think that probably is a very prudent thing to do. And I have a hard time criticizing them for it.

I once performed an interesting experiment regarding reaction times. I had a large piece of cardboard with a target on it mounted on a slide wire. Off to the side behind a shed, I had my youngest son (about 15 at the time) with a string tied from his belt to the target. He couldn't see when I was going to shoot because he was behind the shed. The instruction was to get into a set position and as soon as he heard the bow, he was to take off as fast as he could. I was shooting at 20 yards. It was no contest .... the arrow lost everytime. What we found out was that he could consistantly move that target 1 foot .... every time. That's human reaction time, not the reflexes of a deer. I didn't get into all the calculations of arrow speed and all that, but that little experiment proved to me that there is no beating a deer's reflexes if he decides to bug out at the sound of a bow. I have to admit that I really didn't expect that he could move that target that far with a 20 yard shot. Also, keep in mind that my son was acting at a disadvantage because he had to move forward. As has already been pointed out the "jumping the string syndrome" really involves a body drop as the deer loads up their legs for that initial bound away. So they have gravity working for them. They have not invented a bow that will shoot an arrow fast enough to counter-act that kind of thing. As has already been mentioned, success has everthing to do with the demeanor of the deer. A relaxed, calm deer will offer that little delay necessary to get the arrow there in the spot you are aiming at.

You know, that's the reason that I took up bowhunting in the first place. It was the challenge of having to get up close and personal in order to be successful. More and more, I see that challenge being looked down on. Some of these guys would be just as happy, or maybe would be more happy with a rifle in their hands. It's crazy stuff. The technology craze has hit bowhunting to the point where there is very little similarity to what it once was. And believe me it won't be stopping anytime soon.

No, I don't think their decision not to get involved with deer gender ratios has anything to do with hunter cooperation. I believe that it simply is not part of their goals. And that I think is based on the practicality of resources. They like anybody have to apply priorities, and gender balance simply is not real high on anybody's priorities. Frankly I would rather see them do as good a job as possible on balancing the herd to the habitat and other necessary benchmarks rather than wasting time on gender balancing. And I guess that's how they look at it too.

Yup ... it's been almost 5 years since I quit, and I still get the urge. And yes, the time that I miss it the most is when I'm on stand. Used to stink up the woods at the rate of about 1 cigarette per 1/2 hour. I still managed to get my share of deer, but I always wondered how many I didn't get because of my smoking. It really filled the hunt with confidence when I saw that smoke curling over toward the trail I was watching .... lol.

Ok, I can't stand it any longer ..... What the heck is a flobotamist ? Location ..... Let's face it there's not really any place in NY that comes with ringing endorsements. I like it but then I have been brainwashed by a whole life in this state. But I do have to ask, for a guy that apparently has no real ties to any particular location yet, why have you chosen NYS? Most people are running like crazy away from this state. However, if you are looking for good rural areas that are still within commuting distances (within 45 minutes to an hour) of a major city, and which has the best deer hunting in the state, I would be looking at western New York. Probably areas south of Rochester would be ideal. Probably would be a lot of opportunities for your girlfriend to do her flobotomizing there. We probably got a whole lot of flobots running around over here .... lol.

I have had this before, and was able to eventually control it. And, I am making some progress now. The weird (and lucky) thing is that it never happens while shooting at deer. There is just something about shooting those little round circles that can bring it on. Weirdest thing I have ever experienced. Hopefully it will not effect too much of the season. But I will not go out without having my shooting absolutely up to par. And when you are flinching all over the place, it's hard to get any confidence. I'll get by it sooner or later. Maybe it's a good thing we do have a longer season this year. I'll probably use the extra time just getting my shooting back under control.

Doctor's appointment tomorrow morning. Yeah I know, pretty poor planning. But really, I'm still not ready. I have a real wild flinch that has reared its ugly head this year, and I need more work to get rid of it. It's ok, I'm not in any real hurry yet .... lol.

Well-stated thoughts to kick off the season with!

That is a reality that I believe few hunters appreciate. Few understand how something that is a valued achievement can be cheapened when it becomes too common-place. I don't think that a lot of people know what it means for something to truly be a "trophy". Good observation there, Grow. I agree a few thousand percent.

I love all this day-dreaming about manipulation of deer gender ratios, as if there is anything that the DEC really has the ability to do. From what I have seen, they have their plate full just keeping some kind of balance on the over-all deer population. Anything beyond that is merely a fantasy on somebody's wish list. Understand that antlerless permits are a tool useful only in over-all population control, which has a goal of maintaining deer numbers in balance with habitat and societal needs for coexistance. Gender ratios are not even a small part of that.

If people want to lie, they will lie. I'm sure they are doing it now, and you probably can't change that even if you stay with the system as it is. However, if penalties for both failure to report an falsifying reports were ratcheted up a bit, it may cause people to think twice before issuing a false report. But anyway that is a separate issue. We now have very flawed system that makes a mockery of the "mandatory" reporting requirement. And I am simply saying that a very slight massaging of existing software could put that problem away for good. And save the DEC some resources in the process. We have computerized license issuing. We have computerized reporting. We have computerized manipulation of the data. It's all there right now. Just simply use it and there will be no more dodging the reporting responsibilities. Simple computer sorts will poop out who has or hasn't reported. And if you want computerized warnings to be sent out, that can be done too. And if you want computerized tickets to be mailed out that can be done too.

And can you imagine, in your wildest dreams, the size, scope and cost of a management plan that would do that statewide? And that from a government agency that is kept on a starvation diet as far as resources. A small dose of realism puts my expectations at simply: balance the deer population so that we have a rough match between over-all deer numbers and the available habitat and societal requirements for coexistance with humans .... most of the time. Forget gender ratios. Forget the perfect age distributions. Just get the population size right and I will be satisfied. We can demand whatever we want from the DEC, but the fact is that you get what you pay for, and right now we aren't paying for a whole lot.

Unfortunately that is the one number that needn't be guesstimated. There really doesn't have to be a "reporting rate" concocted, and that number could easily change to something just a bit shy of 100% through mandatory reporting for every tag issued (successful or not). And huge amounts of resources could be saved to boot, simply applying some minor software writing and by utilizing the power of the computers that they already have in place.

A lot of options are controlled by township ordinances. Maybe an outhouse is a good option .... lol. Whatever you do, consider that someday you may want to put in a well. So if you get involved with seepage pits or composting or dumping chemical toilet refuse, etc., consider where such things are located relative to any potential well sites.

For years, I used cigarette smoke. No where near as good as the milkweed seed, but it sure did tell quite a story about where I was about to get busted from ..... lol.

Coincidentally, here is a trail-cam picture from last night: And then the one that I got last year ..... I had a skeletal mount done of him: I only hunt mature deer......lol.

And yet another AR thread.

Ok, that answers the question ......thanx

Lol .... So, exactly how many AR threads do we have going now? Is there some point that gets made when we flood the forum with the same topic? I don't get it.