Doc

I saw one of these QDM shows on TV where they were taking about "controlled burns". It was a pretty interesting program and went into a fair amount of detail describing the benefits and procedures. However, the activity, even on a small parcel, looked anything but cheap. There was a rather large mob of people involved, and some heavy equipment for opening up fire-breaks. Also, it was not without its safety concerns. They had to be very careful about forest conditions and consistancy of wind directions. In other words it is not about touching a match and then going home for dinner . It seems to be a bit of a time consuming project too, in that they have to go slow for safety reasons. Now if you concider how many acres are under the stewardship of the DEC, and also consider their current financial situation, I don't think you will see much of that sort of activity being done now or in the forseeable future. Also, I was thinking about the logging activity on state lands. I know this requires a lot of oversight as well with foresters either laying out a plan or monitoring the activity in some fashion. While this can be done and in fact is being done, in a limited fashion, I believe this is another activity that everyone sees as a free activity for the DEC. But I'll bet there is a lot more department manpower and cost involved than what you might think. The good news is that with logging, you do get some money back to help defray the costs of administering the activity. But what I am not sure of is whether the DEC has enough field personel left to plan and oversee logging operations in a significant way. I'm just saying that it is very likely that all these things that everyone thinks are good ideas (and are great ideas) probably have some pretty good reasons for not getting done. And most of those reasons are probably financial and resource driven.

Here in Ontario County, I will believe the rifle bill when it gets passed. I have never seen anything get so screwed up so many times, and in so many different ways. Is this the time that they finally get it done? ..... we'll see. :

I once read that supplemental feeding does little to help those deer that need it. It seems that the stronger deer dominate the feed source, driving away the deer that are weaker than themselves. So the weaker deer are drawn to and are concentrated near the artificial food source, but are not allowed to actually feed. Another feature of artificial feeding is that it tends to concentrate the herd in one area and creates the effect of a deer yard in places where that yarding effect might not otherwise actually happen. The result is that some of the deer will feed on the artificial food source and many others will over-browse the surrounding natural food sources causing long-term natural habitat damage. Also, I would guess that the DEC may have a problem with the additional enforcement problems of monitoring and legally separating legal supplemental feeding from illegal baiting for hunting purposes where feeders and such would pose temptation and opportunity to be used for baiting purposes. Since their resources are not unlimited, probably the last thing they need is new additional widespread enforcement challenges which causes them to have to monitor food piles to ensure they are not used for baiting. These are just a few thoughts that popped into my head when I read the question. However, I'm sure the DEC probably has some official positions on the subject that they would share if you contacted them.

And you know what? ..... Steve is probably right. We already have one hate-thread that is approaching 100 pages. Now we have two more threads trying for the same distinction. It seems that some guys can't get enough of the name calling and such.

Yup ..... I knew I would screw everything up. Ever since I posted the above message, we have been plagued with one storm after another. It seems like I am living on the back of my ATV, trying to keep ahead of the snow build-up. Now I'm starting to get into the situation of no place to put the darn stuff. Coming into the new year, we had the best winter going that we have had in years until I went and messed it up by bragging.

Thanks for the pictures and info guys. Wooly, One more question ....... that red stuff on the glove ....... that wouldn't be blood would it .... ;D .

Could you guys post some pictures of your knapping tools and how you use them? There must be some technique, or way that you hold or apply the tools to exert pressure in the right way to make a chip flake off. I can't even imagine how one would even know where to start. By the way, if someone knows the details, time and date of the Letchworth Stone Tool show for this year, I for one would appreciate it if you could post that here. I definitely would go over to check that out. Going over to the Buffalo Museum for 8 weeks is probably out of the question. That's a pretty good distance for me

Right now the DEC is doing well just to keep their doors open. Don't be looking for them to be jumping into any new fad-management plans. And if they did get a couple of nickles and dimes thrown in their direction, I don't think that AR would be the most pressing thing for them to use the money on. I think that sits pretty low on the priority list.

Yeah but they never tried the idea of keeping alcohol legal and simply taxing it out of existance. They don't need to outlaw it .... they just use financial harrassment and discouragement. I kind of wonder how long it will take for these guys to apply it to booze once they realize how successful their policies involving mass behavior modification worked with cigarettes. It really is a technique that can be used on a lot of things. Perhaps we will see it applied with firearms someday.

I would like to find some illustrated "how-to" article on knapping just to see if it is something I could learn to do. One thing that I always thought would be a neat thing to do would be to build a longbow by hand from native materials and then make an arrow complete with a stone arrowhead, and then go out and take a deer with that rig. Wouldn't that be the ultimate in an archery challenge?

What all this does is to simply show just how fanatical the anti gun forces are (and they say the NRA is an extremist organization .... lol). These anti-gun nuts would be very happy if the word "gun" were made illegal. Anybody who thinks these people are rational, should read these posts and other similar stories. None of it has anything to do with common sense.

You know what's really amazing is that the government doesn't have the nerve to simply declare tobacco an illegal drug. Instead they go through all this devious nonsense of harrassment and financial punishments trying to further their experiment in human behavior modification through taxation and harrassment. What is frightening is just how perfectly those tactics are working. The success that they have had with tobacco has worked so perfectly, that there is no reason to suspect that it will not be repeated on other citizen activities. What is even more amazing is all the cheering and celebrating that goes on from the citizenry when this government tactic is used. Let's see how popular this sort of behavior modification is when they start working on other things that they feel are social problems, like perhaps obesity.

I really don't have a crystal ball, and I don't know how committed anyone really is to alternate fuels. Past performance doesn't really make us think that gasoline will go out of style for transportation any time soon. I think a lot of the reason that they have not moved faster on this is because every company that gets involved in alternate energy vehicles seems to want to make back all their R&D investment in the first year, and nobody can take them seriously when the cost to the consumer get published. The other neat thing is that every family across the nation has sunk a fair amount of money into their 2nd largest asset, and it only runs on gas. Anybody up for dragging their new shiny $25000 car to the dump so they can mortgage their house to buy a nice new electric car or a hydrogen powered one? So the progress on the alternate fuel has been slow. However, like I said, I don't have a crystal ball, so I am not going to say that someday someone will stumble on to the right technology and the right marketing mindset (such as Henry Ford had) and prices their technological marvels within reach of the average man. One thing I have learned is that I should never say "never". Who would have believed that the hills around Naples would be covered with those giant 200' plus white worley-gigs. When the government wants to throw our tax dollars at something, they can make even unprofitable technology something that a few well connected people can make gobs of money off of. So, if some day, perhaps in the near future, someone were to announce the production of a viable mode of transportation that didn't involve petro-fuel, and they were starting a world-wide distribution at a reasonable price, I guess it probably wouldn't completely shock me. If they can sell tehj public and the government on that loser technology call wind energy, I'm sure there is somebody that cab peddle some non-petro vehicle. If that should happen and someone were to also explain that the costs of plastic products were going to go through the roof, I guess that wouldn't shock me either. I know that not all recycleable plastics are suitable for all plastic products applications. I also know that the recycling process is not free. I also have to wonder if the plastics industry is truly a self-sustaining deal where all the future needs will be met by recycling. I'll bet that's not in the cards ..... kind of sounds like a perpetual motion machine ..... lol. Just for illustration purposes, I would point out that we have ways of recycling asphalt too, but that doesn't mean that even a significant portion of our new highway construction and repair comes from recycled asphalt. So anyway, it is just a thought that rolls around in my head everytime a discussion of producing alternate energy comes up.

I believe the main reason that the DEC is against AR is that it interferes with their prime objective of having as many tools as possible for wacking on deer herds. Look at all the permanent moves that they have either implemented or championed in recent years. Everything from signing over permits to expanding the areas and times of more efficient deer hunting weapons. There is no doubt that the DEC has a vested interest in expanding harvest efficiency (for bucks or does), not the other way around. When do you remember any changes in rules or laws that actually curtailed harvests in any way. I can't think of a single one in recent decades. Yes they cut back on permits here and there occasionally, but that is a temporary move that can be undone at any time, in any year. AR on the other hand would be a permanent restrictive regulation to harvests. They simply do not do that!

Maybe if it was accidental Kneecaps with a baseball bat. Let's keep tradition alive!

So when we are finally successful at replacing petro-fuels, (perhaps with natural gas or hydrogen, or some nifty wind-driven electrical power) some of the undiscussed side-reactions may get a bit challenging to our nation's economy. It sounds like there may not actually be any such thing as a free lunch .... Or at least it's not completely free ..... lol.

have an honest question ...... If the oil industry has such a complete stranglehold on market prices, and there is nothing we can do to affect demand in any meaningful way, how come we are still only paying three dollars and something for a gallon of gas. Why isn't it $20/gal or $50/gal? What is holding them back? My sense of things is that you are exactly right about the price-fixing and the inability for us to exert any kind of pressure on gas prices. But there is still that nagging question of what on earth is restraining them to any extent. There must be some kind of political pressures being brought to bear on them, or something.

Way to go guys ....... only 9 more pages. You can do it!

Lol.... I'm sure they will be happy to hear that. License costs will continue to up and up as long as nobody squawks about it. The more we say we will pay ....... the more we will pay. It could be the best deal going, and I would still never admit it publicly. That's probably the quickest way to make a good deal go away and be replaced by a "not-so-good" deal. It's kind of like those that I have heard who defend higher taxes. What..... are you crazy? Those kinds of thoughts are better kept to one's self. Those government types do just fine in the department of reaching into your back pocket without any encouragement from us.

I hunt state land, and I would never leave anything behind that I didn't mind having stolen or destroyed or used in my absence. It's a shame that we have to think that way, but we do! Nothing of value is safe if we leave it there. I suppose there are other reasons why I don't really want to leave stands installed on public property. It could be construed as somebody's attempt to lay claim to a certain chunk of that public property. That may not be the most appropriate thing to be doing. It's not a big concern of mine because in the almost 50 years that I have been hunting the particular parcel of state land that I hunt, I have only seen two stands left. So it's not a big deal to me.

All of this emphasis on natural gas drilling as well as other forms of nice pretty "greener" types of energy has brought a thought to mind that I haven't heard anyone ever mention. When the day finally comes that most forms of transportation run on something other than petro products, will the petro industry react by closing down significant oil well numbers in favor of other popular greener fuels? What do you think will happen to the costs of every plastic part that is in just about every product we buy? Plastic is a petroleum product. There are other products such as asphalt that may escalate in cost because of near elimination of petro production? You can't produce these kinds of products from natural gas or wind power or solar energy or hydrogen or any of the other favorite fuels of the future. So I just wonder if these things will be made from super high cost of shrunken volumes of petro production? I'm not saying that it will become a problem, but I am just wondering how all that sort of thing may play out. I was just thinking about that aspect this morning when I was looking around at all the plastic products that we rely on and was just wondering how we would be impacted if the raw material for that vital product was suddenly increased by a factor of 10 or 20 or whatever.

I can understand the reluctance of instructors to offer up ethical solutions that regard breaking the law or a law that has been broken. It's a touchy subject. After all even when done quite innocently, shooting a buck without a tag is a violation. And then to arrange to have someone else tag a deer that you shot further compounds the violation. What is an instructor going to say publicly about all of that? I think my public response in a situation like that would be to report the incident to a CO with the explanation, and hope for the best. What I might do in reality might be something quite different, but that is the advice I would be handing out if I were standing in front of a class full of students. By the way, that is the advice that I would be giving out if I were discussing the subject of game law violations on a public forum .... lol.

Everytime a new gun law is passed three or four new versions of the same law get proposed. How many volumes of redundant gun laws are really required. It's called incrementalism and is designed as additional ratcheting of harrassment for legal gun owners in an attempt to make gun ownership so painful and costly that more and more law abiding gun owners simply cave in and get rid of their weapons. So why shouldn't gun owners say, "enough!" When the motives of these anti-gun nuts is as clear as it is, why shouldn't gun owners dig in their heels and resist. This idea that everyone is simply supposed to roll over anytime some anti-gun nut wants to get confrontational has gone on about long enough. To me, if the NRA and other gun owner organizations want to draw a line in the sand, they have my support, 100%.

Fantastic pictures! That one caterpillar with the orange spikey things all over it looks like something you should have been running from rather than taking it's picture ..... ;D Doc

Is anyone really all that naive??? You really believe that all these wonderful ideas for new gun controls have anything to do with cutting gun crime? You apparently think that each additional gun-owner harrassment law when added to the huge volumes of existing gun laws already clogging up law books is going to be the silver bullet that eradicates the use of guns in the commission of crimes .... lol. Since you obviously haven't figured it out yet, let me clue you in that the anti-gun crowd has one, and only one, objective. That is to eliminate the private ownership of all firearms. It's really that simple, and you apparently are a naive, unsuspecting partner in that cause who thinks that anti-gun forces can be appeased by each and every new concession made to their cause. I'm sure they truly appreciate your support.