Doc

Sometimes I have to wonder if people have a realistic idea of the destructive power of bows and arrows. I think they equate the modern archery equipment with the little toy bows with suction cup tipped arrows. Really ... just because it doesn't go boom or kill by massive shock does not make it a toy. When I see some of these target set-up in the suburbs (dead flat yards with no backstops at all), I can only think these people have absolutely no respect for the killing power of these weapons.

Fees vary all over the place. We have one club that charges $35 for general membership plus $25 for range use total=$60 Another club has a one time "membership initiation fee" of $149. Plus a one time $12 certification fee. Subsequent years they charge $126 annually for general membership and $41 range fees. $167 total annual outlay. That's a pretty amazing amount to be paying just to blow up some ammo. I attended an NFAA archery competition there and had a good look around. It is a very deluxe operation! So the point is that you will get different answers on whether these clubs are worth it or not depending on the club and what they charge and what your tolerance level for spending is.

Sure enough that phrase about "ignorance of the law is no excuse" sounds real good and as long as you are not too fussy about reality. The reality is that laws have been added to about as quickly as legislators can do it, and on any given day, you can be assured that you have most likely broken some laws without even knowing it, or without even having any chance at ever knowing it until somebody of authority happens to observe you doing it. It's a sad situation, but ignorance of the law is a very real excuse. It just is not an excuse that will get you out of legal punishment. So sure, you've got people (non-deer hunters) who could buy and use this stuff with no chance in hell of being told that it's illegal until the law comes knocking on the door. As long as its out on the shelves and on display and offered openly for sale, why would anyone question it? Since these stores have a legal loophole regarding these kinds of sales, it probably is a good time to try to have a heart-to-heart talk with store managers and let them know that sportsmen and women are not supporting this practice or the B.S. excuses that they use for pushing those products.

One thing I have noticed is that some of the rod and gun clubs can get very pricey (and I mean in a real big way). I have belonged to archery clubs that were real reasonable, and most operated on a shoestring, but facilties were adequate to host some great tournaments and maintain full participation in affiliated leagues. However, most of the overall rod and gun type of clubs seem to get a bit involved with heavy membership fees (I'm not sure why). At least that has been the experience locally. Do you get your money's worth out of them? Depends on what money is worth to you .... lol. In my case I tend to watch the pennys a bit closer than most. That's a nice way of saying I'm cheap. On the other hand, if you have no access to shooting facilities of your own, what choice do you have?

The problem is that people tend to give a quick glance at the game syllabus, if they even open it up at all. So unless they have heard through the grapevine or some other incidental source that baiting/feeding is illegal, they might make the incorrect assumption that simply because the product is sold locally that the practice is alright. Yeah, I know ..... you are supposed to know and understand all game laws, but I have an old copy of the official game law books, and I assure you that all game law is not in that little comic book that comes with your license. Furthermore, the interpretation of fish and game laws can vary widely depending on how many different ECOs or judges you ask (and those are the people that are supposed to be experts on the laws). So unfortunately, having these stores selling these illegal products does lend some confusion about the law. I would have no problem with stores selling this kind of product to deer farmers, etc. as long as proof of that kind of business were needed for purchase. As far as the enforcement of this particular law is concerned, lets not forget that the enforcement part of the DEC has been starved out, like the rest of the department. So don't be looking for every tip to be immediately acted upon. Those people are spread pretty thin these days.

I stopped into Gander Mountain in Henrietta yesterday ( I can't imagine why .... lol), and I saw quite an array of products that are clearly illegal for possession in NYS regarding anti-baiting laws. There was something that clearly looked like a salt block, and indeed listed salt as a major ingredient. And then there was the mineral items that basically were camoflaged to look like a rock. And then there were other supplies for feeders (clearly marked as such). What the heck is going on there? They seem to have a problem stocking legitimate hunting products and supplies, but have no shortage of things that are illegal to use in hunting applications. Yes, I'm sure there is some sort of legal loopholes that allow them to sell these things. What I have heard is that they carry them for use in other states ....... yeah .... right. Frankly, regardless of what anyone feels about baiting, I would think there might be some sort of outrage about an outdoor store trying to thwart NYS game laws. I was kind of kicking myself all the way home for not digging out the store manager and giving him/her some grief for the policy of selling illegal products.

I had a visitor in the yard yesterday morning about 10:00. Sorry about the crappy photo. I took it through a window, and the screen was down.

This kind of ties in well to the thread about reducing the legal shooting distance of a bow from a building. Those that are convinced that such accidents can't occur should take note.

Sounds like the Bushnell might be more versatile in that it can do both tasks. How do they compare in cost?

My first vehicle was a 1954 ford. That one was a fixer-upper and never made it to the road. Next came a 1952 Ford .... a Texas car that was full of dry-rot on every rubber part, but had no rust. That one lasted a while. Then came an old 1959 Cadillac. Nice comfy car but started going downhill fast with expensive repairs. I remember going down the expressway while the air inside was turning blue from the exhaust leaking from the just ahead of the muffler. Finally in 1965, I bought my first brand new car ..... a Plymouth Valiant. That ran forever. Most of my car choices were economy cars with a couple of ego boosters along the way like my 340 Duster that I could hardly keep on the road in the winter time because of the touchy accelerator and those nasty wide ovals which were like skis that didn't really know which way to go. Then there was a 1968 barracuda that I totalled before I got a whole lot of miles on it. A couple of pick-up trucks found their way into my driveway. Then finally the little tiny high mileage cars. Every darn one of those cars were exciting for at least the first bit of time while I had them. I just know that what I felt everytime a different car came into my life is just like what Robinson is feeling. It's always great.

I understand that there are some who choose to focus on peripheral issues regarding this guy. I try not to get all tangled up in those things and rather focus on how I can use a resource in this battle for gun rights and hunting issues. I see nothing useful in crucifying those that speak out for those issues that are important to me. As I said there is nothing honorable or useful or even sensible in shooting our own troops and then somehow expecting to win the war.

Looks like beaver work to me.

Man! Your first car. I remember that feeling. Nothing like it! Independance at last!!!! Have fun with it and drive careful.

Look, If you want to go about the business of negotiating with some other (yet to be named) person with an adequate platform to reach both hunters and non-hunters, to put forth the pro-gun and pro-hunting message, have at it ........ and let us know how that works out for you. Last time I looked there were no takers for that activity. Or maybe you think we can counter the massive wall of celebrity antis out there with no rebuttal at all or perhaps a bunch of hunters politely discussing the issues among themselves in elegant politically correct language. Let me change a few words in the last line of your reply: "Having someone to deliver the message does matter!" And as we kill off messengers one by one, finding someone to do that is becoming the rocket science part. Wake up .... its a war out there and it's never a good idea to be shooting our own troops.

We probably all have had adventures with electric fences. One that I will remember forever is the time I decided to cross the neighbors electric fence by holding it down with a forked stick while stepping over it. ......Bad idea! Just after I got one leg over, the stick slipped leaving me riding this electric fence. That was when I learned that a person can propel themselves vertically by only using their toes. Somehow, I really did jump up in the air and off the fence without even bending my knees.

Well bandit, that is a strange bird that you got there. I guess there are color phase variations in just about all critters. I would almost consider having a full mount made of it ...... if its' not too late and if it's not too expensive. Otherwise, you have some great pictures of it and they will always help you remember a true trophy.

I also push the fact that very few animals die peacefully of old age in their sleep. A few graphic descriptions of the deer yard over in Honeoye back in the 80's with the gaunt scarecrow looking deer standing in the middle of of east lake road too weak to move out of the way of cars, and the dead deer draped over the top strand of a fence because they lacked the strength to clear the fence when they tried to jump it. Also the description of snow covered lumps out in the field where dead deer carcasses were accumulating. I also point out the browse line and the necessary winter forage that was destroyed for at least a decade thereafter, and which can even now be detected. Now if that doesn't do it, I break out vivid descriptions of the gasping coon with distemper that I had to put down because it was in such obvious suffering. And some descriptions of the deer that wound up in my front deer slashed and bleeding to death after being chased with dogs taking one bite of flesh at a time over miles in the deep snow. And then there is the deer that I shot a couple of years ago that had suffered a similar fate as it was obvious that he was being slowly eaten while still alive. Now anyone who can still continue to harp on the cruelty of a hunters bullet or arrow, simply will never have a grasp on the reality of nature's alternatives to hunting. They want to use sentiment and emotion for their arguments and tug at people's heart-strings? ....... I can do that too.

Ok, here is a prime example of one of the reasons why gun ownership is constantly gaining deeper restrictions and hunting has been showing a marked reduction in participation. It is this kind of naive failure to recognize the importance of individual advocates, and organized advocates or to understand the political nature of these issues. In fact, I noted the tell-tale conspicuous absence of any credit being given the NRA as a necessary and time proven asset in the maintenance of gun and hunting rights. Those who think that Dads and Grandads and shooting instructors are all that's needed also fail to see that we are in a very severe minority, and that much of our destiny is not in our hands. It is a closed loop mentality that does not understand that we have to reach out to voters who don't hunt or who don't have cast-in-concrete views on guns and hunting. Wake up people ..... the opposition is not making those kinds of rookie mistakes.

Ok, here is what I found on California's Dept of Fish & Game website: "Until the mid 1950's, wild pigs were unclassified under state law and could be killed with no restrictions. In 1957, wild pigs were designated a game mammal by the State Legislature. The Fish and Game Commission soon established hunting seasons, bag and possession limits, method of take and the conditions for using dogs. In 1992 Fish and Game Code Sections 4650 through 4657 were added that required hunters to possess wild pig license tags while hunting pigs." So apparently they have given feral pigs full protection as a recognized game species, complete with seasons, bag limits, and special requirements for methods of taking as well as the specific tags that were previously mentioned. I'll tell you, that is a level of protection that most states reserve for their more prized game species. Given the stories of run-away populations and breeding frequency, it sounds like granting rats protected game species status....lol. So again I have to wonder if the claims of hog related environmental horror stories that we hear really have any credibility. There is something about these two widely divergent management claims and practices that really are hard to reconcile. Why don't we hear of California being completely over-run, rooted up and tossed into the ocean by some massive out-of-control hog population explosion.

Just to clarify, the programs I was watching were not involving casual individual license checking. They were portraying large inter-agency, organized raids. They were investing a lot of serious man-hours supposedly for the purpose of protecting these hogs. But they never did mention the specific violations (or maybe I missed it).

I'm sure that eventually NYS will copy California's lead on trying to turn a state environmental disaster into a money grab. In a state like NY that would put a financial strangle-hold on their environmental, fish and game management agency so they can pilfer the funds for more state spending elsewhere, we can assume that it hasn't happened strictly because it hasn't occurred to them yet. That doesn't make it a smart move, it only makes it a typical move.... lol.

Charlton Heston is dead and Tom Selleck shows no interest in getting into the battle. But there are George Clooneys all over the place. I guess it's time to simply let the libs keep the stage when it comes to the battle for the hearts and minds of the fence-sitters .... eh? You people don't seem to understand that we don't have a whole lot of options if we want any public figures at all actively countering all the george Clooneys of the world. You all seem to completely side-step that situation as you revel in your bashing of Nugent. By the way, most likely the reason that Selleck and others don't go out of their way to become active public advocates may just have something to do with the weird euphoria so many of us feel as we gleefully destroy our advocates.

If half of what they say about the environmental impacts of hog infestations are true, I would think that total un-restricted hunting, trapping, or whatever is the proper approach. Eradication should probably be the goal, not trying to squeeze some extra bucks out of the hunters. I'm thinking that "hog poaching" probably is not worth 5 seconds of our sparce DEC law enforcement personel's time. More regulations mean more enforcement time required with an already admittedly inadequate policing force. It seems to me that charging a fee for tags on a destructive invasive species really is not all that smart in that it not only hampers hunter participation in the extermination of the species, but also takes enforcement time away from truly deserving poaching enforcement. Leave it to a liberal government agency to place income above proper management.

I believe that that statement about whether he does more harm than good is pretty much an unsubstantiated opinion. Yes, opinion is what forums are meant for, but let's not confuse opinion with fact. My thoughts are based solely on the factual ways that he presents gun and hunting issues. I mean you all have worked all around the fact that he alone engages the public and does frame and present the debate in factual ways that are impossible to argue with. You have all apparently missed the point that no one else is doing this. And apparently you feel that this kind of thing is not necessary. Well let me point out for those that are unaware of it, that there is a whole crowd of very public, very well financed, and very dedicated and very vocal anti public figures working very hard for the hearts and minds of the uncommited. I do believe that those public anti-hunting and anti-gun personalities cannot go unchallenged. I don't happen to think that we have any spokespeople to squander especially when there are no other ones waiting to take on that role. So as stated before, while we spend all our energies shooting our own messengers, the opposition enjoys a united front, and dedicated singularity of purpose free of our style of self destructive nit-picking. That's not a real good situation for those of us that still believe in hunting and 2nd amendment rights.

I have actually listened to what he has to say and I've got to say that there really is not a whole lot there that I disagree with. I find him to be a guy that is a little rough around the edges as far as personality, but also a guy in complete control of the facts, that is very quick on his feet in a debate and a guy that very few antis can ever get the best of. I believe that most people who actually listen to his ranting, finish up saying, "You know, I can't really argue with any of that". I think we need more of those kinds of people and probably should stop trying to crucify anyone who takes center-stage and articulates these kinds of views. So far, I haven't heard anyone argue against what he is saying. You all just wish it was someone else saying it. I've got news for you ..... there is no one else.