Doc

Actually there are some pretty good post-processing programs that can straighten up the color hues a bit. I don't know about yellow. That's one that I am not used to getting. My corrections are usually for pictures that are too blue. I have been playing around with this L-50, and I am quite disappointed in the trigger speed. It's a lot slower than I have seen in any of the tests. I get the feeling that there might be a lot of empty pictures. Also, the first two test pictures came out very washed out. It is what they call "white pictures". I have had a couple like that on one of my Bushnells. It is a highly washed out condition where the image is almost non-existant. On the IR cameras it usually happens around the time of day where the camera is deciding to use the IR flash. I have never heard of it on white-flash cameras. Anyway, I am still evaluating this camera. I am very concerned about the trigger speed issue, and if that "white picture" problem gets to be frequent, I may not be interested in a second version of this make and model. The jury is still out.

Even if the winter does revert back to ugly, the deer have already gotten well into this winter without having to burn any of fat reserves that they normally would have by this time of the season. So it would have to turn around with something totally ridiculous to impact the herd now. A heavy crust would impact all of wildlife, but most critters would normally not be eating a whole lot of nutricious stuff right now. Lol ..... this winter is certainly feeding all the "global warming" theorists. My thought: If this is global warming, bring it on. Let's get out there and spray those aerosol spray cans ...... ha-ha. I love it!

Larry- Was there any visible signs showing the cause of death (I'm thinking bullet holes)? Do you have a coyote problem or a bunch of dogs roaming loose? Any possibility of disease? We do have some pockets of diseases here in NY. There are a lot of natural causes of death for deer as has been mentioned, particularly bucks. Last year I shot a buck that I am convinced would not have made it through the winter because of massive bite wounds and large chunks of meat taken out of his rump. I have also found things like a buck skull down in the bottom of a 200' deep ravine that had a piece of an antler embedded on the skull right below the eye-socket. So I know there are some pretty violent ways for deer to meet their end. I wouldn't be too concerned unless you start finding a high concentration of carcasses. Then you might want to contact the DEC. The friend that found 3 dead deer in one day might have something to be concerned about there.

First of all, let me point out that no one has ever said that blaze orange makes you bullet-proof. And no one is saying that no one wearing blaze orange will ever get shot. That is like saying that if you wear a seat belt you will never be involved in an accident. Is that true? ..... Of course not. Is it true that texting laws and cellphone laws are no good because people get into accidents that are not using cellphones? ..... Of course not. Do all these things save lives? ..... You bet! A word about stats .... If somebody shows you data that 94% of the cases of incidents where other hunters were mistaken for game involved individuals that were not wearing B/O, and you still do not appreciate the effectiveness and significance of B/O as a safety feature, then I guess carrying the conversation any further is pointless. Oh, and by the way, this same study found that 81% of deer hunters in NYS routinely use blaze orange, so that 94% is coming from only 19% of the hunters. If from that data you cannot deduct that B/O saves lives, then again further discussion is useless. These numbers are not theoretical they are collected data. So the issue of whether B/O saves lives is just plain not really in question. Does the use of blaze orange negate the need to follow other safety rules or abide by hunting laws? ..... I don't recall anybody ever saying that or even suggesting that, so I don't understand why anybody would stir that into a B/O discussion. Naturally that stuff is important. Who would ever suggest that its not? But that is not an "either/or" proposition. How about the stat where these 19% of the hunters not wearing B/O account for twice as many "in the line of fire" shootings. That tells me that there are a bunch of cases where that flash of blaze orange is causing a lot of people to hold back on pulling the trigger. Yes, I would say that B/O is saving lives and I would say that the stats show that to anyone willing to open their mind and read the material. "Out of sight" shootings and "unintentional discharge" don't seem to show much of a difference between blaze orange wearers and non blaze orange wearers. Now there's a surprise ..... lol. Did anyone expect blaze orange to work when you can't see it? Has anyone here ever said that? ....Not me. Look, I didn't make up these stats, I just have posted the links (Many times). It's up to others who want to argue against B/O to find some reasonable credible rebutting stats. You know, if people refuse to even examine the facts when they're laid out in front of them, there's not much more I can do. But for those that are new to hunting, or on the fence or uneducated about the effectiveness of B/O, I can only offer these rebutting comments and data. After that it's up to the good common sense that God gave you to make your own choices. Recognizing that there are hunters afield that exhibit all the traits you mentioned, "Stupidity, neglect, drugs, improper handleing of a fire arm and lack of common sense", I think the proper choices definitely involve giving these guys some additional visual signal that I am not something to be shot at. To me that makes a lot of sense. And by the way, those people you mentioned don't only hunt on "Public property" or in drives or in the southern zone.

By the way, has anyone ever checked out the actual cost benefits of gardening? Assuming that you feel your time is worth anything, and considering the cost of equipment, and the cost of seeds and other expenses of gardening, does anyone actually feel they are saving money by gardening? We do it just to have some fresh vegetables, and to supply a source of exercise. Also, it's just plain fun to watch stuff grow and to be directly responsible for some of the food we eat. I really doubt that we actually save any money though.

No it's not. You've done a very good quick synopsis of the state of the world. Every point is true. It's good to recognize that the world is going to hell in a hand-basket, but understand that there is absolutely nothing that will reverse or solve any of it. All we can do is just watch it all happen.

The reason that I heard that Pataki vetoed the B/O bill was that someone convinced him that if it was law, people would start shooting anything that moved and was not blaze orange. I don't place a whole lot of credibility in that thought and I have never heard a study of all those other B/O states where this has been shown to be anything other than somebody's pipe dream. At any rate, I would hope that such a study would take place before enacting (or vetoing) any B/O law to prove that one way or another. At the very least, I would hope that the decision would be made on something other than somebody's "theory". There's plenty of states out there that have mandatory B/O laws and there has to be plenty of data someplace for those who have access to it. Until that kind of a study is performed, I will stay with the stats that I already have seen that show that B/O saves lives, or put another way, lack of blaze orange costs lives.

I'm surprised this recipe doesn't involve a pine board ..... lol.

Yes Bubba you are entitled to your opinion. As far as your question about the DEC being against the mandatory B/O, I first of all have to say that I don't know for a fact that they are. I haven't really heard any official declaration one way or the other from the DEC. And second, if you have a question as to why the DEC feels a certain way about any subject, the best thing to do is to ask them. I am not a part of the DEC, and have no special knowledge about their positions or attitudes.

I'm expecting a lot of fawns this year if things keep up the way they have been. In fact even if we pick up with a normal year from this point on, the deer have not been winter-stressed at all so far, so fat reserves ought to be in good shape. Look for a lot of twins and even triplets this year.

You guys have a lot warmer climate down there than we do over here in western NY don't you? We'll probably get everything in in May but it will be at the very end of May or maybe even early June. Any earlier than that and we risk a killing frost. Peas can go in a lot erlier, but any plants have to wait until the last minute, or risk losing them. We live in a valley and that poses even a greater risk of late frosts. It sure is murder on our fruit trees.

Last night it was venison roast. Tonight it is going to be breakfast (eggs toast and corned beef hash). We had a big lunch out town.

I have to admit that NYC has kind of a European view of private gun ownership and it hasn't really been kept a secret that the People's Republic of New York basically views the notion of freedom and the Constitution as kind of an inconvenience. For me NYC is simply a place to stay the heck away from (gun or no gun). We visited it one time just out of curiosity (kind of the same mentality of stopping to stare at a train wreck). That was enough for one lifetime. So anyone who goes into that hell-hole with a weapon, probably is asking for confrontation. And I don't doubt for a minute that the authorities there are simply loving a chance to show off their Commie handi-work.

I've been watching this corn field on the way to town. A bunch of guys built this elaborate blind out there and spent a whole bunch of days sitting in the blind when the geese were not cooperating. Today I drove by, and nobody was hunting, and the whole field was covered with geese .... lol. Is the season over or something?

Last year we never got a chance to get the tiller out there because it stayed so wet so late into the season. That's a first for us. Right now there isn't a whole lot that we can do in terms of gardening even though the ground is unfrozen. It's still a mud-pit.

Yup....That's the south end of beaver going north.

Good point! next spring I'll be setting out some cameras over in the swamp and along the creek. I know that sucker gets super ugly with the snow run-off and spring rains. I fully expect there to be times when I won't even be able to get near the cameras. On the other hand, I don't want to mount them so darn high that everything swims or walks under them without tripping the sensor. It's going to be a heck of a balancing routine, but I sure don't want to see my cameras under water either ..... lol. Another thing I have to watch out for is that I don't mount the cameras to some trees that the beavers decide to cut down and lug away. Imagine that ...... going over to check the cameras and finding nothing but a stump. That wouldn't make my day.

I have on no less than a half dozen posts added a link to the stats about blaze orange accidents vs. non-blaze orange accidents and anyone who wants to take the 5 minutes to access and read the stats wouldn't have to "guess" about the effectiveness of B/O. Also Burt's link to the article from Oregon does an excellent job of pointing out the same thing. It's all very clear for those that are truly interested in the subject. It's pretty much a no-brainer that B/O is saving lives. Does it eliminate all shooting mishaps. Obviously not, but we will never know exactly how many hunting shootings have been avoided because most are wearing B/O these days. Stats that study existing accidents suggest that it is significant. Should it be mandatory? ..... I guess I wouldn't complain if it were, but I am more concerned that people don't get away with belittling the importance of wearing it than I am as to whether somebody passes some law. I happen to believe that based on the stats, it would be a worthwhile law, some don't agree ..... I guess that's what makes the world go around. But understanding that there are newbies on this site that take some of these comments about ignoring a proven piece of safety equipment as gospel, I continue to challenge those views whenever I hear it. Probably always will.

Even an up and coming sugar bush needs to be thinned and manicured even if it means cutting some of the maples out. We have an area on top of the hill that was once a cleared field (long before me) and has already gone through and past the brushy stage and is now filled in with maple saplings that are only a few yards apart. The result: none of the trees are really developing properly. I've been working in that area for decades thinning out the thing as I have time. Already, I can see vast improvement in the growth and shape of the trees in the worked over area, vs. the area that I haven't gotten to yet. Perhaps some day somebody will have a nice sugar operation here, maybe not, but at least the maples that are there will have been given a great chance to grow to their max potential for whatever use future owners of the land might want to use them for.

I guess you would have to look at each individual operation to determine if there is actually any elements of hunting involved or whether it is just a livestock-slaughter situation. Personally, I don't make that determination based on whether there is a fence or not. Some of these outfits, you can hunt for days without ever even seeing the fence, especially the ones out west. And then there are others that have the critter chewing its cud next to a feeder in between naps. You know..... the ones that have names ....lol. That pen fence probably makes nice gun rest so you can't miss that 10 yard shot. It's probably a nice "sporting" touch to wake the animal up before you shoot it ..... lol. Anyway, as I said before, I have no problem with any of it, just do me a favor and don't call it hunting. Call it "meat gathering" or "euthanasia" or something else that is completely divorced from anything that would reflect on what I do when I am hunting.

Not until somebody invents snake-bite boots that zip up over my head.

I wonder just how easy those things are to hunt once they've gone feral.

Sure ..... it's more closely related to livestock slaughtering, but as long as no one is passing it off as hunting, I really don't care. I just don't want anyone confusing the nature of my hunting with that kind of thing (PETA loves describing all hunting in terms of canned hunts), but if the participants are clear that this is nothing like actual hunting when describing this to non-hunters, I have no problem with people slaughtering their own meat at that kind of facility. It's a whole lot more honest than going to the super-market and pretending that roast beef is grown on trees and comes with a styrofoam and cellophane husk.

I'm not sure that I will ever be that hungry ...... lol.

Nice looking "spike"....lol.