Doc

Ok .... That's kind of in line with what I was thinking. It's the kind of place that makes sense only to the deer. I know that any hunter could pass through these areas and never see anything there that would make him think he should hunt there. Except that if you happen to see deer there often enough, and maybe even use a trail-cam to verify your suspicions, you might have tapped into their secret travel corridor. I do believe that deer have places that make them feel relaxed and comfortable to travel through. They may not even be correct about that, but there just may be some kind of history with that area that they may not have been disturbed too much before. It may also relat eto a feeling of safety because of scent from other deer. I will say that the nature of these places that I have found really reflects a plain-ness that most hunters wouldn't even bother hunting, and perhaps that is another aspect of the "safe feeling". And, I do believe that there is multi-generational conditioning that deer go through in life. I believe that deer do follow certain patterns simply because they have been taught by previous generations. I think that some of these patterns are imprinted on them as fawns. I also think that there are deer scent deposits that have a calming effect and create a feeling of safety. Ah yes, it is all theoretical and we will never know all this stuff for sure, but it's hard not to have a curiosity about such things.

Just what form should this public self-flagellation take in order to adequately "demonstrate we care"? There are many who would consider nothing short of total surrender of firearms would ever demonstrate that we care. Frankly I am getting a bit sick of the inference that it is somehow the fault of legal gun owners everytime wack-jobs like this go over the edge. It is not up to us to capitulate and support further gun control everytime someone mis-uses firearms. And by the way, it is not up to the NRA to donate our money to correction of mental health issues. I hate to be so blunt, but that is just a plain old goofy idea. Honestly, I don't know what gets into some people's minds. They think that every episode of gun violence has to be met with a pound of flesh from every gun owner and gun advocacy organization. Where the heck does that kind of mentality come from?

Actually, I haven't heard any weathermen claiming that the drought is over. And I pretty much agree with them. We got a decent soaker, and it was pretty much in time to save a lot of stuff, but we have a lot of summer left. It remains to be seen whether this dry pattern is really broken or not. I'm looking at my empty pond and noting that even with all that rain, there is no perceptible change there.

Sure we do ...... His brain got twisted. It happens. He went Cuckoo. He's not the first. He won't be the last. And whatever was going on in his head was probably very logical to him, but I don't ever expect to be able to understand any of it ..... thankfully.

You have to wonder just how many gun control laws are enough. For decades, we have written and passed more laws regarding gun control than we will ever be able to completely understand. Volumes of local, state and federal laws have filled up law books to the point where every aspect other than outright firearms bans have been covered multiple times. What kind of additional laws will be the magic solution. I keep hearing that we need to pass more laws to somehow screen out these wackos from ever getting a gun, but the fact is that no one seems to recognize that humans often react randomly. And there really is no way of controlling the entire U.S. citizenry to the extent that you can eliminate all possibilities of some random person flipping out. It is nice to say, "there ought to be a law to ..... ", but I am more interested in what specific laws do people think would eliminate these unpredictable acts. I don't hear a lot of that kind of useful discussion. But I know where a lot of that kind of thinking usually gets to when you press people on this. That would be the complete elimination of firearms in the country.

The thought about these areas being safe for the deer would make some sense except that the use of these areas is not a result of pressure. I'm not talking about some area of dense cover that they have been driven into by hunting season. In fact the deer that I see in those locations are there whether a season is in progress or not. The habitat is actually quite open. One is a section of very mature hardwoods (you can see for hundreds of yards), and the other is an area of new regeneration timber that is very open and consists of ash trees and young maples. Both of these areas are travel areas with deer obviously on their way from somewhere and heading to somewhere else, but the unpatterned directions of entrance and exit really don't leave any clues as to where and why they are moving the way they do. It really appears to be just a random travel corridor without any trails. I really cannot figure any reason for them to be there and yet they very often are seen moving through. Just one of those mysterious situations that you only discover by spending a lot of time in the woods. Yes, something in their minds, instincts or random movements, makes those areas part of their travel, but as far as I can determine, it is something that only they understand or react to. I suppose that it could be some kind of hub in their various bedding and feeding movements, and the fact that headings seem to be arbitrary may relate to changing food sources and bedding area preferences. I have also run into these kinds of spots in the middle of some rather large stretches of unbroken mature woods. They just seem to be deer magnets for some unexplainable reason. I was just wondering if others had run across such places.

Anyone who thinks that blaze orange is some kind of magic protection that makes you bullet-proof is just as mistaken as those who try to deny its effectiveness. Blaze orange does not make people smarter or more concerned with safe hunting. It doesn't stop irrational hunting behavior or blinding excitement. It is not a cure-all, and it is a foolish person who thinks so. Blaze orange does enhance a hunter's visibility. It does improve dramatically the distinction between a human and an animal. It is a visual color that is designed to catch the eye of other hunters as an alert that there is another hunter in the area, possibly within lethal shooting distance. Don't expect more than that. But also, don't ignore what it does do.

I'm going back to the original question of "who is excited about expanded AR". I can only say that I'll reserve my excitement until I read some encouraging news about the results in the areas that have had AR for a bunch of years. Is it working? Do they have more and bigger and older bucks? Has there been any impact on the primary management tools ...... the hunters? Has the herd shown any kind of improvement because of a change in age structure of the bucks? Has putting restrictions there increased pressure on surrounding WMUs? Why is such a divisive, contentious, and controversial concept lacking in published results when we have so much time invested the experiment already? Show me some positive results in the areas that I mentioned, and I'll work on conjuring up some "excitement". Until then, it's just an aggravating source of controversy that generates a whole lot more heat than light.

I was so impressed when they first came to Henrietta. It was a huge outdoor store like I had never seen before. More darn hunting products under one roof, and everything done in a real "top-shelf" fashion. What a dismal disappointment that outfit has become. Products are stocked in such a way that they seem to never have what I want. Inventories are kept so low that many shelves are empty. Trying to find someone to help you out is a huge task because they keep the staffing at a completely useless level. Intelligence and knowledge of what few clerks that you can find there is somewhat suspect. Prices that were quite reasonable at first are now higher than almost anywhere else that stocks the same items. It is about a 40 minute drive for me to get there, but for the past bunch of years, I have driven the hour and 15 minutes that it takes me to get to Auburn to get to the Bass-Pro shop there. I may not always be happy with the prices there, but I have yet to go there and not find what I want.

Ok, and yet one more time : http://www.cdc.gov/m...ml/00044112.htm The info on this page is simply a raw compilation of actual shooting incidents that anyone can interpret for themselves. Other than outright falsification, there really is no way for flaws to enter in. It is what it is. Take a look. It is actually very interesting stuff for anybody that is interested. As far as the theory of hunters becoming conditioned to shoot anything that isn't orange, I give that the same credibility that I would give any other unfounded, unproven, and unsupported notion. Show me the data and I'll become a believer. Otherwise, I consider it to be simply someone's pipe-dream or made up story to validate an otherwise indefensible need for not wearing blaze orange.

What is it with those weird spots that always seem to have deer, but for no apparent reason. I recently discovered another one of those this year. It's one of those places with absolutely no trails, no favored feed, and no obvious reason for deer to habitually be there. And yet they very often are there. I have found these spots by simply being on the same property for decades and making observations. The most recent one is a spot where I have often spooked deer while walking through. This year I put a camera there, and it is unbelieveable how many pictures of does and fawns that I have gotten so far. But it appears to be an area that deer just randomly filter through, never leaving any permanent trails or any other sign. It's just a pretty non-descript, random chunk of woods with no obvious draw. These are tough places to hunt, because the deer move randomly through it without staying on any particular trail. So setting up with a bow can have the deer right on top of you or more likely at distances beyond bow range. The camera has shown that they seem to come from just about every direction, and are heading out in all different directions. That makes getting wind direction right a pretty interesting proposition....lol. I have found a few other similar situations over the years that have no sign but always have deer hanging around. Again, just areas in the woods that look just like anywhere else on the hill, but for some reason always attract and hold deer. Have any of you people ever encountered these kinds of areas?

Look, you can dance around the issue in any way that you want, but you absolutely cannot dispute those numbers. Put any spin on it that you wish, but you still do not get past the reality of data. As far as people becoming conditioned to shoot things that are not orange, there is no data to support that.....none. It's a nice sounding story for those that want to bury their heads in the sand in the face of real data, but no one has shown any study or reason to believe that it actually happens. And yes, I definitely caught the unmistakeable macho linkage in your post. Funny stuff, but perhaps an attitude held by far too many hunters.

Let me provide the article address once again, and you can form your own opinions. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00044112.htm This will probably make an even dozen times that I have given the address. What is that old saying about leading a horse to water ..... lol. Look, I gave you all the pertainant data in that reply that you quoted, that any one needs to know to understand that B/O saves lives. You choose to ignore it, that's up to you. However, you did finally explain some of the opposition to B/O. I hadn't realized that it was some kind of macho thing, and that some relate hunting safety measures to defining the "real hunters" from the tenderfeet.....Ha-ha. I suspected that it was related to that kind of odd thinking, but I didn't want offend anyone by accusing them of that kind of mentality ..... lol. This is the first time I ever heard anyone try to say that hunters in B/O are more likely to shoot someone. I think that is just a plain old funny notion that probably doesn't even need a reply. Believe me, B/O isn't some kind of fashion statement for greenhorns. And nobody concocted those stats in case you ever have enough interest in the subject to actually read it. And, don't worry, there is no magic spell that comes over people when they put on blaze orange. It doesn't make them take sound shots or fling lead throughout the woods just to see what falls down. However, I will say that I worry a great deal about those in the woods who care so little for hunting safety that they refuse to take such a simple safety measure. It makes me wonder what other safety measures and practices they scoff at.

I have learned that Robin Hooded arrows are a thing to be avoided. I have had 7 of them and got to the point where I was pulling them apart when possible to save the second arrow. The novelty of the first one or two is great and does look good hanging on the wall. But sooner or later you learn to shoot at individual spots with each arrow. Even ripped up fletching and busted nocks get to be a pain. My thoughts on Robin Hoods is that it is a function of luck. I don't believe that any of my robin hoods occurred exactly dead center in the bullseye which tells me that one arrow accidently got in the way of another. None of them were done "on command" or done on purpose or predicted ahead of time. The only guy that I have ever seen drill one arrow with another on-command was Byron Ferguson, and even he didn't do it on the first attempt. When someone states that he is going to shoot a robin hood and then does it with just a few attempts, then I am really impressed. Otherwise, I see it as simply an accident caused by shooting too many arrows at the same target ..... lol. However, one or two hanging on the wall makes a heck of a conversation piece and will impress the heck out of non-archers.

Let's make this real easy to understand. We're all pretty used to computers now, so we all have an idea what their capabilities are. License-wise everything is or can be done involving the ones and zeros of a database. You get your license via computer and even if you don't, all your info is put onto a DEC database. So their computer knows how many and what kind of licences (permits) you have. The harvests are now all computerized, so their computers know what licenses have been used. If reporting involves ALL licenses (successful or not), a quick database sort will tell them who has reported all the results for all of the licenses. All done with the computer and almost all of it is in the computer already. No DEC employees involved. No running around to processers and taxidermists and hunting camps to try to conjure up some bogus "reporting rate" guesstimate. If you don't report the results for all your licenses and permits, the DEC knows all about it at the push of a button. Given that there would be no way of not reporting without the DEC being flagged, I have a hard time believing anybody would flaunt the law. Especially if the penalties were set properly. And by the way, if they want to get real fancy, the computer can issue warnings. And then if you still don't report, they can issue citations via computer. With the proper penalties, I bet you could get that reporting rate up into the upper 90 percent area. All this done with a minimum of actual DEC man-hours (actually far-far less than is currently being used). Sounds kind of good in this age of tight DEC budgets doesn't it. Better results with less manpower ..... can't beat that. It all boils down to one simple requirement. If you bought a license, you owe the DEC a report to cover it at the end of the season (successful or not).

Perhaps it was some of that "more natural competition among bucks" that put this buck in a world of hurt: I believe those to be some antler wounds that may have led to predators taking advantage of the situation and creating this destruction on the buck's rump: That deer was a mercy killing as it could barely get up, and the story in the snow showed that he had been there a long time in considerable pain. Several bloody beds in one small area. I'm sure that deer would not have made it for much longer. I used to have a deer skull that I found in the bottom of a ravine that had an antler tip embedded right between the eyes. I often wonder how many of those remains that we find in the woods and assume are gun-wounded deer are actually casualties of some of the fights. Anyway, the point I am thinking about is that the buck/doe ratios can also create more violence in the fighting, and also cause some additional trauma in terms of depleting needed reserves for making it through the upcoming winter. I wouldn't think that that sort of excessive exertion would be a good thing. I'm just guessing, but it seems that promoting a more violent pre-breeding season would be of little benefit to anything other than predators. I don't know ..... what do you think? Is it a good thing to create conditions of more stress on the buck population? Just asking.

I am just now thinking of moving my one camera site and adding a few more. The pictures are getting a bit repetitive since it appears that the does with fawns are the only ones that are hanging in that area. So now it is time to start moving into areas where I expect/hope to see bucks. I have changed from almost daily checking of cameras last year to about every week and occasionally every week and a half. I think it is probably good not to pressure any area too much with any kind of activity and I may extend intervals between checking even more. Somebody posted a video of a nice buck recently and I was struck with the caution and intense scent checking, and eventually the stare right at the camera as he took a couple more sniffs. It tells me that they are not fooled about the location of the camera and the human scent involved in babysitting one of these. It kind of convinces me that more trips into a bucks domain to check these cameras may definitely get more notice than I want. As the season gets closer, I will move the cameras farther and farther away from any of my stands. Hopefully, I will stumble on to a pattern of how some of these bucks are moving into and through the area. sounds like a good plan. Time will tell if it all works out as I hope.

Ok, both you and Paula are absolutely correct. I stand corrected. However, I do hope that people will understand when I respond to being misquoted. I can't allow that to stand. I choose my words carefully, and I mean exactly what I say. And I must say that I will not get bulldozed by a moderator or anyone else, but I will try to modify my responses so as not to get dragged down to that level. I'm not sure that I will always succeed because there are always those that tend to bait for those kinds of responses and I can only put up with so much of that kind of crap before I respond in kind ..... but what the heck, I definitely will try.

So now you are seeing things that aren't even there. I love it when you make things up. But in answer to your question, you have just quoted what I wanted to say, not what you imagined I said. I have spent quite a few words describing the difference to you, but you simply don't possess the ability to comprehend anything these days. For crying out loud, if you don't understand the english language, look it up before you run off at the mouth. And don't be changing my wording. I know what I want to say and how I want to say it. Oh and by the way, just for your own education the word you were trying to type is "senility".

Be careful. It's not unheard of to develop muscle and joint problems that can last years when stressing the arm, shoulder and back muscles and joints when pulling back a bow. The slightest error in coordination or form can instantly do damage ..... sometimes irreversible damage. Of course, only you can tell whether you are on the verge of too much body stress. I hate to hear about people that may be over-bowed because I know it can affect more than just your accuracy.

Actually it was WNY that stuck the word "condone" into the discussion and then tried to beat me up about it. If you would take the time to read the quotes, you would see that I really was talking about "tolerating" trespass which is the whole theme of yours and Doe's replies. So don't be telling me that I don't get it. And don't be changing the language of my replies like WNY has attempted to do. You have made it clear that you think it is unreasonable for landowners to have unbending feelings about trespass violations, and to me that indicates an expression of tolerance for those kinds of violations. I was merely commenting on that. As far as your potty training and breast feeding habits or problems, I can assure you that I have no interest in that whatsoever. By the way, here are a couple of excerpts that you might find familiar: "During hunting season or if the guy was carrying a machete on his hip, I might feel different. But it's a 12 yr old on his bike in the summer with a helmet on." I guess I missed the part of trespass law that talks about machetes, bikes and helmets and age but I guess this is what makes the difference between whether its a violation or not. Again, excuse-making and tolerance for trespass. Which was exactly the point I was making in my reply. And as for the condoning (WNY's and your word not mine...lol) of trespass let's try this: "And for those that think only a trespasser would condone such an act. Well, guilty as charged." And then you go on to brag about your trespassing exploits as a kid. Look, I don't mind people disagreeing with me, but when they change my words and then try to mock me for what they changed them to, I do get a bit testy. It's a cheap trick that should be beneath you.

Well, how about that ..... finally one rain that didn't skirt around us. And it wasn't very violent either. It was actually a nice steady rain for a short time. Nothing like what we need to fix up the water table, or chsnge the level of my pond to any noticeable extent. but it did give the garden and the lawn a good drink that may last a few more days.

He really is interested in the scent of something in the area. Interesting how he ends up looking straight at the camera and taking one more scent check of the air. I think he knows something is going on .... lol. That is a great video of a nice buck. The camera is doing a good job for you.

Often I try to check out location on posts and topics that might be geographic-sensitive. For example, I know terrain, habitat, deer populations, climate, hunter pressure, and a few other things are completely different up in the Adirondacks than they are over here in Western NY. A lot of times such things can have a bearing on comments about hunting results, methods, and other aspects of hunting or observations.

Boy! you get a lot of pictures of critters that don't even live down where I am (moose and snowshoe). I love seeing a variety of animals and you sure did get some great pictures of all kinds of things.