Doc

Actually, the characters are believable enough, but the narration that goes along with this program is what seems to be a bit of a stretch. They do a lot of over-dramatization of things that otherwise would be pretty mundane things.

The very first thing that sends me to select a stand location, is past activity that I have witnessed over the years. For example, there are traditional bedding areas, there are rut areas that have been established for decades. There are changing food sources that I have noted over the years, that simply need to be timed, re-verified or re-discovered. In a couple of locations, I have simply discovered that deer filter through a specific piece of woods for no real apparent reason. Having hunted the same grounds for years is a heck of an advantage. Having said all that, there is still the constant re-verification process, because over the decades things change, and it is always important to keep knowledge evergreen.

So, I was watching the trapper in Alaska who was having trouble with his snowmobile. Finally it just quit 10 miles from the cabin and he decided to start walking home. I couldn't help wondering why he didn't just grab a ride with the camera-men ...... lol. I guess you have to play along with some of this stuff and try to stay in the spirit of the story-line. For some reason he didn't take his rifle with him, even though they definitely were working hard to paint a picture of constant danger from wolves and bears which kind of tells me that dangerous predators probably are not the concern that they have tried to portray. Also it's obvious that these guys all have (or had) some alternate means of income. Just looking at the facilities, tools, and equipment, and the constant ready access to gasoline, planes, chainsaws, etc. kind of is a clue. But then I suppose nobody ever said that they were always completely destitute. It would be a much better program if they took all the contrived drama out of it. There's not much doubt that before and probably long after the cameramen all go away, the lifestyle still is a pretty darn challenging one. And each of the three lifestyles have certain hardships that make it a way of life that none of us have chosen. So, I tend to cut the program some slack and treat it like a fictionalized and dramatized documentary. And perhaps the program does give a very rough glimpse into what such lifestyles could be for those of us who have ever contemplated living in that way. You just have to recognize some of the stuff as being pure dramatization and try not to be too bothered by that. It's fun to point out the mistakes and flaws in the story-line, but underneath it all, there are still some people who choose a pretty challenging way of life.

Actually, My questions about big plots were valid regardless of the discussions between my Brother-in-law and myself. And frankly I am still surprised that somebody has not boiled it all down to an actual formula that gets you roughly into the ballpark as far as plot size .... something to serve as a starting point or planning tool. Logic kind of tells me that there has to be some efficient size qualifications where if you go too far, you are simply throwing money and effort away, and if you don't go far enough you are not achieving your goals. And I would guess that deer density has to figure into it all. And I would also guess that field planting composition would give you the rest of it all. So I figured, why not ask the question and see if it has been turned into a formula or a process that somebody could explain to me.

Probably one thing that I would not recommend is that you hang your bow in the back window of your pick-up truck. On some of these 90 degree days, I wouldn't even put my bow in the trunk or back seat for any extended length of time. I can't scientifically prove it, but I really do believe that temperature extremes can't do a whole lot of good to something that is laminated and held bent under pressure.

Back in the old days, there were darn few of us, and we weren't all that successful. We were looked at by the gun-hunting community as strictly a harmless little band of odd hunters who really didn't affect anything or ever actually get anything. Then along came the compound bow, and the numbers grew in a huge way, and success rates began to sky-rocket. All of a sudden, gun-hunters are regularly seeing pictures and articles of huge bucks being taken by archers. Everyone now knows somebody or a bunch of somebodys that have taken a deer with a bow, and even some who regularly take a buck with a bow. They look on TV and it looks absolutely easy to take big bucks with a bow. Now they see bow ads that depict bows as a space-age weapon that can perform all kinds of accuracy, power and devastation. It could be that given all these out-of-scale claims and biased portrayal of bowhunting, that people are beginning to think that we no longer really need any kind of special seasons. In fact I have heard that sentiment expressed on this forum more than a few times. Also, as time has gone by, we have pushed for and received much longer seasons, and increased bag limits and the use of DMPs, and all kinds of other "goodies". These things have not gone un-noticed by the gun-hunters. Many times these additional benefits have not been matched by corresponding benefits for gun hunters. I'm sure they get the feeling that all this stuff is happening in a one-sided fashion. Guys that aren't involved with anything relating to bowhunting can easily begin to believe some of this hype, and they have no real experience to put it all back into true perspective. So, maybe they begin to think that we are getting too much of a break. Maybe they really do believe that we are cherry-picking the best of the best bucks before they get a chance at them. Maybe they see all the legislative changes as benefitting bowhunters only. Remember .... just because they may have incorrect perceptions doesn't mean that those perceptions do not color their attitudes. As our numbers grow and our equipment improves, and the manufacturer's hype continues to clog the TV airways, this feeling that we are getting unfair advantages might continue to grow along with the dislike for bowhunters. We may even begin to see some regulatory challenges that try to level the playing field in their eyes. Who knows? After all, we still are in the minority.

Last night I went over to have a chat with the Brother-in-law, and I kind of backed out of the whole deal. When I got to thinking about the whole arrangement, It started to look more and more like a bad idea. Traditionally, he has a huge gang of hunters that hunt there and most are of the "brown and down" persuasion. I know that isn't going to change. So when I got to thinking about me being the prime financial donor in the project, and not having a word to say about how the land was to be managed, I figured the best thing to do would be to quietly bow out. It probably would have been a situation that wouldn't have ended well anyway.

It all was centered around the Emil Mueller farm, but took in areas up and down both East Lake Road and West Lake Road. There were logged areas where you could see way up the hill through the woods and see all kinds of deer. There were household yards that were full of deer. There were deer standing in the roads, some of which you had to steer around because they wouldn't move. Out in one of the bigger fields, you could see the white mounds of dead snow-covered deer among the the ones that were standing there pretty much waiting to die. On the surrounding fences, you would see a few deer hanging that had tried to jump over, but lacked the strength to make it all the way over. The condition of the deer was obvious starvation. The quantity of deer that were there made it obvious that these were not resident deer. In fact on trips through the area in the summer months really didn't jump out at you as being an area that was over-populated with deer. So, I believe that these yarded deer represented deer from miles away including the resident deer. No real way of knowing though. His land and others in that area were quite heavily posted. Actually that is a common trait with most of the land in the area even today. The only visible attraction was the fact that he had the typical farm crops planted that any of the area farmers grew. But when I first saw the situation, it looked to me like the ground was completely bare. There was absolutely nothing left. It was a pretty unsettling sight that I will never forget. Unfortunately, I was not into photography back then or those pictures would have been quite spectacular. By the way, when he died years later, the entire farm was left to the state with some kind of Finger Lakes Community College connection. The land is marked and used as regular state land, but I think the buildings and grounds are now the property of the college.

Actually not necessarily all that far north. I had the misfortune of witnessing the huge yard at the south end of Honeoye lake. I'm not sure just what the draw was for a couple of years to a couple of farm fields over there, but it sure got way out of hand. It wasn't just a few deer, it was hundreds. I'm not sure just how far those critters traveled. But as soon as the weather cleared ..... poof!..... they were all gone. Of course after a couple of years of that, the whole population kind of collapsed. It wasn't a pretty sight. Well anyway, That's not a result I would expect from the creation of one small food plot .... lol. Like I said, I don't know what was so special about those few fields. Certainly, it didn't take too long before everything in those fields and surrounding browse was stripped, and even today, you can see the results. So in almost no time at all, there wasn't any attraction there at all, and yet .... there they were (some dead some barely alive). Pretty gruesome stuff! That yarding stuff is something I'll never completely understand, but then that's another topic.

No, these things are not pieces of delicate china or something. Generally speaking, you have to abuse the hell out of them to actually create damage. And I'm talking about more than just how you store them. Actually, the Matthews that I use never does get stored. It is strung all the time, at full hunting weight and simply hung on the wall and normally used at least once a week. If that is going to do any damage, then I wouldn't even want to be shooting it .... lol.

Thanks for the info. I will pass it along to my Brother-in-law as well. Maybe I can talk him into a more reasonable size plot. Interesting you should mention deer coming in from 3 miles. I don't think that's something I want to promote. My experience with the winter wanderers is that they don't pemanently relocate, and could wind up feeding a bunch of "yarding" deer that are no where around when hunting season is here. It might be that there is such a thing as being too successful ..... lol.

Not trying to speak for anyone else, but I would think that a direct private message would be in order and a suggestion that the picture might want to be taken down to avoid legal hassles. That way, instead of a guy getting all pissed off and embarrassed, he is actually kind of grateful that you are looking out for him.

That is exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I believe the DEC publishes a deer-per-square-mile figure by township. I think I have seen that in the past. From that info there should be a way of getting to an average plot size that is recommended, depending on what is planted in the plot. I'm probably making a whole lot more of this than it should be, but I do not have deep pockets, and have no spare money laying around to be wasted on developing excess acreage of plantings.

Farming has just about deserted the area. They left the deeper valleys back in the 50's. The nearest farm is almost 8 miles away, and that guy has land of his own that is not being tilled. No, we're pretty much on our own with this project. I just have to talk him down in the size of the operation. A 24 acre plot just seems way over-done for a food plot size.........At least that is my take on it. Actually, that's the info I was hoping to get from this thread. It seems to me that by now there should have been some formula developed by the QDM folks that would take the DEC estimated deer per square mile and tell you an approximate plot size that would take care of all the deer within feeding distance of your plot. I'm not talking exact numbers here, but just some sort of guideline.

Quite interesting. Should make for some great video.

I absolutely understand. I am often accused of doing "make-work" projects just to stay active. And it's true. I believe that at my age, when I cease to stay busy, I will seize up and come to a quick end. I also understand interest in farming activities. Some of my best days were spent behind the wheel of a tractor, especially as a kid. And of course having been a farm kid growing up in rural NYS, I have a natural attraction to growing things. And the appeal of food plots for me is based on a lot of that. And by the way, I have seen some of the pictures of the areas that you have created, and they absolutely add to the aesthetics of your place. It all obviously represents a heck of a lot of work and results in one beautiful place. It's very rewarding to see the difference that hard work can make. One of the reasons for the question in this thread was an offer from my Brother-in-law to put in a food plot on his land across the road. My property is almost entirely mature woods with very little acreage that is tillable and he has this huge abandoned field that is starting to go back to brush. My part in this venture would be financial since he has some of the equipment and the land. And, I know he would like to put his whole 24 acre field into a food plot. My initial reaction was that that is a huge area for a food plot, and would cost quite a bit. Great size for an farm hay-field .... lol .... but likely way more than needs to be utilized by the amount of deer in his area. So naturally, my mind turned to the subject of "how big is too big". I thought I might get some insight on here, but I'm beginning to believe that no one has developed any criteria for "right-sizing" food plots. It seems to be only that there is no limit, and bigger is better. Somehow that just doesn't seem to be logical to me, and I have kind of backed off the proposed deal. I was hoping that there might be some procedure, rule of thumb, or whatever for establishing a rough size for a food plot that served the purpose without spending cash on resources that no animal will ever use. So far no one seems to have any knowledge of that kind. Maybe nobody has done any research on that. So anyway, I am still looking for answers.

I was into Lowes today shopping for some pressure treated dimension lumber. I wanted some 8" one-by-fours. I never saw such a twisted mess of scabby, knotty, horrible, boards that really had no practical use to anybody. They were almost funny to look at. Seriously, it was amazing that they could get that many humps and twists in an 8' length without actually trying. Some of them had 3" sideways bows, if you can imagine that. And then to add insult to injury, they have the nerve to ask $3.97 apiece for that crap. I couldn't use them if they were free. There were some 10' lengths that were much better, so with enough sorting, I might be able to cut them up to get some useable 8' sections. I didn't have room in my car for 10' lumber, so tomorrow I will take the trailer. There's not a lot of lumber competition in Canandaigua since Chase Pitkin closed up.

Mine simply hangs in a rack on the basement wall that has 1" dowels wrapped in leather. The bows that I am not currently shooting are wrapped in clear plastic garbage bags and also hung in this rack. They are hung by the string which I assume is probably quite harmless. There is no relative motion of the strings vs. the dowels (aside from the occasional Adirondack tremor ....lol). The only pressure against the strings are the weight of the bow itself (negligible). Recurves are wrapped and hung with the limbs resting on the leather clad dowels. No direct sunlight and fairly stable temperatures.

Don't get me wrong, I am not talking about anyone's specific management of specific plots on specific parcels. My question was more of a generic kind of inquiry. I am not criticizing anyone's management, and none of my comments are aimed at anyone or any specific person or situation. I have seen pictures of plots that look more like an agricultural enterprise. They appear to be huge, and so it makes me curious as to whether there are practical limits. I have seen the prices on some of these bags of special deer formula seeds. I know that gas and diesel fuel prices have gone to ridiculous levels. I know that most people put some value on their time and all these things taken together can represent a huge cash outlay that I would think people would try to streamline to as efficient an operation as possible. Like I say, I have seen pictures of what I suspect is gross over-kill and so with all those things in mind, I was curious as to whether anyone even thinks in terms of over-doing plotting from an efficiency standpoint and from a standpoint of trying to balance created food sources to the size of the herd and the actual usage of what is being put in. It's a subject that I have never heard anyone talk about. I really was not trying to get into whether huge food plots can be "detrimental", other than the thought of simply throwing away good hard earned cash with no return. There has to be some practical limits. I was just curious as to whether anyone has established ways of determining where those limits are and how they are established.

I'm not bashing anybody. I have not said anything about favoring high fences, low fences, or no fences at all. But I will say that this attitude of "gotcha" seems just a tad unfriendly and unnecessary when we have a feature of PMs available.

So let me understand ..... are you trying to extend the NYB bash-fest or trying to ressurect the crossbow controversy. Just trying to figure out exactly what you are trolling for ..... lol.

All the old places where I used to do my woodchuck hunting have grown up to brush or had a house plunked in the middle. Most of the woodchucks I see anymore are next to the road .... lol.

Excess bedding areas are a different story because of the wandering nature of deer, but excess food is simply a waste, and hence my original question. Providing more food than resident deer can consume is something that makes no sense to me. First of all no property exists that does not already have some natural food sources there. So erring on the side of providing slightly too little probably is solved by the natural browse that currently exists. Too much is simply too much. Cover areas (bedding areas) are useful for providing browse (deer being naturally browsers rather than grazers), and also provide food and shelter for other species. I assume no one is interested in creating a "single-species property". So, I see a problem with opening up too large of an area to create an excess of deer food. So, I guess those are some of the thoughts that I had in mind when I raised the question about creating food plots that are way too large to ever be properly used by the deer. It seems there could be a danger of simply wasting time and money, and also creating nearly a "single species" unbalanced eco-system that is great for deer and little else. ...... Not so?

Lol ..... you haven't seen "harsh and attacking" yet apparently. It's turning into the latest great American pastime ever since internet forums began. But seriously, Understand that hunters have ethics and judgments that have been handed down to them from family and friends and a lot of this stuff is firmly entrenched in the way they view fairness in hunting. Also a lot of this stuff is regional. I'll bet everyone here (yourself included) has something that they would not consider "fair chase" tactics or even hunting. Different people have different limits, traditions and rules of fair play. A forum which consists of the airing of opinions creates an atmosphere where those opinions will come out. It is no surprise that we don't all agree, and that may appear as harsh and attacking. I see it more as differences of opinion. This particular forum may not be the place to bring up those differences, but it is understandable that some reactions have surfaced.

I suppose anyone can start a thread on the illegal uses of bait/feed (or any other legal concern) anytime they want without causing embarrassment to members. I mean, if it's just membership education that's a concern, there are a lot of ways to go about that.