Doc

Assuming the article is complete with all of the facts, the issue here is more about the competency of judges than anything written in law.

No, I just threw those questions out there just to make sure that the right thing is given credit for our observations. The reason that crossed my mind is that I too have noticed an increase in recent years of older and bigger deer, and we don't have AR. So it makes me wonder if there aren't far more reasons than simply AR that could be responsible for changes in any particular localized herd......Just a point of curiosity.

Lol.... what is supposed to happen in the next two years that will eliminate resistance?

Just a thought, but I wonder how many of you are reaping the benefits of food-plotting vs. AR? I know some of you that are talking about how AR is working well are also very active in creating food plots and perhaps other QDM habitat improvements. I'm also curious as to whether AR opinions vary depending on whether a hunter hunts primarily state or any kind of public land vs. those parcels that are private, posted and locked up with hunter pressures more regulated (restricted). Don't know if there is any correlation ..... just asking the question.

So what's the deal? Are we all supposed to cheer the fact that fees are going up? Are we supposed to be happy that NY is trying to weasel out of committments to life licenses? Are we supposed to be cheering for the fact that NYS is trying to emulate a few other states that are gouging the hell out of their sportsmen? I guess I don't understand all this rooting for trying to price and regulate hunters out of the sport. I happen to think that such things should be the absolute last resort, and that they should have their feet held to the fire until it is proven that all this crap is indeed the last resort. Until that happens, I feel justified in being a bit disturbed by what appears to be a DEC that is increasingly becoming more and more hostile toward sportsmen and women.

Of course repeating something many times does not lend any credibility to a statement does it? As far as what is classified as what, the only observation that I might offer is obviously the place where the x-bows have been located in ....... the gun season. That may or may not be where it remains, but their first instinct as to where it belongs turned out to be in the gun season. I think they got it right the first time.

The consistancy of the hair on the summer coat tends to show every body feature because it is much finer than the larger hair diameter and heavier winter coat. Also, as has been mentioned, feeding fawns does take a bit out of their weight gain. Some just show it more than others. Around here, at this time of year, you do see a lot of "ribby" looking does. But by the time hunting season rolls around, they look just fine.

Ah yes ...... the great escape.....lol. You are the one who made the statement indicating that stand hunters are not hunters at all. Why are you so surprised that such an offensive statement would invite a firestorm of replies? If you want to make controversial statements, don't be surprised if there are more than a few contradictions. It goes with the territory .

Declining hunter numbers are not unique to NYS. It is a national problem. Perhaps other states have been a bit ahead of us in gouging sportsmen, but that does not justify NY following suit. It appears that our state is now intent on catching up and they know they can get away with it because we don't really voice our concerns in any kind of serious manner. The shrinking hunter population may just be indicating that a lot of hunters frustrated over these obvious attempts at taking advantage are becoming ex-hunters regardless of which state is doing the gouging. However, license fees are only one part of hunter frustrations. Couple cranking up fees with a shopping list of additional regulations and items that in effect reduce hunter opportunities certainly and it's easy to see that there is nothing there that is going to increase participation or reduce the rate of shrinking hunter numbers. So one has to wonder if the DEC really cares about that sort of problem other than just providing lip-service.

It is kind of interesting how the DEC is always acting like they are so concerned about the diminishing numbers of hunters and yet seem to be devising new ways everyday to screw the ones that they have left along with the future hunters that may be considering entering the sport. It all seems like some pretty short term thinking on their part unless they have just given up and now intend to get as much as they can, while they can.

I guess that's a new one on me. I never met anyone who called me a bow-waiter before. I always thought I was bow-hunting. Well, I guess you learn something new every day. No offense, I realize that is just your opinion, but I have to point out that that is just damn foolishness. :

Except for the fact that you have claimed in previous quotes that that sitting in treestands or waiting in ambush at food plots (or waiting in ambush anywhere) is not hunting. So I think what you have been saying is that if you don't hunt deer on foot, you are not a real hunter because you are not really hunting..... Have I got that right?

This according to a recently completed survey of 2500 does conducted by a research team from Cornell University. 62% of the respondants claimed that age does matter.

I am and have been for decades.

Lol .... Now who do we rely on to see if these people have an axe to grind with gun ownership. Anybody know of organizations that rate the raters . My source is better than your source Nyah - nyah. ;D

Actually if you consider gun hunting, I do a majority of my gunhunting by still hunting. What I have found is that sitting is great for opening day, but after that the deer develop a hide and seek tactic that makes them seem to have disappeared. Regardless of how few hunters show up in the following weeks, or how little they seem to move about, the deer still play the disappearing act once they have had the initial opening day trauma. I guess there are still enough hunters walking the woods spreading "hunter stink" that even if the shooting subsides, they still know we are after them. So as the Wentzels say, this is the time to employ the "you go to them" strategy. There's not enough guys out after opening day to really get deer moving to my stand, so I have quite a few strategic routes where I move like a snail with the wind in my face. And by golly if you're persistant enough and slow enough, and quiet enough it is a very productive method......for GUN hunting. For bow, I have had still-hunting work only a few times, but I must admit that most of my still-hunting during bow season really has the goal somewhat diluted by in-season scouting. So perhaps I do not do it with the same intensity that I do with the gun. But there is also the added challenge that when I have a bow in my hands, I really have to get within 30 yards or less of the deer. Not so with a gun. Big difference! My bread and butter for bow hunting is sitting in a ground blind. I consider both methods to be hunting. Both have their challenges, and neither is to be considered a piece of cake or offering any kinds of guarantees.

And yet it is pretty much impossible to ever find anyone who has been surveyed even though these kinds of surveys have supposedly been going on for decades (Cornell and all ... lol). I really wonder what kind of credibility these surveys really have when you consider the tiny percent of population surveyed and the obvious failure of them to reach anyone that we know. But I guess, if policy is going to be made and laws passed, there has to be some attempt at legitimizing them. And holding up a survey done by a leading university probably is what keeps support for the things that the DEC wants to push. Who can question the findings of a university .... eh?

It is ..... just took a short side trip for a few minutes. ;D

Lol ..... I had to replace a belt on my Dr Trimmer yesterday. Not much of a surprise ...... It's 12 years old now and I definitely work the heck out of it. In fact today I put in 4 hours of constant pushing that thing. I do my 1000' driveway edges. Because of the steep ditches, each pass is like some kind of gym workout with pushing the thing down the side of the steep ditch as far as I can reach and then pulling it back up. Right now I feel like one great big ache ..... :-[ . By the way, if anyone wants a recommendation on the Dr Trimmer products, I can only say that for the money, I have never had such a quality built and useful item. There absolutely would be no other way practical for a tough spot like my driveway, especially with all the trees along the side. If this thing ever dies, I will not hesitate to buy another one.

Lol.....wouldn't it be nice if we could rely on common sense. We wouldn't need any of these kinds of laws.

Wouldn't it be interesting if it became law that stalking was the only legitimate way to hunt. The entire hunter population would be on their feet walking over, under, around, and through, each other .... lol. It certainly would keep the deer moving. Actually, back in the old days, before all this wonderful high-tech clothing, we used to see that exact scenario after the first few hours of the season passed and everyone started to freeze up. It was like a perpetual drive throughout the entire woods. And we sure did see a lot of deer!

Yes, I assumed that the wording would have to be obviously worked out to include buildings in sight. I am picturing someone shooting at a deer with a nice shiny house just beyond the 500' limit, showing up right behind the deer. In the case of a rifle, what the heck good is 500 feet. Why should that scenario be legal? With rifles in the season, distance is not really the proper criteria for safety. That is obviously my point. 167 yards??? ...... That's even questionable with a shotgun or muzzleloader.

Someone on this forum once said something to the effect of guns during the gun part of the season and bows during the bow part of the season. That seems like a lot better thing than jumping back and forth from bow to both gun and bow, to bow, to gun, the back to both bow and gun. Doesn't that all sound just a bit goofey? It actually sounds like they are slowly trying to evolve the bow season into a general, anything goes season by getting us used to and accepting some more gun/bow seasons. What's the real agenda here? At times, I get the impression that some people and even the DEC have an issue with bow hunting and bow hunters and would like to arrange just about everything that they can to maximize harrassment of bowhunters. Sometimes all this nonsense really makes you wonder.

I'm wondering why the law never specifically makes it illegal to knowingly shoot in the direction of a building regardless of the distance. With so many counties now allowing rifle hunting for deer, the 500' minimum for guns really seems inadequate. I know this thread is dealing with archery regulations, but a few replies relative to guns have been stirred in as well, and it brought this thought to mind. In fact even with bow shooting, I would think it would be a good idea to include some language outlawing shooting directly at houses and other structures. Can anybody lend any theories why this "directional" thing has never been brought up?

This is just the kind of safety relaxation that will result in even more property being posted. When landowners find out that the only legal recourse to keeping people from shooting next to their house is to post the entire property, that's exactly what they will do.