Doc

Lol .... I've got this one. Along came the miracle age of billions of dollars of research in wonder-drug creation which corporations want to get a return on in the first year through ridiculous prices. These wonder drugs and exhorbitant medical and surgical procedures in turn has made people think that they can live forever. In fact it has made them demand that they live forever regardless of cost. In fact all that has been so successful, that they can keep a body alive long after you have ceased to actually function as a thinking human being (and in some cases actually do). Now people (myself included) make regular routine visits to doctors, and get prescribed some of these wonder drugs with daily dosages at ridiculous costs. We are now chemically regulated. Also, we now have regular tests that check for inclinations toward certain diseases that then lead to more medications and more super-expensive exotic medical procedures. Never mind that many of these tests are flawed and commonly return false positives. With all this medical coddling, the costs for eternal life are way beyond anything that anyone other than the independantly wealthy can possibly afford so insurance is the tool that we use to achieve our present day version of immortality. Well, there's no such thing as a free lunch, so somebody has to pay the exhorbitant bills for all this. And we have not yet even scratched the surface as to what great new expensive drugs and procedures that medical scientist can concoct to insure their accumulation of wealth. In fact it is accelerating. Remember, these things are all happening at our own demand. So naturally insurance costs are going through the roof. I'm not even sure how much greed is actually due to insurance companies. Prior to the 60's, death was an accepted inevitability that everyone accepted, and they had a much more realistic view of how the birth-life-death cycle actually works. I remember farmers and others that didn't even know what health insurance was, and had absolutely no need for such nonsense. Today it is an expected right. Oh sure there is some litigious notions that have caused doctors to take defensive expensive policies that have been passed on in their fees. And there are new welfare situations and outside forces that take advantage of our system, and many other smaller pieces to the puzzle. But the primary culprit is our own unrealistic demand to live forever at whatever cost it takes. It's now institutionalized. How are you going to fight that? But anyway, in answer to your question, I believe this is the primary answer as to what has happened since the 50's and 60's that has turned health care into the 800 pound gorilla.

I have very little thinking in common with this current president, but some one a page or so back asked the question of "What are the alternatives". It's all well and good to throw the stones, and many of the complaints are absolutely spot on. But I still have to ask where are (or were) the competing plans to solve the health insurance situation. Obviously health care is on the fast track to becoming unaffordable ..... anyone arguing about that? All the brilliant minds in the country, and I have not heard anyone come up with even a suggestion of another approach to the problem. They have been picking around the edges with tort reform and other obscure meaningless things. But where are the comprehensive plans? Did I miss them somewhere along the line?

It's not really on topic, but I have to comment on this notion that unhealthy habits cost us more money. I have yet to be convinced that people with unhealthy habits and lifstyles cost us anywhere near what it costs to keep all the health nuts for years and years on their preventive medication and procedures and then eventually in nursing homes for decades. Anyone ever consider what the alternatives are to people dying early from their health neglect. Does anyone think that it is not a super costly venture to be constantly expanding the life expectancy. I love the term preventive health care .... as if you can actually cheat death and prevent inevitable health problems. The only real difference is that the ones with bad health habits leave us sooner. It's all a question of timing, and longer is not cheaper. Sure it's nice that we can maybe add a few years onto our lives and enjoy some extra time here, but let's not think that the benefit is in anyway financial. I don't believe it for a minute.

Every year, something wrecks our garden. I was wondering what it was going to be this year since we got off to such a great start. I think I know now .... lol. Have you all seen the extended forcast. Yeah they show a bit of rain here and there but when those days actually get here, they have had a record so far this year of being just piddly little isolated showers that always seem to miss us. My pond is drying up (not unusual) and it is the only source of garden watering. I'm not going to stress my well just to grow a garden. So, unless something changes shortly, the garden this year will most likely be a voictim to drought. I feel for you people that have put a lot of effort and money into your plots. I suppose there's not a whole lot you can do about it. Let's just hope the weather turns around a bit before it's too late.

Here's what's bothering me about the whole issue ...... It's our water supply that we are talking about. I have been listening to months and months of all the back and forth arguing all with very impressive credentials and super scientific studies in hand. This from both sides of the issue. So it comes down to who can you believe. Neither side seems to have more credibility than the other. Scientific studies and research, hundreds of eye-witness experiences and accounts .... they have all done excellent jobs of turning it into an issue that leaves the average layman totally confused. So who cares if it's confusing? Well, it's not like it is some item or situation where you can choose not to buy or use or associate with it. It is a discussion about the safety of your drinking water. Take the water off my property, and it would become worthless. Worse than that, if it can be polluted with some of the hazardous chemicals that the frackers themselves admit to, your own water could wind up killing you. So what's the choices. We have a process that can't seem to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is safe for such a vital supply as the water that you drink. We have a national need for alternative fuel. We have a potential for financial infusions in areas that could use a bit of help. What decision or factor sits highest on our personal list of priorities. For me, I have to put the health and natural resources at the top. I've finally decided that I am against the "fracking" process until they have absolutely proven that it is safe in indisputeble terms. And I don't mean that it is "most likely" or "probably" safe. There is no fuel source that is worth risking anyone's health or water supply on. That's the one thing that's very clear about the whole issue.

????

As they say ..... a picture is worth a thousand words. That pic will definitely keep me away from the stuff.

I very often purposely put stands in pairs. My reason for that is to be able to handle different wind directions. But my reasons aside, I have never found any problem with having the extra stand. And to emphasize that point I will say that I only construct ground blinds anymore so my stands are definitely more obtrusive than treestands. However, I will also point out that my stands are usually there season after season and have actually become an accepted part of the landscape. In your case you are looking for options. Nothing wrong with that, but I will caution that you might find yourself changing stands and then looking back over to your original and watching all the deer over there .... lol. It can become a "grass is greener on the other side" sydrome.

But we sure have listed a bunch of them on this thread. Sometimes it's good to just sit back and think about some of these things. In fact, the stuff on these two pages pretty much shows that we're not just bunch of kill-crazed individuals, and that the whole hunting experience is a very honorable and well thought out endeavor that is a whole lot more complex than any of the anti-hunters would try to make people believe. I think it's pretty interesting stuff.

Wow! ... talk about a delayed reaction ..... lol. There is nothing in your reply that has not already been answered in the past 4 pages, so I guess I'll let this one rest. It seems to be a very devisive topic that no one really wants to change there mind about, so further redundant discussion seems kind of worthless. If it shows back up in legislation, there may be some point to going through the whole discussion again.

I've been studying the picture some more, and I'm pretty sure it is a mountain lion with big ears. Those big-eared mountain lions are fairy rare, but have been seen in the area.

Now that you mention it, they do all look a bit concerned. The body language does not suggest that it is simply another sibling. So far, I have not seen any indicator of the deer's ability to "jump the flash". This is a pretty quick camera, so when that flash goes off, they really don't get a chance to screw up the picture by starting to run. So I do think the little guy in the foreground is already exiting the area. By the way, don't be thrown off by the relative size of what appears to be an intruder. The ground does drop away in height back in there, and it is partially clear for a ways back, so the critter may be quite a ways back making him appear smaller than it really is. I saw the outline of the ear too, and it does look a bit like a deer's ear.

Well, I'm no expert on the subject of food plots, so it's probably not surprising that I have never ran into one. But as someone pointed out, conditions of herd size, available natural browse, the general health of the plot, and a bunch of other variables probably make boiling it all down to a single formula kind of difficult. On the other hand, I guess I thought that there might be at least a general formula that would give you a very rough guide with maybe a bunch of qualifiers. But, at least it was worth a question just to try to see what kind of info is available on the subject.

A oicture of doe and her twins .................... or is that triplets? Look in the background. Is that another deer, another fawn, or some other critter back there licking it's chops? I'm guessing its another fawn. What's your guess?

I know we all like to bad-mouth unions, especially those of us who are not members. I've certainly had my say about them over the years, and there certainly are adequate examples of ridiculous things happening as a result of union greed and abuse. However, there are some other things that I have noticed happening in corporate America that has softened my view just a bit. For example, when overtime rules at work changed that made a bunch of us ineligible for overtime pay, which came coincidentally at a time when mandatory overtime became quite oppressive. Always the threat of "you don't like it, there's the door". And then there was the time when I was asked to wear a pager while at home. No, I wasn't being compensated for the "on-call" arrangement. It was just some more "something for nothing" that the corporations were demanding. And then there was the continuing wage freezes and all the bogus language that they used to justify that. And now I see people running around in stores with that ridiculous gadget hanging off their ear talking obvious work related crap. And of course there are shrinking health benefits, and shrinking vacation benefits for new hires, and the constant threat to job security (there is no such thing anymore). Over-all, there is the expectation that employees begin to give back the labor gains that were acheived over many decades. The requirement is that employees are to move more toward a 24/7 commitment to the corporation with wages that are moving more toward those of over-seas employees. Yes there are still labor union excesses, and plenty of them. But while we are busy beating up on unions, the corporate world is taking advantage of this diversion to grab back a lot of the employee benefits that we have taken for granted over the years. You don't have to look very far or very hard to find some very glaring examples of that. I've heard people say (and I've said it myself) that unions have outlived their need. Well, maybe that is a bit of a hasty conclusion. Time will tell. But of course by the time we realize what is going on, unions will become completely impotent.

I have found exactly the same thing when it comes to bucks. As soon as there is the first hint of rut, I have noticed that unless a buck is scent-tracking a doe, they tend to travel crosswise to the major trails. That can mean having them pushing through some brush in a wacky location that doesn't even give you a shot. My theory is that it makes a whole lot of sense that a buck can cut more hot doe trails by traveling across the major trails, scent-checking as many different trails as possible instead of following a single trail. That probably accounts for all these stories that you hear about how the buck came in behind the hunter. So even if the hunter does have the wind in his face, in those cases, all that good planning doesn't help him out at all. So how does that relate to stand placement? Well it certainly does relate to hacking in a few extra shooting lanes ..... my "just in case" shooting lanes. In terms of considering the wind direction vs. this frequent ugly travel pattern of bucks when placing a stand, I haven't figured a way of factoring that in other than relying on just plain old luck.

I'm still trying to figure out what a "new truck for hunting" is .... lol. Are you talking about a truck devoted just to hunting? .....for what purposes? I remember back in the late 80's when I bought a shiny new 4WD ford pick-up. The choice was driven by a need for a vehicle to carry canoes, and gear for a week's moose hunting trip deep in the badlands of Canada. Thinking back it was kind of an impulsive thing to do, but I was able to justify it .... lol. Anyway, I know what kinds of thoughts did it for me, but I was just curious as to what kinds of hunting activities justify a new truck purchase for others.

You seem to be very eager to start a controversy where none exists. I frankly have no clue what the heck you are talking about. Look, if your thing is putting in agriculture sized food plots, knock your socks off. I frankly don't care, but this constant sniping is getting a bit silly. Do what you want. I was simply asking a question. You seem to want to turn it into some kind of an argument. Sorry but I just don't get it. You want me to say I'm wrong and you're right about something? OK ..... you're right and I'm wrong. I hope that finally settles what ever your problem is.

One thing I've noticed is that everybody puts wind direction pretty high on their list of "important features of stand selection", and I definitely agree that a deers nose is a prime defense mechanism. However, most of us talk like there is always a nice constant wind direction, when in my experience, that almost never is the case regardless of where I go. For me, the wind shifts are particularly devastating since I hunt in hill and valley terrain. Thermals drive me nuts with wind often reversing direction right at the most critical times of the hunt. I love to mess around with milkweed seeds while on stand, and they really show you just how messed up our perception of wind direction really is. It's not unusual to watch those little seeds float in one direction and then take a 90 degree shift as soon as it get just a few yards out and then shift again, and again. It just shows how inconsistant one of our prime features of stand selection can be even when we think we have it all figured out. There's not a whole lot you can do about wind variations other than note which direction seems to be the most prevalent and then cross your fingers and hope that one of those unfortunate twists and turns doesn't happen when the deer comes along. It's the one element of stand selection that requires the biggest portion of luck.

As I clearly explained, I have no problems with food plots relative to my hunting style or philosophy. Where on earth did you get that from? My issue with the proposed arrangement, as I clearly stated was with the lack of harvest management control on property that I was expected to drop some money into. And I'm not sure what the crack about a "made up mind" was all about. Where that came from, I have no idea. I posed a question and got a wide variety of answers. The only thing I made my mind up to was that I was heading for a bad deal.

Pretty ugly video. It's a shame that some kids can act this way. I do believe it is a "mob mentality" thing. And I suspect that it probably is not the kind of thing that a majority (or even very many) of today's kids would find themselves involved in. But I do find it troubling that we have created a system where there seems to be so little that anyone can do about these things when they do occur. I see this kind of mentality as being a sign of troubled kids that will probably grow into troubled adults. These are the same kinds of kids that get their jollies by torturing pets, etc. (usually a pre-cursor to more advanced violent anti-social behavior).

No, like I said on the previous page of this thread, I re-evaluated the whole deal, and backed out of it. After thinking about the quantity of hunters that my Brother-in-law traditionally invites to hunt his property, and the brown & down deer harvesting philosophies over there, I figured I have much better places to put my money. I figure it was a bad idea that I really hadn't thought through very well. However, the resulting info that came out of this thread was really quite interesting even though there seems to be no clear cut agreement on over-sized plots.

So, what do you all think? How do you define a real "mountain man"? Do you think that any actually exist that live the life that you believe a true mountain man does? If they do exist, do you think they would put up with being followed around by a camera crew? Trying to create such a program probably amounts to the same difficulty as trying to create a program about sasquatch.....lol. I watch the show with no great expectations other than seeing how these specific people exist in a wilderness or semi-wilderness surrounding. Aside from the over-exaggerated narration, I suppose the program does that fairly well.

I guess we all have different ideas of what a mountain man should be like. usually when I hear the term, I think of those trappers who first began the western movement. But then, time marches on, and I believe that the definition of mountain men has changed for most of us to allow for those that choose to live in remote, and wild to semi-wild places. In fact, I don't believe there is even any requirement for solitary existance to qualify as a mountain man. I am thinking of some of the families that live buried in the wilds of Appalachia (sp?). Many of these people live in widely-spread out communities, and have become quite adept at mixing living off the land with a small amount of introduction of very basic technology. Some of the documentaries that depict the lives of these mountain inhabitants show a view of people who still apply self-reliance in the mountains, but not necessarily isolation and complete freedom from equipment from the outside world. The fact is that even the mountain men of pioneer days used as much of the day's technology as they could easily carry with them. So there is a different kind of mountain man that is not clad in furs and buckskin and carrying a primitive muzzle loader and living among, or fighting, indians. And I think it is the modern mountain man that they are trying to illustrate, and probably what you see is about as close as anyone can come to finding samples of people that live the modern definition of the term. I have other issues with the program (particularly the bogus narration), but I do allow some leeway as to how they define a "mountain man". I think it is a much broader term today than many of us think.

When thinking about the wind, don't forget those pesky thermals that can switch directions on you right when the sun drops over the hill. Those should also become a factor in stand placement.