Doc

There are some municipalities that make disposal of electronic equipment (TV and stereo equipment) and chemical waste (paint), a more difficult thing to dispose of. Much of that has special places and times of the year that such things can be disposed of. It becomes a bit of an inconvenience. So if those are the kinds of things that you are finding litering the landscape, that might be the reason why more and more of that kind of crap is showing up.

I think these scuzz-balls are starting to realize just what an impotent position DEC law enforcement has gotten into with all the lay-offs and budget cuts. And I believe that lawlessness in the area of game law violations will increase. That's why it is important for hunters to become more vigilant in reporting law-breaking. We need to get less concerned about making excuses for these violations and more concerned with doing our part in keeping these people from breaking the laws without any fear of being caught. Whenever I see the results of some of these "crack-downs", and how many people they catch, it makes me wonder just how huge the problem really is and how many people are getting away with such acts that we never hear about. Yes, there may be cases of some reports not being responded to, but I have to believe that those are rare. At any rate, if the DEC is having difficulties responding to reports, just imagine how ineffective they are at discovering these violations on their own without the public's help.

Yeah, I would like to excuse the litter that I find as being some kind of accidental dropping of trash, but I really don't think that is what 99.99% of it really is ...... lol. By the way, you might want to do a little research on some of those old bottles. There are people that collect some of them and will pay big bucks. If you find some old deserted dump out in the woods from a century or so ago, it sometimes pays off to spend a few minutes doing a bit of a quick archealogical explorationd checking out what kinds of things people usd to throw away. hey.....You never know .....lol.

Regarding the "one buck rule", I have to believe that this is just another "feel good" regulation that would really have no impact on buck populations. I think it is just another one of these things that sounds good for a few seconds, but really serves only as window dressing. Seriously, how many people do you actually know that harvest more than one buck? I won't say it doesn't happen, but when you actually thinkabout it, you will have a heck of a hard time thinking of anyone who does that on any kind of regular basis. I suspect that in areas where someone does take two, the buck population is probably such that it can stand a hunter or two that doubles up on their buck harvest. Like I say, I believe it is just another feel-good proposal that makes us feel like we have done something when in reality it would not be worth the cost of passing the legislation. The only good thing that such a law might help would be the fact that some guys would be a bit more picky about the quality of the buck that they take because they would understand that there is no second chance for a bigger one.

Here's the way I look at it. We can manage by "one size fits all"from the adirondacks to the capital area to the farmlands of western NY and know that we are screwing up in some of those places. Or we can make attempts to tailor management to the situations, herds, and habitats as they exist, as locally as possible, and have a far better chance of getting it right. Obviously, there is an element of practicality that has to apply, but we already have regions and WMUs layed out with unique doe harvesting boundaries, and nobody seems to have a lot of problems with that. I don't see why buck management schemes would be any different. I can only say one thing ..... I would hate to be a hunter saddled with ARs in a WMU that had their permits cut off or cut back severely. As the example I gave in my last reply, that would amount to telling hunters "Thanks for spending your cash on a license now go out there and have a nice walk. Probably no need to carry your gun. That to me is a local condition that would make AR basically mean, "no hunting". There are some situations where some of these kinds of heavy restrictions are just unreasonable.

There seems to be no limit as to what some people will do to get those prized antlers. How is it that this guy got so far off the deep end? I really can't imagine being that desparate. It's a real shame.

Ha-ha .... I live and hunt in 8N. There is no shortage of deer here.

Do not be discouraged by the fact that he's not posing for your camera since rifle season began. I haven't gotten a picture of any buck since gun season began (day or night). That doesn't mean they are all dead. As was just said, write down everything about this buck that you can remember. If he has made it through, he will be repeating a lot of the patterns that he established this year. You might be able to get an early start on him next year.

Can I say "neither"? I do not believe that either of these plans should be incorporated in an "across the state" fashion. There really are none of the latest new pop-management schemes that I feel are suitable for all parts of the state. It is not always necessary to strap every hunter in the state with all kinds of restrictions in a mindless "blanket" fashion. I'm not sure how many times it has to be said, but this state is not a homogeneous set of habitats, deer populations, and deer pressures and herd conditions. Land uses vary all over the place, and there are places where each restriction has no place and makes no sense. I know there are also places that issue zero antlerless tags. AR in such places would in effect tell hunters that you can't hunt does, and you also can't shoot 95% of the bucks that you will see (if you see any). That pretty much is telling the hunter hand me over your license money and enjoy a good walk in the woods ........ no gun required. About the most painless restriction would be the one buck rule because I am sure that the vast majority of hunters are lucky to take only one buck and taking more than one is most likely a super-rare event. Of course that fact makes you wonder exactly what actual impacts such a rule would really have. Is this just another "feel good" restriction that winds up having a near zero effect on the herd? I think most propnents of these kinds of things are hunters who refuse to recognize that conditions across the state are not exactly like they are on the tiny little areas that they hunt. My take is make the DEC earn their money and put these kinds of plans in only where they make some sense based on need, real research, habitat and herd evaluation and some form of planning.

If there is a firearms deer season in progress, I don't take a single step inside the woods (or any other place that may hold a deer) without some pretty substantial blaze orange. So if somebody is going to shoot me it will only be because they want to ...... lol.

Actually there was nothing said about "its real hard if not impossible to shoot any any kind of deer in my woods" The entire actual quote was "I have to say that that quote is a bit strange. Out here in the real world, there is no such thing as an easy harvest of any deer. That would include big buck, small buck, baby buck or any kind of a doe or fawn. I have to believe that that comment was made in jest". That quote was in response to another quote captioned in the previous reply that claimed that you can "Walk in any woods that have deer tracks and food...Boom..work done..." (which I don't happen to agree with. I guess I have more respect for all deer than to think that way). I was just stating that no deer can be taken for granted, and no deer is guaranteed to be that easy to get. That doesn't mean that life is not "good in the woods". I guess I am not one of those that needs, or even wants, deer hunting to be an easy activity. So, for me, it is possible to not have monster deer behind every tree and still enjoy the hunting that is being afforded. I hope that clears up any confusion that my posts might have caused.

I hunt a chunk of state land and every time I go out there I come back with some kind of discarded crap that somebody just threw on the ground. Pop bottles/cans, plastic sandwich bags, candy wrappers, etc. I also have found all kinds of non-biodegradable surveyor's tape, and several of those plastic helium party balloons that people are so fond of letting go. In all fairness, it is not always hunters doing the littering. That same piece of land also has mountain bikers and hikers that flood every inch of it throughout the spring, summer and fall, and I know that a lot of it comes from them.

I have to say that I am satisfied with the fact that trophy deer do exist here and some are taken every year. Also they are not cheapened by being behind every tree. In other words when someone takes a big buck around here, it is indeed a noteworthy event. Do we match the hunter-heros on Saturday morning TV with their farm raised and genetically engineeed monsters? ....... not hardly. Can I live with that? ....... absolutely. I have to hunt hard for what I get, and that doesn't bother me a bit. Would I change any of that by risking the loss of choice for myself and others? ...... no. Do I enjoy hunting in its present form? ...... more than anything else that I do. So, if I am to be honest, I can't really say that I am ready to sign on to any of the latest pop management schemes. So my answer is "Yes, life is good in our deer woods". I have no idea what others need from their hunting, but my hunting needs are being met just fine. As a qualifier, I will admit to hunting in one of the WMUs that has a high harvest and supposedly a deer density that is quite a bit above the state norm. Perhaps that effects my attitude somewhat. Could hunting be better here? ..... sure anything can be made better, but not at the expense of hunter numbers, or hunter choices.

Dried food packets...... There is no way that you are going to pack cans of food or frozen products, or fresh vegetables and such way back in. There are some tremendous products and a wide variety when it comes to dried food products. Gander Mountain has a decent selection, and I would imagine Bass-pro and Cabelas has them too. Also check out the grocery store for dried foods. If the area has the fish supply, a fold-up back-packing fishing pole and a small assortment of lures can provide some fresh fish dinners to break up the monotony of constant instant dried meals.

I haven't had all that much luck with deer coming in from downwind either before or after I quit smoking. The only thing I don't know is how many deer stopped dead in their tracks before they actually came into view because of some cigarette smoke. Here's my theory:..... yes a deer downwind has a very good chance of detecting your presence because you cannot mask or destroy all of your scent. And that is true wheher you smoke or not. BUT ....... creating more (stronger) scent than is necessary (as in smoking) simply extends the alarm downwind faster and farther and in a more concentrated and alarming form. That just makes sense to me. Back when I used to smoke, I never argued the point that I was handicapping myself. It was just a handicap that I accepted. Now, anyone can argue as to what a deer thinks when they smell cigarette smoke. I never had one tell me so I really don't know. However, older deer may have had more experience with associating cigarette smoke with humans. Again, I have a real problem figuring out what deer are thinking, but I'll bet my not smoking hasn't turned out to be a bad thing where deer hunting is concerned. At any rate, there are a lot of much better reasons for quitting smoking than simply its effect on hunting success or failure ...... lol.

Just curious as to how many guys are using blaze orange during the bow/muzzleloader season.

Lol ..... What is with this version of "PETA-speak"? The last time I heard hunters called "KILLERS" was when some flaming animal rights woman was shouting it at some hunters on TV.

Yup ..... It's a fun place to hang out.

I have to say that that quote is a bit strange. Out here in the real world, there is no such thing as an easy harvest of any deer. That would include big buck, small buck, baby buck or any kind of a doe or fawn. I have to believe that that comment was made in jest.

We used to have sheep, and they would become the target of dogs. Some of these sheep would die with some rather insignificant wounds that certainly should not have been lethal. It was just a case of intense chasing and then they seemed to go into something that looked like "shock". It was all over for them at that point. I suppose it is the same for deer. Probably they reach a situation where they go into shock and no longer defend themselves.

That's the stuff. The thorns are curled into a reverse position so that once you are hung into it, everytime you try to pull out, you are simply driving the thorns deeper into you. It truly is a man-trap. I don't know how that stuff got started, or exactly when I first noticed it, but it was only a few decades back that that crap didn't exist down here at all. Used to be the worst pointy thing out there were the thornapple trees. Boy this stuff has thornapples beat by a mile.

There is a possibility that I didn't think about. If the legs are all shot up maybe they are actually there but are walking below the camera.

Nope ........ They killed 'em all ....... I'm sure of it.

No, it's a relatively small area (probably in the neighborhood of 20 acres), but it is an area that has not seen a whole lot of pressure. It's one of those long thicket areas that is so tight that if you fall over you will never hit the ground. Also it is thick with those stinking multi-flora rose man-killers so it is not the kind of thing that anybody hunts (at least nobody that ever comes back out). And it is the perfect sanctuary ...... one would think. It was real popular for the deer before gun season. Maybe some day we will actually get some snow so that I can really see what is going on.

I have yet to see any thread that stays on topic forever. These things do evolve and wander. That's kind of natural. Sometimes we have to bring it back on track (if there is more to discuss). If the original topic has been satisfied, then there probably is no problem with it moving in new directions as long as there is still interest.